"If we weren't there, it wouldn't have happened". Bulls*%t!
That's right. We didn't go there to end Saddam's tyranny. That's BS.
We went in their to get WMDs...
{oh there isn't any}
We went there to remove Saddam & his sons from power
{ok....we did that}
Now what is 131,000 of our troops doing there??
Forcing democracy down their throats using the muzzle of a M16??
Bush and his administration are RESPONSIBLE for all those deaths. BUSH started this war against the will of 40%+ of his people. Get that through your head please. Unfortunately, Bush & Co. have created NEW TERRORISTS that will cause us pain for many years to come. Many years after this chimp-faced dumbass leaves office.
Do you honestly care what a dictator in the Middle East does to his own people??
Shall we go against Robert Mugabe next?? Or how about Sudan?? I'm sure you CARE SO MUCH about their downtrodden.
All those deaths, right down to the last invididual is Bush's as well as anyone who supported it.
I'm doing what I can against this evil war. I'm voting in October for Kerry, Nader or Pee Wee Herman. I don't care. So long as we get Bush out of the White House. A war criminal who is resposible for 900+ deaths of our militarymen & women. For going to war on the SHADIEST of reasons (or should I say excuses).
Maybe if he served in Vietnam instead of Daddy bailing him out, he wouldn't tread on war so easily.
mourby has a huge chip on his shoulder. Some of the stuff he comes up with is quite outragous.
I'm sure he's quick to forget SaDam's use of civilians as human shields both during the first war and this most reason INVASION of Iraq. Of course SaDam and his leadership take no responsibility in the loss of civialan lives, it's Bush who ordered those civilians next to the anti-aircraft battery.
FYI - My son is in the Army deployed in Korea at present. Before that he was in southern Iraq for almost a year. During that year, his wife, also in the Army, was serving in Baghdad. She is home now raising my granddaughter. One of my other sons is a Marine about to be deployed to places unknown yet.
None of them had to enlist - they wanted to because they believe in what we stand for. I wanted to discourage them but held back - I just tried to give them all the information I could so they could make their own decisions.
I have always been in constant contact with them through the internet no less than once a week. They tell me what the real world is like over there with no media bias - and I know that they would very much disagree with you! It's a joke to most of the troops when they see some of the stuff that people are saying back home. And it's also dis-heartening.
Terrorist were and are there. Links to 9/11 been proven. You don't know the 'total' story if you think that's a lie. Saddam was a brutal dictator who murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. We got rid of a brutal dictator and are helping to set up a freedom-based government. Have we hit speed-bumps along the way? Of course! Did Bush do it perfectly? Of course not! Do you think you could have done it better?? I doubt it. How's Kerry even going to finish the job with his history of cutting military spending? Better yet, if Kerry was in office when 9/11 occurred, what would he have done? Spent 1 to 2 years convincing the UN to fall in line while two or three more attacks occurred on our soil? It's been proven that more attacks were planned - but were postponed when we invaded Afghanistan. And postponed further when we 'invaded' Iraq. If nothing else I'll go with postponement rather than more attacks.
Did we create more terrorist - probably yes. If we did nothing more terrorist would have been created anyway - "see, the US did nothing after 9/11; so come join in our jihad and make it into heaven" or some other BS...
Lastly, it will surprise you that I do care about people in other countries. I figure if I have certain feelings about my great-uncle being mistakenly murdered by English commandoes in Northern Ireland, then I should apply those feelings about all oppressed people. I do things for foreign relief – but that’s my own personal business. Do you really think Kerry gives a rats-a$$ about those people? I don't.
Yes, Bush et-all made some mistakes along the way. But not to the extreme you say with the twists you say. "Let ye without sin cast the first stone" (It's a Bible thing)
So you go ahead and do your little ranting. At least I feel better getting some of this off my chest. Sometimes it really irks me when people say things without hearing the truth first-hand.
