# IRAQ vs. US...who's the big dog?



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

Just wondering what the people's thoughts are...i'm all for it, gonna get me some saddam AND some sand  :nod:


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

NO...... you have no right!
you might have reasons (whether they are good enough is debatable) but you have no right!


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

i believe i have the right to dismantle a regime that is a threat to the world!


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

Go get em sPiKeY!


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

try somebody a bit tougher then who has no oil! :veryangry: 
...north korea..........maybe ???


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> i believe i have the right to dismantle a regime that is a threat to the world!


yeah that is the point, YOU do believe you have the right to dismantle a regime that is a threat to the world!

But not everyone is with you on that, and anyway how do you know for a fact that the regime is any threat to the world?


----------



## mdemers883 (Jan 9, 2003)

I think we should kill saddam, we should have done it long ago. Too bad we can't get a sniper in there to blow that ugly head of his right off instead of having to use a bunch of ground troops. I believe he is definately a threat to the world, anyone that has chem/bio weapons is a major threat, especially when your an A-hole like him. Go get him spikey.


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

and you don't think that the USA is potentially more dangerous to the world than Iraq?
I mean its not like Bush is a rational fellow.
Why don't the rest of the world go into the USA and take out all their weapons?


----------



## cfreddy (Nov 22, 2002)

The way to look at it is like a grade school playground. The Middle Eastern countries are like kids in the school yard. Iraq is the school yard bully. The US is going to be the adult (authority figure) that puts Iraq in line.


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

Q: What do iraq and Hiroshima have in common?
A: Nothing, yet.


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

cfr3 said:


> The way to look at it is like a grade school playground. The Middle Eastern countries are like kids in the school yard. Iraq is the school yard bully. The US is going to be the adult (authority figure) that puts Iraq in line.


but who gave the USA the job of being that adult?
you assume you are always right and better than everyone else.....and whats worse is you don't even know your doing it!

The USA has as much right to control Iraq as Iraq has to control the USA!
Fcuk all!


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

hey someone has to be in control.


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

and i ask you all,who was arming them in the first place when they were fighting iran?! :veryangry: 
who gave anyone like bush the right to rule the world?!
why dont u.s.a. go after the tougher guys with the bad ass weapons and lunatic leaders? theres plenty of them out there,..north korea,china,pakistan,india just for starters, and i didnt see the u.s.a. running into russia either when the cold war was on!is it,s cos with these they know they,ll have a fight on their hands,remember nam! u.s. is being the bully here.bush has got it personal with s.h. from his father who couldn,t finish the job the first time.he knows this wont be much of a fight.........and don,t forget the oil! :veryangry: so take that!


----------



## piranha13 (Jan 24, 2003)

Innes the reason other countries dont invade US and take our weapons is because we dont use them for evil. We've only used them on enemies in WWII. There's no telling how many time Iraq has used them on their OWN people.


----------



## mdemers883 (Jan 9, 2003)

mmm...I guess the U.S. should stay out of everything. Must have been a bad idea for us to bail out the brits when Nazi germany was f'ing everyone up. It wasn't our continent so we should have left everything alone.


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

mdemers883 said:


> mmm...I guess the U.S. should stay out of everything. Must have been a bad idea for us to bail out the brits when Nazi germany was f'ing everyone up. It wasn't our continent so we should have left everything alone.


well said.


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

u wanna look into why and how long it took you to join that war! we may be a small country but we have the balls to fight when the odds are against us!


----------



## mdemers883 (Jan 9, 2003)

We stayed out of the war because "we wanted to remain neutral", and everyone #####ed that we wouldn't be come involved. The germans were doing very well for themselves by sinking the HOOD and invading neighboring countries with slight resistance at best. I guess we shouldn't have sent supplies and loaned money since everyting was under control over there:laugh:


----------



## Guest (Feb 6, 2003)

i put kill saddam because i think he has too much hate in him... and that much hate is too risky to be walking around in this world... but it's not my right to choose who should die or who shouldn't...


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

mdemers883 said:


> We stayed out of the war because "we wanted to remain neutral", and everyone #####ed that we wouldn't be come involved. The germans were doing very well for themselves by sinking the HOOD and invading neighboring countries with slight resistance at best. I guess we shouldn't have sent supplies and loaned money since everyting was under control over there:laugh:


so the germans sunk the hood did they! you wanna check up on that one! at least we didnt get beat off by a load of peasants from paddy fields.as i say bush is a bully just picking his mark[the weak].







anyway gotta go now & kick the #### out of some little kid in the street,...hope he,s got oil!


