08-10-2002 23:32									#61
	Full PM-box? Change here!

"you all do know that the west supplied Sadam with the technology to fight Iran, don't you?"

The stupid thing was Iran had a very modern military left by the Shah in 1979. M60a3, F-14's and F4's. Tow ATG, M113, German and other NATO arms. We supplied the then monarch Shah's army with alot of firepower.

the Iranians were far from defenseless. Its just for some ungodly reason they chose to use Suicide waves to attack and not tanks. And after 1982, the Soviet Union had lent the Iraqi military enough forces to easily wipe the iranians out. But the Iranians continued to waste thousands of good soldiers on an offensive in Southern Iraq which captured Basra to Kuwait but were too weak to hold.

Iran had some 1600 tanks and 400 modern Jets. Almost none saw any action except in retailatory raids on Baghdad.

here is a really good pictures

http://www.pitt.edu/~megst20/war.html

This war always interests. It was so stupid, yet there were alot of issue's between the two countries.

	08-10-2002 23:34									#62
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Fez 2+2 does not equal 5. It just doesn't.

So why do you keep saying it does?

quote: Take this equation: Iraq + Saddam = Misery, Death, and possible WMD strike against 1st world countries). This equation is so damn true it is unbelieveable. Now take into mind.

Four years have gone by since the weapons inspectors left Iraq. Saddam has had plenty of time to develop his weapons, and it's quite possible that he had some weapons programs running when the inspectors left. If all he wanted to was to strike against first world countries, why hasn't he done so already?

I believe that yes, Saddam would probably love to strike against US or Europe. But he doesn't, because such an action would be sure to get him killed in the counterattacks from US/Europe. Saddam loves his life and his power more than he hates US/Europe.

On the other hand, if Iraq is invaded and Saddam sees that he's fighting a losing battle, then he'll have a reason to use his WMDs: He's dead anyway, so why not finish his life with a powerful strike against those he hate?

The way I see it, the US might be giving Saddam a reason to use his WMD by invading Iraq...

	08-10-2002 23:42									#63
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Saint Marcus The Empire launched several invasions into Parthian and Sassanid lands, with mixed success, long after the end of the Republic.

True, but these were no more than border skirmishes not unlike the seeming endless wars against the Germans and Goths. The Romans never embarked on a national effort to conquer Parthia/ Sassanid Empire/Perisa as they did Carthage, Macedonia or Gaul. Perhaps Trajan would have carried through after conquering Mesopotamia, but he was faced with a Jewish revolt in Africa that forced him to withdraw as soon as the fighting had ended.

Most emperors after Augustus simply followed his advice to stay in a defensive posture. The Senate, had they still been the real power in Rome, may have had a different view on Persia. But we shall never know.

BTW, I think Bush has come to realize, if he hadn't before, just how much more powerful the United States is if we enter into a conflict with a national commitment to a clear objective. Congress will undoubtedly authorize a war against Iraq in the next few days by an overwhelming majority.

I also believe our Allies and the UN will be their with us after Congress's vote. Had Bush not sought and received the support of Congress, the ability to pursuade the UN or our Allies to join us would have been greatly reduced.

	09-10-2002 00:17									#64
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Bush will definitely be in a stronger position with the US voters after cornering Congress with the high school "fight or you're a faggot!" tactic. But I doubt it will help with the UN or the allies. The rest of the world tends to see us as having an imperial president and a lapdog congress and public. Nothing happening now will change that perception. Hopefully, the leaders in those countries will likewise realize that this is the best chance they're liable to get of kicking Saddam out, and cajole their own publics.

	09-10-2002 00:23									#65
	Tired of ads?

Pull yourself up to the keyboard and write your congressman. There might still be time to make a difference.

	09-10-2002 00:30									#66
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: True, but these were no more than border skirmishes

Hardly. The Romans got all the way to Nineveh. Not to mention the war for control of Armenia.

	09-10-2002 00:46									#67
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Kepler Bush will definitely be in a stronger position with the US voters after cornering Congress with the high school "fight or you're a faggot!" tactic. But I doubt it will help with the UN or the allies. The rest of the world tends to see us as having an imperial president and a lapdog congress and public. Nothing happening now will change that perception. Hopefully, the leaders in those countries will likewise realize that this is the best chance they're liable to get of kicking Saddam out, and cajole their own publics.

Nothing happening now will reverse that opinion, but we can (and probably will ) make it much worse.

	09-10-2002 02:59									#68
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

You people are clueless. I am not going to talk with clueless people like David Floyd. Get a damn clue. You don't know who you are dealing with... this is not a man you would consider a good neighbor... he ****ing kills people.

