Forums | MacLife

All of the above.

from the polls i've seen, very few think it is about oil...  but they're the ones most heard on TV because they're protesting.

most want to see saddam ousted and think that war in iraq is necessary.

oil

see...where's the evidence...

"oil" for me just doesn't cut it.

i don't see where you all think this stuff up.

just like the caller on c-span...  "i totally disagree with everything bush said.  he just wants oil"

news anchor "is that all you have to say about the address"

caller "yeah, i guess so"

see...where's the evidence...

"oil" for me just doesn't cut it.

i don't see where you all think this stuff up.

First of all, there has been little evidence presented on the "Iraq as threat" side of the argument.  Even if their was such evidence, the preemptive attack that is planned is unprecedented and immoral, in my mind.

Bush's connections with oil are obvious.  Cheney's connections to oil are obvious.  The stranglehold of big business on Washington is obvious.  Think of the opportunity presented by being able to replace the dictatorship of a huge oil producing country with a government hand-picked for democratic and american-friendly rule.

None of this makes any sense?

Evidence? 

The only way we can get evidence either way is to pump Dubya full of sodium pentothol and ask him some tough questions.

That's real cute, asking for evidence all over these boards. Only a handful of people at the top know the truth. Oops, they're not answering my questions, I guess you win!   

Hey! Give me evidence that Jesus was the son of God. Or no, wait! Prove to me that you're not just a baffling figment of my imagination! G'wan, prove it! What, you can't? Ha! I win!

Saddam would not hesitate in using a nuke, or giving it to some terrorist group that would use it, as soon as he obtained it.

What makes you say that?  An attack by Iraq on either the US or Israel would result in its immediate annihilation.  Saddam is not that stupid, nor eager to die.

I'm more worried about a "Chain-Reaction" that could possibly occur.  Saddam nukes Israel, Israel returns fire, then what?  What happens after that "monster" (nukes) is released on the world?

Why would you even want to wait to see "If" he would use such weapons, or give those weapons to a terrorist organization that would use them?

Why would you even want to wait to see "If" he would use such weapons, or give those weapons to a terrorist organization that would use them?

Because that is how I believe it has to work.

I do see your point about a situation between Iraq and Israel, where Israel might attack Iraq in retaliation full-force and without our consent (which I am more worried about happeing because we attack them)...though I still refuse to believe that Iraq poses any threat to the US.

Why would you even want to wait to see "If" he would use such weapons, or give those weapons to a terrorist organization that would use them?

Because that is how I believe it has to work.

I do see your point about a situation between Iraq and Israel, where Israel might attack Iraq in retaliation full-force and without our consent (which I am more worried about happeing because we attack them)...though I still refuse to believe that Iraq poses any threat to the US.

I agree, Iraq isn't much of a threat to the U.S. at this point in time.  But I'm not willing to bet my life or anyone else's life on the presumption that Saddam would not use a nuclear weapon on some country, namely Israel, if he obtained one.  He reminds me too much of Stalin.

And yes, that can be turned around the other way, but the cost of your "wait and see" stance could be a few million lives verses risk a few thousand now.  Either way it still sucks, war is never a good thing.

Saddam nukes Israel, Israel returns fire, then what? 

Iraq gets the fast-track to Allah.

I voted "other."  While oil and power do play a part in this, I don't think they're the main reasons.  Bush believes Saddam Hussein is a horrible despot (which he is) that he oppresses and murders his own people (he does) and that everyone would be better off without him (they would).  However, this would still be an unprovoked war of aggression on our part, Bush is kidding himself if he honestly thinks that the Iraqi people will welcome us with open arms as liberators after we conduct yet another great Air Force war with massive bombings, civilian casualties, and U.S. occupation afterwards.  Saddam is evil, yes, but the American military is not the best way to help his oppressed people.

Actually, I think the war is about power. The power to invade countries like Syria and Iran and Lybia because of the increase in terrorist attacks that will come from us invading a Muslim country and leaving a country that actually has WMD alone. (North Korea, you dolt.)

People talk about the Muslims wanting Jihad. I think "Born Again" Bush is going on a Jihad of his own. Destroying the infidels and freeing the Holy Land and all that rot.