Fav right wing nutter

And why are you so eager to try and sway us from our anti-war views Treehouse? I for one am in no way going to try and convince you not to be pro-war, regardless of how much I disagree with you. If you think you're going to try and change the way we think then you are fighting a losing battle. What you said back there may actually turn off people's interest in your view even more actually, if they sense that you are attempting to indoctrinate them.

 

Absolute nonsense. If they'd wanted Saddam dead they could've arranged it. If they wanted to help the Kurds they could've done that in 91....they didn't because they don't give a toss about the Kurds anymore than they do the Iraqis.

This is a war about Capitalism pure and simple based on a right-wing agenda worked out prior to Bush stealing power four years ago. You could read this but I know you won't http://www.american-buddha.com/rebuild.america.htm

A summary is here http://www.pocketbook.org/sky/inside_out/insideout_rebuildingamericasdefences_pnac.htm

Everything in that document is going to plan by the way!

Wake up mate, smell the shit!

 

No not exactly, true American corporations like Halliburton will benefit from the war but remember the reasons given two years ago. They were that Saddam was refusing to come clean on his weapons of mass destruction status. It took months of wrangling to get him to allow the inspectors back in even then he tried to place restrictions on them banning them from enetering his presidential palaces and spying on them so he knew in advance which locations they were planning to visit. It was about western security pure and simple there was no conspiracy behind the war. The man responsible for the war was Saddam for creating the illusion he had weapons of mass destruction by fucking about the west with his lies and deception.

Also it would have been very difficult for America to have had Saddam assasinated due to the tight security cordon around him. he even had several doubles to pose as him he was that security conscious.

Also Iraq now has the chance of a democratic future. Isn't freedom and democracy worth fighting for? Isn't standing up to tyrannical dictators guilty of hundreds of thousands of people worth fighting for to remove such murderous regimes.

I supportted the war on Iraq for the same reason I would support a war to oust Robert Mugabe. Because I believe democracy,human rights and freedom are better than tyranny and if it takes war to bring them about then so be it!

 

Like I said, I didn't think you'd read that. It's all in black and white in their own words.

 

Zzzzzzzzz. Zzzzzzzzzz. Zzzzzzzzzzz. And that's what they call an excuse. I mean fucking hell.... there are no WMD. If this didn't come as a surprise to me, then it certainly shouldn't have come as a surprise to the American government. "Hey Mr President, we can't find any WMD..... but lookee here..... we did find all this oil!".

Iraq's always had a chance of a democratic future. The question's how it gets there. The region's so destabilised that the chances of democracy are now slim to none.

Fanatic.

 

Directly causing the deaths of, at a conservative estimate, tens of thousands of civilians, using cluster munitions in populated areas, indirectly causing the deaths of many tens or hundreds of thousands more with the use of DU, not to mention killing perhaps a hundred thousand teenage conscripts of the Iraqi military, meanwhile turning Iraq into a recruiting ground for anti-Western terrorism and fuelling the Islamic jihad ... this was the least bad option?

You are posting the same tired Blairite arguments over and over again in different threads, some of which are not even related to this topic. Your indoctrinated lies have already been dealt with but you move on to repeat them elsewhere. You are a pro-war conservative trolling this forum.

 

Top banana! Couldn't have put it better myself. You'd really think he'd just fuck off and find some people who actually like him, wouldn't you? Or perhaps he's a masochist?

 

But before the war no one knew for certain that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction. And only after Saddam's regime had been removed could there have been a thorough, totally unhindered search for such weapons carried out. Leaving Saddam in power and taking a chance that he may have such weapons was too risky.

Not only that but the sheer brutality and cruelty of Saddam's regime totally justified overthrowing it!

 

Please please please please stop quoting him...he's SOOOO boring! Yawn!

 

Maybe we should apply that logic to the cruel and brutal regime controlling the good ol' US of A

 

sorry

 

Been through this before. The UNMOVIC team was very close to finally verifying that there really were none. All that was required were the technical documents verifying the destruction of a final few remnants of these weapons or their precursors - many of which were actually destroyed by allied bombing in 1991. There was negligible risk of Saddam being able to obtain, develop or use WMD.

 

<breaks down in tears>

 

Sorry...

 

I did

So, kinda like shooting s suspect and then checking him for weapons once he's dead? Interesting concept of policing.

Yeah, it risked America not getting its hands on Iraq's oil.

But that wasn't the goal of the war. Added to which, there's every chance that we've made the situation in Iraq far worse, destabilised the whole region and killed tens of thousands of people for nothing.

Of course, we've already been over all of this. We're never going to agree with you and you're never going to agree with us. So if you're not just here to troll, why don't you just fuck off?

 

Ah don't worry...he's quite obviously a troll and even after he's eventually banned he'll come back no doubt for more. It's an obsessive compulsive disorder thing.

Post away, I'm just bored of him. I LONG FOR A NEW RIGHTWING NUTTER!

 

Read up on some history. The left volunteered to go and fight against Francos' fascist regime in Spain even though Franco never threatened any other country. Why? Because they thought it was important to defend democracy against fascism.

The left stated "Fascism Means War" when Hitler first came to power in 1933. That was BEFORE anyone else considered him a threat. When he was actually an ally of the west! The west only started to get worried about him in 1934 when he remilitarised the Rhineland breaking the Treaty of Versailles.

The only mistake the left made then was to ignore the suffering and death caused by Stalin, because he claimed to be a socialist. Just as decades later on the eve of the first Gulf War the left would ignore the suffering and death caused by Saddam Hussein and protest against a war to chuck him out of Kuwait on the basis that some people might get killed.