	09-10-2002 03:04									#69
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Fez: the very model of eloquence

	09-10-2002 03:15									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

How can you even have compassion like so many of you anti-war communists are for such a man like Saddam Hussein? It is disgusting, especially you Floyd.

	09-10-2002 03:28									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Fez, when has anyone here claimed to have compassion for Saddam Hussein? When has anyone claimed that Saddam is a great guy that they'd consider being ruled by or living with?

All we are trying to do is explain to you that there are consequences to the actions Bush wants to take. The US may be the most powerful country in the world, but that does not mean it is all powerful.

The one thing I have not seen you do is explain how to deal with what happens when the US attacks Iraq. You claim that the United States is in danger becasue Iraq had WoMD that is ready and willing to use. If Saddam is ready and willing, what's to stop him from using them the moment the first marine lands in Iraqi territory?

Answer that question.

	09-10-2002 03:30									#72
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Saint Marcus Hardly. The Romans got all the way to Nineveh. Not to mention the war for control of Armenia.

Well, all the wars with the Persians, etc., ended in peace treaties. The Romans perhaps were not strong enough to conquer Persia, nor the Persians strong enough to conquer the Roman Empire. Logistical problems may be partly responsible. Yet I cannot help but wonder if the Caesar had not been assassinated whether he would have been successful where Crassus had failed. Caesar was not one to back off from a reverse (Britain, for example) without coming back at a later date and finishing the job.

Regardless, I have been listening to the debate in the House much of this afternoon. Pro and con. But I must say some of the best speeches are from Democrats who actually address the arguments of the naysayers, point-by-point. I think the best speech I heard in this tenor was by Congressman David Wiener from New York. He gave a simply terrific speech. But his essential thesis was that pre-emption is the right policy when the danger is clear. We should not have to sit back and wait for the inevitable attack if 1) the hostility is there; 2) the means are there; and 3) the willingness to use the means has been demonstrated.

	09-10-2002 03:44									#73
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

either dubya oder rumsfeld are discussing here under the nick "fez" or you've totally fallen for the war-propaganda of mr. "my words are backed with nuclear weapons"-bush jr.
the same as you fell for the anti-communist propaganda ("communism is BAD").
and also to dubya's black-and-white-only-propaganda ("either you are with us or with the terrorists")

damn it! can't you make your OWN opinion?
try and think, why the current US-regime (yes, regime) says all these things? look BEHIND the words... after all, it's not difficult - bush jr. is quite transparent if you only try to see.

i don't like saddam - but no person in the world has the right to decide who should lead another country.

many big mistakes where done: helping the taliban in afghanistan against the soviets, fighting in vietnam, helping iraq against iran, etc., etc., etc.
who sais that this is the right decision?

	09-10-2002 03:46									#74
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: If Saddam is ready and willing, what's to stop him from using them the moment the first marine lands in Iraqi territory?

But are his general's willing?

	09-10-2002 03:48									#75
	Support Apolyton

by the way: osama bin laden said in his most recent speach, that terror will go on, as long as US-aggression goes on.

allthough we can't trust this guy, it does sound logic and very true.
i bet you, that if the US would immediatly stop intervening in those countries and just help them build healthy economies, there won't be any more voluntaries to kill themselves in order to hurt the west.

think about this!

	09-10-2002 03:50									#76
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Fez But are his general's willing?

yes, because they have been brainwashed and "propagandized" just as much as the US/UK generals...
the difference: iraqi generals will die or face the war crime court. western generals won't...

	09-10-2002 03:51									#77
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by sabrewolf by the way: osama bin laden said in his most recent speach,

It's starting to look more and more like the man is a rotting corpse. Why the change from videotape if you want to prove that you are still alive?

PS The terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 weren't in anyway poor.

	09-10-2002 03:58									#78
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc PS The terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 weren't in anyway poor.

no, but they are morally backed by thousands of dead-poor people...

	09-10-2002 04:35									#79
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Fez But are his general's willing?

If his general's aren't willing to use weapons of mass destruction when their country is about to fall, why would they use them before the US invaded their nation?

Or are you suggesting that Iraqi generals will use tactical nbc weapons? Well that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that when the US invades and inevitably destroys their nation, when Saddam feels he has lost all hope and that death is near, that suitcase nuke in DC goes off.

	09-10-2002 04:57									#80
	Tired of ads?

Obviously Bush's warning to the Iraqi generals not to accept an order to use WoMD recognizes the real threat that Saddam represents to use WoMD in any fight to the death. The Iraqi generals are now between a rock and a hard place. If Saddam does give such a order to them, they will have the following choices:

1) carry out the order and be executed by the Allies;

2) refuse to carry out the order and be executed by Saddam; or

3) revolt.

