Invasion of Iraq

Do you support an attack on Iraq?

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 33.3%
  • No

    Votes: 12 50.0%
  • Only if Canada gets the contracts for rebuilding Iraq afterwards with our softwood lumber

    Votes: 4 16.7%

  • Total voters
    24

Regs

Staff member
Total Bastard
Est
Jun 28, 2001
Messages
27,567
Reaction score
14,072
Location
North Surrey
Tokens
9,146
Dirty Money
30,099
A Gallup poll indicates Canadians support an invasion to topple the regime of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, by a 52 to 43 per cent margin, the highest level of support among the four U.S. allies polled.

What do TTPers think?

Personally I think the US is in trouble if they can't come up with concrete evidence to support a reason for an attack. This is not just to high levels of government - more important is probably public perception. The problem for me is that these days I don't really trust anything the US government says.

Let the propoganda machine roll :rolleyes:

~Regs.
 

Hands of Stone

New Member
Est
Jul 30, 2001
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
2
Location
SSAP 24/7
Tokens
0
Dirty Money
100
Interesting how all this is taking place so Close to 9-11

Emotions around the world will be running high during the next couple of weeks, with the aniversery of 9-11, only two days away.
I hope that Bush and the other American polliticians are not using this date to help with their war agenda.

The Amarican's would not stoup to that level :confused:

HOSsaysIraqYouBreak
 

Sliver

Well-Known Member
Est
Jul 20, 2001
Messages
1,285
Reaction score
338
Location
Tri Cities
Tokens
597
Dirty Money
20
Results in Canada are based on telephone interviews with 1,003 national adults, aged 18+, conducted Aug. 21-27, 2002. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points. The survey was conducted by Gallup Canada.
A majority (52 %) of Canadians support an invasion but with a margin of error of + - 3% that majority could actually be 49% .

Canada the only place where a majority is 49% :rolleyes:
 

tiner

New Member
Est
Dec 4, 2001
Messages
228
Reaction score
0
Location
maitland.one of few towns with water
Tokens
0
Dirty Money
100
NO

i voted no but am actually referring to us.

i will be far happier when our moronic leader removes his lips from george w's butt.

if they want to go let them perform their own act of terrorism.

george has "weapons of mass destruction" just like suddam. the only difference as far as i can see is a bad porn mustache.

using the emotion of sept 11 is cheap, bad publicity. if i had lost a loved one in those towers i would be appalled that someone used them to promote further violence.
 

over the top

Member
Est
May 25, 2002
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Tokens
2
Dirty Money
100
americans

wednesday and thursday will be big day's in american history, George Bush is going to try to convince americans (which should be easy considering a huge percentage of them have no clue on what's going on!!!) and thursday he will present his case to NATO. most of the world is against him going into Iraq! he is viewed as some sort of cowboy to many nations. i can't see him bombing the shite out of Iraq exciting many other countries other than England!!! :(
 

Reccos

Active Member
Est
Oct 7, 2001
Messages
1,514
Reaction score
21
Location
Coquitlam - Hong Kong
Tokens
22
Dirty Money
100
No also to attack

Today neither Chretien or Bush speaking on border security used the word Iraq in their speeches. Bush mouthed the words about us being great friends but I am pretty sure he is pissed that Canada is not giving him another blank cheque like in Afghanistan which was an entirely different matter.

To attack Iraq could help to put us on the target list for those kooks just like the US. If the UN believed it necessary, it would be a different matter.

The US as the most powerful nation in the world has no business unilaterally attacking Iraq without a better reason than there is now. There is no way Iraq is going to use weapons of mass destruction as they know full well that would be the justification to obliterate them off the face of the earth if that were to occur.

Interesting how Bush sits there quietly while Mugabe is beating and killing white settlers and hundreds of thousands are starving and dying in other African nations. Maybe some sort of war on poverty and hunger would be a better use of resources than warring on Iraq.

But Bush will attack these guys for sure as he is going to finish what he believes daddy Bush should have done in Desert Storm.
 

The Teacher

New Member
Est
May 12, 2002
Messages
127
Reaction score
0
Location
around the way
Tokens
0
Dirty Money
100
on american mentality

I am really worn from all the news clips that show the american public (in their worldly wisdom) to continually praise the efforts to "hammer Iraq" and "bomb the sh*t out of Afghanistan".

To further kill innocent people to get to the few bad ones - is this really the solution?
 

Dude

Lifetime Better Bastard
Est
Jul 23, 2001
Messages
15,269
Reaction score
3,736
Location
Where my kids are
Tokens
9,088
Dirty Money
100
Right now, I'd have to say No.

Let the propoganda machine roll
The "timing" is a little too convenient, being the one-year anniversary to Sept. 11th. Having flown back from the US (Minnesota) just last night, I can attest that emotions are running pretty high. Lots of ceremonies, presentations, and memorials popping up.

I'm on the side of thinking that something may need to be done about Iraq in the near future, but this looks too much like Bush showboating for public sentiment and votes to me.
 

Fastshow

New Member
Est
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
2,305
Reaction score
2
Tokens
0
Dirty Money
100
pandora's box in aladin's cave......

The recent Saddam-mania (the sequel) is so cynical it makes even a cynic like myself blush fire department red (weren't they perceived as heroes before last September?). The fact that Bush and Blair, as a tag team, were shown up by trusting Afghani 'aides' in their fruitless search for Bin Liner instead of wading in and jeopardising more of their collective militaries' lives, is, perhaps, why the Great Man himself was never brought to the breach. Surely they could have simply sent in some Canadian troops to do the messy task of flushing an ageing Arab out of a cave? They're only, after all, Canadians. No, they trusted some Afghans who, oddly, were not to be trusted. I could have told them that and have commanded a tidy little consultancy fee in the process. So, with no body of Bin Laden to parade about and the whole experiment leaving a rather unfinished feeling for those with the smallest degree of objectivity, why not turn back to the Peter Pan-like Saddam and return him his title of most evil man in the world........ ever? Sexy little PR coup. The trouble Bush is having is that, with Saddam opening up his 'depots of destruction' with unprecendented aplomb and 'honesty', legally, there is no platform on which to start kicking off in the Middle East again. And, when the kicking off does begin, the Pandora's Box such a moronic act will open could, in all seriousness, be the end of us all. Such is the extent of ill-feeling toward Americans and the Western countries that fall into bed with them in certain very prominent and powerful parts of the Muslim world, a Jihad is, and has been for some time, a very real possibility. Look at Beirut, as European a city as there can possibly be in the Middle East, and see how public opinion has veered dangerously toward a common Muslim cause. Go on, look, I fcuking dare you. It's fcuking terrifying; so terrifying even the bloody Germans haven't jumped aboard the USS Revenge. And, surely, if even the krauts aren't up for a ruck they won't win, it doesn't bode well for the rest of us.
 

Saint

New Member
Est
Jul 3, 2001
Messages
85
Reaction score
0
Location
.
Tokens
0
Dirty Money
100
I’m willing to open any box,

Fastshow, you’re right, the merry Germans want nothing to do with USS Revenge but, I ask you, is that a product of them simply disagreeing with B43 or does it have more to do with the fact that their vote (or lack thereof) at the UN Security Council meeting means fcukall and Chancellor Schröder is in a bitch of an election race? I mean c’mon, do you really think Mr. Third Way would be onside if he were in the same position?

Message truncated
 

Reccos

Active Member
Est
Oct 7, 2001
Messages
1,514
Reaction score
21
Location
Coquitlam - Hong Kong
Tokens
22
Dirty Money
100
Canada and Iraq

Now aren't we all glad that the Alliance aren't the government or Canada would be writing blank cheques on Iraq?

I thought it was nice of Bush the other day to let the Prime Minister of Portugal in the Oval Office say on tv with him there that there should be a "global solution" to Iraq and not just an American one. Or maybe he was surprised by what he said.
 

Fastshow

New Member
Est
Jun 29, 2001
Messages
2,305
Reaction score
2
Tokens
0
Dirty Money
100
now that's cynacism.....

Yes. Of course it's as simple as that for the krauts and, trying to find a silver lining when there's precious little lining to be found, at least with President Blair's attention on all things Arab he's stopped cracking on about joining the Euro. Even David Blunkett's taken his eye off that one....... :rolleyes:
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Top