RiSkyBiZ-13's forum posts

Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#1 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts
The movies he starred in didn't require a good actor, just a hardened looking dude- which he was.
Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#2 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts
p.s. what happens if the kid dies before he/she is old enough to make that choice for themselves? Baptism is the parents' way of admitting that they are sinners and want to save their child.
Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#3 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts
If you don't use Firefox you're a n00b. Add-ons = amazing
Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#4 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts
The point of baptism is to wash away the sins that were given to you from your parents, or "original sin" as they call it. There's nothing wrong with that, it's not some kind of hazing into a faith.
Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#5 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts
[QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"]

[QUOTE="wemhim"]Perhaps they could have been forceful, but all out war is just too much.wemhim

Forceful how? We were as politically forceful as possible, and he still refused. We were left with no choice.

I just think a CIA or Special Forces op would be better, not a war, something like a non crap version of bay of pigs for example, instead of killing someone, you identify something. And sabotage that. Of course, I don't know how these things work exactly(I'm not with the CIA or US Special Forces), but they've done operations in the past without going to war. I would just expect the government to be capable of doing what they have done in the past. Then there's the fact there's no proof they had WMDs, there was proof however, that the missles in the cuban missle crisis were actually there.

In a perfect world, that would be a perfect solution. Unfortunately, in a government ran by a warlord, you can't simply assassinate the leader- another will rise in his place.

Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#6 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts
[QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"]

[QUOTE="wemhim"]Perhaps they could have been forceful, but all out war is just too much.THETRUEDOZAH

Forceful how? We were as politically forceful as possible, and he still refused. We were left with no choice.

you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

You're right. I have no right to bring up those months of NATO talks and pleading to Sadaam to disclose and let the UN inspectors into all of his facilities. I can't even read. I won't speak out of turn again.

Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#7 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts

Perhaps they could have been forceful, but all out war is just too much.wemhim

Forceful how? We were as politically forceful as possible, and he still refused. We were left with no choice.

Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#8 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts
[QUOTE="RiSkyBiZ-13"]

[QUOTE="wemhim"]Let's see, because they believed something, that wasn't right. No, it's not oil, it's ignorance. It's like me declaring war on George Clooney because he shoots Indian's(Because he doesn't shoot them). They thought Hussein had WMDs, they were wrong, they made a stupid choice.THETRUEDOZAH

Sure, he didn't have them. All he would have had to do was let inspectors into the appropriate facilities and this whole ordeal could have been avoided. He had months and months to hide weapons, who said he didn't?

The UN's chief weapons inspector

Yes, after months and months of meetings until he could finally inspect. A lot can be accomplished in a few months...

Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#9 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts

That's true. However, that still, in my opinion, wasn't enough to engage in war. But yes, the war is to blame on him as well. And the possibility does remain.wemhim

So we should have waited until we were attacked first? Wait until thousands, if not millions of innocent civilians are killed? Not a very good way of thinking, in my opinion. He didn't disarm, he didn't disclose, so he faced serious consequences- exactly what NATO warned for months upon months.

Avatar image for RiSkyBiZ-13
RiSkyBiZ-13

1448

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

#10 RiSkyBiZ-13
Member since 2007 • 1448 Posts

Let's see, because they believed something, that wasn't right. No, it's not oil, it's ignorance. It's like me declaring war on George Clooney because he shoots Indian's(Because he doesn't shoot them). They thought Hussein had WMDs, they were wrong, they made a stupid choice.wemhim

Sure, he didn't have them. All he would have had to do was let inspectors into the appropriate facilities and this whole ordeal could have been avoided. He had months and months to hide weapons, who said he didn't?