just passed the 1000 dead mark - Page 2 - Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board
Hotrodders.com -- Hot Rod Forum



Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Unanswered Posts Auto Escrow Insurance Auto Loans
Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board > General Discussion> Hotrodders' Lounge> Off-Topic
User Name
Password
lost password?   |   register now

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 09-09-2004, 07:56 AM
Ghetto Jet's Avatar
current hot rod: CTS-V
 

Last journal entry: Lets Get Started With the Improvements
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Pennsylvania
Age: 28
Posts: 1,728
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 10
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by killerformula
over 7,000 wounded. Why do we keep insisting Iraq and 9-11 were related? There's still not a shred of evidence to that end...

K
cause bush said so.

    Advertisement
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 09-09-2004, 10:20 AM
bullheimer's Avatar
NEVER use credit cards!
 

Last journal entry: car with tt2's, (stockers going back on)
Last photo:
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: North of Seattle
Posts: 2,529
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
thanks for keeping this out of the name calling arena,(even tho i started it). i do admit most of our military do really see themselves doing good. it would be great if in fact their mission is ever accomplished. i just see it taking 10 years and 10,000 lives to do it.

but i do also agree with the two previous posts that there was no evidence of bin landen ties to iraq. if i believe the latest on the news the cia had more evidence of ties to iran. i think the war was personal, for Daddy bush. i was all in favor of going back in to kill sadaam, but i was assuming we would do it like Gulf War 1, just kill them off and leave them there. the cost of fixing the whole country isn't worth it. the price tag will kill us.

has it done any good to take over iraq? everyday on the news we see how our nuclear plants are not protected, the air line industry is a complete wreck, trains and ships have tanks and cargo boxes that can never be inspected. and the stupid news gives them great ideas like blowing up a sulfer tank on a train passing right by the capitol in DC and killing 100,000 people in 15 minutes. i just love that, although they always say terrorists already thought of it. 9/11 wasn't caused by iraq, it was caused by nutbags, and they are still there and always will be. 4 out of 5 americans (according to the media) fear they will be involved in an attack. the rest of us have seen our stock porfolios take a dive and at the least have had to wait hours and hours for a flight out of an airport since then.
i guess we should really just be amazed that those kinds of attacks didn't happen all thru the 70's and 80's when we were supporting isreal. someone just finally attacked the source of all there money and military aid.
i am glad iraqi people are semi free, they are still under seige from the terrorists who dont give a damn about rebuilding the country and hide in mosques. but i think the world would be just as safe if we would have left saddam in power. we took care of most of the problem when we kicked butt in afghanistan. our enemy, the perpetrators of 9/11, were the taliban, not saddummy. just because we havent been attacked again, does not mean, to me, that the war in iraq was the reason. if feel the reason was running bin laden off into the hills and quite probably blasting him into a thousand peices. i do respect everybody else's opinion.

Last edited by bullheimer; 09-09-2004 at 10:36 AM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 09-09-2004, 01:44 PM
Gr8 '48 bow tie's Avatar
Be American, Buy American!
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Antonio, Texas SPURS COUNTRY
Age: 74
Posts: 218
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
a clip from bullheimer's post.

i guess we should really just be amazed that those kinds of attacks didn't happen all thru the 70's and 80's when we were supporting isreal. someone just finally attacked the source of all there money and military aid.

Bull, I respect you and your opinion however I tend to disagree with it. Our troops need our prayers and support as they put their lives on the line for us so we can continue to enjoy our freedom. The above clip caught my eye and surprised me in that I thought everyone knows that we still support Israel and always will. We have too much to lose to not support them.

Al

Last edited by Gr8 '48 bow tie; 09-09-2004 at 05:02 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 09-09-2004, 03:21 PM
King of my Man-cave.
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Michigan
Age: 55
Posts: 2,899
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 3
Thanked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Saddam was working on WMD's, no doubt about it. They are in Syria now. That Saddam would have given them to Al-Quaeda is doubted only by fools. Bush was smart to take the war out of the U.S. and into Iraq and Afghanistan, otherwise there would have been more attacks here already.

