600 Dead already - how many more must die?!! - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 46 (permalink) Old 03-31-2004, 09:54 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
merouby's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2004
Vehicle: 91 300SE
Location: Dallas (was Leeds, London, Brooklyn)
Posts: 1,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
600 Dead already - how many more must die?!!

Two words:

Impeach Bush!

Killer of Americans for oil. Bring our people home YOU AWFUL PRESIDENT!!
merouby is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-01-2004, 09:50 AM
BenzWorld W124 Host
 
Tubs300E's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2003
Vehicle: 1993 300E 3.2L 24V
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: 600 Dead already - how many more must die?!!

It's a shame that many have died, but I think we are in there for more reasons that just oil. I think we have a better control of the situation in Iraq than we ever did during Vietnam or at least from what I've learned about Vietnam, I'm a bit young to know first hand.

In fact, Chuck, I have about the same feeling as you did with Vietnam.

I'm young, able bodied, and had to apply for selective service by law. The more people that keep getting killed, the more likely the draft will start up. All it takes is a pull of my number and Tubs is off to boot camp and then Iraq.

Yes, I feel that Bush went into Iraq lying to a country, and I don't think he is a good president by a wide margin. But I feel that now that we are in Iraq, and thousands of a Iraqis are so happy and thankful that we are there fighting to liberate them from the remaining rebel and terrorist threats, I feel it would be an injustice to them to pull out now. Thousands of their countrymen died for the same causes, or died because of who they were. The US comes in, blazes a trail through the country, fights valiantly against the terrorists and rebels that are spread all over the country, and removes an evil dictator from power. In one year, we have accomplished more, and sacrificed fewer lives than they have in decades. If we left now, the terrorist would wipe out the liberated Iraqis, and a new leader of the same fabric as Saddam would rise to power and we will have accomplished nothing. I feel that now that we are in there, whether we were lied to or not, we should support our troops.

My sincere condolences go out to all families who have experienced loss as a result of the war in Iraq. I am thankful everyday our country is protected by men and women of such character and bravery.

-Tubs

W124 Forum Host

1993 Mercedes-Benz 300E Arctic White over Palamino Leather
W124.032 Chassis M104.992 24V Engine
217 Horsepower @5500RPM
229lbs-ft Torque @3750RPM

Aftermarket Modifications
-TYC Euro-Spec Headlamps
-DEPO Clear turn signal indicators
-Kenwood KDC-217S CD Player AM/FM Tuner Headunit
-Chrome Exhaust Tips
-Auxiliary fog lights and driving lights
-Tinted windows: 22.7% on the back 5 and 33% on the front 2
Tubs300E is offline  
post #3 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-01-2004, 11:44 AM
BenzWorld Veteran
 
amgbnz's Avatar
 
Date registered: Nov 2002
Vehicle: Widebody SEC
Location: Toronto - SLRs everywhere
Posts: 774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Bin Laden thanks president Bush

an interesting article from the march 27 HINDUSTAN TIMES...

Why Osama should thank Bush
COUNTERPOINT | Vir Sanghvi
March 27

Whatever our reservations about the current US administration — and it is hard to find an educated Indian with a good word to say about President George W Bush — there is no doubt which side we are on in the international battle against terrorism. We may snigger at Bush’s self-serving use of the phrase ‘war against terror’ and we may oppose what the US has done in Iraq, but if the battle is between Al Qaeda/the forces of global jihad and the civilised world, then obviously we are on the side of the civilised world.

Over the last fortnight, domestic pre-occupations (the cricket matches, the general election etc.) have kept us from seeing how badly our side has been doing in the battle against Al Qaeda/global jihad. Over the last two weeks there have been enough developments for Osama bin Laden to think that he might be winning the war, after all.

The most crucial of these developments has been the confirmation of what many of us had long suspected: President Bush has made a complete hash of the battle against the jehadis.

According to Richard Clarke, the former head of the US government’s counter-terrorism operations (this is a non-partisan post — Clarke was appointed by George Bush Sr., stayed through the Clinton years, and left after several years in George W’s administration), the Bush White House refused to follow up on the Clinton administration’s pursuit of bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Instead, he was told by the new administration that Al Qaeda was not the principal threat facing the US.

