++ [ originally posted by kurvengeflüster ] ++
who said that?
who said that?
Buy on AliExpress.com
US Presidential Elections thread - the fate of the world to be decided (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter Zlatan
- Start date
- Status
Nobody, I was being sarcastic.
Buy on AliExpress.com
because if they do, the it's nuclear war also, North Korea has no possible connection with Islamic terrorist sects. The decision to invade Iraq was based on several critereon, and North Korea doesn't seem to meet them. and it would be much more dangerous if it turned out that North Korea had nuclear weapons.
also, North Korea has no possible connection with Islamic terrorist sects. The decision to invade Iraq was based on several critereon, and North Korea doesn't seem to meet them. and it would be much more dangerous if it turned out that North Korea had nuclear weapons.
++ [ originally posted by HWIENIAWSKI ] ++
because if they do, the it's nuclear war also, North Korea has no possible connection with Islamic terrorist sects. The decision to invade Iraq was based on several critereon, and North Korea doesn't seem to meet them. and it would be much more dangerous if it turned out that North Korea had nuclear weapons.
because if they do, the it's nuclear war
also, North Korea has no possible connection with Islamic terrorist sects. The decision to invade Iraq was based on several critereon, and North Korea doesn't seem to meet them. and it would be much more dangerous if it turned out that North Korea had nuclear weapons.
Iraq didn't have connection with Islamic terrorist sects which Bush said before the war. They might have it now since it's become a "nowhere land".
if the US gov. had thought that Saddam had working nuclear weapons, do you think we would have invaded and risked nuclear war???? and actually while there may not have been an actual contract between Al-Qaeda, I'll bet that there was at least a "as long as you hurt the US, we'll leave you alone" type of relationship going on. and since Iraq doesn't have a working government at the moment, how could they have ties with AL-Qaeda? 
if what you mean is terrorist cells functioning in Iraq, well, only an idiot would argue otherwise. and that is precisely why the US is staying in Iraq-to stabilize the situation and eliminate terrorist cells, training compounds, etc. and the funny thing is that so much of the mess in Iraq can be blamed on American leniency towards ex-republican guard, baathists, etc
if what you mean is terrorist cells functioning in Iraq, well, only an idiot would argue otherwise. and that is precisely why the US is staying in Iraq-to stabilize the situation and eliminate terrorist cells, training compounds, etc. and the funny thing is that so much of the mess in Iraq can be blamed on American leniency towards ex-republican guard, baathists, etc
++ [ originally posted by HWIENIAWSKI ] ++
if the US gov. had thought that Saddam had working nuclear weapons, do you think we would have invaded and risked nuclear war???? and actually while there may not have been an actual contract between Al-Qaeda, I'll bet that there was at least a "as long as you hurt the US, we'll leave you alone" type of relationship going on. and since Iraq doesn't have a working government at the moment, how could they have ties with AL-Qaeda? if what you mean is terrorist cells functioning in Iraq, well, only an idiot would argue otherwise. and that is precisely why the US is staying in Iraq-to stabilize the situation and eliminate terrorist cells, training compounds, etc. and the funny thing is that so much of the mess in Iraq can be blamed on American leniency towards ex-republican guard, baathists, etc
if the US gov. had thought that Saddam had working nuclear weapons, do you think we would have invaded and risked nuclear war???? and actually while there may not have been an actual contract between Al-Qaeda, I'll bet that there was at least a "as long as you hurt the US, we'll leave you alone" type of relationship going on. and since Iraq doesn't have a working government at the moment, how could they have ties with AL-Qaeda?
if what you mean is terrorist cells functioning in Iraq, well, only an idiot would argue otherwise. and that is precisely why the US is staying in Iraq-to stabilize the situation and eliminate terrorist cells, training compounds, etc. and the funny thing is that so much of the mess in Iraq can be blamed on American leniency towards ex-republican guard, baathists, etc
so the US only attack those who have 50-50 chance of having nuclear weapons while leaving contries who we completely sure have nuclear weapons scots free?
using all the reasons they use to attack Iraq , North Korea is further top the list than Iraq do...
++ [ originally posted by HWIENIAWSKI ] ++
because if they do, the it's nuclear war also, North Korea has no possible connection with Islamic terrorist sects. The decision to invade Iraq was based on several critereon, and North Korea doesn't seem to meet them. and it would be much more dangerous if it turned out that North Korea had nuclear weapons.
because if they do, the it's nuclear war
also, North Korea has no possible connection with Islamic terrorist sects. The decision to invade Iraq was based on several critereon, and North Korea doesn't seem to meet them. and it would be much more dangerous if it turned out that North Korea had nuclear weapons.
Yes, you're right, North Korea doesnt meet the most important US criterea for invading a country... OIL!
++ [ originally posted by HWIENIAWSKI ] ++
if the US gov. had thought that Saddam had working nuclear weapons, do you think we would have invaded and risked nuclear war???? and actually while there may not have been an actual contract between Al-Qaeda, I'll bet that there was at least a "as long as you hurt the US, we'll leave you alone" type of relationship going on. and since Iraq doesn't have a working government at the moment, how could they have ties with AL-Qaeda? if what you mean is terrorist cells functioning in Iraq, well, only an idiot would argue otherwise. and that is precisely why the US is staying in Iraq-to stabilize the situation and eliminate terrorist cells, training compounds, etc. and the funny thing is that so much of the mess in Iraq can be blamed on American leniency towards ex-republican guard, baathists, etc
if the US gov. had thought that Saddam had working nuclear weapons, do you think we would have invaded and risked nuclear war???? and actually while there may not have been an actual contract between Al-Qaeda, I'll bet that there was at least a "as long as you hurt the US, we'll leave you alone" type of relationship going on. and since Iraq doesn't have a working government at the moment, how could they have ties with AL-Qaeda?
if what you mean is terrorist cells functioning in Iraq, well, only an idiot would argue otherwise. and that is precisely why the US is staying in Iraq-to stabilize the situation and eliminate terrorist cells, training compounds, etc. and the funny thing is that so much of the mess in Iraq can be blamed on American leniency towards ex-republican guard, baathists, etc
Thats where most Americans are wrong. Saddam had no ties with Al Queda whatsoever. In fact, Sadam and Osama hated eachother and had no contact.
Because Saddam and Osama hate eachother. Saddam had on of the most western-like islamic countries, with women rights, great education and health system, good industry and infrastructure, and he kept religion on a low note and Saddam hated that. Now, he might have connections to Hezbolah or hamas, but they are of no threat to the US. And certanly not Osama.
It means that compared to other Islamic countires, Iraq was comparativly more Western in their society and way of life. I don't know if I would characterize it exactly like that, but it's a valid point. Iraqi had a very educated population, technologicly advanced, espically before Saddam took over in the late 1970s.
However the real reason I think Hussien wouldn't premit terrorists to operate out of his country is they would be a threat to his power. He was a real control freak and had numerous levels of survalliance and secret police - watchers watching the watchers who were watching the watchers. He didn't want anything to go on that he didn't know about and wouldn't have premitted an outside group to gain much power because they might have posed a threat to his regime in the future. When you consider Saddam had quite a different agenda then pretty much any terrorist group that I've heard of, it wouldn't be a very terrorist friendly place.
However the real reason I think Hussien wouldn't premit terrorists to operate out of his country is they would be a threat to his power. He was a real control freak and had numerous levels of survalliance and secret police - watchers watching the watchers who were watching the watchers. He didn't want anything to go on that he didn't know about and wouldn't have premitted an outside group to gain much power because they might have posed a threat to his regime in the future. When you consider Saddam had quite a different agenda then pretty much any terrorist group that I've heard of, it wouldn't be a very terrorist friendly place.
- Status