Bush hidden agenda

Dark Primus · Post by **Dark Primus** » 2002-11-10 10:10am

I have been thinking on why Bush is eager to use force against Iraq, why he want to remove Saddam from power so sudden so quickly?

This is what i think:
If Saddam would be able to get his hands on nuclear weapons he would become a danger to the stability in the region and become the second most powerful nation in the Middle East after Israel. Israel would not accept seeing Saddam with these kinds of weapons in his arsenal. Who knows what he would try to do with them. He might not launch them at his enemies (Israel) directly without getting the world whoop his ass afterwards but he might give them to terrorists who hate the US and Israel even more. And they might smuggle them in to a major American, or Israeli city and detonate them killing a couple of thousands or tens of thousands of their own people but killing millions of Americans, or hundreds of thousands of Israelis. If no one takes the blame then what happens?

Taking over Iraq might be the answer. I have seen people posting and saying nuclear physics (?) have fled from Iraq and stated Hussein were developing nuclear weapons and they might be ready within a year or two.
Taking control over the oil might be just a bonus for Bush

Thoughts, Ideas, death threats?

EmperorMing · Post by **EmperorMing** » 2002-11-10 10:12am

Scary scenario either way...

Dictators with nukes are scary. Dictators with nukes AND a religious bent are even worse...

Admiral Piett · Post by **Admiral Piett** » 2002-11-10 10:22am

"Taking over Iraq might be the answer. I have seen people posting and saying nuclear physics (?) have fled from Iraq and stated Hussein were developing nuclear weapons and they might be ready within a year or two.
Taking control over the oil might be just a bonus for Bush"

The people,or probably the person, in question fled from Iraq nearly a decade ago.I am somewhat sceptical about how much he can possibly know about recent developments of Iraqui nuclear program.They definitively do not have the capabiltity to build a nuclear weapon in a year or two.Unless someone is so kind to supply them with enough plutonium or weapons grade uranium.
Unfortunately for them the two things listed above are the MAIN thing one need to manufacture a nuke and the most difficult ones to procure.
And before pointing to Russia it is worth to remember that the US programs
to help the russians to secure their nuclear stockpile receive only one third of the planned funds.And those funds are a trivial sum compared to what is going to be spent on a war against Iraq.
So figure it by yourselves.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-11-10 11:35am

why he want to remove Saddam from power so sudden so quickly?

He was asking for it even before 9/11 but when your Governer and write an opion story in the local paper calling on then President Clinton to push for removing Saddam you rarly get press asside from the Drudge Report(Which looks for exactly that sort of thing)

As for your thread title "hidden agenda" WTF do you mean by that? Its plain as day any and all reasons we want to go to Iraq

1. He broke the Law, Infact Every law we put him to
2. Broke his word, Maaaaaaany times
3. Told us to fuck off
4. Has been shooting at American Planes and Troops since 98
5. Is devolping Weapons of Mass Destruction(On that everyone agrees, how far and how soon is the aurgment point)
6. We like Oil

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2002-11-10 11:57am

Don't think Bush has any deeply hidden agenda. It's all there if you look. I merely question the validity of it. Of course the fact that we've got the UN at least partially on my side helps allay those some.

Enlightenment · Post by **Enlightenment** » 2002-11-10 01:00pm

EmperorMing wrote:Scary scenario either way...

Dictators with nukes are scary. Dictators with nukes AND a religious bent are even worse...

Error. Iraq--and Saddam--is largely secular and has no particular love for Islamism or Islamist terrorists.

Dark Primus · Post by **Dark Primus** » 2002-11-10 01:00pm

Mr Bean wrote:
As for your thread title "hidden agenda" WTF do you mean by that? Its plain as day any and all reasons we want to go to Iraq

Meaning are there any other reasons to attack Iraq then what has been presented to the public.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2002-11-10 01:02pm

Dark Primus wrote:
Mr Bean wrote:
As for your thread title "hidden agenda" WTF do you mean by that? Its plain as day any and all reasons we want to go to Iraq
Meaning are there any other reasons to attack Iraq then what has been presented to the public.

It's pretty clear what his motivations are. The only one Bean didn't mention is that Dubya wants to off Saddam as revenge for trying to assasinate his father.

Dark Primus · Post by **Dark Primus** » 2002-11-10 01:05pm

Stormbringer wrote: It's pretty clear what his motivations are. The only one Bean didn't mention is that Dubya wants to off Saddam as revenge for trying to assasinate his father.

I had forgotten about that.

Raptor 597 · Post by **Raptor 597** » 2002-11-10 01:12pm

Just a sidenote: Bush is too stupid too have his own hidden agenda. But anyway, yet again CNN is giving Iraq more information then it's spies.

Illuminatus Primus · Post by **Illuminatus Primus** » 2002-11-10 01:17pm

Enlightenment wrote: Error. Iraq--and Saddam--is largely secular and has no particular love for Islamism or Islamist terrorists.

One doesn't have to be a religious fanatic to help them. The enemy of your enemy is your friend. And don't forget Saddam's Intelligence has been linked with the first World Trade Center bombing and he tried to have Former President George Bush asassinated.

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2002-11-10 01:18pm

Dark Primus wrote:
Stormbringer wrote: It's pretty clear what his motivations are. The only one Bean didn't mention is that Dubya wants to off Saddam as revenge for trying to assasinate his father.
I had forgotten about that.

I sympathize with him and understand. But I'm worried that Saddam is going to flinch give in and Dubya is going to start a war with his paper thin justifications just to avenge this wrong.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-11-10 01:28pm

Besides the one I left out(Trying to have Bush Senior killed) is there realy anything else?

What your going to suggest as soon as we take Iraq we will storm in Iraq while US Forces in Germany Smash through Russian Lines and Race for Moscow?

Stormbringer · Post by **Stormbringer** » 2002-11-10 01:29pm

Mr Bean wrote:What your going to suggest as soon as we take Iraq we will storm in Iraq while US Forces in Germany Smash through Russian Lines and Race for Moscow?

huh? I get the reference but what are you talking about?

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-11-10 01:31pm

huh? I get the reference but what are you talking about?

The Thread topic Stormbringer try and keep up

The point is what ELSE could thier be? Unless we Claim Iraq as the 51 State or like I said storm Russia is there anything else even vaugly pausilbe then what I've already mentioned?

Raptor 597 · Post by **Raptor 597** » 2002-11-10 01:36pm

Mr Bean wrote:
huh? I get the reference but what are you talking about?
The Thread topic Stormbringer try and keep up

The point is what ELSE could thier be? Unless we Claim Iraq as the 51 State or like I said storm Russia is there anything else even vaugly pausilbe then what I've already mentioned?

Oh, yes Bean Bush is going on the Madrush aganist Soviets for losing that American Hostage in Moscow, and too go get the Tyrumen Oil Fields

, and the defeunct Russia Manufactoring Capablity then we can move on too China

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2002-11-10 03:11pm

Or perhaps, just perhaps he is going to finish something that previous administrations had left hanging for years. I mean we could just lob cruise missiles at them al la Clinton, but what if we just finish the fucking thing instead of letting it go on slowly for another decade.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2002-11-10 04:13pm

I mean we could just lob cruise missiles at them al la Clinton, but what if we just finish the fucking thing instead of letting it go on slowly for another decade.

Five Carries + Assorted Missle Armed Escourts + missle Armed subs=alloootaa cruise missles

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-11-10 04:19pm

If the US was going to war for cheep oil, we'd just send an AGR to the South China sea and claim the Spratlys for ourselves with the Philippines inviting us in to protect there interests as the cover.

We'd kick off a few companys of troops at gunpoint and sink a PLAN frigate or two and that would be that. But thats not whats happening..

HemlockGrey · Post by **HemlockGrey** » 2002-11-10 04:20pm

Fuck all this bickering and arguing. Let's revert to 1800's America, where our foreign policy was kicking ass and taking names.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2002-11-10 04:40pm

Fuck all this bickering and arguing. Let's revert to 1800's America, where our foreign policy was kicking ass and taking names.

We can start by increasing your taxes. Drafting you or your closest loved ones, right ?

However, in all honesty I always thought the phrase "manifest destiny" sounded pretty cool.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-11-10 04:44pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:
Fuck all this bickering and arguing. Let's revert to 1800's America, where our foreign policy was kicking ass and taking names.
We can start by increasing your taxes. Drafting you or your closest loved ones, right ?

However, in all honesty I always thought the phrase "manifest destiny" sounded pretty cool.

I think he meant 1880's-90's, not the first half of the 1860's. A United States with that mind set and its currently firepower would be about the worst thing that could happen to the EU.

Lets do it.

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2002-11-10 05:09pm

Illuminatus Primus wrote:
Enlightenment wrote: Error. Iraq--and Saddam--is largely secular and has no particular love for Islamism or Islamist terrorists.
One doesn't have to be a religious fanatic to help them. The enemy of your enemy is your friend. And don't forget Saddam's Intelligence has been linked with the first World Trade Center bombing and he tried to have Former President George Bush asassinated.

True, but Hussein and bin Laden wouldn't work together. The Bath party (think I spelled that wrong, but oh well) was formed specifically to prevent Islamic political parties from taking power and to prevent Shar'ia law from taking over in Iraq. Given that bin Laden formed al Qaeda to have Islamic political parties gain control and to introduce Shar'ia law to nations that are non-Islamic, the two of them would be working at mutually exclusive purposes most of the time.

Given that, I think Bean has pretty much hit the nail on the head; Hussein is untrustworthy and shows no sign of altering. The potential disruption of power in the Middle East he would cause with nuclear weapons makes him a definite threat. I'm not sure if a full invasion would be necessary if our idiot intelligence services hadn't cut down on HumInt sources for the past couple decades. Wetworking only works if you have someone close to the target.

Raptor 597 · Post by **Raptor 597** » 2002-11-10 05:16pm

TrailerParkJawa wrote:
Fuck all this bickering and arguing. Let's revert to 1800's America, where our foreign policy was kicking ass and taking names.
We can start by increasing your taxes. Drafting you or your closest loved ones, right ?

However, in all honesty I always thought the phrase "manifest destiny" sounded pretty cool.

Oh, Hell yes. Tax all the Fundies around me and you can't draft my ass because I have an appoint to West Point, just needs too graduate high school first. and Manifest Destiny, another Christain endeavor causing the death of many. Executed excellently as usual for Religious Genoicide.