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

i agree with killing saddam but without a war there :nod: 
get our s.a.s to do it without all the fuss they dont mind action behind enemy lines on their own ...and they,re good at it!  
i,m not gettin drawn into this no more it might cause a war :laughlong:


----------



## mdemers883 (Jan 9, 2003)

Yes, the Hood was sunk by the Bismark. I hope you don't feel that I'm personally attacking you in this thread or any brits. I am just voicing my opinion as you are voicing yours. Although I may not agree with you opinion I still admire and respect it and you do bring up very valid points. I like this little "debate" we are having here, makes for interesting conversation. With that said I still support my opinion. I just want Saddam to be taken down, that is my main reason that I want troops to go to Iraq, even though Oil is a MAJOR part of this situation no doubt. Yes, the US polices the world a lot of times when we shouldn't be, but I think this is an issue where we should get involved for the good of the world. Hitler started out very small and looked what he made...just imagine if he wasn't stopped:0 But I do believe that the US has made some good moves by stepping in such as WWII. I dunno bout the others but I am enjoying this little opposing views thread, and I hope tommo and innes continue to reply, and I do hope we keep this somewhat civil:laugh:







But I will leave this post with one final thought that I always think...IN WAR, THERE IS NEVER A WINNER, EVERYONE LOSES.

Mark


----------



## mdemers883 (Jan 9, 2003)

haha, I posted right aftere you tommo, and yes I agree with you 100% on that this would be best solved by sending in "special forces", I don't think we need to pull american troops as well as foreign troops away from their home for a massive ground invasion, on this we do agree

Mark


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

agreed at last mate  
well all that passed a bit of time, done in now. 1.00a.m.here so goin to watch some t.v.







all views respected,catch you later mate.







:rockin:


----------



## mdemers883 (Jan 9, 2003)

it is only 7:45 here, lol. Yes, agreed, I will talk to you later man. Take care.

Mark


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

hmmm...anyone heard of the quote "speak softly but carry a big stick"...i think roosevelt said it...







in a world where anyone and everyone has the ability to endanger and take away life there has to be someone with the "big stick". i understand that n. korea, china, etc are potential threats to the world, but they have done nothing yet. although i don't believe that the US should be the authority figure for the entire world, but until now, no one has stepped up to the plate to take that authority...i mean the british has potential, but doesnt risk it...as for china, they're new to the game...france, lets just say i'd rather eat frogs then watch them keep watch over the world...and the UN, come on! It's the UN, what have they done so far, except get runned around in circles....as for the saddam's regime...do YOU know how ruthless his sons are? they would kill you without thinking!...and as for mr. bush...he isnt the greatest president, but he means well especially if it has to do with "evil-doers of the world"...







 :laugh:


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

United States Marine Corps ARE the special forces of the world  :nod: ...i mean, no disrespect to the other armed forces of the world, but my Marine Corps kick major ass


----------



## KumbiaQueens (Feb 5, 2003)

why dont you get into the marine corps before calling them your own first...

anyway, about the whole Saddam issue...just find his gay @$$ and send him into any prison. Ensure that he drops the soap on a rope a few times, and he'll never be the same man again. He wont even be able to make his own decisions. He'll be someone's #####.

the US fighting....pointless really....i mean if we didn't get Saddam way back when, what makes you think we're going to be successful now? Just think.... *history repeats itself*... would you want your kids fighting for the same cause 50 years from now? Do you want them to have to leave their loved ones to fight a pointless war!? Yea.....just dont think so much about present time, and go farther into the future....although whatever happens, happens. No one person can stop it, but when gathered with half the world, I'm sure we can kick some major Iraqi @$$.


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

I voted kill that mother fu$ker


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

"anyway, about the whole Saddam issue...just find his gay @$$ and send him into any prison."
If it was that easy we would have done that plus more already. BUT ITS NOT!!!

"the US fighting....pointless really....i mean if we didn't get Saddam way back when, what makes you think we're going to be successful now?"
You learn from experience, what didnt work then wont be tried again this time. Besides we are the only superpower in the world, we have to make sure @$$holes like him dont try and threaten our safety as well as other country's safety!

"would you want your kids fighting for the same cause 50 years from now"
No, which is why we got to take care of it now. They pose a threat to the US as well as other countries and if we dont handle it now, 50 years from now they'll still be fighting in the "War Against Terrorism," or whatever other war it turns into.

"Do you want them to have to leave their loved ones to fight a pointless war!?"
Its not a pointless war if were fighting to end terrorism. If it means saving millions of people for a select few its a risk that we're willing to take and a risk those brave soldiers are willing to take too. I mean, afterall, they did choose to join the military.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

:nod: ...woa!...didnt know i'd get this many replies...


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

KumbiaQueens said:


> why dont you get into the marine corps before calling them your own first...


I will before you say something stupid about me, But im as good as in, I already talked to a recuiter and he said I have to get my GED.


----------



## Ms_Nattereri (Jan 11, 2003)

JearBear, I believe she was talking to USMC*sPiKeY*!!







Thats still awesome though that your going in...I commend you on that. :rockin:


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

I no I wrote that before she has something to say towards me.


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

I agree we (or actually, let the US do that job, since they really want to...) have to get rid of Saddam and his regime. But the "proof" Colin Powell presented was a joke: I mean, blurry black-and-white pictures with grey dots being chemical bunkers. Give me a break







It's all assumptions, guesstimates etc. but no solid proof (circumstancial at best...). I mean, proof is fine, but Powell just made an ass out of himself in front of the whole world. Just pathetic.....!
And those tapes are even worse: every 6 year old child can make a tape like that, and it's Powell's own fault it's no valid proof: no source revealed, no explanantion how and where the info was retreaved, etc.
I really believe Saddam has to go, and I'm affraid a war is the only way to do so, but I think until now, there's still no definite proof. So, carry on searching, boys...


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

secretary of state powell did say his sources were top secret and confidential, and to reveal them would put the sources at risk as well as US intelligence...as for the evidence he provided...the satellite photographs, not so sure about those, and the audio evidence, they do seem quite authentic...but like you said juda, it could be all fake ??? ...the world will never know...







until we find out, lets all go out and grab some drinks, xenon's treat! :laughlong: :laugh:


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> until we find out, lets all go out and grab some drinks, xenon's treat! :laughlong: :laugh:


Now we're talking  
Cheers mate


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

is that guiness?


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

Well this debate has gone some way since I last checked, some things I agree with and some I dont.

The USA taking charge of the situation - I am against, if anything is to happen it should be the UN!, the USA doesn't have the right to step in, simply no right!

The way I see it is that Saddam is bad, the rest of the world want to make sure that he doesn't cause devistation = a good thing.
The problem came when Bush saw his opportunity for revenge against saddam and speeded everything up, and tryed to take charge over the UN.
It seems to me that he has support in the USA and that all the americans believe that he is justified and doing the right thing.
Even if I thought he was doing the right thing - which I don't - I am against him making major world decisions as "the leader" because he is not the worlds leader, nobody is!
and if the world did ever vote on a world leader it would not be Bush that is elected - that is for sure!


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

tommo said:


> is that guiness?


It is whatever you want it to be: Guiness, Coke, coffee, ..... :rockin: :laughlong:


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

hmmm....if it werent for the US taking charge in most of the world's policing, it'd be up to the UK to be taking charge...why? because the UN has done absolutely nothing but sit on its arse and bicker over useless and pointless bs...Name two thing that the UN has done that has NOT resulted in a failure, i'll give you the first one...EAST TIMOR...but yes, name TWO things that the UN has done correctly. 
Innes, look at if from my point of view, if the US had not stepped in, and UK was the only super power on the good guy side, wouldn't the UK and Mr. Blair do the same thing as the US and mr. bush? ???


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

blair has disappeared so far up bush,s backside, it,ll take a barrel of oil for lubrication to get him back out!


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> hmmm....if it werent for the US taking charge in most of the world's policing, it'd be up to the UK to be taking charge...why? because the UN has done absolutely nothing but sit on its arse and bicker over useless and pointless bs...Name two thing that the UN has done that has NOT resulted in a failure, i'll give you the first one...EAST TIMOR...but yes, name TWO things that the UN has done correctly.
> Innes, look at if from my point of view, if the US had not stepped in, and UK was the only super power on the good guy side, wouldn't the UK and Mr. Blair do the same thing as the US and mr. bush? ???


2 things the UN has done correctly - they offer hundreds of people every day help, food and protection.
They follow the rules.

As for the UK stepping in - I am against, for the same reason as the USA.
It's not why, just how!
If saddam was dead I would be happy, But it is not up to Bush to do that, now is it?


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

well if it wasnt for mr. bush wanting to take saddam out of power, it if wasnt for mr. bush waging a "war on terrorism" then i guess that the world "would" be a happier place...saddam would control all the oil of the middle east and have the world literally eating out of his palms, al queda would probably (hope that it never happens, please take no offense to this innes) have destroyed big ben or buckingham palace and allowing his ji-had club to grow into a vast network of terror....
as for the the two things the UN has done correctly, america has done the same...we provide food and protection, we DO follow the rules...so again, what's the point of the UN functioning if it can't do one thing it was created for...to be a world police.... :laughlong:


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

Simply because the UN is not as good as it should be, it still doesn't make the USA in charge of the world.
I'm not saying they do a bad job, they just don't have the right.

"al queda would probably (hope that it never happens, please take no offense to this innes) have destroyed big ben or buckingham palace"

:laugh: Good luck to them!


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

???


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

The united states is in charge of the world and everyone nos it and people around the world wont admit it. Besides alittle thing here and there the US has the world in check.


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

:veryangry: jearbear r u on something?


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

tommo said:


> :veryangry: jearbear r u on something?


See my point, :nod:


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

JEARBEAR said:


> tommo said:
> 
> 
> > :veryangry: jearbear r u on something?
> ...


I don't.








If anything you are living proof of my points about how all americans assume they are better than everyone else, and in charge of everyone else.

I wonder why it is the USA which is involved in all of the recent wars? oo: ???


----------



## tommo (Jan 16, 2003)

with trouble started and brewing in just about every continent on the planet in one way or another how can 
anyone turn round & say they,ve got the place in check!








a hell of a lot of dangerous countries out there don,t wear that one!


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

we dont start the troubles of the world, we just happen to step in and see if we can help stop it...and in a way, we DO have the world in check, as well as the world has the US in check....checks and balances, my friends innes and tommo :nod: ...and by the way, we dont think we're better, we know we're better :laughlong:


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

do you see my point???????


