Falling into place, is Iraq next?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Given that I'm falling asleep and can't find the article that illustrates what I've written here, let's just leave it at bald assertions.

I'm going to bed as well. Here's my article though: http://www.thenewrepublic.com/061801/rubin061801.html

Nighty, night.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
The main arguement is over the competancy of the CIA. I fail to see what your talking about.

Ehhh, sorry, Dino. I was taking a part in your debate with Che.

[Saint Marcus]

Well, it's (almost) out now. The Guardian reports the US will attack Iraq in the comming months, and is building up it's forces. (200k troops, CIA arming the Kurds, etc)

European leaders, like Fischer and Vedrine, stated that Europe will not only, not support an attack on Iraq, but will opose any such action.

BTW, aren't the Kurds (that the CIA are arming now) also terrorists?

...it has become ever clearer that the US is not now primarily engaged in a war against terrorism at all. Instead, this is a war against regimes the US dislikes: a war for heightened US global hegemony and the "full spectrum dominance" the Pentagon has been working to entrench since the end of the cold war.

With his declaration of war against this absurdly named "axis of evil", Bush has abandoned whatever remaining moral high ground the US held onto in the wake of September 11.

True indeed. This has nothing to do with terrorism anymore (north korean suicide bombers??)

[My Wife Hates CIV]

So what's wrong with attacking Iraq? What balance will be upset if Saddam is removed? The US is already spread all over the region (thanks to Bin Laden). Sometimes it seems that Bin Laden might be a US created character. Because of him we have more military force in that whole region than any other nation - and hardly any Americans live there at all. I tell you, for someone who hates the US and US forces in his part of the world... he could'nt make it easier for the US to do what the world hates so much.

Saddam should let the US spend tons building up a huge force just to give in to US demands at the last possible second (and let inspectors back in).

But really. Let's say Saddam gets a nuke he can bolt onto a scud missile with whatever range they have. Would he use it? Even Saddam has his limits. He never used gas weapons against the US or anyone else outside Iraq. Did Iraq gas Iran at all during their little war??

He's probably not much of a threat. But than again, who's going to do anything but complain if the US does attack?? Russia? China? hehe Europe haha??

I say take him out. It would make for good news. It would!

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by My Wife Hates CIV
So what's wrong with attacking Iraq? What balance will be upset if Saddam is removed? The US is already spread all over the region (thanks to Bin Laden). Sometimes it seems that Bin Laden might be a US created character. Because of him we have more military force in that whole region than any other nation - and hardly any Americans live there at all. I tell you, for someone who hates the US and US forces in his part of the world... he could'nt make it easier for the US to do what the world hates so much.

Saddam should let the US spend tons building up a huge force just to give in to US demands at the last possible second (and let inspectors back in).

But really. Let's say Saddam gets a nuke he can bolt onto a scud missile with whatever range they have. Would he use it? Even Saddam has his limits. He never used gas weapons against the US or anyone else outside Iraq. Did Iraq gas Iran at all during their little war??

He's probably not much of a threat. But than again, who's going to do anything but complain if the US does attack?? Russia? China? hehe Europe haha??

I say take him out. It would make for good news. It would!

Iraq did gas Iran

he jsut was afraid of what we would do if he tried that stuff with us (however, if there was nothing to lose...)

Jon Miller

[Comrade Tribune]

Haider Says Baghdad Visit Justified

Austrian far-right leader Jörg Haider defended a controversial visit to Iraq on Wednesday and accused the US of picking on Baghdad as a pretext for building up its arms industry.

On Tuesday, the populist former leader of the far-right Freedom Party met Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, prompting a sharp rebuke from the US State Department. At a news conference in Klagenfurt after his return, Haider, whose party is in coalition with Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel's conservatives, said his visit had been humanitarian in nature. "I handed over equipment for a blood bank in Baghdad mainly to help children suffering from leukemia," he said. In remarks likely to anger Washington and cause fresh embarrassment for Schuessel, Haider criticized US policy on Iraq, which President George Bush has said is part of a global "axis of evil."

"For the first time in my life I am in agreement with German Foreign Minister (Joschka) Fischer, which may surprise you," he said. "I share his view that you cannot portray any state as evil with unproven assertions in order to have a pretext for initiatives in arms policy."

In Baghdad, an official Iraqi newspaper reported that Haider had called for UN sanctions on Iraq to be lifted. "Sanctions on Iraq should be lifted to put an end to the suffering of the Iraqi children and the elderly," the ruling Ba’ath Party newspaper, al-Thawra, quoted him as saying.

"The Americans are not pleased if Europeans independently pursue dialogue with Arab countries, but I presume this is permitted," he said. Although he is not a member of government, Haider is his party's de facto leader and sits on the powerful coalition committee that sets government policy. (From Reuters)
***
For the first time in my life, I agree with Haider on something. As to the 'sharp rebuke from the US state department', they can shove it. What do they think we are? A colony?

[lightblue]

Wasn't Fischer associated with terrorists as well?

I really don't see the problem people have with Saddam getting taken out. As long as they try and minimise collateral damage, I am perfectly okay with whatever the Americans will do, and think the other NATO countries should be too.

On a sidenote, what kind of range do this Iraqi missiles have? I remember during the Gulf War that we in luxembourg were just outside the operational range of his longest range missiles. That means NATO countries such as Greece/Italy and Southern Germany are well within its reach...