Iraqi biological weapons

[Charlemagne]

http://mr_kartik.tripod.com/war.jpg

[MonkeyMan]

Hi Charlemagne Perhaps you can try hosting your image on Fortunecity (http://www.fortunecity.com) it works for me, tripod and some of the supposed more popular sites like geocities are never very nice about what you can do with their space.

[Crackslapper]

I think what he is trying to say is they have none and Bush was talking horse sh*t. But I could be wrong, I normally am

[spqromulus]

They just found chemical producing facilities. Not to mention several weapons, missiles for example, outlawed by the UN. Although no hard evidence of the missing tons of anthrax and other big biological/chemcial weapon caches have been found, give it some time. Even if they arent found, a whole nation has been freed from the Tyranny of one man. Even the most cynical frenchman should appreciate that.

[SmokWawelski]

My vote for the weapons being only a hoax from the DC. But now we KNOW that Syria has them...

[Fragony]

I would like to believe otherwise, but I am afraid that you are right. Don't mean this disrespectfull, but the USA scares me. But as much as I am against this war, I have to confess that I am content with the outcome......no matter the real motives.

[Crackslapper]

Hi Romulus,
I could produce chemicals in my back garden (an do) but that doesn't mean I have weapons of mass descruction. And I am English not French, although the more I hear your President talk the more I like Islam.

EX Nemesis

[Jeff]

Well regardless of what President Bush says it shouldn't sway your opinion on the Islamic faith. There is nothing wrong with people who are Islamic, but like all other religions they have people who are fanatical in their beliefs and take it to an extreme level sometimes. It's the same thing with anything else: A few bad apples don't spoil the whole bunch. I think maybe my government should be content with taking out Saddam and maybe backoff for a while and let the world cool down. I don't think we should start spouting off about Syria, North Korea or anyone else for that matter. We should back up and give the Iraqi people and it's new government whatever aid we can in restoring that country to a funtional capacity. And after doing so completely get out of there and leave them alone unless asked for more help.

[Charlemagne]

Argggh http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif How come the pic didn't show up? It was fine when I previewed the post. Anyway I'm gonna follow MonkeyMan's advice by using Fortunecity. Here is the pic -

http://members.fortunecity.com/charlemagne/war.jpg

Note: If the image doesn't show up again (boohoohoo http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif) try this link -
My new FortuneCity page (http://members.fortunecity.com/charlemagne/)

What do I think about this war? The good thing about it is that Iraq is free of that sadist Saddam. But was war really necessary to acheive that? They killed thousands to get one man As Jeff said I think the US should cool down now and not point its guns towards Syria or any other evil state. I just hope that there will not be any more BinLadens after this or another World War.

[Gregoshi]

Quote[/b] ]I don't think we should start spouting off about Syria, North Korea or anyone else for that matter. We should back up and give the Iraqi people and it's new government whatever aid we can in restoring that country to a funtional capacity. And after doing so completely get out of there and leave them alone unless asked for more help.


Absolutely. I don't think most Americans will put up with any more unprovoked fighting. I shudder to think of the international reaction to such a war would be.

[eXistenZi]

Hmmm it would be nice to gas some Byzantines in Medieval. Perhaps they could add Saddam and Chemical Ali as units in the game. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[MonkeyMan]

Quote[/b] (Charlemagne @ April 16 2003,04:16)]Argggh http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif How come the pic didn't show up? It was fine when I previewed the post. Anyway I'm gonna follow MonkeyMan's advice by using Fortunecity. Here is the pic -
It's because your browser caches the pic from when you looked at it on your site or previously. Hence when you previewed it, it looked fine. If you want to check in future use 'cntl+refresh' to force a complete reload. Fortunecity tends to work fine but sometimes you have to give uploads a little time to start working.

[SmokWawelski]

Quote[/b] ]The good thing about it is that Iraq is free of that sadist Saddam.

That is true, but the campaign can be hardly called a success. We did not catch the guy, neither one of his sons. We did not find any WMD yet, might not find them at all. The world opinion is against us, we ripped the UN and defacto made it a pale shadow of itself. Many Iraqi civilians are dead, much more face a humanitarian crisis. It is very unlikely that any US-friendly government will have large acceptance in this country, since people already start pushing americans out. We lost historical treasures, damaged infrastructure, deposed government. So what we got so far is 120 (?) casualties and a bill to pay.