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

For the thanks we get, I think the USA should the stay the fukc out of all other countries problems. Let Saddam take kwate and any other little country he wants. And when countries come begging for our help or $ (and they will) we should just tell them to go to the UN.

Hey Innes, 
you want to know what gives us the right to go to war agains Iraq? Same thing that gives any country the right to go to war......we want to. Simple as that. Same reason Iraq tried to take kwate, Saddam wanted to. And you know why Blair is on bushes nipple? He knows that if something big happens, the USA is the only chance you have. If ww3 breaks out, do you think you stand a chance against China without the USA.........nope, and Blair knows it.
I wish things were different and countries would respect the boarders they currently have, but that is the way it is.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

couldnt agree with you more, mr. gurke 







:rockin: ...so where's our thank you's? we deserve them


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

OK then you can support a war designed to prevent a war ???


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

It is our business what saddam does, we use the oil in kewiut and it is the whole worlds business if he uses necular bombs, We all no what would happen. No what I mean

BTW: Innes and tommo I dont think Im better then you as a person, That not what I meant but I meant military, and we are and as a country.


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

"we use the oil in kewiut"

You see its all about money!

BTW: Innes and tommo I dont think Im better then you as a person, That not what I meant but I meant military, and we are and as a country.

Fcuk off!


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

wow, innes you the man!!!!
ok, the reason why the talk about the US butting out of other countries pisses me off is because I pay a lot of taxes that goes to other countries and it would be nice to just once hear a "thank you for feeding the people in out country that we cant." instead of " the US is bad for butting trying to "control" other countries" We are just trying to protect the innocent. at least that is the way I see it.


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

and what is differant in any other EDC?


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

name a war it wasn't about money?all wars about money!innes and jb chill out,theres no need for this.can we have a discussion for once while somebody ripping on they other.chet we all have different opinion in matter.and we are not all going to agree.respect each other


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

thePACK said:


> name a war it wasn't about money?all wars about money!innes and jb chill out,theres no need for this.can we have a discussion for once while somebody ripping on they other.chet we all have different opinion in matter.and we are not all going to agree.respect each other


Dam right. I am done with this before things go to far.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

i love a good debate!!


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

thePACK said:


> we are not all going to agree.respect each other


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

first of all the US does not support war, we only wish to stop it or avoid it any means necessary...war is the last possible solution...thus our current event with saddam...he gave the US no choice, but to go in and forceably remove all his weapons...second, the US has other oil contracts that do not go through Kuwait, if i believe correctly, i believe that the UK gets its oil from kuwait...third, i agree with gurke, america does deserve a thank you, instead of having the whole world ##### at us for being bullies and taking the world policing into our hands. the fact is, we're not bullies and we try not to police the world, but we have to cuz no one else does!...fourth, whats EDC?....and fifth of all...i like how your royal british marines work, seen video on them :nod:


----------



## DiXoN (Jan 31, 2003)

i have been reading this post intently and decided to add my opinion on this one
1- yes kill saddam
2- yes it is about oil (wars start for either money or religion or if the leader is a psycho ie hitler/saddam)
3- other country's with major problems don't get help but what the hell we need oil
4-yes the us don't get any praise for helping out but neither do we (uk) you just get blown up but so do the IRA
5-nobody has the right to go to war 'because we want to' but we do need to this time ,we should have finished him off we had SAS ready to kill him but didnt use them we should finish the job
6-no the usa is not a better place than the uk you can just get piranha more easily


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

oooo, and a war that didnt involve money:
1. vietnam
2. korea
3. cold war


----------



## cfreddy (Nov 22, 2002)

Innes said:


> OK then you can support a war designed to prevent a war ???


The reason we want to go into Iraq is that we want to prevent a bigger problem in the future. My question to you unthankful foreigners, were you not appreciative of the US stopping Sadam back in the gulf war? Sadam has shown in both Iran and in Kuwaitt that he is a bully. Sadam is not going to sit back and be quiet, he is an aggressive son of #####. He has also shown that he is perfectly willing to use chemical and biological weapons. It is an undisputed fact that sadam had an arsenal of chemical/biological weapons. These weapons are now missing. Sadam says they are destroyed but offers absolutely no proof of it. Come on, are you so ####ing stupid as to believe that sadam would destroy these weapons and not show the world that he did. You are an absolute idiot to not assume that Sadam still has them. Also, you believe he doesn't have weapons when his scientists with his soldiers sitting over there shoulder tell inspectors there are no weapons. What do you think happens to one of those scientists if they even give the wrong look? I'll tell you, they are taken out back and shot. And to say that we should listen to the UN and follow there lead is bull####. The UN has no power without the US. The legitimacy of UN rule is ensured only through the commitment of US forces, otherwise they are essentially rent a cops. Personally, I would love to see other countries take care of their own problems, but the truth is, if nothing is done now it is just going to be a bigger problem that you lazy worthless peace lovers are going to ask us to clean up. Well, #### that. If you want us to cover your asses, we are going to do it on our terms, and minimize our losses and damage. I applaud Britain for joining us and realizing the impending danger sadam poses and committing to nipping this problem in the bud once and for all...To all you other lazy weak people who cry about US involvement, shutup. You are getting a free ride so don't ##### and moan.


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> first of all the US does not support war, we only wish to stop it or avoid it any means necessary..


god that was funny ,hello? u.s supplied knowledge and bombs to iraq in the 80.why?because they wanted iraq to use it on iran.and afganistan yeah we suppilied them too.there name the taliban.we gave knowledge and bombs to them to block russia from taking over.and know they have come back to bite us in the a$$.don't make are government sound so nice cause they aren't.the only reason there going for saddam is after 9/11 we have to do something,someones head had to roll,since we can't capture bin bit*h,we get the next best thing saddam.who we should get out ,hell daddy bush should of done it back when.


----------



## Innes (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> whats EDC?


Economically Developed Country


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

thePACK said:


> > we gave knowledge and bombs to them to block russia from taking over.and know they have come back to bite us in the a$$.don't make are government sound so nice cause they aren't.
> 
> 
> WE DON'T SUPPORT WAR!!!! WE USE IT BECAUSE IT IS THE ONLY POSSIBLE WAY TO END A SOLUTION IN THIS WORLD!!!!!!! we supplied iraq so they could stop russia from spreading communism...and we're not going after saddam for 9/11, we're going after saddam because of a different matter....we wouldnt be going after him again if the UN hadn't stepped in and put up stupid sanctions on iraq in the first place! :veryangry: ...


----------



## rosecityrhom (Feb 3, 2003)

We need to finally take care of what we started. Saddam has done nothing but abuse his power and his people and is going against the regulations put on him after our first war with him. He's been funding terrorist activities for years and if we take him out there's one less organization to fund terrorism which will save hundreds if not thousands of lives. Saddam is no different than Hitler. :veryangry:


----------



## Dia (Feb 10, 2003)

WELL,.... why should we jump into Saddam Husseins sh*t when we didnt even take care of Osama Bin Lunatic yet???.......


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

we are taking care of osama bin anut...we're just mulitasking it with saddam


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> couldnt agree with you more, *mr. gurke*


lol @ mr. gurke








Anyone realize it means mr. pickle :laughlong:

Sorry to get a bit off-topic, but I just noticed it, and could resist...


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> we are taking care of osama bin anut...we're just mulitasking it with saddam


Do you really think Saddam will just wait in Bagdad for some American soldier to blow his brains out ??? 
Getting rid of Saddam does not transform Iraq in to a free country instantly. I know America doesn't care a damn thing about that, since it seems to be more of a personal vendetta between Bush and Saddam, than an true concern for the Iraqi people.

Freeing Iraq is getting rid of the entire Saddam clique, all his supporters, and most importantly, his Republican guard. They'll all go to Bagdad to defend Saddam's capital, and unlike the normal Iraqi's, they have something to loose (ie. everything they have), and will fight themselves to death instead of surrendering. 
And we all know how good western armies are in urban warfare (I just mention the Americans in Somalia [does Black Hawk Down ring a bell?], or the Russians in Grozny).
Anyone ever though of that...... ???


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

If i remember correctly, i think the US already has plans for putting up a temporarily new government in iraq if we take out saddam and his regime...and we're prepared to fight in an urban warfare...i think we've learned from our mistakes in the past...besides, we have virtual games to help us out :laughlong: ....don't we americans think of everything? :nod:  ....


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> If i remember correctly, i think the US already has plans for putting up a temporarily new government in iraq if we take out saddam and his regime...and we're prepared to fight in an urban warfare...i think we've learned from our mistakes in the past...besides, we have virtual games to help us out :laughlong: ....don't we americans think of everything? :nod:  ....


Well, the near future will probably tell









Oh, and Counterstrike is definetly the best way to learn how to fight against terrorists... :laughlong:


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

CT rules!!!! woo woo!!! :rockin: but i hate it when all but one terrorist dies, and he's the one who sets off the bomb and wins it for his team....stupid campin f__k :veryangry: !!! i hate campers....we should play each other one day juda...i call CT's, gotta have my m4a1 :nod:


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> we should play each other one day juda...i call CT's, gotta have my m4a1 :nod:


Sorry dude, I never ever played Counterstrike, or an online-game for that matter :look: Until yesterday, all I had was modem: now I have cable, do it's time to kick ass and chew bubble gum :nod: 
But I have Unreal Tournament 2003 (and some other games) installed, so if you really want to get fragged, let me know


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

me get fragged? LOL :laughlong: i kicked ass in the original unreal tournament! and as for CS, you have to start playing that, it's literally raised the level of deathmatch...i'll take you up on your offer though, lemme get a cable modem first







...stupid dial-up







...and then, i'll take your ass down!!!!  :nod:


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> me get fragged? LOL :laughlong: i kicked ass in the original unreal tournament! and as for CS, you have to start playing that, it's literally raised the level of deathmatch...i'll take you up on your offer though, lemme get a cable modem first
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, whatever







:







:


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

...no comment :laughlong: ...we'll see my good man, we'll see who's calling who daddy at the end....


