Question:
Seeing as we have captured Saddam, do you think we have Osama too(but just keeping it under wraps before the elections in 2004?)

Choices:
yes
no
I don't know?

 

Ummm...I think he's hiding in a cave somewhere in the middle east.

And if they did have him, they wouldn't be keeping it under wraps before the election, because I would think getting both Saddam and Osama would be like some sort of publicity thing for Bush, you know, he would probably want to seem like a hero or something (even though he's not) and get more support and patriosm and stuff.

He's dead.
-Sunset

quote:

---

i dun reali c y saddam hussein shud be captured... i mean americans did find zilch nuclear weapons... this is all jst george bush fable fibbing... jst cos he want the oil...

---

The oil arguement is bunk. Give it up. Saddam should have been captured due to the various nasty atrocities he's commited, as well as the threat he posed to the region. With Saddam gone, you now have a major source of funding and support for our enemies, (as well as a missile threat) removed from the middle east.

The whole WMD thing, I'm not sure if they're around any more. But this man had a program, and he had tons and tons of chem/bio weapons. They may have been destroyed, they may still be around somehere. The point is, WMD was never a real reason to go to war. It was, I believe, simply a means to pacify elements who were otherwise blind to the threats Saddam posed. There are dozens more like him, but he was a major figure, and we had a casus belli against him.

quote:

---

+ according to statistics in 2002 <since 2003 stats are not given yet> america produced 50% of all the nuclear weapons produced in the world, and Iraq less than 1%... talk about ironism...

---

The IRONY is that you probably don't understand those statistics. No country, except possibly China, is mass producing nukes anymore, therefore the 2003 statistics are irrelevent. Iraq was never known to have any nuclear weapons, so i don't even know how them came up with a percentage. Sounds like the whole thing is a load of crap. I do however realize America has huge stock piles of nukes. And we've got every right to try and hinder production of them. Why? Because power equals security, and we want to hold onto our power, ie. the nuclear monopoly.

quote:

---

If you look at it, Saddam was in trouble the minute Bush won election.

---

I think he was in trouble after Sept 11, when America suddenly had the will to go to war with everyone.

first to comrade.. umm osama was not given millions of dollars.. we have already had this conversation... it was the mujahideen, osama just happened to be a part of them at one point... get your facts straight. and if he forgot why do we still have thousands of troops over there looking for him?? must have forgotten that part as well..

to veldi.. umm do you even know what you are talking about? doubt it... umm BTW iraq has NOT produced any nuclear weapons that anyone knows of.. WMD yes, but no nuclear.. they were working on it though.. so where did you get those statistics anyway?? LMAO

i dun reali c y saddam hussein shud be captured... i mean americans did find zilch nuclear weapons... this is all jst george bush fable fibbing... jst cos he want the oil...

+ according to statistics in 2002 <since 2003 stats are not given yet> america produced 50% of all the nuclear weapons produced in the world, and Iraq less than 1%... talk about ironism...

we'll be over there until we find bin laden or sometihng big happens.
If you look at it, Saddam was in trouble the minute Bush won election. It was gonna happen whether we caught bin Laden first or not. We didn't just go "oh, well since bin laden's too hard to find let's pick on hussien" but now we've got one so we're still looking for the other
Oh amd I know you never said buh turned away from one war to wage another. that was comrade.lol

I never said that Bush turned away from the "War on Terror",but isn't a little strange that after we couldn't get to Bin Laden, we switch gears to Saddam?...maybe Saddam was part of Bush's war on terror, the only thing I'm asking is how long do you think our troops will be in a desparate situation like this?

Ahem, being in rotc i've been able to hear a lot about the Marine Corps and for your info they never left Afganistan, are still looking, and they were just talking about another tape they found the other day. I tihnk they said it was a repeat. So Bush never abandoned the War on Terror. Iraq was part of it actually, as far as I'm concerned

Osama Bin Laden....Osama Bin Laden...not ringing a bell...

Oh, you mean that CIA employee? The one who got all those millions of dollars?

Or...are you talking about the guy George W. Bush said would be brought in "dead or alive?"

Didn't he then convienently forget about that whole thing?

Yeah, I'm starting to remember...

Is it really absurd?...Or do you not care to think on something that may have a logical plee of explanation? It's not completely out of the question to ask such questions, when we all ready are lied to everyday by politicians clinging to keep their jobs for another four years(no pun intended). But it is a valid point to have a discussion about, since there are other opinions that have and will be stated. If anyone is absurd it's those who care not to talk on issues civilized(with-out snide remarks)all because of a few who think that it has no point in discussion.

quote:

---

---

If you don't like it...tough!"Tomorrow will be a new day, and I'll still be here"So can somebody out there give me there honest opinion without absurd and snide comments, Thank You

*he's

osama??his last years news

I have to agree with you on that, Korith.

This is absurd... really...