Jump to content

Welcome to 1Emulation.com
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. This message will be removed once you have signed in.
Login to Account Create an Account
Photo

War

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1
Bertinan

Bertinan

    Novice

  • Members
  • 38 posts
Click to view battle stats
So, umm, what do you people think about the war in Iraq? And who do you think is next?

#2
Diso

Diso

    Poppy

  • 1Emu Veteran
  • 6,145 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:*points*
Click to view battle stats
Other than quick skirmishes, we're doing fine in the war. It doesn't really mean much to me right now.

Who's next? Probably Russia by some accident and then we all get screwed over :lol:

#3
MarkT2256

MarkT2256

    Class 'A' PGA Professional

  • Premium Members
  • 175 posts
  • Location:St. Andrews Links, Scotland
  • Interests:Golf, Retro Gaming
Click to view battle stats
yeah its been very quiet over there, but i bet it will be another year until we actually leave iraq.

#4
DreamCastLover

DreamCastLover

    ĐR€ĹMÇŧT ]v[ŘD

  • Premium Members
  • 891 posts
Click to view battle stats
Well its funny you bring this up. I was thinking about it today after hearing that America were said to be considering completely pulling out of Iraq due to the losses in personal they have had! Pull out!? Wow history would really be repeating itself there.

It seems that when Bush said "oh it's all over" a couple of months ago that everyone has forgotten about it and assumed he is right. The fact is that America has lost more soldiers to Iraqi fire AFTER this war than it did during the entire last Gulf war AND this gulf war put together.

The fact that no weapons of destruction have been found annoys me a lot. That was the single justification to the war. Tony Blair will pay the price here though. His political party is behind to the conservatives for the first time in about 7 years. Good Riddance to him too. I mean it was proven that this war was based on a lie so what does he expect? Even I'm not dumb enough to take a 10 year old essay from the internet and using it as up to date special intelligence reports :lol:

As for where is next? Well I would guess at N korea or Syria.

#5
Bertinan

Bertinan

    Novice

  • Members
  • 38 posts
Click to view battle stats
Well, the reason Bush was so persistent on the fact that they had weapons of mass destruction was because the Iraqis wouldnt let our inspectors in. If they didnt have weapons of mass destruction, why would they refuse to allow inspectors in? Plus, its always better safe than sorry :lol: Least, thats what I heard.

#6
loay

loay

    Proud Fan

  • Premium Members
  • 214 posts
  • Location:ksa
Click to view battle stats

Well its funny you bring this up. I was thinking about it today after hearing that America were said to be considering completely pulling out of Iraq due to the losses in personal they have had! Pull out!? Wow history would really be repeating itself there.

It seems that when Bush said "oh it's all over" a couple of months ago that everyone has forgotten about it and assumed he is right. The fact is that America has lost more soldiers to Iraqi fire AFTER this war than it did during the entire last Gulf war AND this gulf war put together.

The fact that no weapons of destruction have been found annoys me a lot. That was the single justification to the war. Tony Blair will pay the price here though. His political party is behind to the conservatives for the first time in about 7 years. Good Riddance to him too. I mean it was proven that this war was based on a lie so what does he expect? Even I'm not dumb enough to take a 10 year old essay from the internet and using it as up to date special intelligence reports  :wink: 

As for where is next? Well I would guess at N korea or Syria.

i agree for all what you said

#7
xiphoid

xiphoid

    Proud Fan

  • Premium Members
  • 160 posts
Click to view battle stats

Well, the reason Bush was so persistent on the fact that they had weapons of mass destruction was because the Iraqis wouldnt let our inspectors in.  If they didnt have weapons of mass destruction, why would they refuse to allow inspectors in?  Plus, its always better safe than sorry :wink:  Least, thats what I heard.

[pedaant] The UN removed their inspectors, as opposed to Iraq kicking them out[/pedant] the de facto situation may have been different, but those are the facts.

It might be quite interesting to note, that despite Saddam's horrific regime we have actually managed to kill more Iraqi's through sanctions than Saddam ever managed to kill off using weapons we sold him. (these are UN figures of course - don't know how you American boys feel about that organization now though).

Whilst it is great that Saddam was de bunked I feel that as we breached international law (In UK we did) we have done more to destabilise the Middle East than had we used more subtle methods. I find it interesting that Bush has

Struck a blow for democracy

when it was his dad that reinstalled the dictator that Saddam defeated in Kuwait in 1990. It is often forgotten that we reinstalled a dictator in Kuwait. Convenient world wide politics.

The ramifications, over what might be the long term. Is other regimes starting conflicts under the banner of National Security. We have seen Israel step up attacks in the West Bank (breaching over 50 UN resolutions mind) on the back of the same policy that was adopted by my Prime Minister and your President. This could become a worrying trend.

#8
SWAMP_THING

SWAMP_THING

    been at this fun fair too long

  • Premium Members
  • 389 posts
  • Location:UK
  • Interests:sitting down and sometimes going outside
Click to view battle stats
we didnt kill iquais thru sections sadam did he didnt let the keruds have the aid we gave them (well techiqilly he did but they had to come down from their stronghlod in the mountains and he would have killed them)

plus sadam was the master of propaganda, he used to keep all the badies he had staved to death and then pardade the funels all toghter to say "this is how many babies the west have killed in a week"

clever guy but all the sick flocks are :wink:

#9
Bertinan

Bertinan

    Novice

  • Members
  • 38 posts
Click to view battle stats
I think the feeling most Americans have towards the U.N. at the moment is

Go blow yourself.

(These quotes are fun!)
An interesting fact to point out, however, is that if another country of the U.N., like France, had been attacked, the U.S. would have been sympathatic, patted France on the back, given them some money, and ignored them. Cause, lets face it, France isnt all that important. Neither is Germany for that matter. Nor anyone in Asia. Or Africa. Or even Europe....lol.

#10
xiphoid

xiphoid

    Proud Fan

  • Premium Members
  • 160 posts
Click to view battle stats

we didnt kill iquais thru sections sadam did he didnt let the keruds have the aid we gave them (well techiqilly he did but they had to come down  from their stronghlod in the mountains and he would have killed them)

plus sadam was the master of propaganda, he used to keep all the badies he had staved to death and then pardade the funels all toghter to say "this is how many babies the west have killed in a week"

clever guy but all the sick f*ck are :wink:

I can't work out quite a lot of what you mean and/or are suggesting.

#11
Bertinan

Bertinan

    Novice

  • Members
  • 38 posts
Click to view battle stats
Errr...neither could I, but I could take a guess. I think he said that We didnt kill any Iraqis through sanctions, but that Saddam witheld the aid from some (rebel?) group, and told them to come down and get. However, Saddam would have just shot them anyway, so the rebel group did not come down. Then, to show the West as monsters, Saddam gathered up every baby in the country and gathered them over a course of some time. Then he took pictures, and showed them and said this is how many babies the West has killed in a week. Least, thats what I think he said.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users