While I don't agree with everything Bush has done, I dread the thought of Kerry and all the baggage he would bring to the presidency. He has supported EVERY anti-gun bill put in front on him, including a ban on most center-fire rifle calibers used by legitimate hunters and target shooters. He would usher in a new wave of restrictive and ill thought- out environmental legislation that would make us even more dependant on foreign oil. He would make the United Nations a clearing house for our national security. Much of our Federal Park system would become off-limits to almost everybody, including hunters, anglers, and even hikers. No thanks!

tom
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 09-09-2004, 05:50 PM
Ghetto Jet's Avatar
current hot rod: CTS-V
 

Last journal entry: Lets Get Started With the Improvements
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Pennsylvania
Age: 28
Posts: 1,728
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 10
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Well on the plus side, since were already $200 billion in the hole from this war, the oil revenues generated in Iraq should cover the reconstruction costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #21 (permalink)  
Old 09-09-2004, 07:19 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Outer Mongolia
Posts: 134
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I could've sworn i heard in newsweek or some other 'reputable' magazine, that saddam was in the middle of some deal with North Korea.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #22 (permalink)  
Old 09-09-2004, 07:23 PM
adtkart@aol.com
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 3,220
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I respect everyone's opinions. Everyone should be able to think for themselves. I do get irritated when people use the 9/11 bombings for the reason for being in Iraq. It has been said by everyone in the know that Iraq had nothing to do with that. It was only an excuse used by Bush to go to war. I knew when we went into afganistan that we would end up in Iraq. Then, I knew when he announced that he was running for president, that he would get us into war over there.

Sure, some people over there may be better off now. Then again, there are many of them being killed everyday, by their own people, for trying to make things better. Look at how many have died just for trying to join the police force, to enforce their own laws. These things are not being done by terrorist groups, it is their own people, trying to take control of the country.

I am against terrorism as much as anyone. The problem is that there are many "crazy" groups out there. It isn't a single group that controls it all. Even if you get the guy on the top, there is always someone to take his place.

Our military are doing a great job in a very bad situation. Unfortunately, we have many over there that are "part timers" that, beside worrying if they will be killed, have to worry about if they will loose everything that they had when they left, due to low wages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #23 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2004, 12:28 AM
willys36@aol.com's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: How to rebuild a Rochester Quadrajet 4MV carbureto...
Last journal entry: How to change auto shift timing on 200R4
Last photo:
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bakersfield
Posts: 8,384
Wiki Edits: 21

Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Well, here is what the (mostly) Democrats had to say about Saddam,

From http://www.freedomagenda.com/iraq/wmd_quotes.html

Senator John Edwards, when asked about "Axis of Evil" countries Iran, Iraq, and North Korea:

"I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country."

Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
February 24, 2002
During an interview on CNN's "Late Edition"

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0202/24/le.00.html


"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed."

Senator Edward Kennedy (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Speech at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies
September 27, 2002

http://kennedy.senate.gov/~kennedy/s...002927718.html


"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now -- a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program."

President Clinton
Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
February 17, 1998

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/.../clinton.iraq/


"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members...

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
Addressing the US Senate
October 10, 2002

http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html


"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Senator John F. Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Addressing the US Senate
October 9, 2002

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speech...2002_1009.html

Google cache of deleted page:

http://66.102.11.104/search?q=cache:...2002_1009.html

"As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I firmly believe that the issue of Iraq is not about politics. It's about national security. We know that for at least 20 years, Saddam Hussein has obsessively sought weapons of mass destruction through every means available. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons today. He has used them in the past, and he is doing everything he can to build more. Each day he inches closer to his longtime goal of nuclear capability -- a capability that could be less than a year away.

The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards. But the path of inaction is far more dangerous. This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker. Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters. We cannot wait for such a terrible event -- or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse -- to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
September 9, 2002
Addressing the US Senate

http://edwards.senate.gov/statements/20020912_iraq.html


"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. He miscalculated an eight-year war with Iran. He miscalculated the invasion of Kuwait. He miscalculated America's response to that act of naked aggression. He miscalculated the result of setting oil rigs on fire. He miscalculated the impact of sending scuds into Israel and trying to assassinate an American President. He miscalculated his own military strength. He miscalculated the Arab world's response to his misconduct. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm.