Even after 9/11, when it was clear that Clarke had been right and the White House wrong, Bush tried to use the World Trade Centre attack to pursue his own agenda. Clarke says that counter-terrorism officials were told again and again to find any evidence that linked Saddam Hussein to the attacks. Bush’s principal pre-occupation was finding an excuse to attack Iraq in the aftermath of 9/11.

The Bush administration says, in its defence, that Clarke is a liar (it has said this so often and with such desperation that you begin to worry even more about the US’s battle against terrorism if it was led by a liar for over a decade) and that anyway, it was working out an alternative strategy to the one employed by the US in the Clinton years.

In that era, the US would launch missile attacks on targets where bin Laden was thought to be hiding (but wasn’t, as it turned out). The Bush administration says that this was ineffective (which it certainly was) and that, therefore it preferred a new approach — such as the invasion of Afghanistan.

Which, of course, leads us to the second disquieting development in the battle against Al Qaeda. When the US ‘liberated’ Afghanistan, it did so by using the soldiers of the Northern Alliance and various warlords as mercenaries and risking few US lives. When Hamid Karzai was installed as leader of ‘a new Afghanistan’, the US lost interest and moved on (to Iraq).

But it is now becoming increasingly clear that Karzai’s writ does not run beyond the capital; he is merely the mayor of Kabul. Warlords have resumed fighting each other and Afghanistan is slipping back into chaos.

As for the Taliban, most of its leaders are still at large including its one-eyed chief Mullah Omar. Nor has Al Qaeda’s leadership structure been compromised. The Americans have no clue where bin Laden is and Al Qaeda cells keep issuing audiotapes calling for jihad. One, issued a fortnight ago, took credit for the Madrid train blasts. Another, issued on Thursday, in the name of Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin Laden’s number two, called for the overthrow of Pervez Musharraf.

Every Western official now concedes, in the aftermath of the horrific Madrid attacks, that Al-Qaeda has the will and the capability to strike at more Western capitals in the months ahead. Such attacks are now regarded as a virtual certainty.

Some of this terrorism will be packaged as payback for Iraq. Many opinion polls demonstrate that a huge proportion of Americans (in some polls, the majority) believe that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11 though, of course, the truth is that there’s no evidence for that claim. But the Bush White House has sold this lie so assiduously to credulous Americans that the falsehood has stuck.

To the rest of the world, the White House offered different reasons for going in. One, it said, Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. And two, you could not afford to have a repressive, despotic regime in the Middle East, the world’s mot unstable region.

But even as Saddam languishes in US custody, it is hard to see how the Iraq operation has helped make the world a safer place. As we all know, no WMDs were found. And though Saddam was a secular tyrant who kept the jehadis at bay, the new Iraq has become the playing field of every Islamic extremist group in the world. Should the Americans impose a genuine democracy, then power will probably pass to Ayatollah Khomeini-style Shia clerics. And even if they do not, fighters from all over the Middle East and North Africa are flowing into Iraq to fight a jihad against American occupiers. That accounts for the thousands of civilian deaths, the hundreds of American lives lost since the end of the war, and the daily terrorist strikes that we see on TV every night.

Even worse, the perception that the invasion of Iraq was an unjustified act of aggression has hardened anti-American sentiment throughout the Muslim world. Most Muslims are not jehadis, they are moderates. But regardless of which side they are on, they all hate America. Polls in Pakistan, for instance, regularly show that people love bin Laden and despise Bush.

Far from making the world a safer place, the Iraq invasion has actually helped create an environment in which Islamic extremism can thrive. It has been George W Bush’s gift to Al Qaeda.

Last week, there was a brief flurry of excitement when the Pakistani army finally moved into Waziristan, the tribal region that borders Afghanistan and where Al Qaeda fighters are said to have found shelter. The excitement increased to fever-pitch after the Pakistanis told the world’s press, off-the-record, that they had cornered Ayman al-Zawahiri. Musharraf appeared to confirm this when he told a TV channel that they were after a ‘high-value target’.

