Iraq. The poll

[Bereta_Eder]

well i can connect to yahoo.com for example with no problem...?

[Bereta_Eder]

imran is also posting with no apparent problem too...

[Bereta_Eder]

so axi, why do you think there'll be no attack on iraq? it seems that the amerikanski are being preparing for it and it's very propable we could have entered in a phase of redrwaing o geopolitical frontiers.

[axi]

Nah, they will piss off too many people and give the Israelis an excuse to mop up the Palestinian issue, which will piss off even more people. The biggest deterrent is the probable intervention of Turkey and Iran, which will "help" an American invasion as "allies" who will share a part of the territory afterwards. This is not what the US wants.

It seems that I'm the only one that gets constantly screwed around here. Now at least I have unhindered access to Apolyton, due to the server relocation.

[Bereta_Eder]

err I did change my sig. the name not the phrase

[Shi Huangdi]

Originally posted by paiktis22
Then we'll attack Turkey.

Then you die.

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Then you die.

then we expand territory by 73% and 20 million kurds get their country

[axi]

then we expand territory by 73%

Where did you get that figure?

[GePap]

No action soon

Bushie and his gang can't afford not to bomb, since the conservatives (Imran, faded glory, ahem... ) would got apesh*t and call him a wussie and a coward for not going after the great Satan. At the same time, the only neighbor who might help is Kuwait, since they still remember 90, but even they are reluctant. Turkey doesn't want more Kurdish problems, and would not be viewed kindly by the EU, which is no fan of an attack. Axi, Iran a a fellow 'co-evil', so no US, Iran participation, and the Saudis want to keep their heads, so no invasion from there. I agree with faded that we can't use the opposition and that US forces must go in. I mean, what if Saddam used chemical weapons on the opposition, again?

[Jules]

Before you make up your mind...

You might want to listen to this. It's a link to a Real audio broadcast of EIR Talks that aired Dec. 13, 2001. Now before everybody starts rolling their eyes you should know that most of the program was devoted to a Washington DC presentation by former UN weapons inspector Scott Ridder. The first 20 minutes or so contains a segment by EIR Counterintelligence Editor Jeffrey Steinberg assessing the war danger in the Middle East. Ridder's presentation occupies the remaining 40 minutes.

The key points by Ridder are:
1) Iraq poses no threat to US interests.
2) The inspectors were not expelled in 1998, but rather pulled out
because the US was about to bomb Iraq.
3) The Iraqi WMD program was completely dismantled by the
inspectors.
4) The so-called Iraqi defectors making the rounds on the talk
show circuit are for pure propaganda purposes. No competent
security agency would allow their top informants to go blabbing
to the media.

And the link is:

http://www.larouchepub.com/eir_talks/eir_talks_011213.ram

[TCO]

larouche??

[faded glory]

*Hey look Mom! Another "Should we bomb Iraq" poll*

Why didnt you just bump the other 700 threads made since 9/11?

[MrFun]

The first President Bush made this huge sandbox called Iraq in the early 1990's.

Now, his son, who is president, might want to go play in that sandbox. I say let him.

[Shi Huangdi]

Originally posted by paiktis22


then we expand territory by 73% and 20 million kurds get their country

You can't expand your territory if you are dead.

[faded glory]

Oh this is a bumped thread.

Bleh...