Give peace a chance

[The Hierophant]

Originally posted by Attalus: Good post, Heirophant. We, the USA, are at war with terrorists, specifically with Al-Qaeda, since they attacked us and kiled quite a few of our citizens and others living here. They have no qualms about proclaiming that they are going to do it again, when they have the opportunity. Several nation-states, at first, most notably Afghanistan, harbored and supported the terrorists, refusing demands to extradite them, and allowing training camps to exist on their soil. We took out Afghanistan, over protests, and found, whaddaya know, they had the terror camps, etc., they claimed not to have. Now, Iraq is harboring terrorist camops in the north (didn't any of you read Colin Powell's speech to the Security Council?) and he is a known supplier of money and arms to terrorists. He is in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions, as well as the treaty that ended the Gulf War. So, he is next on the list. Give war a chance.

Hmmm. So if the teacher doesn't like it, to hell with them? You have to look out for your own safety right? You'll make some waves in the classroom that's for sure. Hope you are prepared to weather the storm. But when all is said and done, if you can show that taking the punk out was in the school's benefit, they'll forgive you. Only thing is that once the teacher has their authority undermined, and are unable to force their authority back, well they are pretty much made redundant as an order-keeping entity. People start looking to the tough students to look after them in the schoolyard instead of the official school authorities, which can lead to some very ugly situations.

Something to think over at least.

[Lanesra]

Originally posted by Attalus: Good post, Heirophant. We, the USA, are at war with terrorists, specifically with Al-Qaeda, since they attacked us and kiled quite a few of our citizens and others living here. They have no qualms about proclaiming that they are going to do it again, when they have the opportunity. Several nation-states, at first, most notably Afghanistan, harbored and supported the terrorists, refusing demands to extradite them, and allowing training camps to exist on their soil. We took out Afghanistan, over protests, and found, whaddaya know, they had the terror camps, etc., they claimed not to have. Now, Iraq is harboring terrorist camops in the north (didn't any of you read Colin Powell's speech to the Security Council?) and he is a known supplier of money and arms to terrorists. He is in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions, as well as the treaty that ended the Gulf War. So, he is next on the list. Give war a chance.

WE the USA are at war with terrorists !! . Let me tell you something, the whole of the civilised world is at war with terrorists, a large part of the civilised world has lived with terrorism for many years, it's not just something thats happened since 9/11. And lets face it up untill 9/11 most of the funding for the Provisinal IRA or freedom fighters, as I heard them descibed on american television after the canary wharf bombings, came from the Usa, where was the war on terrorism then ? Also on the subject of suppling arms, who supllied the arms to sadam in the first place, who supplied the arms to Al Queda i'll tell you who the USA, Britain, france , and the rest of the western world so we probabally know what they've got it'll have the stars and stripes or the union jack printed on it.

Another question what would we be doing if China or russia were harbouring terrorists would we be saying give war a chance then ?

WE will not beat these people by destroying iraq we will only make the situation worse, take a look at the middle east for proof, we need convesation not obliteration.

[The Hierophant]

Originally posted by Lanesra: WE will not beat these people by destroying iraq we will only make the situation worse, take a look at the middle east for proof, we need convesation not obliteration.

True.
But it's too late for that now I'm afraid. This ball started rolling decades ago. Stop worrying and just roll with it. Everything's going to hell.

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Lanesra: WE the USA are at war with terrorists !! . Let me tell you something, the whole of the civilised world is at war with terrorists, a large part of the civilised world has lived with terrorism for many years, it's not just something thats happened since 9/11. And lets face it up untill 9/11 most of the funding for the Provisinal IRA or freedom fighters, as I heard them descibed on american television after the canary wharf bombings, came from the Usa, where was the war on terrorism then ? Also on the subject of suppling arms, who supllied the arms to sadam in the first place, who supplied the arms to Al Queda i'll tell you who the USA, Britain, france , and the rest of the western world so we probabally know what they've got it'll have the stars and stripes or the union jack printed on it. Another question what would we be doing if China or russia were harbouring terrorists would we be saying give war a chance then ? WE will not beat these people by destroying iraq we will only make the situation worse, take a look at the middle east for proof, we need convesation not obliteration.

Well, if conversation with people who are ready to die to destroy you awere possible, I would be all for it, but just listen to what they are saying. They will not rest until the whole world is under the banner of Islam. Pretty tough deal-breaker! And, by saying we, I was just trying to not include anyone unwilling. As for the IRA, I have been against them all of my life, and have no plans of changing my position.

[Moiraine]

Originally posted by Attalus: We, the USA, are at war with terrorists, specifically with Al-Qaeda, since they attacked us and kiled quite a few of our citizens and others living here.

So then, if I follow your logic, either all people in Iraq are terrorists (included civilian men, women and children) or after the war is over, all the Iraqian non-terrorist population will have a very legitimate reason to make war to the USA since "they attacked us and killed quite a few of our citizens and others living here" ...

How do you plan to stop the cycle of aggression and retaliation ?

[Attalus]

This really belongs in the War Forum. Unfortunately, the only way to change the regime in Iraq is by making war on them. If they want to make war on us, as well, fine. That's what war is. If we win we get the result we desire, regime change and one less haven for the terrorists. That's what victory is.

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Lanesra, Moiraine, Epona, et al -

We have given peace in Iraq a chance. Saddam Hussein has had 12 years to comply with Article 1441. That's the U.N. Article that was signed by ALL U.N. members (including France and Germany) demanding that Saddam Hussein disarm and destroy his weapons of mass destruction. Fortunately for Saddam, the world's attention turned away from him right after the Gulf War, so nobody paid any attention to the fact that he refused to comply. In the first round of "weapons inspections" 12 years ago - Saddam was openly defiant. Instead of playing an elaborate game of "hide-n-seek" - he simply refused to allow inspectors to visit certain sites. And the U.N. and Security Council did absolutely nothing to enforce his compliance. Instead, they chose to "give him another chance to comply" and to "allow more time" for weapons inspectors to find these weapons that Saddam suddenly claimed did not exist. How has that worked so far?

Lanesra - you used the schoolground example to show that "standing up to the bully" and going for a knockout punch would undermine the authority of the U.N. I'll agree that it could do that....if the U.N. hadn't already undermined their own authority. They have proven time and time again just how UNwilling they are to take ANY direct action against rogue nations. And when the do take action, it usually involves sending in troops from the U.S. You and several others are also talking about how the U.S. is wanting to "wipe out" the country of Iraq and kill thousands of innocent citizens.

Look again at the results of the Gulf War. How many civilian casualties occurred then. How many non-military targets were destroyed by errant missiles and bombs. VERY FEW. This isn't WWII where we go in and "carpet bomb" the nation. We have computer and satellite guided weapons that can be programmed to strike a specific target. Still - I will grant you that thousands of Iraqi citizens have died as a result of the war. They have been tortured, executed, and outright slaughtered by Saddam Hussein because we failed to take him out the first time around. Some of you have participated in anti-war demonstrations. That's great. You have a right to make your voice heard and I admire you for standing up for your convictions. Unfortunately, in Iraq...speaking out against the government or Saddam Hussein is punishable by death...and the sentence is carried out swiftly and brutally.

As Colin Powell, told the council on Friday...Saddam Hussein is playing the same game he always has. The longer he can delay action against him..the more likely the world will eventually forget about him again. If he can just keep delaying the inspectors long enough, the internal pressures of the American/British alliance will begin to create it's own strain. The longer the U.N. sits on it's hands and does nothing except say "Let's wait a little longer", Saddam Hussein can continue on with business as normal.

The ONLY thing that will change the way Iraqi citizens are treated on a daily basis is the death or forced removal of Saddam Hussein. There can't be any "half-hearted" measures with him. Hussein finally signed a Presidential Mandate on Friday banning the production and importation of ballistic missiles in Iraq. That's great...except that action came 10 years after he was first told to do it...and he ONLY did it once the U.S. started thier military build-up on his borders. Even so, I doubt the mandate is worth the paper it's written on. If America pulled it's troops back right now....Saddam would begin or continue construction of these weapons tomorrow.

Saddam Hussein has been given several years to comply with U.N. stipulations put in place after the Gulf War. So far, he has ignored all of them...until he threatened with direct force. There is no negotiating with him because he will not keep his word. He has proven it over and over. He continuously claims to have NO weapons of mass destruction, yet he turns around and threatens to use these "non-existent" weapons as soon as he feels threatened.

We have given peace a chance and it just didn't work.

[Arvon]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric:
[QB]Lanesra, Moiraine, Epona, et al -

We have given peace in Iraq a chance. Saddam Hussein has had 12 years to comply with Article 1441. That's the U.N. Article that was signed by ALL U.N. members (including France and Germany) demanding that Saddam Hussein disarm and destroy his weapons of mass destruction. Fortunately for Saddam, the world's attention turned away from him right after the Gulf War, so nobody paid any attention to the fact that he refused to comply. In the first round of "weapons inspections" 12 years ago - Saddam was openly defiant. Instead of playing an elaborate game of "hide-n-seek" - he simply refused to allow inspectors to visit certain sites. And the U.N. and Security Council did absolutely nothing to enforce his compliance. Instead, they chose to "give him another chance to comply" and to "allow more time" for weapons inspectors to find these weapons that Saddam suddenly claimed did not exist. How has that worked so far?

You've said what I wanted to. How many more chances should we give Sad-dam?

[skywalker]

It's not about giving Saddam more chances. I think it's more like giving the people of Iraq a chance for peace. There seems to be only two roads here War or let Saddam get away. I don't think those are the only options. Since when does peace mean Saddam can do anything he wants?

Mark

[Lanesra]

Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric: Lanesra, Moiraine, Epona, et al - We have given peace in Iraq a chance. Saddam Hussein has had 12 years to comply with Article 1441. That's the U.N. Article that was signed by ALL U.N. members (including France and Germany) demanding that Saddam Hussein disarm and destroy his weapons of mass destruction. Fortunately for Saddam, the world's attention turned away from him right after the Gulf War, so nobody paid any attention to the fact that he refused to comply. In the first round of "weapons inspections" 12 years ago - Saddam was openly defiant. Instead of playing an elaborate game of "hide-n-seek" - he simply refused to allow inspectors to visit certain sites. And the U.N. and Security Council did absolutely nothing to enforce his compliance. Instead, they chose to "give him another chance to comply" and to "allow more time" for weapons inspectors to find these weapons that Saddam suddenly claimed did not exist. How has that worked so far? Lanesra - you used the schoolground example to show that "standing up to the bully" and going for a knockout punch would undermine the authority of the U.N. I'll agree that it could do that....if the U.N. hadn't already undermined their own authority. They have proven time and time again just how UNwilling they are to take ANY direct action against rogue nations. And when the do take action, it usually involves sending in troops from the U.S. You and several others are also talking about how the U.S. is wanting to "wipe out" the country of Iraq and kill thousands of innocent citizens. Look again at the results of the Gulf War. How many civilian casualties occurred then. How many non-military targets were destroyed by errant missiles and bombs. VERY FEW. This isn't WWII where we go in and "carpet bomb" the nation. We have computer and satellite guided weapons that can be programmed to strike a specific target. Still - I will grant you that thousands of Iraqi citizens have died as a result of the war. They have been tortured, executed, and outright slaughtered by Saddam Hussein because we failed to take him out the first time around. Some of you have participated in anti-war demonstrations. That's great. You have a right to make your voice heard and I admire you for standing up for your convictions. Unfortunately, in Iraq...speaking out against the government or Saddam Hussein is punishable by death...and the sentence is carried out swiftly and brutally. As Colin Powell, told the council on Friday...Saddam Hussein is playing the same game he always has. The longer he can delay action against him..the more likely the world will eventually forget about him again. If he can just keep delaying the inspectors long enough, the internal pressures of the American/British alliance will begin to create it's own strain. The longer the U.N. sits on it's hands and does nothing except say "Let's wait a little longer", Saddam Hussein can continue on with business as normal. The ONLY thing that will change the way Iraqi citizens are treated on a daily basis is the death or forced removal of Saddam Hussein. There can't be any "half-hearted" measures with him. Hussein finally signed a Presidential Mandate on Friday banning the production and importation of ballistic missiles in Iraq. That's great...except that action came 10 years after he was first told to do it...and he ONLY did it once the U.S. started thier military build-up on his borders. Even so, I doubt the mandate is worth the paper it's written on. If America pulled it's troops back right now....Saddam would begin or continue construction of these weapons tomorrow. Saddam Hussein has been given several years to comply with U.N. stipulations put in place after the Gulf War. So far, he has ignored all of them...until he threatened with direct force. There is no negotiating with him because he will not keep his word. He has proven it over and over. He continuously claims to have NO weapons of mass destruction, yet he turns around and threatens to use these "non-existent" weapons as soon as he feels threatened. We have given peace a chance and it just didn't work.

First of all Cerek, it wasn't me that used the playgound example that was someone else, I wouldn't trivialise it so.

Next these lazer guided bombs you mention, are these the ones that destroyed the chinese embassy, the hopital in Bagdhad, and killed the 18 Brtish troops in 2 personel carriers marked with large white chevrons ? or will they be new ones. If its only about saddam and his cronies, then one of them nice sniper rifles, as advertised on ironworks [img]smile.gif[/img] could achieve this? .

Mods: someone has stated that this should be in the war forum, they're probabally right, I was a little tired and emotional when I posted so if it needs to go, fair enough, sorry for my poor aim [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 02-16-2003, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: Lanesra ]