So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.

In U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, the United Nations has now affirmed that Saddam Hussein must disarm or face the most serious consequences. Let me make it clear that the burden is resoundingly on Saddam Hussein to live up to the ceasefire agreement he signed and make clear to the world how he disposed of weapons he previously admitted to possessing."

Senator John F. Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Speech at Georgetown University
January 23, 2003

http://kerry.senate.gov/bandwidth/cf....cfm?id=189831


Congressman Gephardt links Saddam with the threat of terrorists nuking US cities:

BOB SCHIEFFER, Chief Washington Correspondent:

And with us now is the Democratic presidential candidate Dick Gephardt. Congressman, you supported taking military action in Iraq. Do you think now it was the right thing to do?

REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT, D-MO, Democratic Presidential Candidate:

I do. I base my determination on what I heard from the CIA. I went out there a couple of times and talked to everybody, including George Tenet. I talked to people in the Clinton administration.

SCHIEFFER:

Well, let me just ask you, do you feel, Congressman, that you were misled?

GEPHARDT:

I don't. I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening. And it was on that basis that I voted to do this.

Congressman Richard Gephardt (Democrat, Missouri)
Interviewed on CBS News "Face the Nation"
November 2, 2003

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...le581509.shtml

"We have not reached parity with them. We have the right to kill 4 million Americans -- 2 million of them children -- and to exile twice as many and wound and cripple hundreds of thousands. Furthermore, it is our right to fight them with chemical and biological weapons, so as to afflict them with the fatal maladies that have afflicted the Muslims because of the [Americans'] chemical and biological weapons."

Islamic terrorist group "Al Qaeda"
June 12, 2002

http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cg...=sd&ID=SP38802

"[W]e have evidence of meetings between Iraqi officials and leaders of al Qaeda, and testimony that Iraqi agents helped train al Qaeda operatives to use chemical and biological weapons. We also know that al Qaeda leaders have been, and are now, harbored in Iraq.

Having reached the conclusion I have about the clear and present danger Saddam represents to the U.S., I want to give the president a limited but strong mandate to act against Saddam."

Senator Joseph Lieberman (Democrat, Connecticut)
In a Wall Street Journal editorial Lieberman authored titled:
"Why Democrats Should Support the President on Iraq"
October 7, 2002

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110002391



"Iraq is a long way from Ohio, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

Madeleine Albright, President Clinton's Secretary of State
Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
February 18, 1998

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/02...22006_tpo.html



"Imagine the consequences if Saddam fails to comply and we fail to act. Saddam will be emboldened, believing the international community has lost its will. He will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. And some day, some way, I am certain, he will use that arsenal again, as he has ten times since 1983."

Sandy Berger, President Clinton's National Security Advisor
Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
February 18, 1998

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/02...22006_tpo.html



"Ten years after the Gulf War and Saddam is still there and still continues to stockpile weapons of mass destruction. Now there are suggestions he is working with al Qaeda, which means the very terrorists who attacked the United States last September may now have access to chemical and biological weapons."

James P. Rubin, President Clinton's State Department spokesman
In a PBS documentary titled "Saddam's Ultimate Solution"
July 11, 2002

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/shows/saddam/


"Dear Mr. President: ... We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraq sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Sincerely,

Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman, Frank R. Lautenberg, Dick Lugar, Kit Bond, Jon Kyl, Chris Dodd, John McCain, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Alfonse D'Amato, Bob Kerrey, Pete V. Domenici, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Mikulski, Thomas Daschle, John Breaux, Tim Johnson, Daniel K. Inouye, Arlen Specter, James Inhofe, Strom Thurmond, Mary L. Landrieu, Wendell Ford, John F. Kerry, Chuck Grassley, Jesse Helms, Rick Santorum.

Letter to President Clinton
Signed by Senators Tom Daschle, John F. Kerry and others
October 9, 1998

http://www.iraqwatch.org/government/...n-10-9-98.html

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
Also a member of the House Intelligence Committee
Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
December 16, 1998

http://www.house.gov/pelosi/priraq1.htm

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.

