Viewing Thread:
"War is Definite"

Bush doesnt need a reason for war, you cant but wonder whether Hans Blix is paid by Bush to find something about Iraq that he could start his war over. And anyway, Bush could always find some little thing that he could exploit as a reason for war.
Today, it appears that Blix have found that Saddam Hussein has broken some UN law, and now Bush has a good reson for attacking.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/ [SPACE] meast/01/16/sproject.irq.wrap/
(delete space)

It is enevitable that the US will attack eventually, just look at the troop movements around the area, and that we will too, for worse in my opinion. America doesn't need our help and we are just making ourselves targets for terrorists by helping the US.

Tphi wrote:
> what new project? Anyone else heard of it?

Yes, it's SETI started about 20 years ago.....

~~Belldandy~~

honey babe wrote:
> well theres this new spacr project that America is doing about going
> to find ETs but shouldn't we sort out our own planet before going to
> ruin someone elses?

what new project? Anyone else heard of it?

What exactly do Buddhists believe anyway? I’ve never really known.

OakeyDokey wrote:


> Hell I cant understand all this fighting any way Christians Muslims
> and Jews all worship the same god yet they all kill in his name just
> dont understand the logic myself even after thouroughly investigating
> there histories


I've always been a big believer in that Religion just causes wars or at least is a easy excuse for wars and doesn't bring any peace to people but instead just causes them hardships. That's why i'm a Buddhist, a very peaceful religion.

Your assuming we are civilised

I'm far from civilised myself yet those that are on highest rung claim this constantly. Other civilisations would put us in zoo's for our own protection if they ever found us

As for the war in Irag its never been about anything except the price of oil as elections in a,erica are won or lost on such things(you wouldnt believe the price out there)

this is why saddam invaded kuwait and he was more up on politics than us.

hes as bad as bush and many others

Hell I cant understand all this fighting any way Christians Muslims and Jews all worship the same god yet they all kill in his name just dont understand the logic myself even after thouroughly investigating there histories

well theres this new spacr project that America is doing about going to find ETs but shouldn't we sort out our own planet before going to ruin someone elses?

Miserableman wrote:
> It's the hypocrisy I can't stand - George Bush says "We've got to
> invade Iraq because they're evil". What he actually means is
> "We've got to invade Iraq because it's basically one huge oil
> field, and Saddam has a dodgy moustache".

If there is a hidden reason for a war then it's not for oil but for Bush to finish his daddy's dirty work.

Lombardo wrote:
> Military action involves killing people, thus decisions of this
> magnitude should not be made on "what ifs," I really doubt
> Saddam Hussein WOULD try and take on the West, he seems pretty much
> neutral at the moment.

Actually this military action, if it happens, is aimed at bringing about a situation whereby Iraq is disarmed of all WMDs, now if the Iraqi military wishes to defend those weapons they will die in the attempt.

Saddam would not take on the West directly, Isreal is a distinct possibility though. Fact is Iraq cannot account for all the weapons it has declared, talking about anthrax,ebola samples obtained from Africa, botulism, military grade ricin (not like in London) e.t.c That stuff cannot be found by Iraq, or the UN. Where is it ? The danger is this stuff will get into terrorist hands, or that Saddam will use it on Israel or other targets in the area. We can no longer wait for an event, we have to look at the what ifs now, before more people die.

~~Belldandy~~

No-one ever said Saddam was a good guy, but what on Earth gives the US and the UK the right to demand that Iraq should comply with our jurisdiction? If you were the ruler of a nation, and a set of other nations decided that you had to show them what guns and rockets you had, you'd be pretty annoyed to. Saddam is right to wriggle as much as he can, it's only natural - try asking any UK politician a straight question about traffic congestion to see the same effect.

It's the hypocrisy I can't stand - George Bush says "We've got to invade Iraq because they're evil". What he actually means is "We've got to invade Iraq because it's basically one huge oil field, and Saddam has a dodgy moustache". If the Bush administration really gave a fig about Saddam being a bad boy, then they'd drop him straight away and go after North Korea - a nation on the brink of getting nuclear warheads and missiles to strap them to that can hit anywhere in China, Japan, or even Alaska and Hawaii. Saddam doesn't have warheads that can get over Turkey, let alone reach the UK or the US.

Asher D wrote:
> Whatever way you look at it, war is started by people too old to fight
> in wars.

*thinks* very good point. I cant think of one that hasn't been, But they all seem to be started by leaders, who are genarally past it eg. Bush, Bush Sr...