Announcement

**Nubclear** · December 17, 2002, 17:29

Originally posted by DinoDoc
What does that have to do with anything Tass?

And more.......Ya gotta take them all out, or none of them. Its just that simple.

**Giancarlo** · December 17, 2002, 17:29

And more.......Ya gotta take them all out, or none of them. Its just that simple.

Wrong.

**DinoDoc** · December 17, 2002, 17:32

I saw what you said Tass. It didn't answer the question though.

**Nubclear** · December 17, 2002, 17:32

Originally posted by Fez

Wrong.

GREAT arguement Fez!!! Your best yet!

In other words: Killing off Iraq won't stop any of the others. So ya gotta take them all out or taking Iraq out suddenly becomes pointless (considering that out of them, Iraq probably is at the very bottom of the list).

North Korea should be high on the list. It's ACTIVELY PERSUING WoMD and its admitted it. The US could go to war and it would have a great cause of war.

It claims it has evidence against Iraq but "it can't be shown". That's just a lame excuse, we both know it.

Right now I'd say your biggest threat is North Korea. Iraq really poses no threat to the US at all.

**Nubclear** · December 17, 2002, 17:33

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I saw what you said Tass. It didn't answer the question though.

Please, dont act stupid......This thread has turned into a war discussion so I am simply participating.

**Giancarlo** · December 17, 2002, 17:33

Yes, but that should be handled later. Iraq is on the top of the list. Sorry pal, you have the idea but your logic is all out of order.

**DinoDoc** · December 17, 2002, 17:35

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
This thread has turned into a war discussion so I am simply participating.

I fully realize that. I'm just trying to get you to make relevent points.

**Nubclear** · December 17, 2002, 17:36

Originally posted by Fez
Yes, but that should be handled later. Iraq is on the top of the list. Sorry pal, you have the idea but your logic is all out of order.

And by the time were done with Iraq, will North Korea reach its goal of having WoMD? Or will we even go after North Korea at all?

And what makes you think were going to go after Saudi Arabia? They give us plenty of oil

And they've been our "allies" for quite a while now.....

Hah! Even if you tried, going after China could and would be QUITE difficult.....

France.......well, that would be pretty easy

Plus, do you really think the US can take out ALL these countries, installa democratic regieme, spend the money to rebuild them, and then go onto the next?

**Giancarlo** · December 17, 2002, 17:36

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I fully realize that. I'm just trying to get you to make relevent points.

If at all possible.

**DinoDoc** · December 17, 2002, 17:38

Originally posted by Fez
If at all possible.

There are valid reasons to be against or even wary of war Fez. But the stupid all or none rhetoric isn't one of them.

**Nubclear** · December 17, 2002, 17:38

Originally posted by Fez

If at all possible.

Oh please......

**Giancarlo** · December 17, 2002, 17:40

Originally posted by Tassadar5000

And by the time were done with Iraq, will North Korea reach its goal of having WoMD? Or will we even go after North Korea at all?

Well North Korea has proven itself it can talk. But there must be political progress or military action should take place. Anyways, North Korea can't go on spending 60% of its GDP on the military too much longer.

And what makes you think were going to go after Saudi Arabia? They give us plenty of oil

And they've been our "allies" for quite a while now.....

The US isn't. But that isn't the point and I don't know why you brought that up. Saudi Arabia will have to change.

Hah! Even if you tried, going after China could and would be QUITE difficult.....

China isn't going to last for another twenty years. It will turn back into a republic.

France.......well, that would be pretty easy

Just deploy one soldier and the entire French army will surrender.

Plus, do you really think the US can take out ALL these countries, installa democratic regieme, spend the money to rebuild them, and then go onto the next?

The US isn't. There are political options for some of these regimes. Iraq just isn't one of them. Therefore Iraq must be taken out by war.

Also, can you bring up something halfy relevant? Your posts don't make any sense to what is being discussed.

**Nubclear** · December 17, 2002, 17:47

Originally posted by Fez

Well North Korea has proven itself it can talk.

Yep! They're sure talking to the US quite loudly....reactivating and buildling new plants, persuing nuclear weapons openly, shipping missiles to god knows where.....

Anyways, North Korea can't go on spending 60% of its GDP on the military too much longer.

Then China will help it in order to preserve North Korea. It's in Chinas best interest (both population wise and considering that the South may decide to invade if Pyongyang collapses)

But that isn't the point and I don't know why you brought that up.

Possibly because your entire case for going against Iraq is because (or at least part of your case) it "supports terrorism". It's obvious that some US allies also support terrorism AGAINST the US and therefore your arguement begins to fall apart right about there

Saudi Arabia will have to change.

And what will change it?

China isn't going to last for another twenty years. It will turn back into a republic.

Got any REASONING to back that up?

Plus, thats just like me saying "Well Iraq won't last for another twenty years. It'll become a republic soon, lets just wait.....".

Just deploy one soldier and the entire French army will surrender.

Yep. So thats another reason to go after France first, is because it'll be quite easy to overtake the country.

The US isn't.

Yeah, Afghanistan showed the US isn't quite into nation buildling.............

There are political options for some of these regimes.

Some, but not all. What are you going to do about North Korea? Talks haven't been quite successful yet

And I highly doubt China will be changing its ways. Saudi Arabia won't be doing too much either.

Iraq just isn't one of them. Therefore Iraq must be taken out by war.

