Bush can just "taste" the coming spilling of American and Iraqi blood....

[EROS]

Originally posted by EROS


If MY SON was in the military, I would want to feel that the President had done EVERYTHING in his power to avert WAR.....and possibly prevent my child's death.

Nikole, I wish safe passage for your husband and all those who serve in our military. If you feel that Bush has really exhausted all avenues to avoid war, then you're tragically misled.........

 

[Zurg]

Originally posted by EROS
At present, Hussein IS complying.

No he is not. He has not documented the distruction of the chemical weapons they inspectors proved he made before, as requiredby the UN. The inspections are happening because He isn't in compliance.

He is playing a very cynical game of hide and seek.

 

[CRB#33]

Originally posted by EROS
This is a very politically naive view. Bush and the Administration has made it clear that they "reserve" the right for us to declare WAR on IRAQ if we feel that our national interests are threatened. Bush could care less about the inspections. Of course, he'll have to find some kind of PR cover to start dropping the bombs if the Inspectors haven't found anything. Perhaps if they find a 10 year old nerve gas cannister, Killer George will start the killing.............

I'm glad to see the more eloquent debate board people here. I'm sure you can rip this quote to pieces.

 

[EROS]

Originally posted by Zurg
No he is not. He has not documented the distruction of the chemical weapons they inspectors proved he made before, as requiredby the UN.

I said that he was complying with the Inspections. I fully accept that his 12,000 page declaration is sorely lacking. So do you feel that Bush should therefore declare him in "material breach" and start the killing?????

 

[EROS]

Originally posted by CRB#33


I'm glad to see the more eloquent debate board people here. I'm sure you can rip this quote to pieces.

CRB, you're just as eloquent as the DB crowd . Why so shy??? Go ahead and offer your own opinion .......

 

[CRB#33]

Nah, I just saw Nikole did a very good job already, and I cannot hold a candle to her!

I'm off to bed.

 

[C.Ann]

Originally posted by C.Ann
-----------------------------------------

Could it be that if he DOESN'T comply, then you feel it's okay to kill innocent women and children in Iraq and put our military in harms way?

Wow - that would certainly be an awkward position to admit, wouldn't it??

--------------------------------------------------

Finally! In your last post to me you have admitted that you're talking out of both sides of your mouth - something you quickly accused someone else of earlier in this thread!!

Now maybe I can get to bed so I won't be late for work in the morning..

-------------------------------

Just to be 100% clear here though - and so no one else misses it -

EROS HAS AGREED THAT IF SADDAM HUSSEIN DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE UN LATER THIS MONTH IT IS OKAY TO KILL INNOCENT WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN IRAQ AND PUT OUR MILITARY IN HARMS WAY..

I assume at that point we can also disregard all of his prior objections to these "massacres" - delete his picturesque links - and no longer be subjected to his accusations that we are nothing more than a bunch of "blood-thirsty hang-em-high DISers.."

Thanks for your "confession" EROS..

And to the mods, I apologize ahead of time if I have broken any of the rules with this post.. I just feel that it is VERY important - after all of the hemming and hawing we have been subjected to for MONTHS - that the others here FINALLY get see/hear the conclusions to the anti-war diatribes..

Delete this if you feel it is necessary, but for months on end the DISers here have begged and pleaded for the answers to these questions and we finally have them.. I think it only fair that those who took the time to ask these questions over and over and over that they be allowed to see the answers..

Whatever your decisions as mods though, I will respect them.. I know your jobs aren't easy ones..

Now - I'm going to bed!!! (Any chance we could get a "yawning" smilie here???)

 

[EROS]

C. ANN..........please don't misrepresent my views. I've never said that Hussein should be trusted. If he had refused to allow the U.N. Inspectors in, then I would have supported WAR. If he throws the current Inspection team out, then I would support WAR.

However, at present, there is no reason for the KILLING to start aside from the pathological yearnings of a President who is determined to avenge his father and obtain Saddam's head .........

