- This topic has 59 replies, 15 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Even if there is some oil in the gulf, Iraq has about a quarter of the world’s oil reserves, so that would provide some incentive for us to make sure it is governed by a friendly regime.
Most of the \”millions\” Saddam killed were killed in the Iran/Iraq war, at a time when we were still supporting and defending him, even when he was gassing the Kurds. We didn’t see him as a danger then, but as a friend, who was fighting the \”evil\” regime of Iran. Now, suddenly, we see him as a lethal danger.
As for the politicians, I have to say I was very disappointed in the Democrats in particular for not speaking out more against the war. I think they were all worried what speaking out might do to their careers or that they would somehow be seen as \”unpatriotic\”. The only person willing to speak his mind was Howard Dean and that might have cost him the presidential nomination. But, agree or disagree, at least with him you had some idea of what he was really thinking.
(Hey, I thought I wasn’t posting on this thread anymore)
One of the problems with Dean is he’s all about visceral opposition.If that’s the case with the demoocrats voting for the war, then that would mean that they place a higher value on being elected into power, then they do in maintaining the countries best interest. As much as one could turn them into to villians becuase of that, their not. Congress operated off the same intelligence that the rest of the world leaders had. Congress still has the ability to end the war, inspite of the dog and pony show they put on last week.
On the topic of oil reserves, maybe I wasn’t clear. We could be independent of foriegn oil. No need to \”invade\” others. And Im sorry, its a bit of a presumption that we want to control the rest of the worlds oil supply. After all,we control everything else 8). Even if that was the case, we simply killed two birds with one stone. 😉
The whole thing about the US being \”buddies\” with Saddam then all of a sudden turning, that’s life. I may or may not agree with it, but that’s how the world sometimes works. Allies turn to foes, foes to allies. Things can’t always be black and white, sometimes grey is the only color we can be afforded.
Yep, I guess it’s time to get back to self-defense issues and heavybags… 😉
I do think politicians have to be conscious of their image, at least to a certain extend, after all it isn’t easy having a job where every four years total strangers decide whether or not you get to keep it. Anyway, that’s sometimes better about a multi party system, the kind they have in Europe or Israel: Even if the major parties are cautious about an issue, there will be several smaller parties, who are willing to speak out and if you decide to vote for them they will actually be represented in parliament, so it’s not a \”wasted\” vote. That way, you get an array of different opinions.
Okay, I guess we should end this. Just one more thing I wanted to add to the torture discussion we had earlier: Although 9/11 was a bad event and we would want to try to prevent another 9/11 from happening, Osama bin Laden or al Qaeda don’t really threaten our values or our freedoms. They may inflict casualties, but they simply don’t have the numbers to conquer our country or scrap our constitution. Only we can do that, by throwing away values we’ve held for hundreds of years, just because of the somewhat vague threat of a potential terrorist attack.
Re:
Andre, a few points:
1. There was ZERO overwhelming evidence, multiple international intelligence or otherwise, that Saddam had any connection to Al Qaida. And, the fact that he had WMD aspirations wasn’t exactly a secret.
2. The US lost something like 60,000 soldiers in Vietnam, not ‘over a million’.
3. I don’t give a shyte what John Kerry said, and it’s way simplistic to pigeonhole this discussion as ‘pro-US neocons’ vs. ‘anti-US leftists’.
4. The trials and tribulations of Iraqis should be Iraqis’ problem, not ours.
5. You have a habit (on this forum, at least) of threatening to pack up your toys and leave the sandbox.
Fresh news: Abu Al-Zarqawi may have been killed…something we all can agree would be a fantabulous event.
Packing up my toys? I simply think too much of this kind of conversation on a self-protection board is inappropriate. Also, the imperfect medium that this forum is, I find it hard to fully communicate the depth of my argument.
GV, all I said was what I saw. You don’t know what I think about us vs them, neo cons and libs. Conservatives and liberals alike believe that they have Americas best interst at heart. I prefer to debate on issues and not just party lines. You saw me mention Kerry and assumed I’m pigeon holing. I simply pointed out the dichotomy.
I’ll repeat my point in regards to alqueda in Iraq. If that was the case, then why did the congress approve military measures?
Iraq shouldn’t be our problem? If we had left the country as it was, how long do you think it would have stayed just their problem? Were there now, so what’s gained by complaining about it. Being a vocal oppositionist doesn’t make you a patriot, nor does being a cheerleader for your party(be it libertarion or democrat).
With Vietnam, I apologize, I think I used the total mortality rate as opposed to just the US’s. I’ll have to check.
Re:
quote \”Andre\:Being a vocal oppositionist doesn’t make you a patriot, nor does being a cheerleader for your party(be it libertarion or democrat).I don’t have a party.
Andre, why discuss anything? Let’s just keep all our opinions to ourselves for fear of simulating cheerleaders and flag-wavers. 🙄
Well your condecending tone is one reason why I choose to cut the argument also.
And I love it when people say things like \”I have no party\”, which when often translated means I’m above the fray, I’m informed, and your ignorant.Its not just about what you say, but the quality of your statements.
But I’m not GV, so I must be wrong, hey their goes another syllogistic statement, because its only logical your always right. 😉 . How’s that for passive aggressive sarcasm. 8)Re:
quote \”Andre\:Well your condecending tone is one reason why I choose to cut the argument also.
And I love it when people say things like I have no party, which when translated means I’m above the fray, I’m too cool for school.Its not just about what you say, but the quality of your statements.
But I’m not GV, so I must be wrong, hey their goes another syllogistic statement, 😉 . How’s that for passive aggressive sarcasm. 8)…says the guy with the condescending tone. Well, I guess this discussion has indeed petered out. Later, skater.
Your the one that got the attitude with the, \”packing my bag\” statement. I didn’t take any personal slights at you. You should stop throwing stones in that glass house you live in, you know how cold it gets in these northern winters. 😉
***Warning the following is a statement to prove a point, not an actual belief***
4. The trials and tribulations of Iraqis should be Iraqis’ problem, not ours.
Ok, so being im from Arizona I could say the same thing about New Yorkers and 9/11 right?
We didnt need to help them out and send our firefighters when they could get killed. (AZ sent alot of rescue workers to NY after 9/11) But hey the trials and tribulations of New Yorkers is their problem not mine.
GV your one of those people that believe that the US needs to just worry about itself and no one else. The problem is we are so tied into the world that no matter what happens it effects us.
Yes Saddam used to be our friend, so did Bin Laden. I used to have a best friend that I grew up with about 10 years ago. Then he started doing drugs and totally changed (no I am not inferring that Saddam or UBL do drugs) and our friendship is no more. I did the best I could to help him, but him trying to kill me with a knife was the last straw. Even if we were only cordial to them because they were doing what we wanted, ever hear \”the enemy of my enemy is my friend\”?
Dictators around the world have been falling over themselves to appease us because we removed someone who constantly thumbed his nose at us. Whether you like it or not Iraq has had a positive effect on alot of radical states. What does a dictator want more than anything? To stay in power.
Re:
My comment about the Iraqis was a response to the comment that we needed to liberate Iraq from its dictator…you know, the guy that gassed billions of people, ate babies, chopped off the arms of grannies, and all the other accusations tossed at him. Was he a cruel dictator? No doubt. Did he keep Iraq from becoming a terrorist haven and training ground? Yup! That should be our primary concern, Ron.
The Soviet Union was ruled by a cruel tyrant as well. He also had a network of ghastly prisons, had people tortured, killed off a horde of his own countrymen, and so forth. My grandfather spent 10 years in a gulag on a trumped-up charge…it happened to many. And yet, we didn’t invade the USSR and topple Stalin to ‘liberate’ the Russians. Those people, my people…they went through what they went through, learned from the experience, and here they are today, slowly joining the western world.
Self-determination, my good man.
\”GV your one of those people that believe that the US needs to just worry about itself and no one else.\”
I’m of the opinion that our interests should come first, before that of other nations and peoples. I donated generously after 9/11, as well as for the Katrina relief. Arizona, New York…that’s in my country. As for Mosul and Fallujah, they were far from my mind until we sent our boys in there.
\”Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong-these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history\” -Winston Churchill
You see, we fight them there or we fight them here. That is really the bottom line. Go ahead and say AQ wasn’t in Iraq, well, that is to be debated, the real question is how many have to be there before you say they were there.
Yes there are rulers in this world that are on the same level as Sadaam. We have a process of dealing with these people, first we talk, then we talk, they we give them a chance, they we talk and then we give them another chance. I think we will give up to 17 chances to comply. The fact is the sanctions were running out and he was set to start up the manufacturering of all his toys. Read any of the reports, from us or the Brit’s.
Do we wait for him to rebuild, grow support, or do we take him out before he has the chance? Did we know that it would become the frontline of the war on terror, I hope so, but even if we didn’t, thank God it is.
You see all this talk about the war being lost, bad, is BS. Look at the leaders of the left, they go political, don’t give two shits about our soldiers, get called out and 403-3 all of a sudden find support for this war.
The war is justified on a ton of different fronts, now I don’t think there is a person on this board that would like to see us lose. We pulled out of Nam and 2.5 million people got killed, but then again who cares, it wasn’t us. We have started something and we must see it through.
For those of you who think we are losing, please go study WWII, how long did it take us and how many soliders died after the war was won? These things aren’t easy, we must win the hearts and minds of the civilian population. Now if you think, Kennedy, Kerry, Clinton and the rest of the lets lose this war so we can win the next election grew are saying things that are helping us win the hearts and minds you’re nuts. So if you really want us out, if you really disagree with this war, call them, write them, and tell these politicians to stop encouraging the enemy and start supporting our troops. That way we can win and get are boys home faster.
Similarities between Iraq and Vietnam end in the fact that this is an insurgent war that blends into the population. That and the peacenick hippies running around screaming war is bad. Funny how peace protests are some of the most violent protests now-a-days.
The similarities end right where how committed your politicians are.
Vietnam: Not allowed to hold the territory we took from the bad guys.
Iraq: We started with that tactic, but that has changed, now when we clean em out we stay.Vietnam: Targets in N. Vietnam restricted from airstrikes to seem \”less cruel\” (Thanks To Kennedy/Johnson)
Iraq: Only civilian targets restrictedVietnam: Fighting people who actually thought they were trying to \”unify\” their country
Iraq: Mostly fighting against guys who just want to kill Americans or anyone associated with us because \”Allah wills it\”. The rest are guys who are getting paid for attacking americans cause they need the money.Mistakes were made in both conflicts. We are remedying Bremer’s mistakes now.
Whoever said look at casualties post WWII is awesome. It took a while to put down the nazi insurgency too.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
