Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I'll take that as a compliment. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/tongue.gif I'm not into politics - it makes me sick. The way things are going these days, just thinking about it gives me the dry heaves. Politicians and lawyers should all be sent to the moon. I give the world as we know it another ten years. Things will have to change, big time, or we're all screwed. Have a nice day! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon10.gif

[ October 01, 2003, 17:39: Message edited by: Wydraz ]

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

The problem with our system is that it's winner takes all instead of proportional for the house of representatives.

Also we could have had some sort of runoff with the two top vote getters. Arguably Clinton nor Bush would have won their respective first elections because the spoiler candidates would have dropped out in the second rounds.

Finally there's the two top choices model which might work as well.

Unfortunately the Dems and Reps have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Coincidence....

From http://pubs.acs.org/hotartcl/mdd/98/novdec/viagra.html

"On its way to becoming Viagra, UK-92,480 changed from a drug for hypertension to a drug for angina, and then changed again when a 10-day toleration study in Wales turned up an unusual side effect."

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

North Korea & Nukes

A North Korean minister said the war with Iraq convinced the government to further strengthen its military defense -- implying it may have nuclear arms in its arsenal.

As predicted, other rouge nations use the lessons from the Iraq war to boost their own WMD programs. It is no longer enough that your enemies believe you to have WMD’s, You both actually have to have them, and have the abilities to deliver them.

Congratulation to GWB for an intelligent foreign policy http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/rolleyes.gif
You have made the world a more dangerous place for us all.

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Huh? I would say that the most effective way to deter development and possession of WMDs would be to smack down hard on those who do own them.

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Huh? I would say that the most effective way to deter development and possession of WMDs would be to smack down hard on those who do own them.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Right you are my friend. But the only lesson learned from Iraq, is that you risk getting smacked down if you don’t own any. Iraq didn’t have anything (significant), and I do not think the CIA was so incompetent they didn’t know that.

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Several points. One, we know Saddam had chemical weapons, at some point, because he's used them in the past (on the Kurds and the Iranians). Two, garnering information in a closed and totalitarian society like Baathist Iraq is not easy, especially when the CIA has so few people in its organization who know the language and culture. Three, Saddam refused, categorically and throughout the entire multi-year inspection process, to come totally clean about what the exact status of his WMD stockpiles and programs were. Four, in this day and age, if you wait for "definite proof", you're probably already going to be attacked with a WMD. And I can't think that anyone would seriously suggest that we should have given a proven genocidal thug like Saddam the benefit of the doubt...

[ October 02, 2003, 11:13: Message edited by: General Woundwort ]

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

GW:
Make all the excuses you want. What you or I believe or think is not important for the security of the world. What the governments of North Korea, Iran, Sudan +++ believe is important. What they learned is that security from the US comes only with having a big F.. You All weapon.

The Iraq war was an impressive display of military might, but we already knew from GW1, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan what the US forces was capable of. As a display of political power, so far the war (and the peace) has been a disaster, as it only have shown that the US is willing to face an opponent who can't retaliate. North Korea now knows that it will only need the capability to kill something like 10-15 000 American soldiers in a war to make it politically impossible for the US to invade. Somehow I believe the world would have been better of if they didn’t know that.

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The logic here escapes me. So, because unstable and hostile regimes might worry that other nations will take steps to reduce and neutralize the threat they pose to the world, they might therefore develop WMD's - and so we shouldn't provoke them? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

These are people and governments who cannot be reasoned with or placated. They can only be contained - or neutralized. Yes, its a dirty and dangerous business, but that's the kind of world we live in - and it was so before the US started to do something about it. Burying your head in the sand about what kind of people we're dealing with will only get you kicked in your prominently displayed rear end.

Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.
 

GW:
Did I say something about not provoking them http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...s/confused.gif

I know very well these are people and governments who cannot be reasoned with or placated. The point is; by attacking a relatively weak “no WMD” nation like IRAQ, US has (In the eyes of these guys) showed weakness, not strength. And the current squabble over manpower and cost for securing Iraq makes it easy for them to figure out the US tolerance level for casualties and money for any potential new conflicts.

High level diplomacy is like high stake poker; US has left themselves playing with an open hand (and without holding all the Aces).