Iraq's Resistance Stiffens

MonsieurEvil · March 2003

<a href='http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/news/page.cfm?objectid=12715943&method=full&siteid=106694' target='_blank'>Allah Ahkbar, but I don't feel like meeting him just yet.</a>

Discuss...

Bo_Selecta · March 2003

That doesn't surprise me at all, same thing happened during the first Gulf War.

btw, -this- is the threat that must be eliminated ASAP to save the free world???
LOL
Republicans have strange priorities. <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>

AllUrHiveRblong2us · March 2003

I just cannot wait till we actually go to war with these guys. I'm pretty sure we're gonna move in, wipe em out, and then whine about how we lost 6 guys in a helicopter crash. Those are the stories that most amuse me about war.

Bo_Selecta · March 2003

Don't forget the 20 friendly-fire casualties <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'>

AllUrHiveRblong2us · March 2003

And all the Canadians we're gonna kill while on speed.

SovietDictator · March 2003

Poor Iraqi 'soldiers.' First they were forced into the Iraqi 'military,' then starved and told to go up against the most powerful militaries in the world. Now they surrender and turn back-I think they all might be dead or jailed by now.

Bo_Selecta · March 2003

dead or jailed?
they're probably dead, "Traitors will be shot!" <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'>

btw, I also fear for the safety of their family members...

AllUrHiveRblong2us · March 2003

That's when secrecy pacts come in o-so-handy, that, or biteing down on your cyanide capsule...

SovietDictator · March 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bo Selecta @ Mar 13 2003, 06:51 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> dead or jailed?
they're probably dead, "Traitors will be shot!" <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'>

btw, I also fear for the safety of their family members...  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
Yes, I heard (on a news station, it may be not be FULLY accurate, but I believe it is at least somewhat true) that say if you daughter's-husband's-uncle plotted against Saddam, Saddams men will be knocking on you door with a little suprise for you. Anyways, why would they surrender 'knowing' that possible action might be taken against their families? Oh well I'm not in their position.

redeemed_darkness · March 2003

Hmmm interesting is there any more news sites that says the same news?
Perhaps with more info??

Jammer · March 2003

THIS is why we have the MOAB kiddies! We don't want to kill them, they don't want to die. The MOAB is supposed to scare the crap out of the few loyalists in every group of Iraqi soldiers. The Republican gaurd is a different matter. We're gonna have to take them all out, probably in city fighting. They're the ones who will us chemical and biological weapons. Bush has said a nuclear response has not be ruled out, but he isn't stupid enough to inflame the muslim world THAT much.

I feel really bad for them too. The only significant number of Muslims which oppose the military action are Muslims who live outside of Iraq. This won't be like vietnam. The people did not want us there in Vietnam. The Iraqi people have been waiting for 12 years.

Merkaba · March 2003

Anyone who is familiar with Bill Hicks will laugh at this:

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>It is believed that two rings of steel are being established around Baghdad. The outer one consists of regular Iraqi army soldiers and the inner one is made up of Republican Guard fighters - thought to be the only troops that will put up fierce resistance</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

"8 foot desert warriors who s**t bullets, the <i>Elite</i> Republican Guard...then became the Elite Republican Guard, then the Republican Guard, and then became the Republicans making this **** up about there being guards out there..."

What were the casualty statistics the last time the US went into Iraq? 150,000 Iraqi casualties...79 US casualties. No wonder they're surrendering, I wouldn't be surprised if the entire army got up and walked out. "It's unfair, man! We ain't gonna be putting up a fight, they got all the good sh*t!"

*slams head against the wall* Too much Bill Hicks...

Sirus · March 2003

Monsieur, They're hearts are simply not in the war. They have no reason to fight, they fight only because they have to, in order to protect their own families from Saddam.

They are fighting for no cause, and that's why they're surrendering.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>btw, -this- is the threat that must be eliminated ASAP to save the free world???
LOL
Republicans have strange priorities</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

No, there never was a priority to kill people, or kill Iraqis for that matter, the threat that must be eliminated is the tyrant who has control of biological and chemical weapons, which, i remind you, are used to attack civilians not just military units.

