RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.?

RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

dcnovice -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/20/2007 11:13:58 PM)
Thanks to everyone who's responded so far. We've had a few folks say, no, Saddam wasn't a threat. Two posters have argued that the U.S. actually has a long history of going to war without a direct threat to itself. As far as I can tell, though, no one has flatly said that, yes, Saddam Hussein was a threat to the U.S. in 2003. Now off to bed.

RPutnamJr -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/20/2007 11:15:04 PM)
I would also like to point out that since the USA has gained relative dominance in the world that wars have mostly been fought in undeveloped countries where the countries cannot meet the needs of their populations. Or in coutries where they are still fighting religious crusades. Unfortunately one cannot just sit back and do nothing in all countries now at war since some of those countries have weapons or are developing weapons which I would argue that they do not have the maturity to use or handle properly. I'm not saying that if Iran had a nuclear bomb that they would use it. Or Iran would even let nuclear material or a bomb fall into the hands of potential terrorists, willingly or not, who may use it against us. But does anybody truely want to take the chance? I for one don't want to even take the chance. For that reason alone I would fight the wars we are in right now. And yes just to let you know, I have served in the military, although during peacetime just prior to the first Gulf War.

dcnovice -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/20/2007 11:17:05 PM)
<Deleted because I realized I was hijacking my own thread.>

RPutnamJr -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/20/2007 11:23:50 PM)
Given the level of militantcy within their government and their general population. I would say it is safer to go to war than to wait and find out what would happen if terrorists or Iran gets nuclear material. Especially given the open climate and how easy it would be to smuggle a bomb into the USA. Should we do more on our own yes, such as in securing our boarders. But we must also be realistic. There is only so much we can do. To elimiante the threat before it becomes a threat is much easier to accomplish, than to wait until the threat happens and then deal with it, for then it may be too late. So I pose the question back to you? Do you want to take the chance and then live with the consequences of inaction or face the potential threat and face the consequences of our actions? LOL...sorry for causing you to hack your own thread.

WilliamWizer -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/20/2007 11:37:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RPutnamJr Given the level of militantcy within their government and their general population. I would say it is safer to go to war than to wait and find out what would happen if terrorists or Iran gets nuclear material. Especially given the open climate and how easy it would be to smuggle a bomb into the USA.[/QUOTE] can you explain to me why USA can have nuclear bombs and the rest of the world can't? specially given the fact that the only country in history that has used such power is precisely the USA. quote: ORIGINAL: RPutnamJr Should we do more on our own yes, such as in securing our boarders. But we must also be realistic. There is only so much we can do. To elimiante the threat before it becomes a threat is much easier to accomplish, than to wait until the threat happens and then deal with it, for then it may be too late.[/QUOTE] Problem is... the actions taken don't eliminate any real thread but make life a lot harder for inocent people. quote: ORIGINAL: RPutnamJr So I pose the question back to you? Do you want to take the chance and then live with the consequences of inaction or face the potential threat and face the consequences of our actions? Yes. And I think it would be a lot safest. as an example the 11M terrorist atack at Madrid because we helped Bush in his iraq war. we made the thread by atacking them before any thread and they only answered it.

dcnovice -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/20/2007 11:42:57 PM)
To get us back on topic, the question to which I'm genuinely seeking answers is this: Was Saddam Hussein truly a threat to the U.S. when we went to war with Iraq in 2003?

luckydog1 -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 12:28:19 AM)
The Clinton administration linked Al Shifa to Iraq. And in fact Clinton bombed Iraq many times, not just once in 93. My apologies for not answering your question. Yes, he was a threat, to the USA, our Allies in the region, and the world economic system.

NorthernGent -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 12:34:32 AM)
On the Kuwait point: the US gave Iraq the green light to invade Kuwait in 1991. They effectively set them up by telling them the US would not intervene, then they attacked them on the pretext of Kuwait. To suggest the US government gives a flying one about any of the ME east countries, or any other country for that matter, is pure comedy gold. The facts are: a) There is no evidence that Iraq possessed WMDs in 2002. b) A bit of history: the US not only funded Saddam, they put Baath in power after assassinating Abdul Karim Qasim. Both the US and Britain helped him takeover in 1979 and supplied him with a list of suspects to torture and eliminate until 1990. They supplied him with most of his weapons in the 80s as outlined in Jane's defence and John King's study and they helped persuade him to launch war on Iran. The US then gave him the green light to invade Kuwait. The US government and associates are criminals. It is testament to the power of propaganda, nationalism and a failing education system that people still believe what comes out of their mouths (when history and today's facts tell us different). They have absolutely no facts to support their stance in 2002/3 - only spin. By the way, the Downing Street Memo - which exposes the real motives of the US government - does anyone know if the US government have ever called into question the details of this memo? I know sections of the US media have, but what about the US government? The British government have never denied the details around US motives.

meatcleaver -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 12:34:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/timeline/062793.htm Very short on actual detail and very long on rhetoric. Something like Blair saying Saddam could have WMD ready in 45 minutes, leaving us to infer he had a credible weapon and plan while having nothing of the sort. In these cases, detail are the only way you can judge something as being credible or politicians spinning a line. The article also says Clinton relied heavily on FBI bomb experts. They wouldn't be the same experts that told us Saddam had WMDs? Oh that was the other incompetent bunch, the CIA. Which ever way you look at it, it is the wrong war, against the wrong enemy, in the wrong country.

meatcleaver -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 12:40:00 AM)
For those who don't know about the Downing St memo. http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

swtnsparkling -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 1:29:22 AM)
quote: dcnovice no one has flatly said that, yes, Saddam Hussein was a threat to the U.S. in 2003. Ok dc I'll say it. Yes [:)]

seeksfemslave -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 2:02:48 AM)
To the US no. To Israel and possibly Saudi Arabia YES. That IMO is why the invasion went ahead...that an the attempted assassination of Bush senior.

meatcleaver -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 2:24:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave To the US no. To Israel and possibly Saudi Arabia YES. That IMO is why the invasion went ahead...that an the attempted assassination of Bush senior. Israel is a nuclear state with the fourth largest military in the world. It has better military hardware than Saddam could ever dream of. If Saddam couldn't crack Iran, it wasn't going to crack Israel. As for Saudi Arabia, their military hardware was far superior to Saddam's. However, mentioning Saudi Arabia does bring us to probably the real reason for the invasion, oil and American corporate profits.

seeksfemslave -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 2:36:55 AM)
Someone like Saddam was ruthless and messianic enough to say launch massive Gas attacks against Israel. Especially, I guess ,towards the end of his life. Had he have thought a conventional attack could succeed I suspect he would have tried. Was Iraq involved in the War in , was it 1948 , immediately after Israel declared itself a state. ?

meatcleaver -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 2:58:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave Had he have thought a conventional attack could succeed I suspect he would have tried. Was Iraq involved in the War in , was it 1948 , immediately after Israel declared itself a state. ? A rather irrelevent point, Saddam was a poor eleven year old street kid at the time.

seeksfemslave -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 3:06:39 AM)
I just meant Iraq as an Arab nation. As for continuity of Oil supplies; the West gives up too much if the flow stops. Hence GUNBOATS will be manned. Aye Aye sir. Its the War's aftermath thats turned into a disaster by FREEING the potential for Sunni/Shia hatred. I wish Blair/Bush bashers would admit that..

meatcleaver -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 3:12:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave Its the War's aftermath thats turned into a disaster by FREEING the potential for Sunni/Shia hatred. I wish Blair/Bush bashers would admit that.. I don't think anyone is denying it, Bush was warned about what would happen. As for the war's aftermath, that is a joke, the war is ongoing. The people who say the war was well executed and won, is like saying the German expansion in 1939 was well executed and won. The war stops when there is peace and a stable government in place in Bagdad, until the then the war is ongoing. Even now, the aims of the war have been downgraded. Bush would be happy for a stable governemtn in Bagdad, even if that is Saddam II so he can pull out his troops and declare a victory all over again.

caitlyn -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 9:02:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/timeline/062793.htm Very short on actual detail and very long on rhetoric. Something like Blair saying Saddam could have WMD ready in 45 minutes, leaving us to infer he had a credible weapon and plan while having nothing of the sort. In these cases, detail are the only way you can judge something as being credible or politicians spinning a line. The article also says Clinton relied heavily on FBI bomb experts. They wouldn't be the same experts that told us Saddam had WMDs? Oh that was the other incompetent bunch, the CIA. Which ever way you look at it, it is the wrong war, against the wrong enemy, in the wrong country. The point of that link, was to support the notion that some people felt that Saddam had tried to have a former President of the United States, assassinated. I swear, the rabid anti-war people are just as willing to use distortions, as the administration they hammer.

seeksfemslave -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 9:11:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave Its the War's aftermath thats turned into a disaster by FREEING the potential for Sunni/Shia hatred.I wish Blair/Bush bashers would admit that.. I don't think anyone is denying it....edited A LOT Not denying it is not the same as admitting it or least mentioning it. Of all the posts made by BB bashers I cant recall one refering to it in anyway.

caitlyn -> RE: Was Saddam Hussein a Threat to the U.S.? (3/21/2007 9:21:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent It is testament to the power of propaganda, nationalism and a failing education system that people still believe what comes out of their mouths (when history and today's facts tell us different). They have absolutely no facts to support their stance in 2002/3 - only spin. I think the largest segment isn't influenced at all by propaganda, nationalism, or failed education. The largest segment sees the mistake, but believes that the constant hammering of the past, serves no useful purpose towards the end of solving our problem. For all the suggested enlightenment people like you profess ... can you tell me one positive thing, all your constant accusations and arm-chair quarterbacking will accomplish? The only thing it will do, is get some people to dig in, and support a possibly losing position.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125