A few days later, the Pakistanis had changed their story. It was not al-Zawahiri, they said, but an Uzbek or Chechen leader who was the ‘high-value target’. And, in any case, they said, they had since discovered a network of tunnels in the area so whoever they were after had probably escaped.

Cynical Americans (including the leader-writers of The New York Times) said that this had all been a ruse. Musharraf had finally agreed to invade Waziristan under US pressure (which was a step forward) but al-Zawahiri had probably never been there to begin with. The operation had been staged to distract attention from A.Q. Khan’s nuclear sales agency.

And certainly al-Zawahiri seemed safe — safe enough to send tapes to Al Jazeera asking the Waziristan tribes for more help and urging the overthrow of Musharraf.

Yet another miss in the battle against Al Qaeda.

And then finally, there’s been another worrying development. The Madrid bombs led voters to vote out the Spanish government and to elect a new administration. While the old government had been pro-US, even sending troops to Iraq, the new regime has talked about withdrawing forces from Iraq — a sentiment that has found enormous public support after the bombings.

Anyway you look at it, this is a victory for Al-Qaeda. If it can change a government’s policy with a single strike — as it seems to have in Spain, where it even changed a government — then it will employ this tactic again and again to get its way. A strike in London could hurt Tony Blair. A few hundred more American soldiers killed in Iraq, and the US electorate will want America to get the hell out of there.

No matter whether you supported the Iraq operation — and I did not — no one can be happy about governments being forced to backtrack by the threat of terrorist action. That’s another example of how Al Qaeda is winning.

What all this suggests is that we are in even deeper trouble than we thought we were, right after 9/11. There have been small victories in the battle against Al Qaeda/the jehadis. But there have been huge defeats: the failure to find Al Qaeda leaders, the inability to impose order on Afghanistan, the misconceived and foolish invasion of Iraq, the lack of success in locating jehadis in Pakistan, and the total inability to break Al Qaeda’s global networks (which led to the Madrid bombing.)

In almost every case, the defeats stem from the White House’s incompetence, short-sightedness and its desire to pursue such private agendas as the removal of Saddam when it should have formed a coalition with the rest of the world to fight a truly global battle against terror.

In the circumstances, I don’t think Al Zawahiri is bin Laden’s number two or his strongest asset.

That honour goes to George W Bush. Thanks to his ineptitude and arrogance, Al Qaeda continues to flourish.

--END OF ARTICLE--

500SEC AMG Widebody
ML320
SLK230
1974 280 Coupe

those who want the best car in the world, drive a Mercedes-Benz
those who want the best Mercedes-Benz, drive a w126

MBCA executive board member
Mercedes-Benz Club of Canada - active member
MBFanatics.org moderator
amgbnz is offline  
post #4 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-01-2004, 01:42 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
merouby's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2004
Vehicle: 91 300SE
Location: Dallas (was Leeds, London, Brooklyn)
Posts: 1,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
RE: 600 Dead already - how many more must die?!!

Quote:
But I feel that now that we are in Iraq, and thousands of a Iraqis are so happy and thankful that we are there fighting to liberate them from the remaining rebel and terrorist threats, I feel it would be an injustice to them to pull out now. Thousands of their countrymen died for the same causes, or died because of who they were. The US comes in, blazes a trail through the country, fights valiantly against the terrorists and rebels that are spread all over the country, and removes an evil dictator from power. In one year, we have accomplished more, and sacrificed fewer lives than they have in decades. If we left now, the terrorist would wipe out the liberated Iraqis, and a new leader of the same fabric as Saddam would rise to power and we will have accomplished nothing. I feel that now that we are in there, whether we were lied to or not, we should support our troops.
It all boils down to this: Would you press a button that would kill 600 Americans (and rising) for the sake of the freedom of some people thousands of miles away in some unknown third world country that doesnt exacly "love America"?? That "thank us" by killing us on a daily basis? And in the end elect a form of government that would be hostile towards the United States anyway?