And Republicans. Now anyone who believes that Saddam needs to be disarmed is Republican ? It's odd, the bias and the seperation of America on party lines.

And if Monse is Republican, which he may be, then , <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'>

DOOManiac · March 2003

I thought we lost like 300 people at desert storm? But this is counting the friendly fire and jeep rollovers, which claimed more american lives than the iraqis did unless my statistics are messed up. and since I failed statistics, they probably are.

redeemed_darkness · March 2003

lol sound like we only have to fear killing our selves <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>

Gadzuko · March 2003

I heard a story once that couldn't be verified about a young Iraqi child who, when asked if he had seen Saddam's speech last night, replied that he hadn't because his father always turned off the television when Saddam came on. The father disappeared the next day. Like I said, no way to verify it, but Saddam is one crazy b*stard. His original plan for winning the Gulf War involved capturing 100's of US soldiers and tying them to the front of Iraqi tanks so we wouldn't shoot, and that <i>is</i> verified.

Still not in support of a war yet though <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'>

Fam · March 2003

You are basing this on a report from the Sunday Mirror? I'm amazed you could even find the politics section for all of the pictures of semi-naked girls.

Nemesis_Zero · March 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Merkaba @ Mar 14 2003, 03:49 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Anyone who is familiar with Bill Hicks will laugh at this:

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>It is believed that two rings of steel are being established around Baghdad. The outer one consists of regular Iraqi army soldiers and the inner one is made up of Republican Guard fighters - thought to be the only troops that will put up fierce resistance</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

"8 foot desert warriors who s**t bullets, the <i>Elite</i> Republican Guard...then became the Elite Republican Guard, then the Republican Guard, and then became the Republicans making this **** up about there being guards out there..."

What were the casualty statistics the last time the US went into Iraq? 150,000 Iraqi casualties...79 US casualties. No wonder they're surrendering, I wouldn't be surprised if the entire army got up and walked out. "It's unfair, man! We ain't gonna be putting up a fight, they got all the good sh*t!"

*slams head against the wall* Too much Bill Hicks...  </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> 
"I hear we had a war, now that's pretty f****** weird. Well, not really a war. A war is when <i>two</i> armies are fighting."

"There is just nobody out there who's a f****** threat to us...
That is, I'm only talking about countries we don't arm first here. If you want to split hairs, you've got a point - they can be scary.
For a day."

God, I love Hicks.

Merkaba · March 2003

'Hey Tommy, what does G-12 do?'

'Says it destroys everything but the fillings in their teeth...helps us pay for the war effort!'

'Lets try it out!' *ptchhsz* 'Pull up G-12 please.'

Whoooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh.....................................boooooooooooom

'Kewl! What does G-13 do?'

Bo_Selecta · March 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>No, there never was a priority to kill people, or kill Iraqis for that matter, the threat that must be eliminated is the tyrant who has control of biological and chemical weapons, which, i remind you, are used to attack civilians not just military units.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Containment works, look at the Soviet Union.
Iraq has done nothing to threaten world security in the past 10 years, why the 'need' to attack all of a sudden?
Yes, the is no doubt in my mind that Saddam has these weapons. They guy is a psychopath.
He's also a very clever fellow and knows he can't use these weapons because America would remove him from power and ruling his country is Saddam's top priority.
(guess what will happen once the US decides to attack.. I hope all American soldiers wear gasmasks)

Besides, the security of the world outweighs the fate of the people in 1 country.... <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'>

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>And Republicans. Now anyone who believes that Saddam needs to be disarmed is Republican ? It's odd, the bias and the seperation of America on party lines.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Why is it odd? It's true isn't it? Check the statistics!

..
besides, I think this whole Iraq thing is part of a Republican plan to control the middle east.
(I've read some quotes on bbc.co.uk, the head of the CIA and 2 leading figures in the Bush administration said that "America must ensure its rightful role of leadership in the world", especially in the middle east..)
((They've made these statements _before_ 9/11 ))

CanadianWolverine · March 2003

Besides that this post should probably be in a different thread, I'll respond anyways...

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bo Selecta @ Mar 14 2003, 10:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>No, there never was a priority to kill people, or kill Iraqis for that matter, the threat that must be eliminated is the tyrant who has control of biological and chemical weapons, which, i remind you, are used to attack civilians not just military units.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Containment works, look at the Soviet Union.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

What the... ?!? You mean look at how nuclear/biological/chemical weapons could be easily stolen and sold on the black market thanks to lack of money for their bloated military that is guarding their sites?

Or perhaps you mean how the cold war was such an effective means of containment, which of course has nothing to do with how former USA policy allowed them to arm the likes of Sadam Husein & Company while they were "containing" the Soviet Union. Please note the severe sarcasm I intend to get across here.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Iraq has done nothing to threaten world security in the past 10 years, why the 'need' to attack all of a sudden?
Yes, the is no doubt in my mind that Saddam has these weapons. [The] guy is a psychopath.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

You just answered your own question. Leaders of countries which have great economic cloat thanks to get amounts of natural petroleum (aka oil) resources and threatens the acknowledged leading country of the world, AND also get labeled as pyschopath by folks such as yourself, tend to threaten world security, as if there was much of that in the first place.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
He's also a very clever fellow and knows he can't use these weapons because America would remove him from power and ruling his country is Saddam's top priority.
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

What do you think they are trying to do? And that everyone assumes they will do? Its seems like the only things "clever" Sadam Husein is doing is using his own citizens as human shields and betting on the muslim world wild card.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
[...snipped to shorten, slightly...]
Besides, the security of the world outweighs the fate of the people in 1 country.... <img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'>
</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

This supposed security of the world is alot of countries with their own self interests, its just they don't have either the strength and/or the conviction to carry them out like the USA. Trust me, if any of those other countries were "World Super Powers", they would be doing stuff for their own security across the world too. Hey, its not like other countries who have been a world super power didn't in the past. I live in Canada, so if the USA was as bad as everyone (in public world wide media) makes them out to be, they would've annexed us along time ago.

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>And Republicans.? Now anyone who believes that Saddam needs to be disarmed is Republican ?? It's odd, the bias and the seperation of America on party lines.</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Why is it odd? It's true isn't it? Check the statistics!

..
besides, I think this whole Iraq thing is part of a Republican plan to control the middle east.
(I've read some quotes on bbc.co.uk, the head of the CIA and 2 leading figures in the Bush administration said that "America must ensure its rightful role of leadership in the world", especially in the middle east..)
((They've made these statements _before_ 9/11 )) </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

What the... ?!? What statistics, some from the Democratic party? Care to post some links to some "statistics"? And as far as Republican plan (aka subtle way to say plot) to control the middle east, I suppose that means we should ignore that for the past couple of decades the various international community have been clamouring for peace in the middle east, in sense trying to bring some "control" to the region. Now that the leading world power is stepping up to the plate to try to take some action towards that goal, the international media seems to be saying "No, no, no, don't take the neigbourhood threats out of the middle east, we're comfortable with the on-going conflict there now!"

Why don't you formulate your ideas a little bit better before posting next time, eh?

Shrike · March 2003

</span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
QUOTE
And Republicans. Now anyone who believes that Saddam needs to be disarmed is Republican ? It's odd, the bias and the seperation of America on party lines. </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Why is it odd? It's true isn't it? Check the statistics!</td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'>

Everyone wants Saddam to be disarmed... not everyone wants him to be ousted forcibly.

Bo_Selecta · March 2003

Yeah, that's what I meant.... (whoops...)
<img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'>

Dear sir, you deserve a cookie for pointing that out!
*gives cookie*

Iraq's Resistance Stiffens

Comments