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

That's fine, son :rasp:


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

wow....this thread went from war with iraq to CS to frag and now father and son bonding....i guess i'm not a bastard after all....DAD!!!!!! :laughlong:


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Actually, you *are* a little bastard, but that's besides the point now, son :laugh: 
To get back to the original topic: Son, I demand you to play nice, or I'll have your ass shipped to the Gulf, to get some firsthand experience...







:laughlong:


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

LOL!!! :laughlong: I AM A BASTARD...A COCKY ASS BASTARD...and who gives you the right to say "you'll ship my ass to the gulf"?? I don't see how you're doing anything to help














....


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> I don't see how you're doing anything to help
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What do you mean?


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

I have no idea what i mean, but my guts tell me that you're not doing anything to help the cause of getting rid of mr. hussein :nod: ...you should join the royal british marine...  ...give saddam some of that dry british humor :laughlong:


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Actually, I'm Dutch, so I'll go with the Dutch Navy Seals (yeah whatever, lol :laughlong: ), and pass along the bong to mr. Saddam. Perhaps he lightens up a bit...


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

I SAY WE STOP DICKING AROUND WAITING FOR THE UN TO PLAY CAT AND MOUSE WITH SADDAM AND TAKE HIS BIT_H A_S OUT TODAY!!!!!! GO....GO....GO......


----------



## alvin (Jan 2, 2003)

USMC, all my friends in the armed forces are over there. Are you retired, or stationed here. One of my buddies from HS is currently training in the USNS. Just made it past hell week. 3hrs of sleep in 7 days or so. All standing up. I can sleep standing up if ... I'm drunk and leaning against the bar. No really, though, were are you stationed. Sorry if I missed it earlier, but there is a lot to read. I would have enlisted if I could, but already was told I couldn't due to health problems, so I work for the Gov. designing the most advanced fighter known to man. I wish I could let you guys in on what this thing can REALLY do, but I could get in trouble. Let's just say, we are in good hands, and this should be an in and out deal. Kick ass. Go USA! Sorry, and anyone else with us! John


----------



## thePACK (Jan 3, 2003)

i 'll say one thing if were going to war i wish we would just do it, instead of talking about it.during this time s.h could be building weapons and getting ready.all this tallk is kind of like calling someone and saying "i'm coming over to kick your a$$ so be ready,NO you just go over and kick his teeth in"

alright question: how long do you think we will be at war?couple days,week month whats you opinion?


----------



## SnowCichlid. (Jan 10, 2003)

I dont live in either country but do believ that he needs some torture but also I would avoid war if it were possible... maybe we should send some snippers over and take out ther top guys...could be a better alternative in my opinion, this would cause less destruction and therefore have less a global effect on our invironment which would effect our stock of fish


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

that what im talkin about PACK!....that's exactly what im saying....but we can't cuz of the stupid UN! :veryangry:....the UN, france, germany, and i think russia, are just delaying the inevitable...







aRgH, should've never helped the french in WW2...should've let them bend over further so hitler could stick it further up their ass! :veryangry:


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

thePACK said:


> alright question: how long do you think we will be at war?couple days,week month whats you opinion?


I think it will be many months, if you're lucky... Bombing Iraq to smithereens will not end the problems: a completely new regime has to be installed, and that can only be done when all remnants of Saddam's regime are gone. It'll be nasty house-to-house fighting in Bagdad against an enemy determined to either win the war or get shot.
You know the US army is still fighting Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan: those were not nearly as much as the Iraqi forces, and with far inferior weaponery...

Anyways, good luck in the Gulf


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> should've never helped the french in WW2...should've let them bend over further so hitler could stick it further up their ass! :veryangry:


I agree!
I think we should expand the Atlantic a bit: just dig a huge hole were France lies :laughlong:

The French are j a bunch of stupid chauvinistic mofo's who still think their a superpower.... Hello, reality check: YOU AIN'T!!!!! 
Dumbasses! All they deserve is some baguettes up their poop-holes


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

who is the post whore now.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

Judazzz said:


> You know the US army is still fighting Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan: those were not nearly as much as the Iraqi forces, and with far inferior weaponery...


LOL...so true juda, so true!!! :laughlong: now if you sent in a Marine Corp division, you and i both know it would've been over in about a month or less....







.... LOL, the US Army :laughlong:







....

...*please note* to all army veterens out there, i mean no disrespect, but Marines are the prestigious armed forces out there


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> ...*please note* to all army veterens out there, i mean no disrespect, but Marines are the prestigious armed forces out there


Yeah, show some respect man: I lost my left leg at Gettysburg, so simmadown a bit, eh?














:laughlong:

I don't want to burst your bubble, but as far as I know, those yanks running around in the Afghani desert are special forces... ???


----------



## Judazzz (Jan 13, 2003)

Dang double post...


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

...i hate bombing things to smithereens!














no fun in that, i prefer the old fashion WW2 style fighting methods, bombing things to keep the enemy at bay, and then rushing in to take out the opposition







:nod: (ie...the british bombing berlin, distracting the luftwaffe, and giving the allied forces a chance to perform D.DAY







)


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

Judazzz said:


> Yeah, show some respect man: I lost my left leg at Gettysburg, so simmadown a bit, eh?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


...Gettysburg? when the hell did you fight our civil war? ??? you must be something like 140 years old ??? ...that's an army special forces? ??? i thought it was the regular US Army forces out there in the afghani desert....wow, they are "special" :laughlong:


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> LOL...so true juda, so true!!! :laughlong: now if you sent in a Marine Corp division, you and i both know it would've been over in about a month or less....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not this again. Marine Recon are bad asses, but regular marines......just like army infantry. If you want the real deal you have to go with Special Forces or the Delta Force and who know what they are.
I was in Panama for Jungle training during the elections in 1989 and the Special Forces had been in the bush for 6 months straight waiting incase something happened. And that is some nasty jungle. I saw one dude come out of the bush, look at us and then disappear back into the bush. Dude had a beard about 6" long, long ass hair, looked like he just crawled out from under a rock.....that is a bad ass.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

hey hey...regular marines are not "just like the army infantry"..i find that insulting







...but yes marine recon as well as delta force and seals are bad ass...i have no problem with them because i know they could kick my ass (SF/DF/MR vs. USMC pvt...you know who's gonna win that one







)


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> hey hey...regular marines are not "just like the army infantry"..i find that insulting
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok, so explain to me why the marines are so different that the Army Infantry?
And if I was in Delta Force, I would find it insulting to be placed in the same ranks as Marine Recon and the Navy Seals. There is no compairison there. Recon, Seals, Rangers, S.F., that is where the Delta Force recrute.


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

Marine corp infantry is very different from army infantry, Air force infantry and what ever infantry there is, The marine infantry is more well trained for combat situations and hand to hand combat and they are the first ones there during war, So dont give me the sh*t, And another thing is marine corp boot camp is 5 weeks longer then any other boot camp and marine corp boot camp is ten times more physical then any boot camp. The marines boot camp is doubled and even tripled what you have to do in army boot camp and more sh*t to learn, Do some god dam research before you open your mouth, and yes any special forces will be more trained then a regular branch in the marines that is way they are special forces. But the marines is the strongest branch in the armed forces. Not to take anything away from the army infantry they are trained as well.

My uncle is a staff sargent in the army and when I asked him what the strongest branch in the military is he told me the marines. For the same reasons as I said above.

It sounds like you served in the army if so thats good and thats something to be proud of But still everything I stated above is fact.

And one word the crucible. USMC SPIKEY noes what im talking about when I say crucible.

I thought about joining the army Rangers but I did not cause I had my reasons. I wanted them or marines.

Not to start a little word war with you but This had to be said. :







:


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

JEARBEAR said:


> Marine corp infantry is very different from army infantry, Air force infantry and what ever infantry there is, The marine infantry is more well trained for combat situations and hand to hand combat and they are the first ones there during war, So dont give me the sh*t, And another thing is marine corp boot camp is 5 weeks longer then any other boot camp and marine corp boot camp is ten times more physical then any boot camp. The marines boot camp is doubled and even tripled what you have to do in army boot camp and more sh*t to learn, Do some god dam research before you open your mouth, and yes any special forces will be more trained then a regular branch in the marines that is way they are special forces. But the marines is the strongest branch in the armed forces. Not to take anything away from the army infantry they are trained as well.
> 
> My uncle is a staff sargent in the army and when I asked him what the strongest branch in the military is he told me the marines. For the same reasons as I said above.
> 
> ...


Jarebare, 
Your aggression towards me just proves what an ignorant dumbass you are. Never once did I attack you or your ignorant philosophy. You want to think the Marines are the "baddest" thing around, fine, that is up to you. In 4 years when you cant hang anymore, you can come work for me.

In the course of 4 years wtf does 5 weeks of basic "BASIC" training have to do with anything? Are you that stupid that you don't realize it is all a head game? "We are tougher than you", what a bunch of b.s.. Why don't you grow up, get an education, and then come at me with more than that. 
I trained in Thailand with Marines, have you trained with the Army Infantry? I partied in Hawaii with Marines, have you partied with any Army Infantry? Obviously not or you would not be so disrespectful.

I did not disrespect you at all, I asked you a simple question, and you attack me? I was looking for a more intelligent answer than you gave me, but I guess that is what I should have expected from a stupidass jarhead.

Oh, and by the way, you would have enjoyed Ranger training, I know I did.

This entire post was directed at one person, not Marines in general.

Xenon, if you want to delete this, go ahead, but a response to his ass was needed.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

One more thing, the military is a tough way of life and all that serve the US military deserve our respect and appreciation, no matter what branch of the service they choose to enter. They all play a roll in the protection of our country.


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

grosse gurke said:


> Jarebare,
> Your aggression towards me just proves what an ignorant dumbass you are. Never once did I attack you or your ignorant philosophy. You want to think the Marines are the "baddest" thing around, fine, that is up to you. In 4 years when you cant hang anymore, you can come work for me.
> 
> In the course of 4 years wtf does 5 weeks of basic "BASIC" training have to do with anything? Are you that stupid that you don't realize it is all a head game? "We are tougher than you", what a bunch of b.s.. Why don't you grow up, get an education, and then come at me with more than that.
> ...


First of all I did not attack you but I was just stating a fact you attacked me just now but that is not the point, You were in the army rangers cool No disrespect towards the rangers, I have nothing but respect for you, They are an elite force of the army am I correct, They are more trained then regular marines and army, But that does not change the fact that out of the four military armed forces, ARMY,AIR FORCE,NAVY,MARINES, The marines are the most highly trained ones except for AR,MR,NS,DF, are you still going to argue the fact of that. Then what you are saying is bull sh*t my friend, That is what I ment, That is fact and if you still deny that then you are the dumb ass. Besides when did you serve in the military?


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

grosse gurke said:


> One more thing, the military is a tough way of life and all that serve the US military deserve our respect and appreciation, no matter what branch of the service they choose to enter. They all play a roll in the protection of our country.


I agree, There was no disrespect toward you, am I going to apoligize no, but no disrespect to you.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

If I misunderstood your post I apologize however
"Do some god dam research before you open your mouth"
Sounds like an attack to me. I dont want to argue with you, but for the record, Navy Seals are usually the first in and last out of a conflict. Like I said, all branches play a part and if you feel that your branch is the best, baddest, meanest fine.

I served from 86-90. You?

I dont know if you are in the Marines or are joining, either way good luck, it is a interesting life, one that was not for me but I must say I traveled to some amazing places and met some great people.


----------



## Xenon (Nov 15, 2002)

> ARMY,AIR FORCE,NAVY,MARINES


This might sound dumb....but isnt the Marines part of the Navy?


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

I dont want to argue ether but do you get what I ment now, I was just saying out of the basic branches the marines were the most highly trained and most physical, I just want to no if you agree? Just a simple yes or no it does not matter if you dont people have opinions and you will have yours and ill have mine,

I will be joining the marines, Hopefully very soon and what I said above is why I picked them, I did as much reserch on them as I possibly could, I have to get my ged first, That will take no time. I have the intensity and confedense to accomplish that and I will, I like physical sh*t thats why i picked infantry.. But good luck to you to. And hopefully I will be a recon someday that is what im aiming for and funk abunch of sh*t up.


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

Xenon said:


> > ARMY,AIR FORCE,NAVY,MARINES
> 
> 
> This might sound dumb....but isnt the Marines part of the Navy?


It does not sound dumb, The marines back in the day were a force to the navy like the army Rangers are to the army, But they are there own branch now,


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

JEARBEAR said:


> I dont want to argue ether but do you get what I ment now, I was just saying out of the basic branches the marines were the most highly trained and most physical, I just want to no if you agree? Just a simple yes or no it does not matter if you dont people have opinions and you will have yours and ill have mine


No, I dont agree.

Good luck in the Marines, I hope it is everything you are looking for.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

....the marine corp is a department of the navy, technically we belong to the navy, but we are our own big bad division in the US armed forces...i have no disrespect for our four branches of service, i have full respects for them....i guess i just have more pride for my marine corps...i mean, wouldnt you have more pride for your army rangers since you were a part of it?


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

USMC*sPiKeY* said:


> ....the marine corp is a department of the navy, technically we belong to the navy, but we are our own big bad division in the US armed forces...i have no disrespect for our four branches of service, i have full respects for them....i guess i just have more pride for my marine corps...i mean, wouldnt you have more pride for your army rangers since you were a part of it?


I was not in a ranger unit, I was in the infantry. I completed the ranger training and certification. You should take pride in being a marine as should every member of the service. My point was that unless you are in the Recon, Rangers, Seals, SF, DF, the training for ground troops is very similar. Every unit believes they are the highest trained, as well they should, but I think it is disrespectful to tell someone they are full of sh*t when that person is not yet enlisted. 
You have a better understanding of the cooperation between branches that needs to occur in order to have a successful campaign. There is a big difference between pride and egotism and yes I do take pride in the way I served my country.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

....true....agreed...from now on, no more dissing of other branches....MARINES RULE!!!!







:







: ....hahaha...sorry, just a random outburst, but mr. gurke has a point


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)




----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

I dont agree with everything but gurke has some good points.


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

Jearbear,
If everyone always agreed, the world would be a very boring place. :







:


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

grosse gurke said:


> Jearbear,
> If everyone always agreed, the world would be a very boring place. :
> 
> 
> ...


yes it would. :nod:


----------



## Grosse Gurke (Jan 3, 2003)

OH........so now you agree with me.


----------



## fishman2 (Nov 27, 2002)

:laugh:


----------



## JEARBEAR (Jan 30, 2003)

grosse gurke said:


> OH........so now you agree with me.


Not no more I dont :rasp: Yeah i agree with you on that. very very boring.


----------



## ProdigalMarine (Jan 31, 2003)

in the famous words of homer simpson..."BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING!"...i think this thread has lived every once of its life :nod: ...so lets move on to better things like lots and lots of girls as well as lots and lots of hard liquor :nod: :laughlong: :rockin:


----------

