[Professor S]

Originally posted by DeathsHand
First of all, a "Dirty Bomb" wouldn't even be a very big devistating thing... people hear the nuclear material part and they're like "Nuclear Material!? A NUKE!? HUGE EXPLOSION YADA YADA!" but a dirty bomb is just like a normal bomb laced with Nuclear Material... Sure it would kill people and most likely render a small area of wherever uninhabbitable for awhile (quite a long while), but it wouldn't be like a nuclear bomb, and it would in no way top Sept. 11th in death toll...

Oh yes a dirty nuke would be the equivalent of having a rock thrown through our collective window. That makes perfect sense.

Now a normal nuclear bomb/device/thing is a different story... But I think that would be quite hard for them to get that in this country...

We also thougth it would be quite hard for them to hijack our own planes and kill thousands of innocent people, so lets completely ignore the past and march on blindly into the future. Once again, that makes perfect sense.

And yes we will be attacked again eventually in one way or another... Big or small... In the US or just US interests abroad... I think it's pretty much inevitable, even if we try to do something about it... Simply because there are sooo many terror cells in soooo many countries...

Ah yes, so we should just sit around and wait for them to kill us. What a wonderful philosophy

But whatever... I guess doing something is better than doing nothing in some situations, and yes having a "this isn't dangerous" attitude is bad in some cases, but having a "SHOOT FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER YEEEEHAW I WANT A WAR W00T W00T!" attitude is too... What if you attack someone and then find out they weren't doing what you thought they were doing or whatever? Then chances are the US would think up some way to cover their asses... I'm not saying they're NOT up to something suspicious, I'm saying WHAT IF they're not... And of course you say WHAT IF they are, but saying what if they are is just as much a possibility as saying what if they aren't when nobody knows 100% for sure... And just as dangerous... don't do something and if it turns out he is up to no good, some place gets attacked and people die...

If we had the shoot first ask questions later mentality, the entire Middle East would be a steaming radioctive crater right now. The fact is that Saddam is not complying with the conditions of his surrender. That is a big problem and needs to be resolved one way or another. It is obvious that the "reasonable" solution is not working.

"But we still all strive for the reasonable, peaceful resolution and men like Saddam Hussein use our humanitarian nature against us. He constantly tests our mettle by refusing to allow inspectors into his fascilities"

I know this is a much smaller scale, but I constantly have people coming in and out of my room and it's quite annoying... Sometimes they could in and I'm like "I don't want anybody in here right now" Or say things like "Man I wish I had a working lock on my door"... Does this mean I'm doing something I shouldn't be doing? No, it means I don't want a bunch of people wandering in and out of MY room...

Are you F**KING KIDDING ME? That is the stupidest comparison I have ever heard in my life. I don't even have to rebut that, it rebuts itself when you use common sense when reading it.

It's easy for us to just say "Well just let the damn inspectors in and all will be fine!", but Saddam might just have some big ego (or whatever it would be called) and is like "No! This is my country and I don't want weapons inspectors in!"...

Does it sound suspicious? Yes... Does it means he IS doing something suspicious? No...

And really, I think he most likely is... and I'm not necesarily against attacking Iraq... But I'm just looking at all different possibilities rather than "HE'S DEFINANTLY UP TO NO GOOD! LET'S GO IN AND TAKE OVER THE COUNTRY WHEN HE'S ALREADY LET WEAPONS INSPECTORS BACK IN AND IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF THE WORLD DOESN'T LIKE THE IDEA!"

Saddam's ego or whether or not he is even up to no good is not the issue here. As I have stated repeatedly in my posts, HE HAS VIOLATED THE TERMS OF HIS SURRENDER IN THE GULF WAR. That is reason enough to force him to comply. Excuse me is I hold little sympathy for Hussein's right to privacy. The man should be dead by now for his crimes against humanity.

The last time the international community allowed a hostile government to slide in terms of surrender, guess what happened? The Nazi war machine. As a part of the terms of surrender for Germany during World War One it was deemed that Germany could not have a standing army greater than 80,000 I believe (I'm not positive, but it was around that number maybe even less). When Germany annexed Austria they had a standing army of nearly 1,000,000 troops because the free world ignored Germany's blatant disregard for the terms of surrender.

This is not fiction, this is not a scarey bed time story that you tell to your kids to make sure they brush their teeth and say their prayers at night. This happened. There is a reason why there are terms of surrender. Don't think this couldn't happen again.

This will not fix itself. This will not just go away. That type of thinking has caused millions of people to die in the past, and if it does not change it will most likely happen again.