I wouldn't press that button. Would you?
merouby is offline  
post #5 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-01-2004, 05:01 PM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
Jamison's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 98 BMW 528i
Location: Pennsylvania - Lehigh valley
Posts: 589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to Jamison
RE: 600 Dead already - how many more must die?!!

In my very humble opinion:

President Bush has done the right thing. With that being said, I think the President's strategy is sound. Terrorism is unlike any enemy we have ever had. It requires tactics we are not used to. Remember in any war there are casulaties. Nothing is different about this war.

The President has the unique oppertunity to rid the world of terrorism by installing a democracy in the heart of the middle east and ridding the world of a ruthless dictator that supports terrorists all over the world. In theory by doing this the concept of freedom will spread to others and eventually it will dominate the region bringing with it peace and prosperity. Also by doing this it will provide the free world a base to combat terrorism in all forms.

I am appaled to see people protesting the war because they think it is about oil. It is not about oil, it is about a greater goal. That goal being to establish peace and to eradicate terrorism in that region. It is about protecting the world from a faceless and ruthless enemy who hold twisted visions of world domination and chaos. If oil was the true reason behind the war, why did we not invade Kuwait. Or Saudi Arabia, or any other middle easter country for that matter. Hell why not invade Russia. Russia has more oil beneath its permafrost than the entire middle east! Why?! Ill tell you why. Its becaude the war is about defeating terrorism and setting an example to follow.

In order to accomplish this goal, soldiers will fight and possible die in this conflict thats goal is world peace. Not oil. So please dont blame the war on oil. Blame it on the lack of freedom. Blame it on the lack of capitalism. Blame it on pure nothingness of the lives these poor people in these countries lead. this is why they follow radicals like Osama. This is how horrible monstors like Saddam are created and along with them an endless stream of followers who share the common goal of destroying freedom wherever it is found.

It all comes down to this. Fight the fight and do our best to kill terrorism at its source with minimal casualties, or appease the problem until another Sept. 11th happens. Only next time the terrorists wont be using 757's they will be using nuclear weapons. Next time there will be suicide bombings in our country. The fighting wont be in Iraq or Afghanistan, it will be in the streets of the United States. Next time the casualties will be in the millions. What do you say to that?
Jamison is offline  
post #6 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-01-2004, 05:04 PM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
Jamison's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 98 BMW 528i
Location: Pennsylvania - Lehigh valley
Posts: 589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to Jamison
RE: 600 Dead already - how many more must die?!!

In my very humble opinion:

President Bush has done the right thing. With that being said, I think the President's strategy is sound. Terrorism is unlike any enemy we have ever had. It requires tactics we are not used to. Remember in any war there are casulaties. Nothing is different about this war.

The President has the unique oppertunity to rid the world of terrorism by installing a democracy in the heart of the middle east and ridding the world of a ruthless dictator that supports terrorists all over the world. In theory by doing this the concept of freedom will spread to others and eventually it will dominate the region bringing with it peace and prosperity. Also by doing this it will provide the free world a base to combat terrorism in all forms.

I am appaled to see people protesting the war because they think it is about oil. It is not about oil, it is about a greater goal. That goal being to establish peace and to eradicate terrorism in that region. It is about protecting the world from a faceless and ruthless enemy who hold twisted visions of world domination and chaos. If oil was the true reason behind the war, why did we not invade Kuwait. Or Saudi Arabia, or any other middle easter country for that matter. Hell why not invade Russia. Russia has more oil beneath its permafrost than the entire middle east! Why?! Ill tell you why. Its becaude the war is about defeating terrorism and setting an example to follow.

In order to accomplish this goal, soldiers will fight and possible die in this conflict thats goal is world peace. Not oil. So please dont blame the war on oil. Blame it on the lack of freedom. Blame it on the lack of capitalism. Blame it on pure nothingness of the lives these poor people in these countries lead. this is why they follow radicals like Osama. This is how horrible monstors like Saddam are created and along with them an endless stream of followers who share the common goal of destroying freedom wherever it is found.