 

[Zurg]

Originally posted by EROS
I said that he was complying with the Inspections. I fully accept that his 12,000 page declaration is sorely lacking. So do you feel that Bush should therefore declare him in "material breach" and start the killing?????

Nope.

I think I would point out that the 12,000 pages are sorely lacking. but just saying so means he can continue to stall disarmament.

So I would start making the reality of noncompliance clear so that he doesn't start jerking the inspectors around. I would do that with gun boat diplomacy, that is make it real clear that the ability for the military to act is a clear and present.

Saddam isn't goping to respect the UN or any words to disarm unless there is a clear expectation that failing to do so will have costs. And the only thing he has shown any regard for is him staying as despot of Iraq.

What would you do. Sit back and ask real nice if he will disarm pretty please?

 

[EROS]

OK, so let's say that the U.N Inspectors find some unaccounted for supplies which could be used in the manufacturing of ANTHRAX.

Should we then start the killing????? Will you allow the U.N. to destroy possible precursors to WMD or would you say, "Let the bombing begin"????

 

[AirForceRocks]

C. ANN..........please don't misrepresent my views.

She hasn't misrepresented your views at all. Perhaps taking it in steps would make it easier for you and everyone else to see what you have been saying.

1) President Bush is a bloodthirsty killer that wants to start a war.

2) This war would be bad because innocent Iraqis and U.S. military members would be killed.

3) A war started for other reasons, reasons that you agree with, would still result in the deaths of innocent Iraqis and U.S. military members.

4) Even though the war would kill innocent Iraqis and U.S. military members, that wouldn't be bloodthirsty, because you agree with the reasons behind it.

In other words, it isn't the idea of war that bothers you, it is the idea of war that you disagree with that bothers. It isn't the innocent deaths that bother you, because that would happen in either scenario. No, what bothers you is that the President would start a war for reasons with which you disagree.

I think C. Ann summed it up very nicely.

Oh, and for anyone that wants to know how long EROS thinks we should wait - he has stated on the DB that there is no reason for the inspectors to EVER leave Iraq - they should stay there basically forever, just to ensure that Hussein doesn't develop more WMD...

 

[AirForceRocks]

Should we then start the killing????? Will you allow the U.N. to destroy possible precursors to WMD or would you say, "Let the bombing begin"????

According to not just the U.S., but also the UN, such a find would constitute a material breach.

Let the bombing begin.

 

[EROS]

Originally posted by AirForceRocks
No, what bothers you is that the President would start a war for reasons with which you disagree.

That's correct. If more Germans had been able to see that HITLER was a madman, then the devastation of WWII could have been averted.

Lyndon Johnson cited the Gulf of Tonkin resolution as a rationalization for the ultimate destruction of 56,000 lives and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese lives.

Sometimes leaders err, even in a democracy. Just study the strategic planning and lies of General Westmoreland.

 

[EROS]

Originally posted by AirForceRocks
According to not just the U.S., but also the UN, such a find would constitute a material breach.

You'll have to take that up with Nikole, tomorrow. She's convinced that Bush won't go to WAR until Saddam throws out the Inspectors. I called this view "politically naive", but she disagreed .......

 

[AirForceRocks]

According to the resolution, we don't have to wait for him to throw the inspectors out - any material breach gives us the right (which we already have anyway, with or without the UN) to go after Hussein.

How exactly is it President Bush's fault that the UN Security Council passed such a tough resolution? Did he force the other members to vote for it? If I recall, the vote was unanimous...

 

[disneefamily]

Disnee Dad Says...................................... Just need to point out, it's not if the German people realized that Hitler was a madman then the devastation of WW2 could have been avoided. Many knew and could do nothing about it, same as Iraq today. Most people know he is evil. The truth is if the French, and English and the rest of Europe saw that Hitler was evil and didn't sit back and
do a Chamberlain, they could have avoided the devastation of WW2.
We are trying to avoid a repeat of that.
I have nothing against pacifists, but just like the post I reference, you seem to be wrong everytime you make a statement.
The German people could no more stop Hitler than Iraqi people could stop Saddam. So we preempt, we stop it before it happens, saving us from another Chamerlain debacle.

 

[shortbun]

Hi Eros- another anti-war person reporting in to
get slammed. Let me just say this to you my brother
in peace - "A man convinced against his will is of the
same opinion still." The folks you are arguing with
are never going to accept an iota of your reasoning.
They do, in fact, cough when speaking of your
profession and get away with it-where are the moderators?!
The same poster calls for a total wipe out of all living
people in Iraq and NO ONE but you objects...get the picture?
I wonder if your talents are wasted here? George Bush aka
"shrub" is certainly bloodthirsty, he's said as much and
revels in it. That's why few publicly care, they applaud his
bravado. geesh! BTW, as someone who totally agrees with you...
it's depressing to have this topic continuously thrown at
me. I'm powerless over it and I like to use the DIS to
relax until some fierce thread sucks me in. I've even
put a few folks on my ignore list so I can smile happily and
not have to read their posts in bliss!! That said-
Do George's real reasons for war and what he says are
his reasons match? NOT! If you believe that folks, I've
got a bridge you can buy. Why trust politicians now?
Do you really believe that our current president does
not have a political/personal agenda? Pluheeze!
What about George Bush (the junior) makes him different
from any person with ego enough to pursue the presidency?
Do I think George will keep finding wars to fight so people
will continue to "support" him and re-elect him? I certainly do,
Olie! (stan laurel nod here) He's found the perfect foil in the
American people who are so desparate to "defend" and
"revenge" the horrific attacks on our soil that they will follow
this man off the edge of the earth like a bunch of lemmings
because it's the easiest thing to do. I hated, despised, agonized
over the attacks of 9/11 and subsequent threats. I do not,
however, relinquish my freedoms over it and I won't let
anyone looking for re-election at the feet of this disaster drag
me into his personal search for fame and fortune. And THAT
is truely what I believe George W Bush is doing at ANY COST
to the American people. I do not believe for one single minute
that he doesn't know that he could do nearly ANYTHING under
the guise of defending America from terrorists and get away
with it. Wanna buy some swamp land? He's having FUN folks
and at the expense of all of us. Now, Eros, I've wasted my
time with this post but I do understand that it feels better to
purge once in a while... later man, I don't have time these
days to do much posting.
Love to all!
mimi

 

[AirForceRocks]

George Bush aka "shrub" is certainly bloodthirsty, he's said as much and
revels in it.

Oh he did? And where was that? I'd be very interested in reading ANYTHING (facts please, not opinion pieces) that backs this up.

BTW, as someone who totally agrees with you...it's depressing to have this topic continuously thrown at
me.

Then I would recommend not reading such threads. The topic title makes it very clear what this thread is about. If such topics depress you, I fail to see why you would even bother reading them.

Do George's real reasons for war and what he says are his reasons match? NOT!

As before, I'm sure you have something to back this up...

Never mind, I see in your post lots of sentences beginning with "I believe". While I certainly defend your right to believe whatever you like, those beliefs are always better defended when there are facts there to back them up.

 

[EROS]

SHORTBUN, thanks for your post . Well, at least two of us on the DIS aren't buying into the BUSH prescription for the necessity of death and destruction in Iraq. I hope that WAR can be averted, but I'm afraid that this Administration WANTS to shed American and Iraqi blood...........

As for the moderators, I'll refrain from any comment...........

 

[AirForceRocks]

Well, at least two of us on the DIS aren't buying into the BUSH prescription for the necessity of death and destruction in Iraq.

We already know that the "death and destruction" part isn't an issue for you - you have said that you would support a war if the inspectors weren't there...