We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Former Clinton Vice-President Al Gore
Speech to San Francisco Commonwealth Club
September 23, 2002

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...ore-text_x.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...797999,00.html
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/...734161501.html

Al Gore said last night that the time had come for a "final reckoning" with Iraq, describing the country as a "virulent threat in a class by itself" and suggesting that the United States should consider ways to oust Saddam Hussein.

The New York Times
Gore, Championing Bush, Calls For a 'Final Reckoning' With Iraq
February 13, 2002

http://query.nytimes.com/search/abst...AB0894DA404482

The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."

Robert C. Byrd
Former Ku Klux Klan recruiter, currently a US Senator (Democrat, West Virginia)
Addressing the US Senate
October 3, 2002

http://byrd.senate.gov/byrd_newsroom...oct2002_2.html

http://australianpolitics.com/news/2...2-10-03a.shtml
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/a...byrd100302.htm

And more,


"Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance -- not even today -- of the disarmament, which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the world and to live in peace."

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003

http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusn...wsID=354&sID=6

"The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed.

13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes."

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003

http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusn...wsID=354&sID=6

"The recent inspection find in the private home of a scientist of a box of some 3,000 pages of documents, much of it relating to the laser enrichment of uranium support a concern that has long existed that documents might be distributed to the homes of private individuals. ...we cannot help but think that the case might not be isolated and that such placements of documents is deliberate to make discovery difficult and to seek to shield documents by placing them in private homes."

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003

http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusn...wsID=354&sID=6

"I have mentioned the issue of anthrax to the Council on previous occasions and I come back to it as it is an important one.

Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.

There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared, and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date. It might still exist. Either it should be found and be destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision or else convincing evidence should be produced to show that it was, indeed, destroyed in 1991."

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003

http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusn...wsID=354&sID=6


"His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region, and the security of all the rest of us.

What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made?

Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.

And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal."

President Clinton
Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
February 17, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/.../clinton.iraq/


Regime change in Iraq has been official US policy since 1998:

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (sponsored by Bob Kerrey, John McCain, and Joseph Lieberman, and signed into law by President Clinton) states:

"It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime."

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998
105th Congress, 2nd Session
September 29, 1998
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/li...980929-in2.htm

CNN
October 10, 2002

House gives Bush authority for war with Iraq

The House voted 296-133 to give Bush the authority to use U.S. military force to make Iraq comply with U.N. resolutions requiring it to give up weapons of mass destruction.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/10/iraq.us/

CNN
October 11, 2002

Senate approves Iraq war resolution

In a major victory for the White House, the Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions.

http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/



"The global community -- in the form of the United Nations -- has declared repeatedly, through multiple resolutions, that the frightening prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam cannot come to pass. But the U.N. has been unable to enforce those resolutions. We must eliminate that threat now, before it is too late.

But this isn't just a future threat. Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.

As the attacks of September 11 demonstrated, the immense destructiveness of modern technology means we can no longer afford to wait around for a smoking gun. September 11 demonstrated that the fact that an attack on our homeland has not yet occurred cannot give us any false sense of security that one will not occur in the future. We no longer have that luxury.

September 11 changed America. It made us realize we must deal differently with the very real threat of terrorism, whether it comes from shadowy groups operating in the mountains of Afghanistan or in 70 other countries around the world, including our own.

There has been some debate over how "imminent" a threat Iraq poses. I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated. It is in the nature of these weapons, and the way they are targeted against civilian populations, that documented capability and demonstrated intent may be the only warning we get. To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? We cannot!

The President has rightly called Saddam Hussein's efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction a grave and gathering threat to Americans. The global community has tried but failed to address that threat over the past decade. I have come to the inescapable conclusion that the threat posed to America by Saddam's weapons of mass destruction is so serious that despite the risks -- and we should not minimize the risks -- we must authorize the President to take the necessary steps to deal with that threat."

