Author
|
Topic: Discussion: Bush v. Hussein 2
|
Jolt135
Farting Nudist
Member # 1974
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-10-2003 03:21 PM
In a forum that used to be a pot of gold for political discussions, it's been 29.5 hours and STILL no thread announcing the fall of Saddam.
No longer. [ 04-11-2003, 03:47 PM: Message edited by: Jolt135 ]
From: Woodbridge, VA, USA | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pornbot
I AM A GAY FAGGOT GAY
Member # 1321
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-10-2003 03:32 PM
wot happen
From: Auschwitz | Registered: Dec 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lark84
My skeleton is made of creamy nougat.
Member # 1186
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-10-2003 03:39 PM
someboy set him up the bomb
he got signal
all his base are belong to u.s.
he has no chance to survive make his time
hahaha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-10-2003 04:47 PM
Well, it's not like it's any big surprise that we kicked some puny little nation's ass. And the "fall" of Saddam was mostly symbolic. Tearing a statue down doesn't exactly mean it's over.
It seems to me, putting up a statue of yourself it pretty much askin' for it...unless you want to be humiliated on the cover of Time magazine or something.
It is pretty interesting what a lousy general Saddam is, tho. He is pretty krappy at war. I think anyone who's played video war games for any length of time could have done a much better job.
I bet Bush is pissed that he didn't use chemical/biological weapons on our troops, tho.
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
pkthunder
I look like your mom.
Member # 67
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-10-2003 04:52 PM
I just got the desire to cover Lark in caramel and nuts and dip him in chocolate and eat him.
And yeah, Bush probably is pissed, in a way.
From: Broomfield, CO | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living on air bubbles
Frank Stallone
Member # 2089
|
posted 04-10-2003 04:54 PM
quote: Originally posted by Mr. K:
I bet Bush is pissed that he didn't use chemical/biological weapons on our troops, tho.
Yeah, darnit.
From: Cherry Hill, Suicide Captial of The World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cesar
Farting Nudist
Member # 529
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-10-2003 11:06 PM
Yeah, all those masks are going to waste... hey wait a minute, why did we have this war again?
From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
MK
is somewhat large.
Member # 1445
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-11-2003 05:00 PM
Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bowser
I'm such a moron that I keep an axe behind me at all times.
Member # 2037
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-11-2003 05:08 PM

From: My mommy's uterus | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Manuel Calavera
Sock Lover
Member # 1202
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-11-2003 05:15 PM
It would be actual funnay if they used the ingame font.
- - - - - Gates is the Saddam Hussein of the consumer technology world. ~ Mr.K
From: Newcastle, Home of Geordies, Brown Ale and The Wildhearts | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
ceoalex316
Time for the flaming leprosy party
Member # 338
|
posted 04-11-2003 07:17 PM
quote: Originally posted by Mr. K: I bet Bush is pissed that he didn't use chemical/biological weapons on our troops, tho.
I bet he's pissed that he can't find them either.
From: NYC | Registered: Apr 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yurika
Farting Nudist
Member # 2525
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-12-2003 08:49 AM
According to the geek on CNN a bunker buster bomb must directly hit saddam or be within 15 or so feet to kill/mame him. Anything further and a 1 ft concrete wall can save Saddam. Though his ears would be pwned by the sound of a large explosion.
- - - - - Remember folks theres no "I" in "Orgy". Now ask yourself "Are you a team player"?
From: Australia, Sydney | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-15-2003 12:02 AM
It really is curious that Saddam didn't use his WMDs. Regardless of why he didn't, it certainly doesn't lend much credence to the notion that it was vital to attack right away because we were in danger of him using them on us.
I mean, we started a war with the stated purpose of taking him out, personally, and he still didn't use them.
Very curious.
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Muffin King
Farting Nudist
Member # 2240
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-15-2003 12:05 AM
I'm pretty sure he knew he was going to lose this war anyways, so the smartest thing to do would be to make Bush look like a fool and keep the world opinion on his side. I reckon he's off in hiding somewhere.
From: Maryland | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-15-2003 12:48 AM
So...he's still concerned about world opinion when we're actually trying to kill him and moving into his house. We couldn't do much else to provoke him.
Under what conditions do you think he would actually use WMDs, if he's so worried about what the world thinks of him?
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Muffin King
Farting Nudist
Member # 2240
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-15-2003 12:56 AM
So...he's still concerned about world opinion when we're actually trying to kill him and moving into his house. We couldn't do much else to provoke him.
