Who's the biggest Villain Sadam or Bush?

[Mike Lowrey]

look weapons of mass destruction is more like war heads and so forth. chemical weapons dont define weapons of mass destruction, though it can be a part of it. We still never found weapons of mass destruction in Iraqi. But look we are one of the countries that gave Sadam chemical weapons, but we gave to him after Sadam went to war with Iran. Sadam was our one of our allies until he went to war with kuwaitt. So if Bush would have said we are going to war because he was killing his people and he had chemical weapons, I wouldn't call him a liar.

Check your history of this. The original reason for the war was the fact that the 911 attacks was an "act of war against the US". The ties for the planning, etc of that attack led back to Sadam.

[2.0civic]

Check your history of this. The original reason for the war was the fact that the 911 attacks was an "act of war against the US". The ties for the planning, etc of that attack led back to Sadam.

THANK YOU!!! Thats why i ALWAYS ask for clarification..

Dont beleive EVERYTHING you hear and try to overanalyze it...

Theres always three sides to everything military... Our side, Their side, And the MEDIA....99% of people only hear the media...

[ShooterMcGavin]

The ties for the planning, etc of that attack led back to Sadam.

um maybe YOU need to check the facts on that one rich

[Mike Lowrey]

um maybe YOU need to check the facts on that one rich

LOL. I am typing too fast. Osama......

[1000cckiller]

LOL. I am typing too fast. Osama......

lol

[1000cckiller]

Check your history of this. The original reason for the war was the fact that the 911 attacks was an "act of war against the US". The ties for the planning, etc of that attack led back to Sadam.

Acutally you might want to check yours, because if you pay attention to all the media, and other news sources, it was stated that sadam had nothing to do with 9/11. 9/11 has no issue hear. Also I believe they are both villains. We are not the world police,we have our own problems that need to be handled here.

[2.0civic]

That is because they only listen to what they are told by the media. There is problem number 1.

\/\/\/\/\/

THANK YOU!!! Thats why i ALWAYS ask for clarification..

Dont beleive EVERYTHING you hear and try to overanalyze it...

Theres always three sides to everything military... Our side, Their side, And the MEDIA....99% of people only hear the media...

\/\/\/\/\/LIRL point proven

Acutally you might want to check yours, because if you pay attention to all the media, and other news sources, it was stated that sadam had nothing to do with 9/11. 9/11 has no issue hear. Also I believe they are both villains. We are not the world police,we have our own problems that need to be handled here.

[Mike Lowrey]

Acutally you might want to check yours, because if you pay attention to all the media, and other news sources, it was stated that sadam had nothing to do with 9/11. 9/11 has no issue hear.

See my last post. I do beleive that 911, does have issue here.

Also I believe they are both villains. We are not the world police,we have our own problems that need to be handled here.

Yes, we have problems here. The attack was a problem HERE. The previous terrorist attacks were problems HERE. We also have several other problems in the US that need attention, but that does not mean you can ignore the killing of several thousand people!

The US has been "meddling" in other countries for many years. They have surely meddled too much on several instances. i.e. Saddam. The US chose sides, supplied him weapons and he took over control of the country. We basically took the lesser of two evils at the time. That is not the first time we have done this.

[collins]

We are not the world police,we have our own problems that need to be handled here.

"AMEEEEERICAAAA!! FUCK YEAH! WE'ER OFF TO SAVE THE MUTHA FUCKIN DAY YEAH!!!"

-team america


reps to SOME ppl...

[Jaimecbr900]

Funny, but reading thru some of the news yesterday.....I found THIS.....some of you guys are so sadly misinformed it's unbelievable. I want to know what some of you who have to say now....

__________________________________________________ ___________


U.N. Supports U.S Troops Staying in Iraq
Published: 6/14/07, 3:25 AM EDT
By EDITH M. LEDERER
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The U.N. Security Council agreed Wednesday to an Iraqi request to extend the mandate of the U.S.-led multinational force after the country's foreign minister said the troops were "vitally necessary."

The council also strongly condemned the bombing of Samarra's revered Shiite shrine and urged all countries, especially those in the region, to support Iraq in its pursuit of peace.

Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told the council members that despite the senseless violence "the government has made tremendous strides toward the day when security will be provided by a self-sufficient, Iraqi national security force."

"While Iraqis will always be grateful for their liberation from an absolute despot, no Iraqi government official - indeed, no Iraqi citizen - wants the presence of foreign troops on Iraqi soil one day longer than is vitally necessary," he said.

"But today, and for the foreseeable months at least, the presence of (multinational) troops is vitally necessary not only for Iraq but also to safeguard regional security and stability," Zebari said.

Last year the Security Council extended the force's mandate for a year starting Dec. 31, but authorized a review of the mandate by June 15.

Russia supported the extension of the multinational force's mandate but said the council must "signify the deadlines" of the foreign military presence in Iraq, which its ambassador, Vitaly Churkin, called a "serious irritant for many Iraqis."

U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said Iraqi security forces are undertaking a greater role, assuming main responsibility for security in seven provinces and taking the lead in operations to combat insurgents and militias.

But, he said, Iraq's success in promoting stability and consolidating its "young democracy" will depend not only on progress in the security sector but on advances in the economic field "and most importantly movement in the political arena."

Khalilzad said Iraqi security forces are critical to the push to pacify Baghdad. Since the U.S.-Iraqi operation began in February, Khalilzad said attacks against civilians and sectarian murders in the city have decreased while attacks against coalition forces and high-profile terrorist attacks are still frequent.

Taking a bleaker view of the Baghdad operation, Ashraf Qazi, the top U.N. envoy in Iraq, said that "progress has been slower and more uncertain than had been hoped for ..."

"Iraq is today faced with an exceptionally complex series of overlapping sectarian, political and ethnic conflicts that are beyond the capacity of any one actor or policy to resolve," he said. "This situation has contributed to a deepening sense of insecurity and pessimism among many Iraqis."

Both Qazi and Khalilzad said progress on national reconciliation is essential. While acknowledging that constructive discussions would be "very difficult" in the current environment, Qazi suggested the United Nations should play a bigger role in this area.

The United Nations has the "potential" to assist and develop national dialogue, regional cooperation on Iraq, and international support, Qazi said.

Russia's Churkin said that without international assistance for the political process, leaders of Iraq's different groups would not be able to overcome "the inertia" of mistrust.

__________________________________________________ ____________


Now even the U.N., the world's biggest sissies, are saying that we shouldn't just "pull out". What are the Democrat sissies gonna hold on to now???