Just curious...

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by hot4chicks, Mar 4, 2003.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Cloud Nine

    Cloud Nine I had to open my big mouth.......

    Rare prime time press conference tonight...

    Bush is going to interupt Survivor, I wonder if he's going to give his war speech tonight.

    (BTW- no one has adressed why they think casulties are going to low with such certainty.)
  2. BigMadM

    BigMadM Linoleum

    Re: hey hey HEY

    Welcome to the UG world as seen thru the eyes of BMM.
  3. h. von bingen

    h. von bingen Sharon

    hey hey HEY

    how did i end up in this conversation?

    minding my own business,
  4. pjorourke

    pjorourke Thinks he's Caesar's Wife

    Point taken. Cannons on the SUV notwithstanding, I never meant to imply you were a war-monger in general -- just a supporter of force in this specific case. Some of "your" 30% would support war in any situation, some only given these facts and circumstances. Likewise, some of "HvB's" 30% would oppose any wars, others just oppose this war. My point was merely that there is a large fluid middle on this issue that will swing with the tides of war.
  5. Reel Deal

    Reel Deal

    What is the over/under...

    ...for fingernails left on Khalid Shaikh Mohammed?
  6. SkellyChamp



    But I will anyway
  7. Reel Deal

    Reel Deal

    Whoa, PJ...

    I have "solid support" for war the same way I have "solid support" for cancer surgery.

    I don't want any body to have cancer surgery if there are other viable options. But each of those options have serious side effects.

    Tumors grow unless aggressively treated; ultimately, they kill.

    I liken the Peaceniks to Christian Scientists. They are well-meaning, well-intentioned people. They are nice, generous, and are kind to animals. Unfortunately, too many have let their children suffer and die because of their beliefs.

    Saddam, and his ilk, are tumors. He is not the only one. He may be the largest, and the one who is most likely to cause the demise of the West, left untreated. We've tried chemo with little, if any, success. Time for surgery; with the skill of the surgeons, radiation is unlikely.

    Surgery is not pretty, and it is painful. But the results after proper rehab is often far better than the outcome left untreated.
  8. Cloud Nine

    Cloud Nine I had to open my big mouth.......

    I dont know why everyone's so confident about low US causuties. (I hope theyre right) However Sadam's up against the wall this time and may do something horrible with chemicals, bio-agents or radiology. You never know. I hope I'm wrong.
  9. trickstud


    I second pj

    1. I think they have done a great job, except for the fact of 18 resolutions to the UN(they may be setting bad precedence)
    2. Just like the french, the people who are against the war now will jump the fence once we beat the piss out of those camel jockey bastards.
    3. The only US casualities will probably come from friendly fire, we have come so far from the gulf war technology wise it is ridiculous, we can basically beat them with out any infantry going in.(from the air alone)
    4. the markets will heal once we get this done with!
  10. pjorourke

    pjorourke Thinks he's Caesar's Wife

    1) Yes they know what they are doing. But diplomacy is never pretty to watch.

    2) There is solid support for the war at about 30% of population (e.g., Reel Deal) and opposition at 30% (e.g., HvB). Its that 40% in the middle thats in play. When the shooting starts, that 40% will be 100% supportive.

    2a) There won't be major US casualties.

    3) I think an act of domestic terror is probable, though less likely after the capture of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. If an act occurred, it would strengthen US resolve rather than weaken it.

    4) Markets are allready down due to war uncertainty. There won't be any rally until this cloud passes one way or another.

    5) A draft would be totally ineffective for a high-tech army such as we have today. It is too expensive to train soldiers that are turning over every two-years. The U.S spends about 25% of its total budget on personnel. The rest is equipment and supplies. This contrasts with an army like Germany where 60% of the total is personnel cost.
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2003
  11. hot4chicks


    I'm not looking to start a huge debate or create macho arguments about how many missiles can fall where, but I am curious what people think of Bush/Iraq, because of UG's wide cross-section of participants.

    1. Do you think the White House looks effective or knows what they're doing in dealing with Iraq?

    2. Is there domestic support for a war in Iraq?
    2.(a) Does support erode as US casualties mount? How many US casualties before the US negotiates for a cease-fire?

    3. If there is a domestic terror act, does support erode?

    4. If the stock market or real estate market start to spiral lower, does support erode?

    5. Would you support a draft?