View Full Version : Our President offers a Consolation Prize...
The Prez is offering a consolation prize to Americans. He could not find Bin Laden, so he has to go after Saddam Hussein. He'll probably have to do it alone, without help from the UN and other Countries but has ask for the American people's support via the media.
Unfortunately, many people agree with the Cowboy. Nobody taking into consideration that many inocent lives will be harmed. If our Prez is so tough, why doesn't he send a Commando unit to abduct Saddam and take him out of power?
Well, the Prez is so dumb he hasn't probably thought of that. I rather lose a "few good men" than have a bitter concience because we killed inocent people.
02-08-2003, 12:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 9BallChump:</font><hr> The Prez is offering a consolation prize to Americans. He could not find Bin Laden, so he has to go after Saddam Hussein.
<font color="blue">Did you listen to Colin Powell's speech Tuesday? </font color>
I rather lose a "few good men" than have a bitter concience because we killed inocent people.
<font color="blue">You would rather see American soldiers die rather than Iraqi civilians? Interesting perspective. If Iraqi civilians die it will be because Saddam has used them as human shields. How many innocent Afghans died as compared to Al-Quaida and Taliban? Not many.
Iraqi Civilians are already being tortured and killed. If we wait long enough Saddam will use Al-Quaida as a proxy to kill us.
The biggest problem the Americans will face is keeping the Iraqi civilians from tearing Saddam's henchman limb from limb in revenge for what they have done to that country.
I'll make a bold prediction right now. No Iraqi civilian, not one, will take up arms against the American military. A few of the Iraqi military may fight back but 95%, at least, will surrender in a New York minute. The biggest problem with this war will be the shortage of white flags.
02-08-2003, 02:59 PM
"How many innocent Afghans died as compared to Al-Quaida and Taliban? Not many."
Do you really believe that? War was and always will be a dirty business. But the current "war style" leads to a very high civilian death rate. Minimizing the death rate of US soldiers leads to a higher civilian death rate. I do not want to say this way of leading a war is morally right or wrong. I only want to point out that a "smart & clean" way does not exist. There is simply nearly no media coverage about the nasty side of war.
Could you call a number how many civilians can be killed to save one US soldier? 5? 20? 100? I would not like to make these kinds of decisions.
For those who are really interested:
A study in contrast: the Afghanistan and Kosovo air campaigns
Afghanistan's civilian deaths mount
Short discussion of the "Civilians-Killed-Per-Bomb-Dropped Ratio"
Daily Casualty Count of Afghan Civilians Killed in U.S Bombing Attacks
Before I reply, I have to say, I think your name says it all. LOL
[ QUOTE ]
The Prez is offering a consolation prize to Americans. <hr /></blockquote> I do not agree....I believe the President is continuing his quest of removing the terrorists and those that harbour the terrorists.
[ QUOTE ]
He'll probably have to do it alone, without help from the UN and other Countries <hr /></blockquote> This is hard to debate because you obviously do not read or listen to the news.
[ QUOTE ]
but has ask for the American people's support via the media. <hr /></blockquote> Is there any other way. Maybe he should show up at your pool hall and discuss this personally with you.
[ QUOTE ]
He could not find Bin Laden, so he has to go after Saddam Hussein. <hr /></blockquote> If I have not mistaken, I do not believe anyone has found Bin Laden. You cannot prove he is alive or dead. Why sit and wait for him?
[ QUOTE ]
Nobody taking into consideration that many inocent lives will be harmed. <hr /></blockquote> You have forgotten the many innocent lives we lost here. Going after Saddam is not about the oil...It is about carrying out the sanctions put into place which Saddam has failed to fulfill. Just read some of Blix's statements. It is also to remove a man that harbours Al Qaeda.
[ QUOTE ]
why doesn't he send a Commando unit to abduct Saddam and take him out of power?
Well, the Prez is so dumb he hasn't probably thought of that. <hr /></blockquote> The crown jewel of your whole post. You, the pool chump is omnipotent. That is hilarious. Do you even know how the Iraqis new we were in Bagdad back in the early 90's. They thought the Americans were sitting idly by out in the water and in Kuwait waiting for something to happen. This is very old news, but I will remind you...We sent in a unit to spy on Bagdad and to see what was going on and to track Saddam. While they were hiding in a bunker beside the main road, they were seen...By two little curious girls play with a ball and saw a handle sticking out of the ground. The men chased after them but was called off by his commander and ordered not to shoot them. They ran home told whomever and the chase was on. Thus the very beginning of the internal strikes on Bagdad.
I am sure with your wealth of knowledge you remember that and are also able to remember what happened in Bosnia. These two events should show you that it is not a walk in the park and just knock on the doors and take these people.
[ QUOTE ]
I rather lose a "few good men" than have a bitter concience because we killed inocent people. <hr /></blockquote> I rather lose zero good men. Do you even know that accuracy of a JDAM or an LGB? Sure some will be lost, but it is minimal compared to what they will do to us if we sit back and let it happen.
Those were great readings. I would like to see how much other information was passed up during the research. What was used is probably portions of the information that helped prove the points. Is it everything, I doubt.
My reasons to doubt some of the stuff that you showed...One I do not think they went into depth at how accurate the weapons are that were used. Why is this important? Because they were being shot into cities where accuracy is important. A JDAM or LGB has a 5 ft radius tolerance. That is pretty tight, considering what was out there just 15 years ago. What this means, if we were using weapons from just 15 years ago, they would have done even more damage than we have seen and would have had to drop 4 times as many bombs to hit the same spot. The evidence in those reports proves this theory because they are stating the casualty rates based on quantities of munitions dropped. If the quantity dropped goes down then the ratio of innoncent deaths/bombs dropped will increase. If these people are hiding their military at the bottom of a hospital, should we just wait until they move out and then get them. NO. What we did was drop the bomb on a side of the building (killing some innocent but not the whole hospital) and destroying those hiding underneath. The building stayed standing and less people were harmed. This simple, true/real life example shows the ratio increasing...One bomb used to kill those underneath and some collateral damage, instead of all 16 munitions dropped and killing the same amount of people.
Once again, there is a play on words, and a belief that the average person will not read in depth into what is being said in order to make their own logical conclusion.
One of the sites was referring to the amount of civilians that were killed as reported by the enemy. Do you really think that number is not exaggerated. The enemy knows CNN is there and will shout that number out and then not even worry about having to account for the actual number. During desert storm, Saddam was blaming us for thousands of deaths in the hospital that we bombed, however he forgot to mention that the hospital was only a 1/4 filled and the number was tremendously lower than he reported. CNN also failed to report that Saddams largest weapons lab was destroyed with that same bomb. Thank you CNN for reporting false deaths without giving any recognition to the military for a perfect hit on the largest lab in the country.
I did enjoy reading the sites you posted, just have my few reservations with the amount of indepth sources cited.
Has Collin Powell convinced any of the other countries, specially France, Germany, etc? He has no damn case. It's unbelievable all the BS said. Powell probably didn't even convince himself.
If Iraqi civilians die it's because of the stupid gunhoes who fail to follow instructions or don't even know how to operate the "sofisticated" US weaponry. You have to be intelligent to operate this type of equipment, not high school dropouts or dumb-a$$es who didn't have nothing to do back home and decided to join the "Armed Forces."
What a bunch of BS, this thing about Iraqi civilians being tortured. Just another stupid justification for the Prez to jump and beat someone senseless because the US couldn't get the job done the first time. This reminds me of the school bully who eventually gets beat by the school nerd.
With the bunch of cowboys we now have in the Armed Forces, they probably get lost in Iraq and could even find a pot hole to $hit in.
Maybe you and e8gr should have been the Prez and Sec of State.....but then you both wouldn't know how to handle this anyway...
Incredible how some people would say anything to defend the dumb cowboy we call President.
You talk so much $hit, you probably have to empty your outhouse every day! Boy, that smell is horrendous! Please eat some mint and chew gum!
Hey thanks Chump. Please prove where I am wrong, instead of resorting to childish replies.
02-10-2003, 11:14 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 9BallChump:</font><hr> eg8r:
You talk so much $hit, you probably have to empty your outhouse every day! Boy, that smell is horrendous! Please eat some mint and chew gum! <hr /></blockquote>
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote 9BallChump (from a while back):</font><hr>
....I'm a road player, pretty good one, and I don't want my true identity revealed!....
http://www.billiardsdigest.com/ccboard/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=ccbboard&Number=42983& Forum=All_Forums&Words=9BallChump&Match=Username&S earchpage=0&Limit=25&Old=allposts&Main=42965&Searc h=true#Post42983
After reading the post above, I can't say I blame you for wanting to remain anonymous.
02-10-2003, 11:38 AM
I just love reading your political posts. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.