I dunno, maybe he's looking out for the long run. My guess is that he hopes to get people against the US so that maybe they'll leave or something. I don't really know what he's thinking, it's just my best theory.
Under what conditions do you think he would actually use WMDs, if he's so worried about what the world thinks of him?
I'm not sure. Maybe there is that one in a billion chance that he actually disarmed, but I doubt it. There's really no way to tell. He could use them spontaneously to catch the Americans off gaurd, or give them to Iraqi guerrilla agents. Maybe he just wants the US to look bad above all else, and won't use WMD's at all.
From: Maryland | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yurika
Farting Nudist
Member # 2525
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-15-2003 08:18 AM
quote: Originally posted by Mr. K: It really is curious that Saddam didn't use his WMDs. Regardless of why he didn't, it certainly doesn't lend much credence to the notion that it was vital to attack right away because we were in danger of him using them on us.
I mean, we started a war with the stated purpose of taking him out, personally, and he still didn't use them.
Very curious.
Wouldn't he use them on Isreal rather than the USA. Also don't chemical agents have like an expiry date.
- - - - - Remember folks theres no "I" in "Orgy". Now ask yourself "Are you a team player"?
From: Australia, Sydney | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mr. K
Racist
Member # 2
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-16-2003 03:11 AM
TMK: I dunno, maybe he's looking out for the long run.
He's either dead right now, or will be dead/captured/irrelevant very soon.
He doesn't have a long run. (That's what Satan told me anyway.)
I don't really know what he's thinking, it's just my best theory.
Obviously, I dunno either, but I like a theory that makes sense.
Maybe there is that one in a billion chance that he actually disarmed, but I doubt it.
I agree there. I'm pretty damn sure they're eventually going to find some WMDs, but you never know. They really have a hard on for finding them too, and everything seems to be a false positive.
Even that chemical warhead they recently found seemed to only have "trace amounts". So, like, if Saddam broke into your house and smeared it on you, you'd be in big trouble.
And, if he did destroy all his WMDs, that would involved removing chemical agents from the warheads...so, that's exactly what you might expect.
Again, odd.
He could use them spontaneously to catch the Americans off gaurd, or give them to Iraqi guerrilla agents.
Sure, he could, but it's a little late for that to have a decent effect. Gassing the invaders of your nation who are trying to kill you could be considered noble (or at least self-defense), but gassing the police is pretty weak.
Maybe he just wants the US to look bad above all else, and won't use WMD's at all.
Well, I mean, if his goal was to make us look bad by not using WMDs, then we didn't really need to go to war...for that reason, anyway.
Yurika: Wouldn't he use them on Isreal rather than the USA.
For one thing, even France, Germany, Russia, etc. would be against him if he did that.
For another, Bush said the reason for the war was to prevent Saddam from using WMDs against us. Sometimes he'd mention "his neighbors" too, but the point was that we're invading his country because we're actually in danger.
Also don't chemical agents have like an expiry date.
Good question. So, you're thinking that maybe they expired? If that's the case, then he'd already been "disarmed".
From: Cinnabar Island | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Muffin King
Farting Nudist
Member # 2240
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-16-2003 07:58 AM
quote: Originally posted by Mr. K: Obviously, I dunno either, but I like a theory that makes sense.
Ouch, that was harsh.
From: Maryland | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sonuis
Sonius
Member # 1508
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-16-2003 01:28 PM

Is it wrong when you find real advertisements like this on CNN.com?
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
MK
is somewhat large.
Member # 1445
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-16-2003 03:47 PM
quote: Originally posted by Sonuis: 
Is it wrong when you find real advertisements like this on CNN.com?
That's anti-Saddam right? Then there's no prob...
Registered: Jan 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Living on air bubbles
Frank Stallone
Member # 2089
|
posted 04-16-2003 04:48 PM
quote: Originally posted by Yurika: Wouldn't he use them on Isreal rather than the USA. Also don't chemical agents have like an expiry date.
Think about that for a second. An expiration date is when the product is no longer safe to use. Are chemical weapons supposed to be safe?
From: Cherry Hill, Suicide Captial of The World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rolken
Vulcan
Member # 7
Member Rated:
|
posted 04-16-2003 06:09 PM
An expiration date is when the product may no longer function properly. Nuclear weapons "expire" after awhile because uranium, being radioactive, decays over time. Plain old chemicals don't suffer the same effects.
From: Provo, UT | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|