VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 11:49:31 09/09/02 Mon
Author: *
Subject: Re: Iraq?
In reply to: Jack 's message, "Iraq?" on 12:22:08 09/08/02 Sun

the BNP claiming that 2/3 of all racist attacks occur to white ppl is obviously yet another method of creating racial tension. askin children to illustrate this is an attempt at indoctrination. This BNP claim is biased and according to all other sources false. besides this, even if it were to b true (which is unlikely) no political party should b dwelling on which racial group suffers the most racist attacks. this should b irrelevent. All racism should be tackled. by raising such points as the BNP have, hate towards ethnic minorites is increased and racist attacks go up. wot the BNP do is FUEL RACISM.

rite Iraq. Bush is blatantly fighting his fathers war, carrying on his father's legacy, completing his dream. I am also suspicious of the US claims that Hussien has chemical and biological weapons and mayb even nucleur warheads. surely if this was the case, the US would not b so adamant to bomb iraq, indeed it should fear counter biological and chemical attacks on the american people. Also, if such weapons were posessed by Iraq, America would not claim that this new war they are talkin of beginning will be a pushover.

A further case against the war is even if such weapons are in existence in Iraq, why give Saddam an excuse to use them by waging war?

the reasons for the war.......to remove an oppressive dictator who is harming his ppl, who are beggin to be liberated by the all powerful and great US. would these ppl b the same ppl who were cheering and dancing (as wrong as it was) in the streets on 9/11. These ppl were celebrating US suffering, they are anti-american. this leads me to beleive that american intervention in their country is most unwelcome.

Bush is clearly a war monger, most world leaders and memebers of the UN have recognised the american ploy to exploit the tragic events of 9/11 to spread american influence even further and capiltalise on the middle eastern countries (OIL- LOTS OF IT- money money money) under the guise of fighting terrorism.

i saw on tv an american official say "they (iraq) should respect America". should??????? y? america is a hotbed of hypocrisy. They claim to b fighting for democracy, by toppling a dictator, now if Hussien was pro-american such as Diem and Rhee as examples, America would have no problem with a restrictive and oppressive regime. The same was for the Taliban, true, they should have been removed, as they were an extremly brutal organisation BUT WHO IN THE FIRST PLACE FUNDED THE TALIBAN AGAINST THE USSR AND GAVE BIN LADEN SPECIALIST TRAINING????????????? Our good freinds and bringers of liberation the USA. America is the biggest funder of the IRA, but of course, since they're pro american, they cant b terrorists, they r freedom fighters.

Finally, if the US was situated mid world and not isolated all the way in the far west, they wouldnt dare wage wars practically every six months. its only cause hussein cant carry out air strikes over the distant america and cannot devastate the country like the US is able to do all over the third world, that they take the matter of war so lightly.

If saddam has weapons of mass destruction then it is a cause for concern, there is no arguement there, and some action has to b taken. but if the world is not convinced that there is need for war, y should bush go ahead with it with blair following at his heels like a well trained puppy?


oh, was wondering, does america still have weapons of mass destriction stashed away sumwhere after the cold war??? or did they really scrap forty years of arms build up. How much can u trust them?

The only reason the USA is doin this is because they feel their military superiority threatened by a little tiny country like iraq. and there is not even any substantial evidence to prove that they have cause to b threatened.

America just wants to b the most powerful and best. thats wot it comes down to. we must all bow down to america, our god.

HYPOCRISY HYPOCRISY, HATE IT. HATE WAR.

ps. i'm not anti american, just anti patehtic excuses for waging war and hypocricy.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.