Saddam Hussein and terror

[Federalist]

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

Comments anyone?

[cut]

Saddam had clear links with anti-israeli terrorist groups and not AQ but so does Saudi Arabia. Iran has clear links with both. The war in Iraq shouldn't be considered part of the War on terror. Even if there is some evidence that isn't dubious it's no where near enough to link the War in Iraq to the war on terror.

That site has just about all the dubious evidence that has been found between 9/11 and now, it's comparetively nothing!

Futhermore, if the the there really were links between links between AQ and Saddam, the British and American governments would have included it in their reasons for going to war in Iraq, making life a lot easier for themselves.

[[SAB]Grey]

Yeah if they could prove the link to 9/11 or AQ Bush election HQ would have been shouting it from the rooftops. Now if your talking about a war on just terror in general then they might have a point. Unfortunately then the questions arise of who's next and where do we stop? Just for starters.

[Federalist]

Who's next is pretty easy. I'd say Iran. "Where do we stop" is a very good question though. We can't flatten half the planet. :bash:

[Haiw]

Who's next is pretty easy. I'd say Iran.
And with which troops?

[ThePatriot]

haiw the united states, what dont people understand about whatever it takes

[Haiw]

haiw the united states, what dont people understand about whatever it takes
So from which magical hat are you gonna pull the troops to do it?

[[SAB]Grey]

haiw the united states, what dont people understand about whatever it takes That makes it sound like reinstating the draft to me.

[ThePatriot]

Grey]
haiw the united states, what dont people understand about whatever it takes That makes it sound like reinstating the draft to me.

you afraid? you do realize other countires have mandatory military service. right?

[cut]

Grey]
haiw the united states, what dont people understand about whatever it takes That makes it sound like reinstating the draft to me.

you afraid? you do realize other countires have mandatory military service. right?

those countries tend to be ones with defence forces rather than expeditionary ones. Conscription is impossible if you need well trained troops out for a period of 6 months.

[Haiw]

Grey]
haiw the united states, what dont people understand about whatever it takes That makes it sound like reinstating the draft to me.

you afraid? you do realize other countires have mandatory military service. right?
I thought the glorious leader Mr. Bush had said he wouldn't instate a draft? ;) So what's it gonna be... conscription or leaving alone Iran? :P

[ThePatriot]

Grey]
haiw the united states, what dont people understand about whatever it takes That makes it sound like reinstating the draft to me.

you afraid? you do realize other countires have mandatory military service. right?
I thought the glorious leader Mr. Bush had said he wouldn't instate a draft? ;) So what's it gonna be... conscription or leaving alone Iran? :P

either way the job will get done.

[Haiw]

And could you enlighten us with the brilliant plan of action?

[[SAB]Grey]

you afraid? you do realize other countires have mandatory military service. right?
Well we'd have to be in some serious trouble for me to get drafted at 34, married, and with a family.

You are sure as **** I'd be scared as an U.S. citizen to have to do mandatory service in another countries army. :slap:

[TALOS]

Looked like pretty clear links to terrorism to me, or do you deny abu nidal was a terrorist? You deny that the cheques were written to the palis? do you deny Aziz would know? Or abu abbas?
Its a war on terror, not AQ, people keep forgetting that. Also, the uS reserved the right to attack when and how they chose, so NO, they do not HAVE to go to every country and wage war if they choose not to or to wait for a better time.
A lot of people sure go to a lot of effort in here to defend one of the worst regimes and dictatorships known , that of the thug and tyrant Saddam Hussein.

[triath]

Who's next is pretty easy. I'd say Iran.
And with which troops?

The tens of thousands not in iraq and afghanistan?

[[SAB]Grey]

Looked like pretty clear links to terrorism to me, or do you deny abu nidal was a terrorist? You deny that the cheques were written to the palis? do you deny Aziz would know? Or abu abbas?
Its a war on terror, not AQ, people keep forgetting that. Also, the uS reserved the right to attack when and how they chose, so NO, they do not HAVE to go to every country and wage war if they choose not to or to wait for a better time.
A lot of people sure go to a lot of effort in here to defend one of the worst regimes and dictatorships known , that of the thug and tyrant Saddam Hussein. Who's defending Saddam?

[Haiw]

Who's next is pretty easy. I'd say Iran.
And with which troops?

The tens of thousands not in iraq and afghanistan?
Right now the US army is already overstretched like it is... anyone with a brain can see that an invasion of Iran is just practically impossible right now.