Senator John D. Rockefeller (Democrat, West Virginia)
Also a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee
Addressing the US Senate
October 10, 2002
http://www.senate.gov/~rockefeller/n...mt0102002.html

UN weapons inspectors were forced to leave Iraq in 1998:

CNN
November 5, 1998

U.N. Security Council votes to condemn Iraq

The United Nations Security Council late Thursday [Nov 5] voted unanimously to condemn Iraq and to demand that Baghdad immediately resume cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors. Baghdad has already said it will not comply.

The resolution called Iraq's decision last week to halt cooperation with the U.N. Special Commission a "flagrant violation" of the 1991 resolution on Iraqi disarmament. It is the 45th U.N. resolution involving Iraq since the country invaded Kuwait in 1990.

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9811/05/un.iraq.02/


America is threatened by an "unholy axis":

"We must exercise responsibility not just at home, but around the world. On the eve of a new century, we have the power and the duty to build a new era of peace and security.

We must combat an unholy axis of new threats from terrorists, international criminals, and drug traffickers. These 21st century predators feed on technology and the free flow of information... And they will be all the more lethal if weapons of mass destruction fall into their hands.

Together, we must confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons and the outlaw states, terrorists, and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."

President Clinton
State of the Union address
January 27, 1998

http://clinton5.nara.gov/textonly/WH...8/address.html

http://www.usemb.ee/union98.php3


"As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, I firmly believe that the issue of Iraq is not about politics. It's about national security. We know that for at least 20 years, Saddam Hussein has obsessively sought weapons of mass destruction through every means available. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons today. He has used them in the past, and he is doing everything he can to build more. Each day he inches closer to his longtime goal of nuclear capability -- a capability that could be less than a year away.

I believe that Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime represents a clear threat to the United States, to our allies, to our interests around the world, and to the values of freedom and democracy we hold dear.

What's more, the terrorist threat against America is all too clear. Thousands of terrorist operatives around the world would pay anything to get their hands on Saddam's arsenal, and there is every possibility that he could turn his weapons over to these terrorists. No one can doubt that if the terrorists of September 11th had weapons of mass destruction, they would have used them. On September 12, 2002, we can hardly ignore the terrorist threat, and the serious danger that Saddam would allow his arsenal to be used in aid of terror.

The time has come for decisive action. With our allies, we must do whatever is necessary to guard against the threat posed by an Iraq armed with weapons of mass destruction, and under the thumb of Saddam Hussein.

The United States must lead an international effort to remove the regime of Saddam Hussein -- and to assure that Iraq fulfills its obligations to the international community.

This is not an easy decision, and it carries many risks. It will also carry costs, certainly in resources, and almost certainly in lives. After careful consideration, I believe that the risk of inaction is far greater than the risk of action.

We must address the most insidious threat posed by weapons of mass destruction -- the threat that comes from the ability of terrorists to obtain them.

The path of confronting Saddam is full of hazards. But the path of inaction is far more dangerous. This week, a week where we remember the sacrifice of thousands of innocent Americans made on 9-11, the choice could not be starker. Had we known that such attacks were imminent, we surely would have used every means at our disposal to prevent them and take out the plotters. We cannot wait for such a terrible event -- or, if weapons of mass destruction are used, one far worse -- to address the clear and present danger posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq."

Senator John Edwards (Democrat, North Carolina)
Addressing the US Senate
September 12, 2002

http://edwards.senate.gov/statements/20020912_iraq.html

"Dear Mr. President:

The events of September 11 have highlighted the vulnerability of the United States to determined terrorists. As we work to clean up Afghanistan and destroy al Qaeda, it is imperative that we plan to eliminate the threat from Iraq.

This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs.

The threat from Iraq is real, and it cannot be permanently contained. For as long as Saddam Hussein is in power in Baghdad, he will seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. We have no doubt that these deadly weapons are intended for use against the United States and its allies. Consequently, we believe we must directly confront Saddam, sooner rather than later.

Mr. President, all indications are that in the interest of our own national security, Saddam Hussein must be removed from power."