Looking into Afghanistan today: similar defeat with no real government and warlords running the show, and with Osama still missing, I cannot say that it was a success either...

[Portuguese Rebel]

Quote[/b] (Gregoshi @ April 16 2003,00:37)]Absolutely. I don't think most Americans will put up with any more unprovoked fighting. I shudder to think of the international reaction to such a war would be.
Im not sure about this Gregoshi. There are a lot of bloodthirsty americans out there and the TV propaganda seems to work miracles on those guys. They seem to actually believe anything they are told.

Anyway, if the US decided to atack again, what could the rest of the world do? Economic sanctions?Military intervention? Total nuclear war? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif

Of the above only the first and the last could work. And the last ain't nice at all http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif

[SmokWawelski]

US became THE most powerful country and as such is in the position to do whatever it pleases. I do not think that even the UN, Europe, Russia or any other country can resist US. Only global coalition could do something, but then, we all are in the same bandwagon, speaking about economy and security.

PR: I am glad that somebody shares my views about the nature of news coverage in the US.

[Gregoshi]

I'm not sure about this Portuguese Rebel. Foreigners seem to think there are a lot of bloodthirsty americans and the TV propaganda seems to work miracles on those guys (foreigners). They seem to actually believe anything they are told. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

Seriously, I know there are some of the blood thirsty types (there are always a few), but I think you grossly overstate the American lust for war. Support for the Iraq war in the US (at least from my personal experience) hardly enthusiastic but more like a necessary evil to eliminate a potential threat. Aside from the belief Iraq had WMD, I think another thing driving the support for the Iraq war was the sense of unfinished business from the '91 Gulf War. The primary motivator for American military activities is justice for 9/11 - a case I felt was very weak with Iraq. But I think the unfinished business made up for that weak case. Bush had better have a much better case for any other military action he might feel necessary or he won't have the backing of the American public. We can't and won't continue to pay for these adventures with lives and money - both to fight the war and then rebuild the country.

What could the rest of the world do? Economic sanctions. I think the '91 Gulf War showed that a bad economy has more influence than a military victory when it comes to electing presidents. Americans being forced to buy American products would do the trick nicely I'd think.
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

Of course all this is my opinion only. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[spqromulus]

Alright, alright. Some of you may have a media biased look at how Americans really are. The majority of us are not blood thirsty but we will fight bravely to defend our way of life. This war we are in is not just to Take out Saddam or Bin LAden, it is to stop Terrorism and those that support terroism. Victory is not define by finding some chemical or biological weapons, and I seriously doubt any other military could have completed this war in Iraq as swiftly and cleanly as U.S. IT is a fact Saddam supports AL Quada. He also gives 25000 to suicide bombers, espeically palastinians. Remember the bombs vests found in the Iraqi schools? 12 years is enough time to wait for the man to disarm, if you dont believe that their is no point in arguing. Perhaps the UN is only goood for handing out Food and Humanitarian aide since it cant do much of anything else. And If it offends you that we have to go to war to protect ourselves and the world, I and every other American could really care less.

[spqromulus]

Give democracy a chance, these countries arent going to turn around into a legitamite democracy over night. Its a gradual process, not a failure.

[Knight_Yellow]

low there romulus



http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif



the orgs in trouble now http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif

[Goatus Maximus]

I second Gregoshi's sentiment...I supported the invasion/liberation/boondoggle in Iraq, but I would not support any further liberation/WMD hunts until both the Iraq and Afghani operations move farther along, meaning that the local people have the framework to build a viable government/economy and our presence is minimized. America can not afford (either politically or economically) to just use its military might to remove unfriendly regimes without using its economic and diplomatic might to secure the peace.

[Longshanks]

Quote[/b] (SmokWawelski @ April 16 2003,13:52)]
Quote[/b] ]The good thing about it is that Iraq is free of that sadist Saddam.

That is true, but the campaign can be hardly called a success. We did not catch the guy, neither one of his sons. We did not find any WMD yet, might not find them at all. The world opinion is against us, we ripped the UN and defacto made it a pale shadow of itself. Many Iraqi civilians are dead, much more face a humanitarian crisis. It is very unlikely that any US-friendly government will have large acceptance in this country, since people already start pushing americans out. We lost historical treasures, damaged infrastructure, deposed government. So what we got so far is 120 (?) casualties and a bill to pay.

Looking into Afghanistan today: similar defeat with no real government and warlords running the show, and with Osama still missing, I cannot say that it was a success either...
Leave to a liberal to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory Whether a military campaign is successful is not determined by how well the post-war peace goes. The Taliban/Al Qaeda and Saddam's Baathists were both routed.

[redrooster]

The military victory does not mean very much.
The military phase in both Afghanistan and Iraq was just a step on a very long road. A long road that could be very bumpy.
So what if the US aided northern alliance danced into Kabul. The moment the warlords finished up the Taliban, the next thing was that they raced back to their tradition strongholds and for them its business as usual. Osama is still at large and Al Qaeda is still operating although at lower capacities. The country is hardly at peace, and development there would take a very long time.
Its too early to tell with Iraq. But i'm sure glad the iraqis are glad for the oil that they have thus making many in the developed world very friendly and willing to help them.
Anyway, the military victory does not mean very much, its what you do after that would really mean anything.

[The_Emperor]

In my view the Bush Administration has shown its priorities in Iraq by leaving everything unguarded and letting chaos run rampant... (Oh wait they did guard the Oil Fields and the Ministry of Oil was the only government building protected by US forces)

As far as spreading democracy goes, who says the Arabs will accept democracy? They have lived this way for hundreds of years, and given the amount of hatred of the west in the area I think they will be deeply suspicious of any puppet government that is put into place.

It remains to be seen if Iraq will be a becon of light or just another Afghanistan

[spqromulus]

Emperor, I dont think you are keeping up with the effort in Iraq. Aside from guarding the oil, American troops have also been giving food and aide to the Iraqi people. Even now they are in Baghdad guarding check points and looking for snipers and other bad guys. And lets not be to premature about Iraq or Afghanistan. I dont see how you can say Afghanistan is a failure just because some warlords have power. Its forging a democracy for itself but needs time.

[cugel]

the UN is only goood for handing out Food and Humanitarian aide since it cant do much of anything else. And If it offends you that we have to go to war to protect ourselves and the world, I and every other American could really care less.

Speak for yourself I don't know where you get this every American idea. Maybe a majority now support this very shortsighted view, but when the S*** hits the fan (which it is now starting to do) that won't be the majority view for long This is precisely the problem. Too many Americans feel like the world owes us after 9/11 and aren't really too particular about whom we bomb. Or, in the imortal words of Donald Rumsfeld to General Zinni no-one can tell us who we can bomb and who we can't bomb. As much the principle at stake in Iraq as anything else.

Unfortunately for the Rambos among us, it matters very much what the world thinks of us. Personally I don't much want to live in a world where the U.S. is feared and hated by everyone else and that's where we're rapidly heading. Isolating the U.S. from the world can only lead to increased terrorism and increasing attacks against americans both here and around the world. That won't make us more safe. There's no hope of stopping terrorism without serious international cooperation. How many nations will go out of their way to cooperate now? What are we going to do? Invade Europe, Africa, Asia, occupy anyone who doesn't cooperate? There isn't remotely enough military power to do that and our economies are all interlinked in ways that make a serious effort to dominate the world through military power hopeless anyway. We forget too easily that Iraq was chosen to demonstrate a new principle in the world, that what we say goes. It was chosen not because it was strong or a serious threat, but because it was weak and could be conquered almost without casualties (ours at least). As Time magazine and numerous other mainstream publications have noted, there has been almost no planning in the administration about how to rebuild the country. The obvious effect, one that every serious knowledgable commentator predicted, that the result of toppling Saddam would be a marked rise in islamist power both in Iraq and throughout the middle east is now coming true. In short, we're creating more enemies and polarizing the situation, undermining our friends and losing the battle for hearts and minds. What good does it do to eliminate Saddam, if the cost is creating 10-20 new Bin Ladens? The Iraqi Shiites are already demanding that the U.S. withdraw. Soon there will be an increase in attacks on American troops. Even if we avoid a guerilla war there seems no real intention to install democracy in Iraq. That wasn't why Paul Wolfowitz sent our favorite Iraqi quisling, Ahmed Chalabi, to Iraq, even before the fighting stopped. He wanted to create facts on the ground and give his chosen candidate a leg up. It now seems unlikely to work, but is a clear indication of administration intentions (as is the refusal to allow the U.N. any political role in running the country - since this would make it much tougher to privatize the Iraqi oilfields and sell them off to U.S. and coalition oil companies as has been openly discussed among neo-conservatives in Washington both before and after the war).

None of this bodes well for our security in the future, and the economic cost of maintaining this huge and increasing military force has yet to be really felt. It's not those sunny uplands of better days (to quote Churchill) that we're heading for.

[The_Emperor]

Quote[/b] (spqromulus @ April 19 2003,14:18)]Emperor, I dont think you are keeping up with the effort in Iraq. Aside from guarding the oil, American troops have also been giving food and aide to the Iraqi people. Even now they are in Baghdad guarding check points and looking for snipers and other bad guys. And lets not be to premature about Iraq or Afghanistan. I dont see how you can say Afghanistan is a failure just because some warlords have power. Its forging a democracy for itself but needs time.
Oh trust me I have been keeping up to date with the developments... and I see too few troops were sent in to keep the order, and utter chaos in the streets.

Afghanistan is a failure because of the fact that the warlords were bribed off and no peacekeeping forces were sent in. I mean just a few months before the war the leader in Kabul was nearly assassinated Democracy in kabul isn't democracy in the country, and without a serious effort to put it in there, we won't see anything but token changes.

I know the aid is now comming into Iraq, but it all seems too little too late. Especially since the country has now had its mass looting and destroy everything phase... More troops should have gone in, and they should have been prepared to accept their responsibilities as an occupying power under the Geneva conventions to protect hospitals and other key buildings, and to enforce law and order.

[spqromulus]

We forget too easily that Iraq was chosen to demonstrate a new principle in the world, that what we say goes. It was chosen not because it was strong or a serious threat, but because it was weak and could be conquered almost without casualties (ours at least).

It was chosen, because at the time the consequences of not acting were greater then the consequencies of acting. Not what we say goes, but the fact a country has a right o defend itself if it believes its been threatened and has evidence (12 years of noncompliance with UN), which is not something for other nations to decide liek the Eu hegemons Germany and France. And the Iraqi military is not that weak friend, we've lost over a 100 lives.
I have my doubts like everyone else about what is going on over there, but im not gonna believe everyting the media shows me. Iraqi stores and museams are being looted? We're gonna build them back. the chinese college kids destoryed their museams in the 60s beacuse they believed they were undergoing a cultural revolution. Maybe thats what you have here now in Iraq. I am not saying this war and everything thats going on over there is perfect, but I will not be a total cynic about it either. Theres always a bright side, and I dont mean that in a way for you to twist around and turn into some kind of anti american thing, which all of you are so good at.

[The_Emperor]

Here we are weeks later, still no WMD... I seriously doubt they will EVER be found in Iraq and western intelligence will be the laughing stock of the world if they are not found.


Quote[/b] ] Iraqi stores and museams are being looted? We're gonna build them back.


I'll only believe that when I see it, Given the USA's bad track record in Nation building.


Quote[/b] ]the chinese college kids destoryed their museams in the 60s beacuse they believed they were undergoing a cultural revolution. Maybe thats what you have here now in Iraq.

A cultural revolution? You clearly don't know how defensive and proud the people in that reigion are of their culture and history.

The US didn't have the plans in place for what they would do once Iraq fell, and that has been seen so clearly.

[Lord of the morning]

The biological weapons is a hoax. The missiles they have found were marked made in brittan remember that any chemical, biological or other forms of advanced weapon Iraq has was given to them bu the US during the time when Saddam was favoured by the US (dont forget who gave him the power he had). If he actually had any of teh chemical weapons the US wanted hm to use against Iran left, why would he not have fired them on the invading forces?

To make a statement about the overall war. I think that it is good Saddam is removed from power. However the war is, was and always will be illigal. The war was declared without the approval of teh security council and that is it. No arguing about saddam breaking the law will help, if you break the law I may not hit you, kill you ar anything like that. I may go to the ploce and make ask them to trial the offender.

Anyway, this doesnt really belong here IMO. Political discussion can break apart the greates community.

[spqromulus]

I'll only believe that when I see it, Given the USA's bad track record in Nation building

Bad record track? Did you forget who rebuilt Europe after ww2?? You guys wouldnt even be here today if it werent for that. I know you all hate it when Americans bring that up but its a fact. The new age has come, Open your doors and windows to Mcdonalds and nike shoes I would love to rebuttle each and ever one of your comments but it is too time consuming and I know niether one of us will come to understand the others viewpoint any time soon. and yes I would go over their and die because my freedom means that much to me. Cheers, Cheers http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[SmokWawelski]

Are you reffering to the MC that makes US the fattest nation, and Nike that uses cheap China labor, and is affordable only because of these poor people ?

I take the old age...

[spqromulus]

Fine, lets all be communists

[spqromulus]

First off, that comment is very popular in Canada amongst chums, but for the sake of decencey which you apparently must uphold in the total war community, I will remove it. But lets not deny what you really meant. You meant you wouldnt want to be over there, risking your life to remove a monster and then having to watch over the innocent people of Iraq. Well I would. I would risk my life for not only my secruity and freedom, buts theres as well. Dont back track what you really meant mr monitor, other wise you wouldnt have ended the last sentence I like freedom, but (not) that much thanks. Indeed you dont.

[spqromulus]

ok, so how do I remove the comment?

Edit: You can't. I can. I did. I won't have to do this anymore, will I? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/pissed.gif

Nobody who read your post in its original form will remember anything about your point. However, they will remember your use of profantity and most likely draw some not so pleasant conclusions about you as a person. When you resort to such language, people tune out to your message and focus on the delivery. I don't think that is what you intended, but that is what you got.

- Gregoshi

[Gregoshi]

Unfortunately for spqromulus, Junior Patrons do not have an edit button.

[Knight_Yellow]

Romulus are u part of the SPQR clan or are u just sum1 else who happened to take one of my clan members names.


i hope its the latter i realy do.

[spqromulus]

I'm sorry I have a flare for profanity, I'll try to restrain myself.

[spqromulus]

I don't want to be there.
Do you? I like freedom but that much thanks.:D
Again, guys, im sorry for taking profanity to this comment, but when I hear cowardice like this, it really gets to me. I humbly ask your pardons.

[The_Emperor]

Quote[/b] (spqromulus @ April 26 2003,10:33)]I'll only believe that when I see it, Given the USA's bad track record in Nation building

Bad record track? Did you forget who rebuilt Europe after ww2?? You guys wouldnt even be here today if it werent for that. I know you all hate it when Americans bring that up but its a fact. The new age has come,
So the best example of nation building you can come up with is from 60 years ago... (when the USA had only a small portion of the wealth and power it has today), I think that in itself shows the failure of America's modern nation building efforts

[spqromulus]

So the best example of nation building you can come up with is from 60 years ago... (when the USA had only a small portion of the wealth and power it has today), I think that in itself shows the failure of America's modern nation building efforts

Whatever, we have the experience, and we can do it. And there are more countries then that but Europe is probably the most powerful.

As far as lord goes, I just call them like I see them. Maybe im wrong and you arent a coward, but i am weary of countries that twice in a century couldnt forsee the rise of fascism and stop it before it was too late. If its not cowardice its lack of vision.
And I know the obvious anti american response this will bring

[KukriKhan]

...but i am weary...

No kiddin' m8. Knock it off. Now.

You know I'm right.

Don't fall for the hoopla of battle, the exurberance of victory, the hubris of conquering.

Name-calling, stereotyping, finger-pointing: those are all weapons of dishonor and deceit.

We don't do that here. And neither should you. Period.

[spqromulus]

Look, I already apologized for the Canadian slang.

[spqromulus]

Indeed, lets stop pointing fingers and look at the planks in our own eyes.

[Gregoshi]

Topic closed.

The next post I read from either of you (you know who you are) better give me a warm and fuzzy feeling inside.