[TALOS]

Grey]
Looked like pretty clear links to terrorism to me, or do you deny abu nidal was a terrorist? You deny that the cheques were written to the palis? do you deny Aziz would know? Or abu abbas?
Its a war on terror, not AQ, people keep forgetting that. Also, the uS reserved the right to attack when and how they chose, so NO, they do not HAVE to go to every country and wage war if they choose not to or to wait for a better time.
A lot of people sure go to a lot of effort in here to defend one of the worst regimes and dictatorships known , that of the thug and tyrant Saddam Hussein. Who's defending Saddam?
Many posters in these forums have made comments that the war is illegal, "because the UN didnt approve it" They say that Bush is the Hitler and that Iraq was a threat and that Saddam should not have been toppled etc etc.... that supports Saddam IMO

[Haiw]

Eh?! That does not support Saddam... :|

[Kilgor]

Last year I went to Iraq. Before Team America showed up it was a happy place. They had flowering meadows and rainbow skies and rivers made of chocolate, where the children danced and laughed and played with gumdrop smiles.

:D

[TALOS]

Eh?! That does not support Saddam... :|
Saying that Saddam shouldnt have been toppled doesnt support him? I am confused then , sorry, :roll:
All the attacks on the US for removing Saddam and saying the americans are the aggressors takes the side of the enemy, it certainly isnt remaining neutral on the subject, the people act like Saddam was so wonderful< they say they know he was bad but in the same breath say that it wasnt necessary to emove him. they bring up the Iraqis who have died since but forget all the ones who died under saddam, if everyone cared so much about the iraqis why did they not speak up when 100's of thousands of them died under years of dictatorial rule. They say that Bush is phoney in his comments about the iraqi people yet the ones who lay that claim are the ones that would leave them in fear and torture daily from Saddams goons.

[OB Kenobi]

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

Comments anyone?

Crap.

[Sir Zach of R.]

Wasn't it Deuterium who said something about finding an AQ flag in Iraq?

[Zander]

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

Comments anyone?


bs

[username]

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

Comments anyone?

i think this ones been posted a few times before.

[Christoff]

if everyone cared so much about the iraqis why did they not speak up when 100's of thousands of them died under years of dictatorial rule. They say that Bush is phoney in his comments about the iraqi people yet the ones who lay that claim are the ones that would leave them in fear and torture daily from Saddams goons.

So... ah... if Saddam was such a bad man, and we knew this, why didn't daddy Bush take him out in '91 when he had the chance?[/quote]

[achilles]

Who's next is pretty easy. I'd say Iran.
And with which troops?

Oh you know...the good old coalition...Tony, Sylvio, Poland...Micronesia p-)

[TALOS]

if everyone cared so much about the iraqis why did they not speak up when 100's of thousands of them died under years of dictatorial rule. They say that Bush is phoney in his comments about the iraqi people yet the ones who lay that claim are the ones that would leave them in fear and torture daily from Saddams goons.

So... ah... if Saddam was such a bad man, and we knew this, why didn't daddy Bush take him out in '91 when he had the chance?[/quote]
Im not as eloquent in explaining the political mentality of the time as walford is but he has made some very valid points as to the UN being the body at the time who controlled whether or not Saddam was ousted. Bush Sr went to the UN for the first Gulf war and they of course were not goin to approve the removal of Saddam, as a matter of a fact much has been said in re this subject for over a decade so to say that many in the military were ready to take saddam out even back then would be quite accurate. Bush Sr was worried about UN approval, Bush Jr isnt goin to wait for the dictators and anti american members of the UN (who make up a fair chunk of that body) to give him permission or the war on terror would never get anywhere.
The UN is more interested in appeaseing these nations.IMHO

[Federalist]

http://www.husseinandterror.com/

Comments anyone?


bs

Well, that was a convincing and alliterated rebuttal. :roll:

[Knutsen]

TALOS , i don't think calling the war illegal means supporting Saddam.
The war was not about terrorism or about Saddams evilness (if so then he should have been wiped out 13 years ago ). This war is about money and some kind of revenge. It's about money because all the interests many memebers of Bush Administration have in enterprises like Halliburton, Blackwater, LockHeed Martin......
It's also about revenge cause after 9/11 the US felt vulnerable for the first time in many decades. People needed someone to blame on , someone to pay for the massacre , and who better than Saddam Hussein? He is a criminal and the US had a war against him and his country has the second biggest oil reserves, that makes him the perfect candidate for an invasion.

The war brought a good thing, that is, Saddams detention which i celebrate but that is only a good thing that came out of a criminal war.
I'm against the reasons to make the war , i'm against the lies and the use of fear the US administration have done to convince the world that war was necessary.
That's why i'm against the war, not against wiping out Saddam.

[vryhpyammoadded]

Who's next is pretty easy. I'd say Iran.
And with which troops?

The ones we draft ;)

[vryhpyammoadded]

One little tidbit I’d like more info on was why the King of Jordon was so desperate to meet with Bush on 9/08/2001 after he got word back from his Intel people about the terror summit Saddam held in Baghdad?