The news about the attack on Iraq is probably not news to many of us here in the club.

However, I wanted to open up a topic about this just to talk and share opinions. Keep checking back and share links with each other as this event unfolds.

As of right now, the US remains poised for an attack as the 8pm ET (today) deadline approaches.

It appears that the US has support from many countries. But, it still appears that the UN is still not supporting this action.

Last night I caught part of the presentation given by the British Prime Minister Tony Blair. While I sat and watched his strong presentation, a lot of the reasoning behind the attack began to make sense.

There are various opinions about the subject and I would like to open a discussion about it.

I realize that many people will have different opinions on this matter. Please understand that your opinion is welcome and I will do what I can to minimize flame wars. And, if you are strong about a certain position on this matter, please don't flame those who might disagree.

Let's share with each other (links, ideas, etc) and keep talking about it as the event unfolds. All members are encouraged to participate and especially those from outside the US.

We are a global group with many different cultures and races. Keep this in mind when posting your comments. Thanks everyone. Let's talk!!

Originally posted by Mike

It appears that the US has support from many countries. But, it still appears that the UN is still not supporting this action.

Care to list the "support" that we have? I only hear about US, Brits, and Aussies going to be doing the fighting. Those heavyweights of European politics, Spain and Portugal are "standing behind us". WAY BEHIND US! Like not even near the theatre of war. Big help! Great support!

Oh, Yeah, Turkey may "allow" us to fly over their territory. Of course they won't go as far as to let us stage men and material on their soveriegn territory. Kinda Half-assed support IMHO. Kuwait (who owes it's existance to the US) and Qatar are the only Arab countries allowing us to use their soil.

Tony Blair is close to talking himself out of a job!

The attachment is not meant to trivialize the event it depicts, rather to remind all that the war will not be fought exclusively on Iraqi soil. Stand-by!

You mentioned UN approval. Since the UN was formed in 1945 there have been three cases where UN approval was given for a war: in 1950 after North Korea invaded South Korea, in 1991 when Iraq invaded Kuwait, and, most recently, for the US led operations in Afghanistan. There have been 26 international wars in that same period. In most of the other actions by the US (Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Kosovo, etc.) the US didn't even bother going to the UN because of a certain veto. The same can obviously be said of other countries who have gone to war(including the USSR, France, China, the UK, etc.).

This new war is essentially a continuation of the 1991 Gulf War. That war ended with a cease fire under which Iraq was to keep certain obligations. Until those obligations were met the US was to keep in place a trade embargo (no goods in and no oil out). For those of you who think this is all about oil keep in mind that lifting those sanctions on oil would be in the best interests of the US economically.

Saddam Hussein has been a brutal dictator for a long time. The people of Iraq have suffered horribly. The per capita income is less than $3000 a year and the infant mortality rate is up to over 60 per 1000 live births.

The best thing that can happen right now is for this war (which is inevitable at this point) to be over quickly with a minimum loss of life. Iraqi soldiers who do not put up a fight will be simply ignored to go about their business.

Once Saddam Hussein and his evil cohorts are out of power the people of Iraq will be better off. Once Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are eliminated the better off the whole world will be. I don't know how anyone could dispute that.

Hopefully this will happen quickly and we'll be able to move in to help the people like we've done in Afghanistan recently by providing food, medicine, clean water, and other infrastructure improvements. I don't want to see the US rule the country but it's inevitable that it will happen for a while. Keep in mind that the people of Japan still treat Douglas MacArthur as a hero for his rule over Japan after WWII. He is essential the author of their current constitution and they are certainly way better off now for it. The sooner the Iraqi people can get things back to normal and choose their own leadership the better.

What we can't forget is that we have been the targets of religious zealots, usually of the Muslim faith, for the last 23 years.

We can't forget 9/11 which killed more innocent victims than Pearl Harbor, and we quickly announced our entry into WWll as a result of that attack. Are we that different now that we should just try to look the other way?

Have we forgotten all the bombings of our embassies abroad in the last 20 some years? Or the attack on the USS Cole? Beiruit? The bombings of our embassy in Tehran in 1979 started this war, and now it's well past time to finish it.

We have turned the other cheek too long, and considering these acts as mere crimes in which we sent in the FBI to combat them has led us to where we are today.

The French don't want us in the war because in 1980 they were supplying the Iraqi's with the material for a nuclear reactor,which the Israeli's soon took care of after a failed attempt by the another of our allies.

The Russians don't want us entering into this war, because for the entire reign of Saddam Hussein, they have been selling just about anything and everything of their Cold War military they can, to him and anyone else with the money to buy the hardware.