Sincerely,

Congressman Harold Ford (Democrat, Tennessee)
Senator Bob Graham (Democrat, Florida)
Congressman Tom Lantos (Democrat, California)
Senator Joseph Lieberman (Democrat, Connecticut)


Senator Sam Brownback (Republican, Kansas)
Senator Jesse Helms (Republican, North Carolina)
Congressman Henry Hyde (Republican, Illinois)
Senator Trent Lott (Republican, Mississippi)
Senator John McCain (Republican, Arizona)
Senator Richard Shelby (Republican, Alabama)

Letter to President Bush
December 5, 2001

http://www.house.gov/ford/12_06_01a.htm


"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts."

Congressman Henry Waxman (Democrat, California)
Addressing the US Congress
October 10, 2002
http://www.house.gov/waxman/news_fil...q_10_10_02.htm

http://www.house.gov/waxman/news_fil...q_10_10_02.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #24 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2004, 01:59 AM
Dutchman's Avatar
Old Salt
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Portsmouth, Virginia
Age: 56
Posts: 491
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks for the info Willys!

I am sure that the President (no matter who is in office) sees a big picture that none of us could even imagine.

For the longest time, our military has been under cold war outlook. I see daily changes since 9/11 on many different fronts.

I mostly served on carriers and always knew the job there. Now, I see another and amazing view from an Ampib ship.

Sure is great to see all the debate and open minded people here.
Never doubt or take your freedoms for granted.

Dutch
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #25 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2004, 09:38 AM
Beenaway2long's Avatar
or Jeff, or Doc, or...
 

Last journal entry: Results of the Camaro
Last photo:
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Syracuse, NY-well, just North
Age: 51
Posts: 988
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Willys,
Your wasting your time. Even though you have posted all the accurate info with backup, I seriously doubt that anyone that's AntiBush will make the effort to read it. It seems that its easier to play ostrich and bury ones head in the sand while the terrorists takes turns at what is facing skyward (if you catch my drift).

I challenge ANYONE to come up with any FACTUAL information, as why we are in Iraq for:

Oil (Why is it over $40.00/barrel?)

Avenge Daddy (Please, you REALLY don't believe that, do you?)

Anything OTHER that WMD and crushing Al-Quaeda

I seriously doubt that you will find it. We have already taken THREE WMD's. Saddam, Quasay and Uday. We should have done it 12 years ago. Maybe there would be 300,000 iraqi's alive today if we had. Maybe 3000 Americans wouldn't have lost their life 3 years ago today.

But..... because Bush is at the helm, ANYTHING he does is wrong, remember? Put the partisanship aside and view EACH candidate for what he TRULY is. Look at BOTH sides of EACH candidate and re-weigh the results. Also, remember that Kerry is buddy buddy with China and North Korea. Ever look at where the jobs are right now? Look no further than ANYTHING in front of you.
"Made in China." You don't think HE will change anything, do you? Really?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #26 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2004, 10:11 AM
RCastle's Avatar
Come Home Safe Soldier
 

Last journal entry: Headers
Last photo:
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Louisville,Kentucky
Age: 43
Posts: 848
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Well worded guys...There seems to be a thought that Saddam would all of a sudden roll over and be a nice kid.He was a thug who deserves all he recieves.There is no reason for believing if left alone that he would have ceassed all WMD's.If he was not concerned why did he lie in a hole like a RAT,have body doubles,gas his own people.His sons did horrific things to his own people,Olympic competiters,bad performance=death sentence-Sound familiar?Adolph Hitler.Does anyone believe that the world be better off had Hitler's plan been effective?World dictatorship,one master race?Come on,grow up.Serbians?Ethnic clenansing?mass graves.Want a bad situation?Somalia=Bill Clinton.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #27 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2004, 01:20 PM
lluciano77's Avatar
Short changed on common sense
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: california
Age: 37
Posts: 3,548
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by 68Velle
what is the kill ratio between iraquis and americans, does anyone know?

Just think how bad the mid east would be kissing our ***** if we just up and pulled out, 'no thanks, we dont' need any more oil, talk to you later'.
20:1

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Dutchman
[B]Bullheimer,

Wow, that was a tough one. I've been in the Navy a while and don't see many people on my ship having any problems with going to the scene (I'm out to sea somewhere). The morale is high and ready. I have seen my 'Commander in Chief' change many times and have seen the effect in the services. Its nice to have a good one right now.

What other President has ever handled an attack on the United Sates?

Don't forget Pearl Harbor.

Quote:
Originally posted by killerformula
over 7,000 wounded. Why do we keep insisting Iraq and 9-11 were related? There's still not a shred of evidence to that end...

K
We are not insiting that 9-11 and Saddam were related.

Al Qaida and Saddam had ties.

Iraq harbored a few known terrorist groups.

Iraq had plans of attacking the U.S..
That was a promise made by Saddam.

Saddam had plans of conquering the entire Gulf region.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghetto Jet
cause bush said so.
Bush never said so. That is completely untrue.

That is the reason why there are people that don't like Bush. Because, they can't get their facts straight.

I know it is cool to hate Bush, but at least watch the news, do research, and know what you are talking about before you go to vote.

Quote:
Originally posted by bullheimer

but i do also agree with the two previous posts that there was no evidence of bin landen ties to iraq. if i believe the latest on the news the cia had more evidence of ties to iran. i think the war was personal, for Daddy bush. i was all in favor of going back in to kill sadaam, but i was assuming we would do it like Gulf War 1, just kill them off and leave them there. the cost of fixing the whole country isn't worth it. the price tag will kill us.
There was evidence of ties between Bin laden and Saddam. They kept in contact frequently. They didn't care much for each other because both are leaders out to rule the world.

The war wasn't personal for Daddy Bush. Come on that is rediculous.

Do you remember what happened when we pulled out after the first Gulf War? Saddam killed over 300,000 of his own people.

Last edited by lluciano77; 09-11-2004 at 01:20 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #28 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2004, 04:01 PM
killerformula's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: Carburetor
Last journal entry: Clean up
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Northeast
Age: 34
Posts: 3,485
Wiki Edits: 3

Thanks: 13
Thanked 27 Times in 18 Posts
We are not insiting that 9-11 and Saddam were related.

Al Qaida and Saddam had ties.

Iraq harbored a few known terrorist groups.

Iraq had plans of attacking the U.S..
That was a promise made by Saddam.

Saddam had plans of conquering the entire Gulf region.


Any proof of that? Iraq was one of the only countries in that region that had very FEW known terrorist ties. Of course they do now, that we destabilized the region. The real terrorists are in Saudi Arabia, but for some reason, we're in Iraq...

K
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #29 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2004, 08:37 PM
lluciano77's Avatar
Short changed on common sense
 
Last photo:
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: california
Age: 37
Posts: 3,548
Wiki Edits: 0

Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
It was in the 9-11 report.

Killer, even though I don't listen to him very much, and I think he goes overboard sometimes, I think Rush Limbaugh said it best.

Al Qaeda is in:
The Philippines
Sudan
Saudi Arabia
Turkey
Iran
Mexico
Egypt
Pakistan
Afghanistan
Chechnya
Syria
Islamabad
and he went on and on naming countries.

Then he came to the end of the statement. What he said was, "Al Qaida is in all of these countries. And yet some how by some act of god, Al Qaida is not in Iraq". Now of course he was making light of all of the liberals saying Iraq has no ties to Al Qaida. This was aired before the release of the 9-11 report.

Killer, Iraq had very few known terrorist ties? Let me see some proof of this.

Last edited by lluciano77; 09-11-2004 at 09:55 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #30 (permalink)  
Old 09-11-2004, 09:30 PM
killerformula's Avatar
Hotrodders.com Moderator
 
Last wiki edit: Carburetor
Last journal entry: Clean up
Last photo:
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Northeast
Age: 34
Posts: 3,485
Wiki Edits: 3

Thanks: 13
Thanked 27 Times in 18 Posts
Well I would assume the burden of proof would be on the conservatives... i mean, to justify the war and all. I would assume that the proof that there were terrorist ties would be so well known and rock solid that nobody would be able to refute it... and yet i've seen none produced, on this board or otherwise.

K
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Hot Rod Forum : Hotrodders Bulletin Board forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name (usually not your first and last name), your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright Hotrodders.com 1999 - 2012. All Rights Reserved.