More shyt happenin in iraq
 

An Iraqi mob, most of them teenagers, dragged two bloodied soldiers from the car, threw them to the ground and pummeled their bodies with concrete blocks, according to witnesses, describing a burst of savagery reminiscent of that in Somalia a decade ago.


A few accounts said the soldiers' throats were cut — either by the attackers or by the mob. That didn't set well with everyone in Mosul.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... &e=3&ncid=

oOo:

Fucking savages... annoy:

nuke'em and the fuckin hippies

fuck that. level the whole town with tanks.

Well, they could just pull out of there becuase more soldiers have died since the war ended than when the war was going on, but they can't just exactly pull out, Bush had dug himself into a deep hole.

grow a brain son

I wonder if this will make Americans want to go to Iraq to fight or to just pick up and leave... calmdown:

[quote="Sgt Stryker":42d07]grow a brain son[/quote:42d07]

Cram it gramps

[quote=MuZzA]Cram it gramps[/quote:d2421]

Shut the fuck up you stupid little slave of cocks.

[quote="Art Attack":1db4a]Well, they could just pull out of there becuase more soldiers have died since the war ended than when the war was going on, but they can't just exactly pull out, Bush had dug himself into a deep hole.[/quote:1db4a]

The war hasn't ended. More soldiers have died since Bush declared major fighting over in Iraq.

If a forigen (sp?) country invaded the country that you live in, and you hated that country more then anything in the world, and you saw some injured enemy soldiers, what would you do? Help them? Some would, but chances are most people wouldn't. They'd get in a cheap kick, then loot their bodies. Not defending what they (Iraqis) did or anything. But like that guy on the maddox website said, they are just doing everything they can to win.

Fucking towel head savages, that whole towns population needs to be rounded up and shot in the back of the head nazi style after we burn there shit hole town down, the life of one american and british soldier is worth the lives of the entire muslim population on earth.

[quote=Quze] The war hasn't ended. More soldiers have died since Bush declared major fighting over in Iraq.

If a forigen (sp?) country invaded the country that you live in, and you hated that country more then anything in the world, and you saw some injured enemy soldiers, what would you do? Help them? Some would, but chances are most people wouldn't. They'd get in a cheap kick, then loot their bodies. Not defending what they (Iraqis) did or anything. But like that guy on the maddox website said, they are just doing everything they can to win.[/quote:dd3d4]


Thats true. but what if you are the american soldier who has to go over there and put up with that shit? you are there to make sure there isnt any looting, look for WMD (lol), keep your eyes peeled for the most wanted dudes, and you have the mindset that you are there to help them rebuild their lives. how are you going to feel when your buddies are killed like that? how are you going to feel when you know that it could happen to you? suddenly the population you are supposed to lend a hand to becomes a population you despise. this situation goes both ways. on one hand, iraqis are upset about having a foreign army occupying their country and feel they can take it out on our troops. but they should know that the occupying force isnt going to be as friendly if they get attacked like this. we dont want another vietnam case, but for the sake of the iraqis, they shouldnt want one either because we'll drop the hammer on their asses.

[quote="Cpl. Eames":23981]Fucking towel head savages, that whole towns population needs to be rounded up and shot in the back of the head nazi style after we burn there shit hole town down, the life of one american and british soldier is worth the lives of the entire muslim population on earth.[/quote:23981]

If you love genocide so much, start with yourself and do us all a favor.

BTW. I agree that our lives are more important, that's why we should have stayed home and leave the Iraqis to Saddam, its obvious they deserve each other.

sick...This calls or class action ass kicking ghetto style. Give an american soldier in that area a fire at will command estimating each guy is packign a couple hundred rounds of ammo and theres a coupld hundred men oer htere. yeha well win and send a message that if ya fuck with us we will blow up your house, burn your posessions and kill your cat. Some times you need ot be cruel to get the point across that this shit needs to stop or it will get worse.

[quote="Sgt Stryker":924cc][quote="Cpl. Eames":924cc]Fucking towel head savages, that whole towns population needs to be rounded up and shot in the back of the head nazi style after we burn there shit hole town down, the life of one american and british soldier is worth the lives of the entire muslim population on earth.[/quote:924cc]

If you love genocide so much, start with yourself and do us all a favor.

BTW. I agree that our lives are more important, that's why we should have stayed home and leave the Iraqis to Saddam, its obvious they deserve each other.[/quote:924cc]

Who said anything about genocide??? I was talking about reprisals against rebels, and its to late to say we shouldnt have gone to war, because whats done is done and we should support our president and the military to finish what they started.

[quote:9103a]"They are occupiers, and this is their punishment," truck driver Hisham Abed said Monday of the soldiers. "The Americans make nothing but empty promises. There's no electricity, no gasoline and no work." [/quote:9103a]

idiot towell heads, we cant do that to ALL of iraq in 2 months.... hake:

ok let me get this strait...

[quote:9103a]"This is normal. If someone is killed his family has to take revenge," said Abed, the truck driver.[/quote:9103a]
[quote:9103a]A few accounts said the soldiers' throats were cut — either by the attackers or by the mob. The official said Iraqis robbed the car they were driving and stole personal effects from the soldiers' bodies.
. Witnesses said that an Iraqi mob, most of them teenagers, dragged the two bloodied soldiers from the car, threw them to the ground and pummeled their bodies with concrete blocks[/quote:9103a]

tell me, how is that normal.... eek:

we shouldnt have helped them if this is how we get repayed....

[quote="Cpl. Eames":c98df][quote="Sgt Stryker":c98df][quote="Cpl. Eames":c98df]Fucking towel head savages, that whole towns population needs to be rounded up and shot in the back of the head nazi style after we burn there shit hole town down, the life of one american and british soldier is worth the lives of the entire muslim population on earth.[/quote:c98df]

If you love genocide so much, start with yourself and do us all a favor.

BTW. I agree that our lives are more important, that's why we should have stayed home and leave the Iraqis to Saddam, its obvious they deserve each other.[/quote:c98df]

Who said anything about genocide??? I was talking about reprisals against rebels, and its to late to say we shouldnt have gone to war, because whats done is done and we should support our president and the military to finish what they started.[/quote:c98df]


Did hitler level towns the same way ?

Didn't the romans, the mongols, and every other offensive army in history that had to occupy hostile enemy territory resort to reprisals to disuade partisan activity??! Since we didn't wage a total war against Iraq and dont have the numbers to effictivly police and occupy the entire country only through the use of informants, colaborators, reprisals, and other fear tactics can u disuade the enemy from partisan activity.

[quote="Cpl. Eames":6e5c5]Didn't the romans, the mongols, and every other offensive army in history that had to occupy hostile enemy territory resort to reprisals to disuade partisan activity??! Since we didn't wage a total war against Iraq and dont have the numbers to effictivly police and occupy the entire country only through the use of informants, colaborators, reprisals, and other fear tactics can u disuade the enemy from partisan activity.[/quote:6e5c5]

The mongols also ate horses and didn't use forks,
I think we're a little more civilized... well most of us are anyways
The mongols and romans didn't claim to have the moral high ground either, they just invaded and took what they wanted. I'd like to think that my country is not a criminal agressor like the mongols but a liberator and peacekeeper.

[quote="Cpl. Eames":a6933]Fucking towel head savages, that whole towns population needs to be rounded up and shot in the back of the head nazi style after we burn there shit hole town down, the life of one american and british soldier is worth the lives of the entire muslim population on earth.[/quote:a6933]

if i was out there u ignorant piece if shit american, and u were out there too, i would tear ur body up too if u died. i love to see ppl like u get killed.

[quote="Sgt Stryker":b0f58][quote="Cpl. Eames":b0f58]Didn't the romans, the mongols, and every other offensive army in history that had to occupy hostile enemy territory resort to reprisals to disuade partisan activity??! Since we didn't wage a total war against Iraq and dont have the numbers to effictivly police and occupy the entire country only through the use of informants, colaborators, reprisals, and other fear tactics can u disuade the enemy from partisan activity.[/quote:b0f58]

The mongols also ate horses and didn't use forks,
I think we're a little more civilized... well most of us are anyways
The mongols and romans didn't claim to have the moral high ground either, they just invaded and took what they wanted. I'd like to think that my country is not a criminal agressor like the mongols but a liberator and peacekeeper.[/quote:b0f58]

I would like to think this too, and if we were fighting a ligatimate army from a legitamate nation in a conventional battle scenerio then I would be the first to champion following the rules of war to the fullest, but when your facing an enemy who has no regard for anything, doesnt wear a uniform, is made up from people from all over the mideast who are fighting for some sick jihadist organization that encourages vicious attacks against anyone they disagree with and whose mission is to inflict as much casualties on us as they can, disregarding their own lives then the only way to disuade further attacks and prevent the loss of more of our troops lives is to become harsher and crack down on these bastards instead of apearing weak and taking no serious retalitory actions against them...when your dealing with savages, the only thing they will respond to is more savagry...

[quote="[2ss]Panzer":b29d4][quote="Cpl. Eames":b29d4]Fucking towel head savages, that whole towns population needs to be rounded up and shot in the back of the head nazi style after we burn there shit hole town down, the life of one american and british soldier is worth the lives of the entire muslim population on earth.[/quote:b29d4]

if i was out there u ignorant piece if shit american, and u were out there too, i would tear ur body up too if u died. i love to see ppl like u get killed.[/quote:b29d4]

ya...when i get to the mideast and if u happend to be there you would have to wait for me to be dead before you could tear up my body because if i was alive and i heard you speaking your anti american bs, I would beat you to a bloody pulp, then after i was done beating you, i'd let everyone from the platoon beat your ass, you fucking hipee...canada would be with us in iraq if it wasnt for cowards like you, and the fact that you have a fucking frenchman leading your country.

[quote="Cpl. Eames":89bb1][quote="[2ss]Panzer":89bb1][quote="Cpl. Eames":89bb1]Fucking towel head savages, that whole towns population needs to be rounded up and shot in the back of the head nazi style after we burn there shit hole town down, the life of one american and british soldier is worth the lives of the entire muslim population on earth.[/quote:89bb1]

if i was out there u ignorant piece if shit american, and u were out there too, i would tear ur body up too if u died. i love to see ppl like u get killed.[/quote:89bb1]

ya...when i get to the mideast and if u happend to be there you would have to wait for me to be dead before you could tear up my body because if i was alive and i heard you speaking your anti american bs, I would beat you to a bloody pulp, then after i was done beating you, i'd let everyone from the platoon beat your ass, you fucking hipee...canada would be with us in iraq if it wasnt for cowards like you, and the fact that you have a fucking frenchman leading your country.[/quote:89bb1]

why would Canada fight Iraq?
they're smart enough not to fall for the phantom WMD line we got hooked on. Face it, Saddam didn't even have too many tanks, not to mention WMDs or missiles that could reach the US.

[quote="Sgt Stryker":377d1][quote="Cpl. Eames":377d1][quote="[2ss]Panzer":377d1][quote="Cpl. Eames":377d1]Fucking towel head savages, that whole towns population needs to be rounded up and shot in the back of the head nazi style after we burn there shit hole town down, the life of one american and british soldier is worth the lives of the entire muslim population on earth.[/quote:377d1]

if i was out there u ignorant piece if shit american, and u were out there too, i would tear ur body up too if u died. i love to see ppl like u get killed.[/quote:377d1]

ya...when i get to the mideast and if u happend to be there you would have to wait for me to be dead before you could tear up my body because if i was alive and i heard you speaking your anti american bs, I would beat you to a bloody pulp, then after i was done beating you, i'd let everyone from the platoon beat your ass, you fucking hipee...canada would be with us in iraq if it wasnt for cowards like you, and the fact that you have a fucking frenchman leading your country.[/quote:377d1]

why would Canada fight Iraq?
they're smart enough not to fall for the phantom WMD line we got hooked on. Face it, Saddam didn't even have too many tanks, not to mention WMDs or missiles that could reach the US.[/quote:377d1]

it wasnt about iraqs ability to directly attack the us, but it was about the possiblity of him supplying wmds to a terrorist organization like al-queda who might use them in attacks, and canada should be with us in iraq...not only is canada america jr...but as a common wealth of great britian they should feel like its there duty to go and defend the interest of britian like faithful ol australia, who has been with us in all of our conflicts since ww2, by our sides and fighting with american troops...i guess when the cards are down we know who are real friends are....only england and austrailia...when it used to be the entire common wealth, the french and germans were never trustworthy to begin with.

its kind of hard to give Al Quaeda weapons that one does not have, we still have not found any there.
Also if we wanted to put the hurt on Al Quaeda we should have pressured Saudi Arabia, however we can't do that because the Saudi king and certain members of US government are buddy-buddy

You stupid fucks, you guys are dumber then a box of rocks. The point is: Saddam was in the process of creating WMD, and if he did he would of most certaintly gave them to terroists. Then what would the terroists do?? Fucking land one in one of our bays back home. Then that'd wipe out half of our country east or west coast and then people would blame President Bush for not taking action against Saddam or the Terroists a few years back.

It's called being "prepared" you ignorant bastards. We're not going to sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting for the next terroist attack. I'm just glad 9/11 was just two planes hitting two buildings... not two nukes taking out both of our coasts.

[quote="Cpt. Zapotoski":dd123]You stupid fucks, you guys are dumber then a box of rocks. The point is: Saddam was in the process of creating WMD, and if he did he would of most certaintly gave them to terroists. Then what would the terroists do?? Fucking land one in one of our bays back home. Then that'd wipe out half of our country east or west coast and then people would blame President Bush for not taking action against Saddam or the Terroists a few years back.

It's called being "prepared" you ignorant bastards. We're not going to sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting for the next terroist attack. I'm just glad 9/11 was just two planes hitting two buildings... not two nukes taking out both of our coasts.[/quote:dd123]

you should get your head out of your afterburner groundpounder!
they didn't have the ability to make replacement parts for Soviet era tanks, most of their intact armor was broken down.
You don't expect them to build a nuke or chemical weapons if they can't fix a goddamn tank!

[quote="Cpt. Zapotoski":524e2]You stupid fucks, you guys are dumber then a box of rocks. The point is: Saddam was in the process of creating WMD, and if he did he would of most certaintly gave them to terroists. Then what would the terroists do?? Fucking land one in one of our bays back home. Then that'd wipe out half of our country east or west coast and then people would blame President Bush for not taking action against Saddam or the Terroists a few years back.

It's called being "prepared" you ignorant bastards. We're not going to sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting for the next terroist attack. I'm just glad 9/11 was just two planes hitting two buildings... not two nukes taking out both of our coasts.[/quote:524e2]

Agree with you completly...SEMPER FI

[quote="Sgt Stryker":47f9b][quote="Cpt. Zapotoski":47f9b]You stupid fucks, you guys are dumber then a box of rocks. The point is: Saddam was in the process of creating WMD, and if he did he would of most certaintly gave them to terroists. Then what would the terroists do?? Fucking land one in one of our bays back home. Then that'd wipe out half of our country east or west coast and then people would blame President Bush for not taking action against Saddam or the Terroists a few years back.

It's called being "prepared" you ignorant bastards. We're not going to sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting for the next terroist attack. I'm just glad 9/11 was just two planes hitting two buildings... not two nukes taking out both of our coasts.[/quote:47f9b]

you should get your head out of your afterburner groundpounder!
they didn't have the ability to make replacement parts for Soviet era tanks, most of their intact armor was broken down.
You don't expect them to build a nuke or chemical weapons if they can't fix a goddamn tank![/quote:47f9b]

The real fact of the matter is that its a well known fact that sadam has had in his possesion wmd's and has used them before....if sadam didnt have wmd why wouldnt he let the un inspectors in?? Why did he keep delaying allowing them to come into iraq?? Maybe so he can hide them in some bunker in the middle of the dessert, or send them to another country...or better yet even sell them off?? If he wasnt hiding something why would he not allow the weapon inspectors in?? We went after him because he didnt comply, which by un law should have resulted in the security council taking action against iraq, but wait france and germany didnt want that...they didnt want to end their lucrative buisness ties to sadam, and what happend to nato? I thought when one nato country went to war the others were automaticly suposed to come to their aid...where are our nato allies with the exception of the uk and its common wealth (excluding canada) when we need them now in iraq? They are screwing us over forgeting all we have done for them in the past, the fucking ingrates...after we liberated the fucking cowaradly french and occupied western germany...under the marshall plan we payed for the rebuilding of western europe, and how are they repaying us now??!!! After 9-11 where 3000 americans died the adminstration took alot of heat for not being prepared and forseeing this attack, we don't play games anymore...as long as we suspect someone of harboring and suporting terrorist then we should attack them because we can't afford to let another 9-11 happen, ever.

[quote="Cpl. Eames":1c5bf][quote="Sgt Stryker":1c5bf][quote="Cpt. Zapotoski":1c5bf]You stupid fucks, you guys are dumber then a box of rocks. The point is: Saddam was in the process of creating WMD, and if he did he would of most certaintly gave them to terroists. Then what would the terroists do?? Fucking land one in one of our bays back home. Then that'd wipe out half of our country east or west coast and then people would blame President Bush for not taking action against Saddam or the Terroists a few years back.

It's called being "prepared" you ignorant bastards. We're not going to sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting for the next terroist attack. I'm just glad 9/11 was just two planes hitting two buildings... not two nukes taking out both of our coasts.[/quote:1c5bf]

you should get your head out of your afterburner groundpounder!
they didn't have the ability to make replacement parts for Soviet era tanks, most of their intact armor was broken down.
You don't expect them to build a nuke or chemical weapons if they can't fix a goddamn tank![/quote:1c5bf]

The real fact of the matter is that its a well known fact that sadam has had in his possesion wmd's and has used them before....if sadam didnt have wmd why wouldnt he let the un inspectors in?? Why did he keep delaying allowing them to come into iraq?? Maybe so he can hide them in some bunker in the middle of the dessert, or send them to another country...or better yet even sell them off?? If he wasnt hiding something why would he not allow the weapon inspectors in?? We went after him because he didnt comply, which by un law should have resulted in the security council taking action against iraq, but wait france and germany didnt want that...they didnt want to end their lucrative buisness ties to sadam, and what happend to nato? I thought when one nato country went to war the others were automaticly suposed to come to their aid...where are our nato allies with the exception of the uk and its common wealth (excluding canada) when we need them now in iraq? They are screwing us over forgeting all we have done for them in the past, the fucking ingrates...after we liberated the fucking cowaradly french and occupied western germany...under the marshall plan we payed for the rebuilding of western europe, and how are they repaying us now??!!! After 9-11 where 3000 americans died the adminstration took alot of heat for not being prepared and forseeing this attack, we don't play games anymore...as long as we suspect someone of harboring and suporting terrorist then we should attack them because we can't afford to let another 9-11 happen, ever.[/quote:1c5bf]
He did let the inspectors in. Remmeber they were called out before the invasion? NATO is used for defense not offense. When one NATO country is attacked all of them declare war on that country. Not when one attacks a country. Why didn't NATO countries fight in Vietman then, if you think that? Dude, Al-Qaeda is no linked to Saddam. Saddam is a secular leader, while Bin Laden is fundementalist. Here's a hint... they tried to kill Saddam. You know, if Al-Qaeda would have had weapons of mass destruction it was highly likely that they would actually use them against Saddam. Why would Saddam give them weapons then brainiac?! Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..........

Its all to be blamed on the people higher up in the government, Bush and his cronies, bringing America into a war people did not want. Whilst the ordinary Iraqis and Americans especially those young lives serving at the front with their limbs blown off are suffering the cronies are getting fatter and filling up their wallets like the fat cats they are.

ask any american over there if they want to be there and see what they say, they arent being forced at gun point to be there

and you think the ordinary iraquis wouldnt have their limbs blown off even if we werent there? highly highly unlikely

nuff said

[quote="Cpl. Eames":ee663][quote="Sgt Stryker":ee663][quote="Cpt. Zapotoski":ee663]You stupid fucks, you guys are dumber then a box of rocks. The point is: Saddam was in the process of creating WMD, and if he did he would of most certaintly gave them to terroists. Then what would the terroists do?? Fucking land one in one of our bays back home. Then that'd wipe out half of our country east or west coast and then people would blame President Bush for not taking action against Saddam or the Terroists a few years back.

It's called being "prepared" you ignorant bastards. We're not going to sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting for the next terroist attack. I'm just glad 9/11 was just two planes hitting two buildings... not two nukes taking out both of our coasts.[/quote:ee663]

you should get your head out of your afterburner groundpounder!
they didn't have the ability to make replacement parts for Soviet era tanks, most of their intact armor was broken down.
You don't expect them to build a nuke or chemical weapons if they can't fix a goddamn tank![/quote:ee663]

The real fact of the matter is that its a well known fact that sadam has had in his possesion wmd's and has used them before....if sadam didnt have wmd why wouldnt he let the un inspectors in?? Why did he keep delaying allowing them to come into iraq?? Maybe so he can hide them in some bunker in the middle of the dessert, or send them to another country...or better yet even sell them off?? If he wasnt hiding something why would he not allow the weapon inspectors in?? We went after him because he didnt comply, which by un law should have resulted in the security council taking action against iraq, but wait france and germany didnt want that...they didnt want to end their lucrative buisness ties to sadam, and what happend to nato? I thought when one nato country went to war the others were automaticly suposed to come to their aid...where are our nato allies with the exception of the uk and its common wealth (excluding canada) when we need them now in iraq? They are screwing us over forgeting all we have done for them in the past, the fucking ingrates...after we liberated the fucking cowaradly french and occupied western germany...under the marshall plan we payed for the rebuilding of western europe, and how are they repaying us now??!!! After 9-11 where 3000 americans died the adminstration took alot of heat for not being prepared and forseeing this attack, we don't play games anymore...as long as we suspect someone of harboring and suporting terrorist then we should attack them because we can't afford to let another 9-11 happen, ever.[/quote:ee663]

he had weapons that WE GAVE HIM TO FIGHT IRAN,
those were long ago expended in:
1. the Iran Iraq war
2. attacks on Kurds
3. what our troops blew up in 1991


I wouldn't doubt my intel if I were you, I have been studying war and weaponry since I was six years old, I know damn well what I'm talking about.

If Bush was genuinely concerned abotu terrorists getting WMDs, he'd put pressure on Iran, they have a much more advanced chemical industry, their government is about as extremist as you can get, and their nuclear program has been confirmed by several intelligence sources. Of course our leadership just needs to put on a act of fighting terrorism to get re-elected. We didn't even get Afghanistan squared away and here we are in a long drawn out occupation, while we only have a handful of troops in Afghanistan trying to destroy Al Quaeda.

As far as your UN coment, yes Iraq was humiliating the UN, however any invasion plan would have to have been pushed through the security council.
HINT: intelligent people don't believe in the WMD line, try to convince them to act because of Saddam's human rights record.
Bush, however, being the brilliant negotiator he is, ended up humiliating the UN more than Iraq did, now the UN nations don't want to send peacekeepers for the simple fact that Bush ignored the UN. Thanks a lot Mr. President, I know our troops sure appreciate the extra load rolleyes:

[quote="Recycled Spooge":686ca][quote="Cpl. Eames":686ca][quote="Sgt Stryker":686ca][quote="Cpt. Zapotoski":686ca]You stupid fucks, you guys are dumber then a box of rocks. The point is: Saddam was in the process of creating WMD, and if he did he would of most certaintly gave them to terroists. Then what would the terroists do?? Fucking land one in one of our bays back home. Then that'd wipe out half of our country east or west coast and then people would blame President Bush for not taking action against Saddam or the Terroists a few years back.

It's called being "prepared" you ignorant bastards. We're not going to sit around with our thumbs up our asses waiting for the next terroist attack. I'm just glad 9/11 was just two planes hitting two buildings... not two nukes taking out both of our coasts.[/quote:686ca]

you should get your head out of your afterburner groundpounder!
they didn't have the ability to make replacement parts for Soviet era tanks, most of their intact armor was broken down.
You don't expect them to build a nuke or chemical weapons if they can't fix a goddamn tank![/quote:686ca]

The real fact of the matter is that its a well known fact that sadam has had in his possesion wmd's and has used them before....if sadam didnt have wmd why wouldnt he let the un inspectors in?? Why did he keep delaying allowing them to come into iraq?? Maybe so he can hide them in some bunker in the middle of the dessert, or send them to another country...or better yet even sell them off?? If he wasnt hiding something why would he not allow the weapon inspectors in?? We went after him because he didnt comply, which by un law should have resulted in the security council taking action against iraq, but wait france and germany didnt want that...they didnt want to end their lucrative buisness ties to sadam, and what happend to nato? I thought when one nato country went to war the others were automaticly suposed to come to their aid...where are our nato allies with the exception of the uk and its common wealth (excluding canada) when we need them now in iraq? They are screwing us over forgeting all we have done for them in the past, the fucking ingrates...after we liberated the fucking cowaradly french and occupied western germany...under the marshall plan we payed for the rebuilding of western europe, and how are they repaying us now??!!! After 9-11 where 3000 americans died the adminstration took alot of heat for not being prepared and forseeing this attack, we don't play games anymore...as long as we suspect someone of harboring and suporting terrorist then we should attack them because we can't afford to let another 9-11 happen, ever.[/quote:686ca]
He did let the inspectors in. Remmeber they were called out before the invasion? NATO is used for defense not offense. When one NATO country is attacked all of them declare war on that country. Not when one attacks a country. Why didn't NATO countries fight in Vietman then, if you think that? Dude, Al-Qaeda is no linked to Saddam. Saddam is a secular leader, while Bin Laden is fundementalist. Here's a hint... they tried to kill Saddam. You know, if Al-Qaeda would have had weapons of mass destruction it was highly likely that they would actually use them against Saddam. Why would Saddam give them weapons then brainiac?! Errrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr..........[/quote:686ca]

Remember, how he wouldnt let them into specific facilities in the country???! facilities rumored to have wmd's in them?? The inspectors were in Iraq, but they were sitting on their asses in a hotel in baghdad because they werent allowed into the facilities that needed to be inspected. And like I said before, even if we find no wmd's we're already in iraq and you should suport the administration and the troops instead of bickering about how we shouldnt be there and how we should go home. As for the link between sadam and bin ladin and your statements of no liberal bias in the media (which is just idiotic ask any moderate political science major or anyone with common since and they will tell you there is a liberal bias) tell me how quick the media was to forget what they had been reporting regarding the link between saddam and bin ladin prior to 9-11.

United Press International
Nov. 3, 1999, Wednesday, BC cycle.
WASHINGTON – The U.S. government has tried to prevent accused terror suspect Osama bin Laden from fleeing Afghanistan to either Iraq or Chechnya, Michael Sheehan, head of counter-terrorism at the State Department, told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee. ...




U.S. Newswire
Dec. 23, 1999
Terrorism Expert Reveals Why Osama bin Laden has Declared War On America; Available for Comment in Light of Predicted Attacks.

... Aauthor Yossef] Bodansky also reveals the relationship between bin Laden and Saddam Hussein and how the U.S. bombing of Iraq is "strengthening the hands of militant Islamists eager to translate their rage into violence and terrorism."




National Public Radio
MORNING EDITION (10:00 a.m.ET)
Feb. 18, 1999
THOUGH AFGHANISTAN HAS PROVIDED OSAMA BIN LADEN WITH SANCTUARY, IT IS UNCLEAR WHERE HE IS NOW. ANCHORS: BOB EDWARDS REPORTERS: MIKE SHUSTER

... There have also been reports in recent months that bin Laden might have been considering moving his operations to Iraq. Intelligence agencies in several nations are looking into that. According to Vincent Cannistraro, a former chief of CIA counterterrorism operations, a senior Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi(ph), sought out bin Laden in December and invited him to come to Iraq.

Mr. VINCENT CANNISTRARO (Former Chief of CIA Counterterrorism Operations): Farouk Hijazi, who was the Iraqi ambassador in Turkey ... known through sources in Afghanistan, members of Osama's entourage let it be known that the meeting had taken place.

SHUSTER: Iraq's contacts with bin Laden go back some years, to at least 1994, when, according to one U.S. government source, Hijazi met him when bin Laden lived in Sudan. According to Cannistraro, Iraq invited bin Laden to live in Baghdad to be nearer to potential targets of terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. There is a wide gap between bin Laden's fundamentalism and Saddam Hussein's secular dictatorship. But some experts believe bin Laden might be tempted to live in Iraq because of his reported desire to obtain chemical or biological weapons. CIA director George Tenet referred to that in recent testimony. ...

Foreign news services also carried news of the now-supressed Saddam-bin Laden connection:




Agence France-Presse
Feb. 17, 1999
Saddam plans to use bin Laden against Kuwait, Saudi: opposition

Iraq's President Saddam Hussein plans to use alleged terrorist Osama bin Laden's network to carry out his threats against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, an Iraqi opposition figure charged on Wednesday.

"If the ... Jaber, a member of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), said Iraq had "offered to shelter bin Laden under the precondition that he carry out strikes on targets in neighbouring countries."




Deutsche Presse-Agentur
Feb. 17, 1999, Wednesday, BC Cycle
Opposition group says bin Laden in Iraq

DATELINE: Kuwait City

An Iraqi opposition group claimed in a published report Wednesday that Islamic militant Osama bin Laden is in Iraq from where he plans to launch a campaign of terrorism against Baghdad's Gulf neighbours.

The claim was made by Bayan Jabor, spokesman for the Teheran-based Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI).

Bin Laden "recently settled in Iraq at the invitation of Saddam Hussein in exchange for directing strikes against targets in neighbouring countries," Jabor told the Kuwaiti newspaper al-Rai al- Aam ... Taleban leaders in Afghanistan, where he had been living, said they lost track of him. Media reports have speculated he sought refuge in Chechnya, Somalia, Iraq, or with a non-Taliban group in Afghanistan.

Jabor, who was interviewed in Damascus, Syria, said Iraq began extending invitations to bin Laden six months ago, shortly after the United States bombed his suspected terrorist training camps in Afghanistan after linking him with the August 7 bombings of U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and in Dar-es-Salam, Tanzania.

The United States indicted Bin Laden for the embassy bombings and has offered a five million dollar reward for information leading to his capture. Bin Laden's disappearance has coincided with stepped up threats by Iraq against neighbours Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Turkey for allowing the United States and Britain to use their air bases to carry out air patrols over two "no-fly" zones over northern and southern Iraq. ...

Well, I think I may have shutten the liberals up on the iraq issue, who else needs to be educated??

apparently you need education, but that's a waste of resources

[quote="Sgt Stryker":c0aec]apparently you need education, but that's a waste of resources[/quote:c0aec]

Oh again with the personal insults! Can't argue the issue inteligently anymore? Stryker I'm suprised normally your able to come up with a decent rebuttle, I guess not this time.

[quote="Cpl. Eames":2257f][quote="Sgt Stryker":2257f]apparently you need education, but that's a waste of resources[/quote:2257f]

Oh again with the personal insults! Can't argue the issue inteligently anymore? Stryker I'm suprised normally your able to come up with a decent rebuttle, I guess not this time.[/quote:2257f]

more like I don't care to argue with someone as closed minded and obviously racist/pro-nazi as you

[quote="Sgt Stryker":b3296][quote="Cpl. Eames":b3296][quote="Sgt Stryker":b3296]apparently you need education, but that's a waste of resources[/quote:b3296]

Oh again with the personal insults! Can't argue the issue inteligently anymore? Stryker I'm suprised normally your able to come up with a decent rebuttle, I guess not this time.[/quote:b3296]

more like I don't care to argue with someone as closed minded and obviously racist/pro-nazi as you[/quote:b3296]

Oh again with the insults, even though I havent said anything racist, and because I disagree with you I'm automaticly "closed minded" and a "racist" why don't you argue your position a little bit better and try and convince me with facts that I'm wrong, or have you tried and failed and thats why your resorting to insults which clearly show your loss of effective come backs.

[quote="Cpl. Eames":40fae][quote="Sgt Stryker":40fae][quote="Cpl. Eames":40fae][quote="Sgt Stryker":40fae]apparently you need education, but that's a waste of resources[/quote:40fae]

Oh again with the personal insults! Can't argue the issue inteligently anymore? Stryker I'm suprised normally your able to come up with a decent rebuttle, I guess not this time.[/quote:40fae]

more like I don't care to argue with someone as closed minded and obviously racist/pro-nazi as you[/quote:40fae]

Oh again with the insults, even though I havent said anything racist, and because I disagree with you I'm automaticly "closed minded" and a "racist" why don't you argue your position a little bit better and try and convince me with facts that I'm wrong, or have you tried and failed and thats why your resorting to insults which clearly show your loss of effective come backs.[/quote:40fae]

I knew you were wrong from the time you suggested killing everyone in the mid east, can you back that statement up?

[quote:40fae]Simple soultion to global terrorism....invade the middle east starting from israel and moving all the way east to india, kill EVERYONE that lives there, burn there shit down and leave nothing standing, take their oil and turn the whole mideast into a vacation resort for westerners, thus solving our economic and terrorist problems in one single grand offensive.[/quote:40fae]