Guest purrfectlillady2000 Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 No Saddam...No weapons of mass destruction yet...............!Big place to find the weapons......and the b...... saddam......They will both be around somewhere!Also......plenty of reason to go into the place without the chemical weapons......Only problem it should have been done long ago.Hats off to the brits and the us.Better late than never!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Damo Posted April 9, 2003 Report Share Posted April 9, 2003 There have been reports today suggesting that Missiles and rockets with Chemical warheads have been found!But as always these are unfounded reports and have yet to be made official! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted April 10, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2003 Thank heavens that that little s hit of a misinformation minister has dissapeared. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Posted April 10, 2003 Report Share Posted April 10, 2003 He's on his way way here andsome, good job at no. 10 awaits. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark2 Posted April 10, 2003 Report Share Posted April 10, 2003 A picture of an Iraqi resistance fighter, http://www.chix0rs.org/resistance.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 No Saddam...No weapons of mass destruction yet............09/04/03...!HmmmStill think ...Yemen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted April 19, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 We have to appreciate that Iraq is quite large country. You can't expect to walk in there and see road signs saying 'this way to the weapons of mass distruction factory and store'. It's going to take time. It won't be helped now by these demonstrations trying to drive the Americans out. The Iraqi's in the main are glad that Sadamm has gone, but seemed to expect that the power would be switched on, a democratic government set up, food and medical supplies up to 100%, schools opened up and everyone back in work the next day. I find it very difficult to understand the Muslim mind. Are there any Muslim site members, or friends of muslims out there who can explain things to me. I am NOT intending to be racist or anti Muslim. I just cannot understand a people who welcome in the coalition one day, saying 'thank you for getting rid of one of the worst dictators ever', and then say 'right, get the hell out of here', a few days later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Stirred by Saddam wannabe's.....with an eye on the prize..................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 If the US do manage to create a democracy in Iraq ,it'll be a first for an Arabic country........harder than the actual war methinks................Anyway the US know for a fact that he has had WMD , because they sold them to him........Why dont they just be up front about it,and show the receipts as proof of purchase /ownership ?...........Is it because they are worried about thier image............... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nellie2 Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Andsome....... I couldn't quote your post it is too long....but I wanted to post my thoughts to your question....this is getting a bit like a debate though!!!Anyway......I don't think it has anything to do with whether the Iraqi's are muslim or not. Put yourself in their shoes for a minute. You have lived in fear under an oppressive regime for a long time.....your country is then invaded by the Americans who promised so much last time but then pulled out and left you to suffer the consequences.....everything around you is destroyed by bombing and then looters....everything that is familiar to you is lost or not working.....you have no employment anymore, no income, no water, no light etc. The regime has fallen and of course you want your life to get back to normality....you are not an engineer or a politician....you don't know how these things work.......all you want is to start to get your life back together. It doesn't seem much to ask on the face of it but the logistics are daunting. So no......I don't think it has anything to do with a peoples religion......just their needs and their wish to have the basic amenities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,276...,940405,00.html"The US is planning a long-term military presence in Iraq, in a move which will dramatically extend American power in the region and spread dismay and fear among its opponents across the Arab world. According to reports, the Pentagon intends to retain four military bases in Iraq after the invasion force withdraws. It is already using the bases to support continuing operations against pockets of resistance. They are at the international airport near Baghdad, at Talil; close to the city of Nassiriya in the south; at an isolated airstrip called H-1 in the western desert; and at the Bashur airfield in the Kurdish north." everybody comfortable with this ?Exactly what is the agenda here ?Nothing to do with the problem of the Saudi's asking the US to remove or reduce their presence due to internal and external Arabic pressure.....? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted April 21, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 This could go on forever. the trouble with politics and religeon is that people will never agree.As a change of subject Nellie you look gorgeous in your new frock. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ellas Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 no tankus not impressed with that major general the usa have put in charge thats not going to work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter e Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 your country is then invaded by the Americans who promised so much last time but then pulled out and left you to suffer the consequencesAmerica can't be blamed for this, nellie. In the last Gulf War there where those who wanted to finish Saddam for good (and they should have), particularly the USA. But World opinion, and particularly the UN and the neighbouring arab countries wanted the coalition to leave as soon as possible after the Iraq army was removed from Kuwait and was no longer a threat to Saudi Arabia. Blame them for pressuring the coalition into leaving - not the Americans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 From one of my posts in another thread http://www.windowsforum.org/forum/index.ph...t=ST&f=8&t=1585 12/04/03"but I cannot help the feeling ...that Iraq is really a side issue pushed to the front because it suits the US agenda for that region........we somehow jumped on board..........The core problem in that area is Israel, propped up by the US..............................Im not sure ,but I think that they have broken more UN resolutions than any other country......and all that happens is that the US gives them more military equipment............"I don't take what Bush sez at first value..................The reasons why we went into Iraq kept changing...see how our Tones replies to Parliament have altered over the last few weeks...The US had an agenda right from the start...(years ago)......and the overview has little to do with the Iraqi people...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ellas Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 yes but peter e the easy bits been done I bet not have the thoughts gone into what happens after the conflict ,americas got to be careful not to turn the whole arab world against them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Staying put in Iraq is certainly going to provide a focus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 From an American publication.........Open to a lot of different interpretations.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 The Americans are talking about "domino's " again tonight .............Last time they played that game politically was in the 70'sDonald Rumsfelt has totally denied that the US has a long term military base interest in Iraq....Hopfully he is sincere........................................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nellie2 Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 Thanks very much andsome...thought it was time for a change!Peter e.......I was trying to look at it from the ordinary Iraqui's point of view. There were many who suffered because they showed support for the west in the Gulf war and then the west pulled out. I know there were other things happening at the time, but they may not!!I think Ellas is right too.....great care needs to be taken on how this mess is sorted out, we must not get lost in the political tangle and forget about the people who's lives have been devastated by this whole thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OxId3 Posted April 23, 2003 Report Share Posted April 23, 2003 I hope the smelly *beep* burns ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted April 24, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 24, 2003 Don't we all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 24, 2003 Report Share Posted April 24, 2003 Some interesting viewpoint on a US talkshow....The reason given why (daddy) Bush did not go after Saddam after the invasion of Kuwait ,was that some of the Arabic coalition forces (notably the Saudi's) recommended that they should not go into Baghdad as Iran would immediately exploit the political void ,via the Sunni's...which appears to be exactly what is happening now..The Saudi's have as much to fear from a secular theocracy as much as the US ..The Royal family would loose everything as they would be next...and they would also be on their doorstep ,infiltrating their population Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankus Posted April 25, 2003 Report Share Posted April 25, 2003 Some idea what the Iraqi Military were up against.....5.2Mb win media clip..7.2 min (warning actual gun footage ..may cause distress, the voiceover is quite chilling.)http://www.vampirebat.com/obeythefist/AC13..._GunshipMed.wmvUsed in Afghanistan and the Gulf (this is in Afghanistan)The military blurb......Today’s AC-130U Gunship is more lethal than its predecessors, due to the addition of a GAU-12, 25 mm Gatling gun Firing at 1,800 shots per minute and mounted on a fully trainable gun mount, the GAU-12 provides twice the lethality of its former 20 mm cannons, a longer stand-off range and greater accuracy. The operator can select from a series of burst lengths to tailor effectiveness of the GAU-12 for each target due to a fully automated ammunition handling system, capable of carrying 3,000 rounds. The gunship also carries both a 40 mm Bofors cannon, capable of up to 100 shots per minute, and a 105 mm howitzer that can be fired six times a minute. To maximize accuracy, both large guns also are installed on trainable gun mounts. The AC-130U has a dual-target attack capability that allows it to attack simultaneously two targets located up to a kilometer apart. Its fire control system enables the AC-130U to destroy targets more quickly, expediting air-to-ground mission objectives while decreasing threat exposure time, which enhances aircraft survivabilityBasically the plane circles its target , firing until it no longer exists.......Only used in "theatres" where the US have total air superiority... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted April 25, 2003 Author Report Share Posted April 25, 2003 TankusForgive me if I am wrong, but you seem to be very anti the west. If you have to go to war you do not go armed with bows and arrows. The coalition did their very best to avoid civilian casualities, but war is a messy business at the best of times. Can I take it that you also think that we should have made friends with Hitler, Mussolini, and the emporer of Japan?Nothing personal you understand, but you sound just like my son and daughter. They both think that we should not have fought the second world war, but should have waited to see if Hitler invaded, and if he did we should have relied on passive resistence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.