But the issue is being resolved using diplomatic means. There is no proof that iraq HASNT complied with the resolution, theres no proof Iraq ISNT going to comply with the resolution....It's following exactly what the US has been saying it wants for quite a while now.

North Korea on the other hand.......

**Giancarlo** · December 17, 2002, 17:55

Originally posted by Tassadar5000

Yep! They're sure talking to the US quite loudly....reactivating and buildling new plants, persuing nuclear weapons openly, shipping missiles to god knows where.....

Let them collapse on themselves.

Then China will help it in order to preserve North Korea. It's in Chinas best interest (both population wise and considering that the South may decide to invade if Pyongyang collapses)

China may actually want the South to invade. The North has been causing problems.

Possibly because your entire case for going against Iraq is because (or at least part of your case) it "supports terrorism". It's obvious that some US allies also support terrorism AGAINST the US and therefore your arguement begins to fall apart right about there

Nope my case is supported by the publication of a October 2002 Central Intelligence Agency Report. Highlighting what Iraq has and what Iraq didn't account for in the early 90s. Gee what happened to those 600 or so chemical weapon filled rockets?

Or something like that. I suggest you check it out.

And what will change it?

Internal dissent. Same stuff Iran has been getting. Reformists are becoming a new force in Iran challanging the Mullahs.

Got any REASONING to back that up?

Plus, thats just like me saying "Well Iraq won't last for another twenty years. It'll become a republic soon, lets just wait.....".

Well you are foolish.

Yep. So thats another reason to go after France first, is because it'll be quite easy to overtake the country.

I hate France but France is irrelevant.

Yeah, Afghanistan showed the US isn't quite into nation buildling.............

You don't know a frigging thing you are talking about. Get a clue.

Some, but not all. What are you going to do about North Korea? Talks haven't been quite successful yet

And I highly doubt China will be changing its ways. Saudi Arabia won't be doing too much either.

Well North Korea can't go on spending 60% of its economy on the military. You keep ignoring that point. So it will collapse. China has been changing its way in the past thirty years pal. Open your eyes.

But the issue is being resolved using diplomatic means. There is no proof that iraq HASNT complied with the resolution, theres no proof Iraq ISNT going to comply with the resolution....

Yes there is proof. Iraq submitted a bull**** weapons report. Also the inspections are the dumbest political thing I ever seen. How the heck can a group of what... 100 or 200 people cover a nation like Iraq? How about all the chemical, biological and nuclear weapons Iraq hasn't accounted for last time? What happened to those? Your logic is all shot up. Get a clue.

It's following exactly what the US has been saying it wants for quite a while now.

No it hasn't.

**Nubclear** · December 17, 2002, 18:11

Originally posted by Fez

Let them collapse on themselves.

China will help because they dont want their communist ally to collapse. Immigration, and sharing a border with South Korea isn't the best thing ever...

China may actually want the South to invade. The North has been causing problems.

Again, there would be a flood of peopel going into China. China does not want this and is trying to preserve North Korea so it can keep its people to itself.

Nope my case is supported by the publication of a October 2002 Central Intelligence Agency Report. Highlighting what Iraq has and what Iraq didn't account for in the early 90s. Gee what happened to those 600 or so chemical weapon filled rockets?

Or something like that. I suggest you check it out.

Wasn't it the CIA that also said something along the lines of "If you attack Iraq, chances of terrorism will incease"?

Hmm.....

Internal dissent. Same stuff Iran has been getting. Reformists are becoming a new force in Iran challanging the Mullahs.

And china will surpress them using its very large military. You need to remember that internal dissent does not automatically equal a revolution. The chances of a "democratic" revolution in China are actually quite low.

Although I do hope I'm wrong, of course

Well you are foolish.

That's not a very logical arguement, Fez. "You are foolish" offers no proof of that arguement nor the one before it, and therefore I can't debate it until you begin using some logic.

You don't know a frigging thing you are talking about. Get a clue.

Yet another illogical arguement. Why can't you just counter it using any form of logic at all? If I don't know what Im talking about and you do, then counter it.

Well North Korea can't go on spending 60% of its economy on the military. You keep ignoring that point. So it will collapse. China has been changing its way in the past thirty years pal. Open your eyes.

So? Do you really think China will simply let its North Korean ally simply collapse because it has a bad economy and let millions of people cross the border INTO china?

Even if it wanted to theres still that problem of people just flooding that border.....

Yes there is proof. Iraq submitted a bull**** weapons report.

And how is it "bull****"? Because you don't like it?

How the heck can a group of what... 100 or 200 people cover a nation like Iraq?

Have you ever heard "innocent until proven guilty"? I will admit that it does seem quite impropable they'll catch EVERYTHING in their small little probe, but until the United States can actually offer EVIDENCE that Iraq possess these weapons.....

How about all the chemical, biological and nuclear weapons Iraq hasn't accounted for last time? What happened to those?

I dunno....They could've sold them, hidden them, they couldv'e been destroyed by Saddam or by the United States....

However again, thats not evidence of a thing other than they're missing. Iraq may not even have them. Who knows.....they could've given them to Pakistan who gave them to NORTH KOREA!

But again that does not mean their guilt. Innocent until proven guilty....

No it hasn't.

What hasn't it done?

Announcement

War Protestors: Anti-American or Patriotic?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment