It's official ... no WMD in Iraq.
Sinner
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 6,599
Likes: 0
From: NoVA
Originally posted by Kestrel
They hate us because we played them like pawns in the cold war and turned their countries into warzones. The US has a history of installing leaders in places and messing with governments as we see fit (Vietnam, Nicaragua, Panama, Haiti, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, just to name a few). All people in these countries see is that American troops or American supported dictators are killing their friends and family, and that's reason enough to hate the US.
They hate us because we played them like pawns in the cold war and turned their countries into warzones. The US has a history of installing leaders in places and messing with governments as we see fit (Vietnam, Nicaragua, Panama, Haiti, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, just to name a few). All people in these countries see is that American troops or American supported dictators are killing their friends and family, and that's reason enough to hate the US.
Push to shock!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,583
Likes: 0
From: Palo Alto, CA
Originally posted by /^Blackmagik^\
who did we "install" in vietnam?
who did we "install" in vietnam?
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,058
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, FL
Originally posted by /^Blackmagik^\
how so? perhaps you didn't comprehend my post correctly? the title of this thread is "It's official ... no WMD in Iraq" and is absed around the posted article from cnn.com. how exactly can this possibly be official when they are still finding things. the point of my post was to point out how making such a bold statement based on a news article is ridiculous when this article was on the same front page of cnn.com.
i guess subtlety owns you?
how so? perhaps you didn't comprehend my post correctly? the title of this thread is "It's official ... no WMD in Iraq" and is absed around the posted article from cnn.com. how exactly can this possibly be official when they are still finding things. the point of my post was to point out how making such a bold statement based on a news article is ridiculous when this article was on the same front page of cnn.com.
i guess subtlety owns you?
Originally posted by Kestrel
The guy's name is Nguyen Van Thieu, he was president of South Vietnam from 1965-1973. He was very much a dictator and suppressed any dissent against him during the Vietnam War, and pretty much the only reason he became president was because he was anti-Communist, and the US liked that.
The guy's name is Nguyen Van Thieu, he was president of South Vietnam from 1965-1973. He was very much a dictator and suppressed any dissent against him during the Vietnam War, and pretty much the only reason he became president was because he was anti-Communist, and the US liked that.
I need sleep...
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
From: NH
Originally posted by Kestrel
The guy's name is Nguyen Van Thieu, he was president of South Vietnam from 1965-1973. He was very much a dictator and suppressed any dissent against him during the Vietnam War, and pretty much the only reason he became president was because he was anti-Communist, and the US liked that.
The guy's name is Nguyen Van Thieu, he was president of South Vietnam from 1965-1973. He was very much a dictator and suppressed any dissent against him during the Vietnam War, and pretty much the only reason he became president was because he was anti-Communist, and the US liked that.
And yes he was assasinated.
Also, Kestrel, all the nations you mentioned their leaders were not installed by the US, rather they were once friendly nations whose governments we supported for a variety of reasons. If there is a leader that comes close to being installed it would be Hamid Karzai, but even at that he has been elected by his own people.
I need sleep...
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
From: NH
America is one of the few nations allowed to have WMD, and in the case of chemical and biological it is to be used to develop methods to combat them, not weaponize them. In the case of nuclear weapons we are on of 5 nations allowed to have them along with Great Britain, France, Russia and China underthe Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. The countries that have not signed that treaty are Cuba, Israel, Pakistan and India. Pakistan and India have nuclear weapons, it is highly probable that Israel has them (although they do not come out and say it), and Cuba does not. Also North Korea signed, but then pulled out of the NNPT and while they are open to build a nuclear bomb it is unclear if they have been successful or not.
That said the chemical and iological weapons we have are small and very insignificant and will probably never be used by the US in a hostile act. Also having nuclear weapons serves as a large deterent knowing that your enemy can respond in kind if you were to use one...it basically is what prevented a nuclear war from happening during the cold war. Both Russia and the US knew they would be wiped out no matter what if war happened.
What does concern me though is that Bush wants to develop low-grade nuclear weapons to be a more powerfull bunker buster bomb. I am afraid that if developed, and then used, it would give more justification for other nations to then use their nuclear stockpiles. It also would not fare well for the US creating more enemies than we currently have.
That said the chemical and iological weapons we have are small and very insignificant and will probably never be used by the US in a hostile act. Also having nuclear weapons serves as a large deterent knowing that your enemy can respond in kind if you were to use one...it basically is what prevented a nuclear war from happening during the cold war. Both Russia and the US knew they would be wiped out no matter what if war happened.
What does concern me though is that Bush wants to develop low-grade nuclear weapons to be a more powerfull bunker buster bomb. I am afraid that if developed, and then used, it would give more justification for other nations to then use their nuclear stockpiles. It also would not fare well for the US creating more enemies than we currently have.
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,058
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, FL
Originally posted by DVPGSR
What does concern me though is that Bush wants to develop low-grade nuclear weapons to be a more powerfull bunker buster bomb. I am afraid that if developed, and then used, it would give more justification for other nations to then use their nuclear stockpiles. It also would not fare well for the US creating more enemies than we currently have.
What does concern me though is that Bush wants to develop low-grade nuclear weapons to be a more powerfull bunker buster bomb. I am afraid that if developed, and then used, it would give more justification for other nations to then use their nuclear stockpiles. It also would not fare well for the US creating more enemies than we currently have.
ex-soler
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh, NC
Originally posted by DVPGSR
What does concern me though is that Bush wants to develop low-grade nuclear weapons to be a more powerfull bunker buster bomb. I am afraid that if developed, and then used, it would give more justification for other nations to then use their nuclear stockpiles. It also would not fare well for the US creating more enemies than we currently have.
What does concern me though is that Bush wants to develop low-grade nuclear weapons to be a more powerfull bunker buster bomb. I am afraid that if developed, and then used, it would give more justification for other nations to then use their nuclear stockpiles. It also would not fare well for the US creating more enemies than we currently have.
http://www.markfiore.com/animation/bustertwo.html
Alot of his stuff is pretty humorous overall, but he is a big Bush-basher so I forewarn everyone before any indignation begins.
A little chin music
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,655
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland, Ohio - Rock 'n Roll capitol of the World
The U.S. is one of the few nations who can be trusted with nukes..... as in we aren't going to use them just because we want to turn the mid-east into one giant parking lot. Our enemies, on the other hand, would love to get their hands on one just to take out NYC (Germany had plans in the works during WWII). And this is where the cold war meets the war on terror: during the cold war, the USSR made threats, we made threats. We made them sweat, they made us sweat. But in the end, neither one of us really wanted to push the button. The terrorists want to push the button.