Seems funny, I can remember it wasn't all that long ago, our biggest worry was Gadafi, and who ever hears about him anymore? Now, there are two names in the news almost on a weekly basis since well before 9/11, Hussein and bin Ladin.

It's time we took care of business and got on with our lives.....

We turned a blind eye in the 1930's when a little known man by the name of Adolf was coming to power, and look where it took the world. Are we going to sit by and watch Hussein and bin Ladin join forces and use todays weapons against their enemies? Which just happen to be us this time?

This is just my opinion, but anyone who leaves this country, and goes to Iraq to use themselves as a human shield, just because they think they know more about what is good for this country and our future, should be treated as common traitors. They have given up any and all rights as a US citizen, and should be dealt with in the strictest of military justice that is given to traitor to their country. This is nothing more than spitting on the graves of the millions of men and women who have died protecting our rights since the Revolutionary War.

I usually don't like to talk politics, but this time, it's really gotten to me, the way the media has turned this country upside down with their reports from our enemies front door steps.

You're opening a can of worms here....Honestly, I don't support the war. $$$$$ is the bottom line for these so called leaders. I wonder if one of these so called leaders would go and fight on the front line! I have to much to say so I won't say it....

As D-day draws nearer, we stand together as one, fighting for the security of our world.

I believe war should only be resorted to when there is no other option. Today, there is no other option.

Although I stand behind the military going into Iraq, I must admit it is not exactly comforting knowing many of our military units are up there, while our own defense is even weaker than it usually is. That coupled with John Howard stuttering as much as he can at every press conference that there is no intelligence to suggest Australia is in danger of attack, makes my life as an Australian a bit uncomfortable.

We can only hope this will be over soon.

im not for the war because it just doesnt make sense to spend millions of dollars and fight something that we shouldnt. there is no need to go overseas and to wherever being the worlds police.

on another thought 9/11 was a trajedy, but how could that happen, it does seem a little to easily planned, one plane getting threw i could see but both planes coming in and taking out the towers just seems fishy.

i really dont know where to stand but i feel bush is fighting a battle of family for his father rather then putting the people that elected him first in there opinion.

it is true what you spoke of too 2many about adolf a long time ago.

by the same token look at what we now have which is "home land security" doesnt that sound familiar. think back to hitler and the father land that we must protect. remember that in his propaganda to his country.

russia had protect the motherland, they both became and were police states. anyone watch the protestors to the war last night getting beat and hit by police for protesting and enacting a right as a US citizen.

to me its a big mess, that someone needs to clean up, war isnt always the way. just a few thoughts i have

Well, here's another slant on the topic from a person in our military:

Subject: TERRORIST WAR

U.S. Navy Capt. Ouimette is the XO of NAS, Pensacola.

Here is a copy of the speech he gave earlier this

month -- a wonderful and accurate account of why we

are in trouble today.

++++++++++++++

America WAKE UP!

That's what we think we heard on the 11th of September

2001, and maybe it was, but I think it should have

been "Get Out of Bed!" In fact, I think the alarm

clock has been buzzing since 1979, and we have

continued to hit the snooze button and roll over for a

few more minutes of peaceful sleep since then.

It was a cool fall day in November 1979, in a country

going through a religious and political upheaval, when

a group of Iranian students attacked and seized the

American Embassy in Tehran. This seizure was an

outright attack on American soil; it was an attack

that held the world's most powerful country hostage

and paralyzed a Presidency. The attack on this

sovereign U.S. embassy set the stage for the events to

follow for the next 23 years.

America was still reeling from the aftermath of the

Viet Nam experience and had a serious threat from the

Soviet Union when then President Carter had to do

something. He chose to conduct a clandestine raid in

the desert. The ill-fated mission ended in ruin --

but stood as a symbol of America's inability to deal

with terrorism. America's military had been decimated

and downsized/right-sized since the end of the Viet

Nam war. A poorly trained, poorly equipped, and

poorly organized military was called on to execute a

complex mission that was doomed from the start.

Shortly after the Tehran experience, Americans began

to be kidnapped and killed throughout the Middle East.

America could do little to protect her citizens

living and working abroad. The attacks against U.S.

soil continued. In April of 1983, a large vehicle

packed with high explosives was driven into the U.S.

Embassy compound in Beirut. When it exploded, it

killed 63 people. The alarm went off again, and

America hit the Snooze Button once more. Then just

six short months later, a large truck, heavily-laden

down with over 2,500 pounds of TNT, smashed through

the main gate of the U.S. Marine Corps headquarters in

Beirut. Two hundred, forty-one U.S. servicemen were

killed. America mourned her dead and hit the Snooze

Button once more. Two months later, in December 1983,

another truck loaded with explosives was driven into

the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait, and America continued her

slumber. The following year, in September 1984,

another van was driven into the gates of the U.S.

Embassy in Beirut, and America slept.

Soon, the terrorism spread to Europe. In April 1985,

a bomb exploded in a restaurant frequented by U.S.

soldiers in Madrid. Then, in August, a Volkswagen

loaded with explosives is driven into the main gate of

the U.S. Air Force Base at Rhein-Main -- 22 are

killed, and the Snooze Alarm was buzzing louder and

louder as U.S. soil was continually attacked.

Fifty-nine days later a cruise ship, the Achille

Lauro, was hijacked, and we watched as an American in

a wheelchair was singled out of the passenger list and

executed. The terrorists then shifted their tactics

to bombing civilian airliners when they bombed TWA

Flight 840, in April of 1986, and killed four; then,

the most tragic bombing, Pan Am Flight 103 over

Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, killing 259. America

wants to treat these terrorist acts as crimes; in

fact, we are still trying to bring these people to

trial. These are acts of war the Wake Up alarm was

louder and louder.

The terrorists decided to bring the fight to America.

In January 1993, two CIA agents were shot and killed

as they entered CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

The following month, February 1993, a group of

terrorists was arrested after a rented van packed with

explosives was driven into the underground parking

garage of the World Trade Center in New York City.

Six people were killed, and over 1,000 were injured.

Still, this was a crime -- and not an act of war?

The Snooze alarm was depressed again.

Then, in November 1995, a car bomb exploded at a U.S.

military complex in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, killing

seven service men and women. A few months later, in

June of 1996, another truck bomb exploded only 35

yards from the U.S. military compound in Dhahran,

Saudi Arabia. It destroyed the Khobar Towers, a U.S.

Air Force barracks, killing 19 and injuring over 500.

The terrorists were getting braver and smarter as they

saw that America did not respond decisively. They

moved to coordinate their attacks in a simultaneous

bombings of two U,S, embassies -- in Kenya and

Tanzania. These attacks were planned with precision;

they killed 224. America responded with cruise

missile attacks and went back to sleep.

The USS Cole was docked in the port of Aden, Yemen,

for refueling, on 12 October 2000, when a small craft

p! ulled along side the ship and exploded, killing 17

U.S. Navy Sailors. Attacking a U.S. War Ship is an

act of war, but we sent the FBI to investigate the

crime and went back to sleep.

And, of course, you know the events of 11 September

2001. Most Americans think that this was the first

attack against U.S. soil or in America. How wrong

they are! America has been under a constant attack

since 1979, and we chose to hit the snooze alarm and

roll over and go back to sleep.

In the news lately, we have seen lots of finger

pointing from every high official in government over

what they knew and what they didn't know. But, if

you've read the papers and paid a little attention, I

think you can see exactly what they knew. You don't

have to be in the FBI or CIA or on the National

Security Council to see the pattern that has been

developing since 1979. The President is "right on"

when he says that we are engaged in a war. I thin! k

we have been in a war for the past 23 years, and it

will continue until we as a people decide enough is

enough.

America has to "Get out of Bed" and act decisively

now. America has changed forever. We have to be

ready to pay the price and make the sacrifice to

ensure that our way of life continues. We cannot

afford to hit the Snooze Button again -- and roll over

and go back to sleep. We have to make the terrorists

know that in the words of Admiral Yamamoto after the

attack on Pearl Harbor "all they have done is to

awaken a sleeping giant."

Thank you very much.

Dan Ouimette

Pensacola Civitan

19 Feb 2003

This country was created through dissent. The right to "spit on the graves of the millions of men and women who have died protecting our rights since the Revolutionary War" is protected by our constitution. NOW I DO NOT CONDONE SUCH BEHAVIOR. Remember, I am a Viet Nam era Veteran. I chose to join the US Navy to serve my country! But the right to do is available to our citizens. Just don't do it on my father's grave or you'll have to deal with me on a personal basis!

2ManyZ's (and MikeW's as well) arguments are by and large true, regarding Russia, however, he's neglecting to point out the the USA was instrumental in enabling Saddam Hussain to enter into power in Iraq. Bib Ladin's boys are responsible for the attack on the USS Cole, 9/11, and many other terroristic acts, and YES; Hussain has supported them. So you link Hussain to those acts, right? Why stop there, the US helped put him in power, so is the US to blame also? OIL money from Bin Ladin's Saudi Arabian family also is a major support of terrorism, so do we also blame all of the countries that have purchased Saudi Arabian oil for these acts? Where/Why does one conveniently draw the line to place blame?

I do not support people going to Iraq to act as human shields for one simple reason. IT IS STUPID! It isn't going to change a thing, and is likely to get more people killed. Bullets, bombs, and rockets do not recognize your "noble" intentions. They just maim and kill. Those people should NOT "be dealt with in the strictest of military justice". "Military Justice" (UCMJ) is reserved for those actually in the military. These people should NOT be lauded as heros, or noble in anyway either. IMHO their efforts should be directed at efforts than have a realistic chance of influencing events. Lobby the politicians, vote the ones out of office that do not do as you desire, publicly demonstrate your support for peace in a peaceful manner in your home state/country. Put your $ and efforts where your mouth is. Going to Iraq as a human shield is IMHO just grandstanding in the same way as Bush's trip to the Azores to meet with his "supporters".

No one (that I know of) doubts that Saddam is a brutal dictator, or that the Iraqi people might be much better off without him. That does not legitimize a USA led attack for me. It is a civil matter for the Iraqi people to deal with. When enough of his subjects grow weary of the reign of terror, they'll take care of him. If Saddam launchs missles, or another form of attack on some other country, that country and it's allies should (and WILL) deal with him.

As far as invading Iraq to "provid(e) food, medicine, clean water, and other infrastructure improvements." There are plenty of places in the USA that could use that kind of help from the Federal government. Why should we ignore those local needs and export this EXPENSIVE help half way around the world? Acess to OIL is the reason that I see.

How interesting is it that our leader comes from an "oil" family, just like Bin Ladin does. (I'm NOT comparing them, but I do find it an interesting situation.)

PS to ZmeFly: That would be BILLONS of dollars!

PPS to 2ManyZ's: Not all terrorism comes from Iraq. This war WILL NOT stop acts of terrorism. It may put some terroists out of business, but the entire Middle East is full of people who hate the USA. There will be many others spurred to action by our invasion of Iraq. They will act against us. Terrorism works because in a free society it is almost impossible to defend society against the actions of indiviuals without severely limiting individual freedoms.

Is that Navy Captain trying to blame all of the acts he mentioned on Hussain? To use those acts as a justification to attack Iraq is NUTZ! Or is he advocating the US to take over the entire Middle East?

Wow what a thread to get going on a site of Zcar nuts. Gets one to thinking that there are things more important than THE Z. But there certainly are. I think this unprovoked attack/invasion (how can it be called a war?) will result in unimaginable horror in the USA and to Americans abroad. I believe that the lessons learned by the Palestinians in Israel will be used here. Suicide bombings, chemical weapon attacks, etc. will happen. When they do happen, pity anyone who looks midde eastern or just looks different. lt has already started.

It does not take any effort to hate. To love takes some work understanding other people and their cultures, even those of other cultures that are ciitizens of the US. The last name of the president of NASCAR French. Do you suppose he will change it to Freedom? Some people in Congress have nothing else more important to do I guess. Sort of like Ashcroft covering the breasts of that statue.

Why when Hitler invaded Poland, etc. was it called blitzkrig or an invasion or attack and when we invade somewhere, which is often enough, it is called a liberation???

Why when we invade a country to establish a democratic government, are we so prone to quickly overthrow it? Does anyone really believe that democracy can be established in the Middle East? This is an area that has been civilized AND TRIBAL for thousands of years. Just watch how long a new "democratic" government lasts if out supply of oil is threatned.

I certainly believe that we should support our troops. The best way is to bring them all home before any are killed. Seems like that is the best support that we can give them.

Do a Google search of Smedley Buttler to get the perspective of war from a two time Congressional Medal Of Honor winner.

Mike, drop this thread. PLEASE. I've already seen enough.

2 Many, RIGHT ON. Let's get this $^!# done.

Are Democrat bombs, good bombs??

If America put Saddam in power, is it ok to leave him there?

Isn't there more Socialist in the U.N. than Capitalists??

If N. Korea is a bigger threat, would the peace activists support bombing them??

Can any Democrat in congress answer these questions with a simple 'yes' or 'no'??

a final note. there is peace.....when nobody stands up to a tyrant. There is peace...... after victory. I choose the later.

now, back to working on my Z. I got gas to burn.

It's easy to avoid, just dont "click" on the link!

There are plenty of other Threads for you to enjoy!