I suspect that 3) will happen if Saddam gives the order.

	09-10-2002 05:00									#81
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

In that case, what threat is Saddam to the United States?

	09-10-2002 05:03									#82
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by faded glory "you all do know that the west supplied Sadam with the technology to fight Iran, don't you?" The stupid thing was Iran had a very modern military left by the Shah in 1979. M60a3, F-14's and F4's. Tow ATG, M113, German and other NATO arms. We supplied the then monarch Shah's army with alot of firepower. the Iranians were far from defenseless. Its just for some ungodly reason they chose to use Suicide waves to attack and not tanks. And after 1982, the Soviet Union had lent the Iraqi military enough forces to easily wipe the iranians out. But the Iranians continued to waste thousands of good soldiers on an offensive in Southern Iraq which captured Basra to Kuwait but were too weak to hold. Iran had some 1600 tanks and 400 modern Jets. Almost none saw any action except in retailatory raids on Baghdad. here is a really good pictures http://www.pitt.edu/~megst20/war.html This war always interests. It was so stupid, yet there were alot of issue's between the two countries.

Faded, IIRC, the lack of use of the airforce was due to lack of spare parts and maintenance. Also, many of the pilots were pro-Shah and had fled.

I think they had the same problem with the tanks, plus a lack of ammo for them.

	09-10-2002 05:19									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Lorizael In that case, what threat is Saddam to the United States?

I listed the three options in case of a war against Iraq. The revolt will be caused by Allied threat to arrest the generals for war crimes given yesterday by Bush in his speech. This would only be a credible threat if the Allies are closing in.

Until then, Saddam remains a threat to attack the US and its allies by giving al Qaida bio-weapons.

Once he has nukes, he can restart his war machine and keep the US at bay by threatening New York or London. Who knows what is in all those containers on inbound freighters? Saudi Arabia will be the first to go, IMHO. The ploy just might work if we elect a peacenik idiot such as Gore.

	09-10-2002 08:05									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: You people are clueless. I am not going to talk with clueless people like David Floyd. Get a damn clue. You don't know who you are dealing with... this is not a man you would consider a good neighbor... he ****ing kills people.

So basically, instead of refuting anything I say, you resorted to the infallible "na na na na you're stupid na na na na" defense.

Keep digging your intellectual hole there, buddy

quote: It is disgusting, especially you Floyd

First of all, I'm not a communist, as you well know.

Second, why single out me? Perhaps because I've posted more and longer posts on the subject in this thread? You're perhaps directing your attacks at the person most likely to refute you point by point in an effort to forestall said refutation?

	09-10-2002 09:04									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by sabrewolf i bet you, that if the US would immediatly stop intervening in those countries and just help them build healthy economies, there won't be any more voluntaries to kill themselves in order to hurt the west. think about this!

We help many of their economies every time we import oil...but they cant seem to distribute the wealth equitably.

	09-10-2002 13:02									#86
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Ned:

"Roland, except for a few instances after the Republic, the Empire went into a defensive shell. It no longer ran a preemptive foreign policy."

The Republic had no clear foreign policy or strategy.

"The exceptions were Claudius's conquest of Britain and Trajan's conquest of Dacia."

Conquering Britain was barely preemptive - preempting what ?

"So long as the policy of pre-emption was in place, the Empire grew and prospered."

The most prosperous phase was from Augustus to Antininus Pius, when according to you they had given up the pre-emptive policy.

"that the United States must pursue a policy of pre-emption to ward off further 9/11 attacks."

The US is simply too weak for that.

	09-10-2002 13:30									#87
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I love the way Fez makes you side with people you don't agree with

	09-10-2002 13:56									#88
	Support Apolyton

Fez is sometime black&white minded.

	09-10-2002 16:40									#89
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Adam Smith We help many of their economies every time we import oil...but they cant seem to distribute the wealth equitably.

That's an intrinsic property of Capitalism.

	09-10-2002 17:03									#90
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Adam Smith We help many of their economies every time we import oil...but they cant seem to distribute the wealth equitably.

i wasn't only talking about iraq. also pakistan, afghanistan, palestine, philipenes, caucasian republics, african countries, etc.
of these only the first two are getting some help... and only since approx. one year.

distributing wealth is difficult, and as urban ranger said, an intrinic property of capitalism. but if you tie payments to agreements (e.g. "at least 80 of these 100 million dollars go to reforming of the economical systems, privatisations, etc.") you can get the money distributed better. maybe still 80% get lost in corruption, but that's better than the "normal" oil-buy, where ALL money goes to just a few powerful people.