It all comes down to this. Fight the fight and do our best to kill terrorism at its source with minimal casualties, or appease the problem until another Sept. 11th happens. Only next time the terrorists wont be using 757's they will be using nuclear weapons. Next time there will be suicide bombings in our country. The fighting wont be in Iraq or Afghanistan, it will be in the streets of the United States. Next time the casualties will be in the millions. What do you say to that?
Jamison is offline  
post #7 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-01-2004, 07:51 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
merouby's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2004
Vehicle: 91 300SE
Location: Dallas (was Leeds, London, Brooklyn)
Posts: 1,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
RE: 600 Dead already - how many more must die?!!

So your saying Jamison that it has nothing to do with the Iraq having the largest untapped oil reserves (due largely due to an 12 year oil embargo with small exceptions) in the Middle East?

You do realize there are only two countries that are not at full oil production already. Saudi Arabia & Iraq. The two largest consumers of crude oil are the United States and China. Do you still think oil had nothing to do with it?

So...Would you press the button if you were President and kill 600 of your citizens for Iraqi freedom?
merouby is offline  
post #8 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-01-2004, 09:54 PM
BenzWorld W124 Host
 
Tubs300E's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2003
Vehicle: 1993 300E 3.2L 24V
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 1,088
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: 600 Dead already - how many more must die?!!

Would you press a button to allow thousands of Iraqis to continue to die?

I don't expect you to agree with me merouby, You views tend to be more extreme than mine are. So undoubtedly, whatever I say, you will have something to snap back with. I'm not going to get into a shouting match over the death of human lives. I feel it's just not appropriate or respectful.

By the way, I do agree that oil has something to do with it. I just don't feel it was the driving force.

-Tubs

W124 Forum Host

1993 Mercedes-Benz 300E Arctic White over Palamino Leather
W124.032 Chassis M104.992 24V Engine
217 Horsepower @5500RPM
229lbs-ft Torque @3750RPM

Aftermarket Modifications
-TYC Euro-Spec Headlamps
-DEPO Clear turn signal indicators
-Kenwood KDC-217S CD Player AM/FM Tuner Headunit
-Chrome Exhaust Tips
-Auxiliary fog lights and driving lights
-Tinted windows: 22.7% on the back 5 and 33% on the front 2
Tubs300E is offline  
post #9 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-02-2004, 12:12 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
merouby's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2004
Vehicle: 91 300SE
Location: Dallas (was Leeds, London, Brooklyn)
Posts: 1,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
RE: 600 Dead already - how many more must die?!!

Quote:
Would you press a button to allow thousands of Iraqis to continue to die?
Well, I don't want anyone to die, but if saving American lives means the death of Iraqi lives by their own leader.... Better Iraqi deaths than American ones. Let Saddam press the button that kills his own. Terrible thing, me saying that, i know, but we can't save everyone. We got enough bad crap here at home that needs to be dealt with, to be worrying about what happens to citizens by their own dictators in some far off country...unless of course, oil's involved [V]

Tubs, I hope my reply doesn't fall in the catagory of a shouting match either.

My main concerns are

* senseless death of American lives
* awful leadership of our current president
merouby is offline  
post #10 of 46 (permalink) Old 04-02-2004, 09:57 PM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
Jamison's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 98 BMW 528i
Location: Pennsylvania - Lehigh valley
Posts: 589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to Jamison
RE: 600 Dead already - how many more must die?!!

Oil was not the reason we went to war in Iraq. We went there to help eradicate terrorism, bring and end to the oppressive dictator, and try to spread peace through the region. Also the known existance of wmd was a huge threat to stability in the region as well. We did not send the troops for oil. If that was the case, we would now be in the process of massive operations aimed to exploit the resources. We are currently not doing that. instead we are establishing a free government and doing our best to help bring order back to the country. Those 600 Americans died to help end terrorism not to help us get more oil.
Dont you think that if oil was the reason for war, we would not have drilled Alaska and fought with the enviromentalists instead of a invading a country with a somewhat formidable army and risking the lives of our people?
Jamison is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome