What's Really Going on In IraqFollow

Don't you think that if they had chemical or biological weapons that they actually would have used them to defend themselves? If they did, then the casualty rate would have been much higher.



Ummm - here is an excerpt from an interview Cheney did on 3/16/03 on Meet the Press



How soon we forget.

wow cant even write cause i think the guy who posted the site really thinks it going good over there i am not disrepecting.
but bro seek the truth.
they working on a pipe line and iraq is in the way and at the same time happens to have good amount of oil to boot.
it same thing as being a fbi agent and going in a bank with a gun and saying hand over the cash
because you a fed you work your way to get away with it

Edited, Mon Aug 2 14:51:54 2004 by OBERION

Disclaimer:Forgive me if this post blows, but i was reading through the thread and decided to post. this is my first post, and i dont give a **** if you rate me up or down. Just please read this and try to understand where I am coming from.

I just wanted to give two different views on this so called "war" or "liberation" or whatever the proper word for it is.
For one, my wife Jami is currently enlisted in the US Army, and is scheduled to go to Iraq in December of this year. Understandably, I am scared ********* because, the fact is, PEOPLE ARE DYING THERE EVERY DAY. No matter what the numbers are or how long we have been there, if one soldier dies, it is sadening. For one year I will not be able to call my wife, find out how she is doing, and so forth. On top of that, she will pretty much always be in danger. No man, wether he is the President of The USA, or Jesus Christ himself could look me in the face and tell me he put my wife in danger for good reason.

On the other hand, at the place i am currently employed, I work with a man who was born in Iraq, and recently moved to the US. The gratitude in this man's eyes when he speaks about our "invasion" of Iraq is overwhelming. To hear of his stories, first hand, about friends of his mutilated or killed by the evilness we call Sadamn Hussein, is sickening. When he told me of the story about he returned to Iraq to move his family to Saudia Arabia under the cover of darkness and with the fear of death, as hard as i tried, i could not relate. As americans, we are almost blind to the plights of the rest of the world. Face it people, when you live it good, it is hard to relate to the poor.
In December, I will kiss my wife goodbye, and hope she comes back in a year. Then i will go to work, and see that man and say hello to him, and think of how many other people who were not as lucky as him.
In war, noone is right or wrong. There is no right reason for epople dying, and alos turning your back on the whispers of help coming from the destitute is wrong. I am not a Bush supporter, I am not a democrat. I'm just one guy, trying to show the other side how the other side looks at it.

You don't understand the enemy.

Never said that I completely understand them. But let me ask you this...

If Bush where to say tomorrow that by the end of August all of the troops of the Coalition of the Willing will be gone from Iraq and the Iraqi's can take which ever path they want, what direction will they go?

If Bush where to declare the War on Terrorism over, do you think that the muslim terrorists will dance in joy and praise Allah?

If Western Civilization would make a decree to pull back all forms of western influence and culture from the Middle East do you think the terrorists would stop attacking?

It is people like you that make our government into the enemy because you do not understand the reality that is on the other side of the world. You probably think that if we hold out our hands in peace and friendship and embrace their culture that they would reciprocate. Well I do not believe that. Not from the terrorists.

So tell me PP, what is the appropriate way to handle the terrorists that opened the first salvo of attacks in the war on Terror? Huh?

If Western Civilization would make a decree to pull back all forms of western influence and culture from the Middle East do you think the terrorists would stop attacking?


Yeah, actually.

Do you think they just like killing themselves.

Oh wait, I forgot who I was talking to, they're EEEEVIL!!! not a a group with a specefic agenda but EEEEVIL!!!! heathens.

Wow, you and I agree on something. Arbitrarily nuke the entire Middle East. That should clear things up.

Did I fart? No. I have been actively supporting the decisions of my government and the military that is carrying out it's assigned mission. How is that looking stupid?


Because the means becomes the ends for you. You're blindly supporting your country.

It's America and you love it, right or wrong.

Instead of examining the actions and deciding your oppinion of them regardless of who's taking them you're examining who's taking them and deciding your oppinion regardles of the actions.

That makes us all look foolish.

No amount of research or time spent would give me enough information. The type of stuff I'd need would more than likely be classified.

How would I know what is made-up or just bad opinion?

My point is that you're ignorant, but you have no idea that you are.

I freely admit that I know very little of what is happening over there. Now, I know exactly what is happening in my own life's scope, but how can you make these grand statements of this and that....when YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY FIRST, SECOND, or THIRD HAND INFO????

Wait, I know why....because you're a fu[i][/i]cking know-it-all.

Force depeltion projections for "mild" gases were about 5k. For VX about 11k.

No one really thought there was VX, though.

I don't know how the hell you know those numbers. I assume they're tied to a specific delivery method. For some they seem quite high (mortar), for others terribly low (mid-air burst).

My argument was more on the logistic side of things though...

1. The decision to use the weapon has to be made.
2. You have to find the US troops.
3. You have to deliver the weapon.

Mostly my argument was that on the whole, the Iraqi military just didn't show the overwhelming zealous commitment to really use WMD.

Clearly, if we were fighting a group made up entirely of terrorists, then my assessment would change.

If you were willing to shoot bullets that allready showed more resolve than average, I can't imagine firing a gas shell would require much more.

That's my point though. What percentage of Iraqis simply didn't fight?

And what exactly were they going to fire them with? Slingshots? Those same invisible planes made sure every field gun within a hundred miles of any US troops was destroyed before anyone could think about using them.

Pure speculation, but what would you do under those situations? Can't fire your chemical warheads cause the guns are all destroyed. Hmmm... Maybe bury them in the desert somewhere? Yeah. Maybe...

Or maybe they didn't exist. Or maybe they had them but didn't use them. It's an irrelevant argument. We know they didn't fire any at us, but whether that's because they didn't have any weapons to fire, or didn't have anything to fire them with is kinda hard to be sure about.

Not making any real solid point here because there's not enough information. I am pointing out that you can't rule out anything either. We did effectively prevent any sort of real military resistance to our attacks. The only real fighting we got involved with was infantry fighting in the cities. Anything that would qualify as armor or a field weapon was destroyed before any of our ground units engaged. So you can't make any assumptions about what weapons they may or may not have had available based purely on what they used. By that logic, they had no tanks. Clearly flawed.

do to others as you want done to you

Edited, Wed Aug 4 12:34:29 2004 by OBERION