Remove this Banner Ad

War has started

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dry Rot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Originally posted by Malibu#27
You are a perfect case in point of age not mattering.



But actually Suzie, of course it does, would you let a 10 year old run the country ..... no ..... well doesnt that mean that age was a factor.


I wasnt having a go at dancing doggie, just trying to understand her point of view, and perhaps understanding where she was coming from.
Click to expand...
But you wouldn't let a government pick it's own party now would you? no. That's what this whole war is about. The Iraqi government is run by a dictator. That has to go otherwise the innocent people will be shot or controlled by Hussain and his government.
 
Originally posted by eastaugh36
Garbage. Bush said in his address that the Iraqi peoples freedom day has come. No more fear for them when this evil regime is eradicated. I liked this part of his speech.
It annoys me these people who bag America, we have a great history and friendship with them dating back to world wars 1 and 2, if it wasnt for them we would be talking japanese.
Click to expand...
There is no question that had the Americans not entered the war when they did there might have been a very different outcome on both the European and the Pacific fronts.
Credit where credit is due.
However keep it to where it is due only.
When and why did they enter the war?
 
Originally posted by goaldrush
Nope. The funny thing is that I like John Howard and George Bush. I am loyal to these two people. They have the guts and the determination to go ahead and handle the war on Iraq and terrorism with ease.
Click to expand...

Yeah well thats the exact reason I hate them.. sure they are going ahead with the war- but they have no guts whatsoever.. they are fu*kn weak pricks.

Its easy for them in their nice big mansions, with control over 2 biggish countries- and lots of people waiting on them, hand & foot.. as much security as one could ask for, its all very easy for them- not like they are going into Iraq is it? Instead they will risk the lives of thousands of other people.. while they sit around, protected by security guards

Its all bull****.. how about they get a gun and go to Iraq- see how long they last, see how much they really want to go ahead with war..

JMO

Go Roos
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

This is the stark reality of the world we live in today - there is no such thing as a world with peace. Does everyone who doesn't want war honestly think people like Saddam and Osama will negotiate for peace? So you say no war in Iraq, ok then how about we just pull out and let Saddam continue killing his own people. Giving peace a chance is akin to putting your head in the sand like ostriches.
 
Originally posted by dancingdoggie17
and in all this the word "terror" isn't being used for all the right people.

a terrorist is obviously a person who brings terror into the lives of others. GEORGE BUSH IS ABOUT TO BRING TERROR TO THE LIVES OF 19 OR 22 (can't remember precisely) MILLION PEOPLE. PLUS MORE FROM COUNTRIES AROUND IRAQ.

that makes GEORGE BUSH THE WORLD'S #1 TERRORIST.
Click to expand...

Tell me this then DD17 if you think Bush is the number one terrorist:

Is Bush (or even Blair or Howard) going to hijack a plane with innocent people and fly it into an Iraqi tower? Is Bush, Blair or Howard going to place a bomb outside a nightclub full of people enjoying themselves and detonate it? Is Bush, Blair or Howard going to tell their soldiers to strap themselves with bombs and explosives, wear some civilian clothes over it, and blow themselves up in a crowded marketplace? Is Bush, Blair, or Howard going to pay the families of these suicide bombers $25, 000 for the efforts of their son or daughter? Is Bush, Blair, or Howard going to attack their own people with chemical weapons? I think not.

When will people realise that the coalition forces are not gunning for innocent Iraqi civilians like some protest banners have said? Every effort will be taken to minimise civilian casualties, and unlike Saddam, Bush, Blair or Howard will not target their own civilians in a last ditch effort. Why won't any anti-war protesters have banners saying give up your chemical weapons Saddam or leave your own people and the Kurds alone? Is it cause Bush, Blair and Howard are leaders of a country that allows so many freedoms Iraqis do not have? Try imagining an Iraqi protesting and see what Saddam does to them.
 
Originally posted by Knackers
Maybe those who are naive on this board and have no real idea of what this war is truly about, should read this article. It's the closest thing to the truth that "The Age" has ever printed.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/19/1047749824415.html
Click to expand...

More theories about this being more about an Oil Currency War than an Oil War.

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/RRiraqWar.html

The cost of rebuilding the Iraqi oil industry has been variously estimated at $40bil to $80bil.

Which company would put in that much investment for returns that are many, many years away? Not enough I can tell you.

If, however, the real reason is the currency, the US govt will subsidise the lot in order to ensure the US dollar remains the currency of oil, while having a gun to hold to OPEC's head in the form of a potential flood of oil onto the international markets, breaking OPEC quotas wide open. Unless, of course, OPEC sticks with the $US.

The irony is that they can only fund this through the fact that they have such power, bestowed upon them by the use of the $US as a global trading currency, i.e. the rest of the world is supplying them with the resources to screw over... the rest of the world.
 
Originally posted by myee8
Tell me this then DD17 if you think Bush is the number one terrorist:

Is Bush (or even Blair or Howard) going to hijack a plane with innocent people and fly it into an Iraqi tower? Is Bush, Blair or Howard going to place a bomb outside a nightclub full of people enjoying themselves and detonate it? Is Bush, Blair or Howard going to tell their soldiers to strap themselves with bombs and explosives, wear some civilian clothes over it, and blow themselves up in a crowded marketplace? Is Bush, Blair, or Howard going to pay the families of these suicide bombers $25, 000 for the efforts of their son or daughter? Is Bush, Blair, or Howard going to attack their own people with chemical weapons? I think not.
Click to expand...
They don't need to have people run around with bombs strapped to them, or fly planes into building. They have the technology to do that remotely. And far more inaccurately.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by eastaugh36
It annoys me these people who bag America, we have a great history and friendship with them dating back to world wars 1 and 2, if it wasnt for them we would be talking japanese.
Click to expand...

Isn't it strange then that there is no mention of the US helping us out when Darwin was under attack or our soldiers were fighting in Timor and New Guinea.............sure they were here later in the war after we had recalled our own troops to defend our nation.......but not when we were most at risk........
 
Originally posted by eastaugh36
The boat people should be locked up. They did it the illegal way. Easy. There should be no debate to that issue.
Click to expand...

Tell us what is the legal way for someone to apply for refugee status in Australia when they have no way of contacting our immigration department by being based in Iraq. They destroy their papers to avoid persecution if caught by unsympathetic countries on there way here and basically give up all their possesions for the chance of a better life.............

Compare that to the process a British citizen goes through to migrate to Australia and you'll see who really has it easy..........
 
Originally posted by Malibu#27
I think the world would be a better place if were without terrorism.

IF this is a step to remove such terrorism then I will feel safer.
Click to expand...

But the US have been one of the biggest supporters of various terrorist regimes over the years when it suits them...........now suddenly they are trying to convince us they are the good guys......
 
Originally posted by Malibu#27
BIG difference,


These are people that are destroying all traces of their identity before entering our country .... why ?
Click to expand...

To escape persecution by un-sympathetic countries after they have fled their own country where they have no chance of using normal immigration channels that western countries have in place.........
 
If you all think Howard is such a bad leader, why don't we just invite Saddam to come to Australia and be our leader, seeing he is such a good guy! At least the Iraqi people would be free from this tyrant.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Originally posted by Malibu#27
I do not believe that the children overboard affair was the reason that the Liberals got in.
Click to expand...

The polls disagree......Beazley and Labor were in front before the Tampa overboard affair and the fear factor campaign that the govt used in regard to boat people coming in.............

After the Tampa incident the polls showed a huge swing back to the Libs who continued to spend millions of dollars each day keeping the Navy active in our northern coastlines to intercept the few thousand boat people that come in each year.

Compare that to the number of illegal immigrants that enter the US, UK and other European countries and the numbers coming here don't even add up to 1% of the total.............

Fear was the campaign that got Howard back in at the last election whilst local issues were tossed aside............
 
Originally posted by FreoDocker
Exactly, can we expect to see the US war on Zimbabwe next if this was the case?
Click to expand...

And Israel, Syria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and the hundreds of other countries that have been involved in terrorist activities...............

Western style democracy will not work throughout the world and those that think once Saddam is gone that Iraq will live happily ever after are in for a very big surprise............he's an angel compared to some of the extreme radical groups that are shacked up there waiting for their day to show their might........
 
Originally posted by Bluey
They don't need to have people run around with bombs strapped to them, or fly planes into building. They have the technology to do that remotely. And far more inaccurately.
Click to expand...

Or more importantly the money to support any terrorist group that acts in it's interest..........Central America has plenty of examples........
 
Originally posted by gbear
If you all think Howard is such a bad leader, why don't we just invite Saddam to come to Australia and be our leader, seeing he is such a good guy! At least the Iraqi people would be free from this tyrant.
Click to expand...

I don't think you'll find many of us 'anti-war' crowd saying Saddam is a good guy..........but the Iraqi people are a long way off of being truly free and independant once he's gone..........there are plenty of other extreme groups waiting in the wings to show their power and might on it's citizens............
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

Cyber_punk
Massive 8.8 magnitude earthquake sparks Tsunami warnings for US west coast, Hawaii, Japan, Russia and others
Replies
0
Views
247
Cyber_punk
Cyber_punk

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom