now were at war, what do you think

small air raids may be going on tonight over Baghdad

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

strange. it doesn't feel like we're at war. =/

__________________
immagijibae: seons a hoeeeeeee, he wears them g-strings, and i also knowwwww, they hurt his dinga-lings~ la l alalala~ nanannan~ oh~ seons a hoeeeeee, he wears them g-strings..............
immagijibae: liiiiiiiiiiiiiike my new 1-minute-made-up song???????

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by krnxswat
strange. it doesn't feel like we're at war. =/

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by AjY 2k


maybe when there are more 9/11's (or worse) you'll realize

---

__________________
immagijibae: seons a hoeeeeeee, he wears them g-strings, and i also knowwwww, they hurt his dinga-lings~ la l alalala~ nanannan~ oh~ seons a hoeeeeee, he wears them g-strings..............
immagijibae: liiiiiiiiiiiiiike my new 1-minute-made-up song???????

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Russia and china and france is gonna Backstab the us

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

do you guys think north korea would do anything?

__________________
immagijibae: seons a hoeeeeeee, he wears them g-strings, and i also knowwwww, they hurt his dinga-lings~ la l alalala~ nanannan~ oh~ seons a hoeeeeee, he wears them g-strings..............
immagijibae: liiiiiiiiiiiiiike my new 1-minute-made-up song???????

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by krnxswat
do you guys think north korea would do anything?

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

I'm not going to divulge (at length) my really extreme opinions.
I will say, though, that I support our military and president.
And, France, though it wants to become a part of the reconstruction effort, I doubt will be even considered for it since it seemingly only wants to jump at the money gains of such an act.
Also, Tom Daschille is a hypocrite and a mega-jerk.
and, now, I'm just going to post a few articles.


from msnbc.com:

“ON MY ORDERS, coalition forces have begun striking targets of military importance,” Bush said from the Oval Office of the White House at 10:15 p.m. ET. “... These are opening stages of a long and concerted campaign.”
Peter Arnett, on assignment in Baghdad for “National Geographic Explorer,” reported for NBC News that anti-aircraft fire emanated from the southern outskirts of the capital about 5:30 a.m. (9:30 p.m. ET Wednesday), about 90 minutes after the deadline Bush set for Saddam to flee the country had expired.
NBC News’ Jim Miklaszewski reported that U.S. forces had launched a preliminary wave of attacks using B-1, B-2, B-52 bombers, as well as F117 “stealth” bombers flying from three aircraft carriers, against what senior U.S. military sources described as a “key air node” and a “national command center.” The forces were firing cruise missiles from both land and sea.
Sources told Miklaszewski that the raids in and around Baghdad had been intended as “extensive prepping of the battlefield” in the no-fly zone in the south of the country. But the attack was ramped up after U.S. intelligence spotted what was termed a “target of opportunity,” described as a “senior or very senior member of the Iraqi regime.” U.S. officials would not disclose the identity of the target or say whether the attack was successful.
Loud sirens and anti-aircraft fire persisted in Baghdad for almost two hours as police cars raced through the streets, Arnett reported


from foxnews.com:

"The opening stages of the disarmament of the Iraqi regime have begun," White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said.

Bush planned to address the nation at 10:15 p.m. EST, little more than two hours after the deadline the president set for Saddam Hussein to flee his nation or face war.

Fleischer spoke as anti-aircraft fire and explosions were heard across Baghdad after air raid sirens went off at the capital at dawn.

(note: clipped to conserve space and relevance)


from cnn.com:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush announced Wednesday night he has ordered the coalition attack on Iraq to begin.

"American and coalition forces are in the early stages of miltary operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger," Bush said.

He said the first strikes were against "selected targets of military importance."

The attack in Iraq early Thursday morning, involving F177A Stealth fighters and multiple cruise missiles from U.S. warships, was a "decapitation attack" to take out Iraqi President Saddam Hussein even before the planned start of the war, Pentagon sources told CNN.

Whether the mission succeeded is not known. Administration officials told CNN the strike was ordered for fear the opportunity could be lost.

Air raid sirens were heard in Baghdad at about 5:30 a.m. Thursday (9:30 p.m. Wednesday ET) about 90 minutes after the U.S. deadline for Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to step down or face a U.S.-led military attack.

In his four-minute announcement from the Oval Office, Bush said the military campaign, supported by 35 nations, would make efforts to spare Iraqi civilians. But he made it clear the U.S. military planned to use its full might in the war.

"This will not be a campaign of half measures, and we will accept no outcome except victory," he said.

The president's address came at 10:15 p.m., about two hours and 15 minutes after the expiration of a deadline he set for Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and his sons to leave the country or face military action.

The United States and Britain have massed nearly 300,000 troops in the Persian Gulf region.

Earlier, Adm. Timothy Keating, commander of the U.S. 5th Fleet, said allied forces were prepared to carry out an "unprecedented" campaign: "If we go, the plans we have are unlike anything anyone has ever seen before."

In the hours leading up to the deadline, about a dozen U.S. and coalition warplanes dropped precision munitions on nearly a dozen Iraqi artillery pieces in the southern no-fly zone that could have been in range of American troops poised to invade southern Iraq, Pentagon officials told CNN.

There was also concern some of the artillery could be capable of using chemical weapons and U.S. planes had been conducting around-the-clock reconnaissance of the sites.

Warplanes also struck Iraqi cable repeater sites and command and control sites. In addition, at least one Al Ababil surface-to-surface missile launcher was struck.



--I'm going to be gone a while(as if my prescence has been very prominent in recent weeks anyway.) I've become a news junkie, and little else really interests me right now. Not even Korean music
TTFN

__________________
~everybody loves Alex oppa~

-first member-

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

it started

it's pretty funny

why do people call war to an unilateral attack?? that's plain killing

so, g.w. butcher is already trowing bombs towards inocent iraq people who had done NOTHING to deserve it (just like lots of people that died on 11/9/01), maybe for money?? why dwas everything planned like this??

first, two airplanes crash towards the twin towers, then afghanistan gets blamed, then the taliban government is exterminated, afghanistan fall into the hands of the capitalism they couldn't know before

but it goes beyond than that I think

the country which "losses" a war has to pay its economical loss, so, afghanistan is going to be pushed to the same ruin the already had, or maybe worse, and I know what ruin means because I live down here at Mexico, I know what is to have an foreigner debt or whatever it's called like

so, if they trow bombs towards iraq, if they kill everyone, if they "win the war in the name of democracy and world safety (?)" iraq has to pay the loss of the war, with petroleum maybe, the same petroleum the export to Europe

by the way, all countrys in europe now use the EURO and its rates are bigger than the american dollar, if the US keeps iraq's petroleum, who's going to be the richest country of the world again??

the united states are going to get out of their recession

maybe Spain and the UK will get some petroleum barrels for free?? iono, this is just what I think

I'm not against the war, because actually there's no war: it's not a war if one of the sides cannot defend, it's just plain massacre

you wouldn't be in anything like a fight if your hands were tied down, right??

how does butcher know there are massive destruction weapons there at iraq?? did his daddy sell them?? what happened?? who should I believe??

__________________
psalm 38:6

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

last post for me (hopefully)...oh, and pardon me Dekkai...I'm going to pick at your arguements a little. please do not be too offended:




why do people call war to an unilateral attack?? that's plain killing
-What grounds do you base this statement on? our target is Saddam, his sons, and possibly some top government officials that have kept Iraq's murderous regime in power. We're not lining innocent civillans up and knocking them down. Besides, the only person that has done any real (inhumane) killing/torture in Iraq is Hussein.

so, g.w. butcher
-I don't understand your rationale for name calling. It retards your arguement and makes me less inclined to consider what you are trying to say. I could say that Hussein is a "mass murdering F***head" but it wouldn't necessarily make me right.

is already trowing bombs towards inocent iraq people who had done NOTHING to deserve it
-I think Saddam earned it. He harbours terrorists, continues to manufacture illegal weapons, hold his own people hostage, and also use the threat of burning oil as a bargaining chip with other nations. The waste made by burning oil is toxic, besides the extinguishing of oil fires being very dangerous.

(just like lots of people that died on 11/9/01), maybe for money?? why dwas everything planned like this??
-Money may be a factor in our reasons for going to war, but the main thing is the volitale relationship between Hussein and world politics. His continuing defiance of the UN for over twelve years, and the ever continuing genocide of his people has compelled a coalition of over thirty-five countries to act.

first, two airplanes crash towards the twin towers, then afghanistan gets blamed, then the taliban government is exterminated, afghanistan fall into the hands of the capitalism they couldn't know before
-We blamed Osama Bin Laden who was also tied to the first trade tower bombing in the early nineties. Then we tied him to the Taliban who protected him. Then we went in and rectified the taliban, removing an oppressive regime that held daily executions in their football(soccer) stadium as well as hangings from street poles and the like. Capitalism is not a bad thing. It is a means for aquiring wealth independantly. Also, I'd like to point out that Afghanistan is one of the thirty-five plus members in the coalition against the regime of Iraq. I don't believe that they'd support us if they didn't like us.

the country which "losses" a war has to pay its economical loss, so, afghanistan is going to be pushed to the same ruin the already had, or maybe worse, and I know what ruin means because I live down here at Mexico, I know what is to have an foreigner debt or whatever it's called like
-We are still in Afghanistan helping it to rebuild. And, yes, it is only fair that some of the cost of rebuilding their own country comes out of their own pockets. They don't have to repay now. Once they are on good financial/economic footing, and have the means, they can do whatever.

so, if they trow bombs towards iraq, if they kill everyone, if they "win the war in the name of democracy and world safety (?)" iraq has to pay the loss of the war, with petroleum maybe, the same petroleum the export to Europe
-We're not going to "kill everyone." President Bush is admant about protecting civillian life. However, it is a fact of war that people will die. I think, though, that less people will die in this engagement now than would die if Saddam stays in power and has continued opportunities to commit atrocities against his own people. Yes, it is highly possible that Iraq will repay its war/rebuilding debt in petroleum, but that is also their own right. It is their most abundant and valueable natural resource. It is up to them to do with it what they please.

by the way, all countrys in europe now use the EURO and its rates are bigger than the american dollar, if the US keeps iraq's petroleum, who's going to be the richest country of the world again??
-I don't understand your question. And, yes, it's a common known fact that most countries in Europe now use the euro currency. Good for them.
The US has already made clear that it will not seize Iraq's oil. It would be a grevious foreign policy faux pas if the US were to turn on its word. However, if the Iraqi people sell their oil to us, that is a completely different matter all together.

the united states are going to get out of their recession
-fantastic

maybe Spain and the UK will get some petroleum barrels for free?? iono, this is just what I think
-If they do, that's the Iraqi people's perrogative.

I'm not against the war, because actually there's no war: it's not a war if one of the sides cannot defend, it's just plain massacre
-It is a war. The Iraqi government is hell bent on defending itself to the bitter end. The Iraqi people will not be massacred. The US is not that stupid, and is also actually interested in preserving the people. That has been our main objective for some time now.

you wouldn't be in anything like a fight if your hands were tied down, right??
-If it were a life or death situation, I'd fight. If it were a situation in which I may sustain harm, I would fight. If I were bound against my will, I would fight.

how does butcher know there are massive destruction weapons there at iraq?? did his daddy sell them?? what happened?? who should I believe??
-Bush knows that there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq due to US and foreign intelligence. There is documentation showing that they do exist. The Iraqi government has failed to produce any documentation of their destruction (al-samouds do not count. there is no telling how much he was destroying/planning to destroy in comparison to his cache. and there is no telling how many he was producing at the time of the public destruction)
His dad did not sell the weapons to Iraq. France, Germany, and Russia did. France sold Iraq jet parts, a means for acquiring nuclear power, and other miscellany illegal goods even after the passing of resolution 1441.

weapons that Iraq has/has yet to account for (small list):
mustard gas
vx nerve gas
various other chemical agents
al samoud missiles
cluster munitions (capable of spreading chemical/biological agents)
drones (capable of spreading chemical/biological agents)

Believe who you choose to. But, be sure that you are informed.

__________________
~everybody loves Alex oppa~

-first member-

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by roentgen
I think Saddam earned it. He harbours terrorists

---

__________________
ni pour ni contre; ça m'est égal

"The weight of this sad time we must obey,/ Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say./ The oldest hath borne most; we that are young/ Shall never see so much, nor live so long."
King Lear (V.3.300-304)

Last edited by Crazydeb8ter on 03-20-2003 at 08:37 AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

no to war yes to peace!!

i'm afraid of wht's going to happen to the economy....another recession and i think i'm going to be jobless~~

__________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

oooh

well, I'm so glad the bombs are actually THAT intelligent that they'll only go against saddam and when they hit they'll recognize his DNA and if it's not a hussein family member then it will drop flowers all over the place

yeah, so many civilians are gonna be saved, gobalization an liberalism are just so cool!! I wish I was invaded, too!!

__________________
psalm 38:6

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

hmm..well. i heard they killed saddam hussein's son or sons during the first bombardment in bahgdad..i know they havent confirmed it yet, but anyone know if they did?

anyways..got home and online it said that the first phase of the 'shock and awe' raid began with an airial strike. anyone know more about this? or the tanks taht were moving through the desert yesterday?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dekkai
well, I'm so glad the bombs are actually THAT intelligent that they'll only go against saddam and when they hit they'll recognize his DNA and if it's not a hussein family member then it will drop flowers all over the place

yeah, so many civilians are gonna be saved, gobalization an liberalism are just so cool!! I wish I was invaded, too!!

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by noriko378
who are pulled away from their families...who are left to stay in their homes? The wives and children.

---

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by PsychoSnowman
not to tangent off, but why is there such prioritization in keeping wives alive? if it's the reminents of chilvalry and tradition, it think it's stupid. Children i can understand wanting to protect, but wives...um, ok. The only reason i can think of htat would be rather logical would be that women tend to nurture the children.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by noriko378
It isn't a matter of giving special prioritization to keeping wives alive. It is still traditional for majority of the families in Iraq that the wives stayed home with the kids. I was just merely pointing out who would get the brunt of the damage.

---

__________________
Long messages do not equal aggravation of any sort,
rather they reflect nothing more than a response of insight
that should always be read in a matter-of-fact tone.

"Those womyn that seek equality with men, lack determination."

"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be wrong."
-Cromwell

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

now that we are at war, i just hope to god that this whole thing will be over quickly and victoriously. the protests going on in berkeley and stuff just aren't going to do any good. people are expressing their opinions, but it's not like congress is gonna pay attention. i'm scared tho. they thought WWI would be over soon too

and about the women and children thing - children shud be saved, but i think the women thing is kinda outdated.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

quote:

---

Originally posted by daNNy LuV 1TYM
now that we are at war, i just hope to god that this whole thing will be over quickly and victoriously.

---

__________________
the fool is the one who thinks he is wise, yet the wise one is the one who thinks he is a fool

Remember the heros
Remember the lives
Remember the day
God bless

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged