Hi guys..

(I know this **** isn't about honda/acura..)

Whats your opinion about the war against Iraq. My opinion is that Saddam have to be killed, by Bush, or by someone else..So why use all this armies, and all this weapons to kill one human. Just send a Serialkiller and kill that mothafu'a

Cuz if all that armies will attack on Iraq, there will be children and mothers killed..

Write your opinions

 

Cause it's not just about killing Saddam. It's about overthrowing the WHOLE terrorist way of life. Killing one point man won't do away with the cause.

Yea, he needs to die. He's not worth being alive. He's helping nothing.

 

"VTEC POWER", but you have a porsche in your sig.. :slap:

 

:chuckles:

Like someone else said, theres alot more to it

 

ohh...i thaught that was a S2K

 

man.. this whole Iraq thing is complicated. but from what little bit i know... we have so much to think about. its about terriorism, and stopping it. its about oil and trade stuff, and its about world peace. we have to get approval from all these countries to declare war, to keep good peace with them.

And im prolly gonna get hell for this but, as much as i would like to see Saddam get killed, i dont think we've exhausted every peaceful way to get through this. War sucks, and it should be a last resort. Wars, gonna fuk up our economy and send people into a land that might get killed for nothing. the US has a lot to think about and i just hope we dont get soo targeted on bombing these guys just and forget everything else we need to consider

 

I think it's ironic that people who never even thought about Saddam a year ago suddenly think it's more important than life itself to get him. You've been duped by the old "look, behind you!" trick.

I always thought that good people had morals, and they stood by them. Terrorists are the ones who use violence to get their way. Guess who fits the definition of terrorist in this case?

After 9/11, the mandate was to go after Al Qaeda, not Saddam. Some people have been using sweeping generalizations in making excuses why Saddam should be included. The problem is that those sweeping generalizations say that we should be attacking half the world. If we are really and truly going after real threats, why are we not going after N. Korea, or Pakistan for that matter? Please, don't bother saying "but Pakistan is cooperating with us..."! I know a double standard when I see one.

Saddam is an easy target. Iraq has been under siege for a dozen years, and is an "easy kill" as a result. I think that Bush picked a weak country to attack for his own glory. But weak countries are not what threatens us.

Let's not forget that the reason why Al Qaeda chose the WTC to attack on 9/11 was to bring financial ruin to the USA. Al Qaeda failed to do that, but Bush is picking up right where Al Qaeda left off. The US is already broke; we can't afford this war. So those of you who are cheering for this war are really cheering for Al Qaeda to win. Way to go, guys.

 

Do you realize that Saddam and Al Qaeda are working together, or did you not get the memo?

 

Just because someone said it on TV doesn't make it true. No, I'm not some slack-jawed yokel who blindly accepts everything that's fed to me. I can and do think critically. I demand proof. When there is no proof, I say "BS".

 

Ok... so would you prefer someone to take the same info they are giving you on the news and put it in a hand written letter and mail it to you?

TV is the way we get most of our info. That and the internet.... what other form would you believe?