So go ahead and say what you will - believe M. Moore with his edited interviews of a couple of military personnel. Keep on believing that those few people speak for all of them...
I've had enough of this. I guess I better start saving up for a back-yard bomb shelter - just in case Kerry does get elected.
One other thing I find interesting... Before Saddam's fall, the only thing the media could show was people kissing his a$$ when he went into the street - for fear that if they didn't they would end up in some mass grave.
Now, the media loves to show the Iraqi people protesting the US - protesting in the streets! Read between the lines, people!
They only reason they have the freedom to protest in the street is... You guessed it - the US!
So I (and my kids) smile everytime we see it. Keep on protesting! Show the world you're free!
No thanks are necessary. Thanks come from: No more mass graves. No more women maimed or raped (oops, they don't count). No more chemical raids on the Kurds. Etc, etc...
I for one am proud. Democracy has a foot-hold in that region - if they want it. Because they have the freedom to choose. Before you spout anything contrary - double-check your facts...
Well forgetting the reasons that we were told that we had to go to war with Iraq (for the second time at a Bush's hands) was that Iraq posed an immediate and present danger turned out to be a lie. The US does not have the right to topple a government just because we don't like what the government does there. And 50% of the Iraqi population supported Saddam anyway.
And I want to know what kind of democracy we have there? There is no elected government, people are scared to go onto the streets (more so than under Saddam), the economy only exists due to the good graces of the American Taxpayer, and at least under Bush, no plan to get us out of that tragic mess. As far as the rape rooms go, I assume that you completely ignored what is going on in the prisons there. I am amazed that you are proud of Bush's folly, especially since you admit it has made terrorism worse.
Keep on believing what you want and stick with it.
Along with that back-yard bomb shelter I better get a gun so I can protect my family. Just in case...
Like I've said before - one good thing would happen if Kerry gets elected: We wouldn't have to listen to Michael Moore's blubbering two-faced spew for four years.
Well forgetting the reasons that we were told that we had to go to war with Iraq (for the second time at a Bush's hands) was that Iraq posed an immediate and present danger turned out to be a lie. The US does not have the right to topple a government just because we don't like what the government does there. And 50% of the Iraqi population supported Saddam anyway.
And I want to know what kind of democracy we have there? There is no elected government, people are scared to go onto the streets (more so than under Saddam), the economy only exists due to the good graces of the American Taxpayer, and at least under Bush, no plan to get us out of that tragic mess. As far as the rape rooms go, I assume that you completely ignored what is going on in the prisons there. I am amazed that you are proud of Bush's folly, especially since you admit it has made terrorism worse.
First off SaDam did pose a threat to the US. his own son-in-law, when he defected to Jordan talked about the on-going weapons programs, SaDam was working on long range missles, he was supporting terrorists (PLF, Abud Nidal, etc) Did you protest our preemptive war in Yugoslavia? Milsovic didn't pose a threat to the US. Even if Bush and the entire international intellegence community was wrong (which there's evidence to conclude they were correct, see prewar exports to Syria) that doesn't mean that the war was wrong. The Civil war was to preserve the Union, not to end slavery. Would you say the Civil War was an unjust war?
China is more dangerous than Iraq, and their agenda is not necessarily one that respects our ideology either. Should we bring them democracy? Yes, there are some that will argue that we are doing just that by investing and moving them along the lines of a "market" economy. As far as a country killing it's citizen, the students at Tien An Men is not so far in our collective memory is it?
I cringed when Clinton signed the preferred trade status agreement! Somehow, we are all responsible for this one. We'd rather pay $1.50 for some idiotic trinket at the Disney store, than live by principles that would end up having us pay $3.00 for the same piece of crap!
If we care about oppressed people, AND if such ruthless dictators so vehemently oppose us, our ideas our freedoms, AND if such have acknoledged (and even demonstrated) the possession of WMDs, AND if all of the above are reasons to go to war, why not nuke North Korea!
Shucks, we can't, China's too close and would not like it a bit, and since China's a big part of the world economy and a huge market, we'll just continue to keep our pants down.
We are not the champions of the free world. We do not do things for altruistic reasons. We do things that will help us protect ourselves from a perceived threat (in some cases we do not, i.e. North Korea) and make economic sense.
Eventually, we do such things. Our actions in the former Yugoslavia republic prove it, our intentions to get Sudan to quit killing and raping it's citizens is another.
History is pretty much irrelevant in that each decision we take affords us the ability to make the right choice.
Yes we supported and put in place people that were not democrats but dictators (Iran is a prime example, and the Ayatollah backslash tells us we should abandon that strategy. I think that to date, we've pretty much avoided that crap.) We liked Saddam being there for a while, we even sold him crap. Heck, we helped a bunch of Afghans when they were fighting the Russians after the 1980 invasion, some of these freedom fighters are the guys we now dispise but hailed a while back...
So what? New age, new reality. Let's deal with the new variables, coming back to past mistakes won't make us better, actions and decisions that we are taking now will speak as to what we're about.
As a side note, if ridding Iraq of Saddam was the goal, could not assassins have done the work? We shy away, for politic reasons, from killing heads of state but find no contradiction when faced with engaging into a full war effort which will be much less efficient in cost of lives (on both sides)?
People have a right to autodetermination. I believe Iraq will screw it up. They won't want a democracy. Democracies require too much from their citizens. Not that we are more virtuous than most, we have crooks just the same, but their mentalities are such that a theocracy will emerge, and perpetuate the cycle of hate.
We've already lost THE war, it's a matter of time, maybe a few generations. The strength of the democratic ideal has in it the germs of its destruction. We are willing to listen, understand, and debate with ideologists that care not to be convinced. They will win because moral decisions do not burden them in face of their cause.
For matters of national security, we cannot afford to be soft.
ML, you're a very smart guy and I hope you know that I have a real respect for your opinions. Although we may not always agree, I know that you put a lot of thought into your assertions and conclusions.
China; we do not want to go to war with China. They are the closest thing to a super power, the have the population, manfacturing capacity, and nuclear weapons. They are getting a taste of capitalism and so far it appears they're begining to embrace it a little more. They do not appear to be suporting "terrorist organizations" however have sold and do sell arms to other nations. This is a problem, but because of their capabilities diplomacy and mutually assured desctruction are the answers here.
North Korea; For the last 12 years our policy has been containment. Years ago we made lots of promises to Kim Jong Il to try to keep him from development of Nukes, when the time came those promises weren't fulfilled or at least put off. North Korea is being looked at as a problem to China, South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan. We're relying more on these countries to work things out. An attack on North Korea would assure the descruction of South Korea. This is not an easy problem to solve.
Iraq: Iraq was a beatable force, would show others in the region that we're not affraid to take action. Did pose a threat (as hard as it is for some to believe that). As for an Assassin, that would have left his sons to step in and would not have changed much.
When and If GW wins come November I would put money some type of action against Syria possibly Iran. In Iran I would say somthing along the lines of a supported uprising.
These are dangerous times. Anything less than a very strong position will invite further attacks.
That's odd. Because the 9/11 Commission (who were able to see the proof) think otherwise.
Quote:
Saddam was a brutal dictator who murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. We got rid of a brutal dictator and are helping to set up a freedom-based government.
That's not why we went to war, nor is it any different from the other 100 or so governments with their own dictatorships.
Quote:
No more women maimed or raped (oops, they don't count).
You mean they finally got rid of the Americans at Abu Ghraib??!
Quote:
Did you protest our preemptive war in Yugoslavia?
That wasn't preemptive. Serbian armies were attacking both the Bosnians and the Croats. We went in under NATO to protect those citizens ASKING US for OUR AID. Who asked for our aid in Iraq?? No one. Unless you mean the failed 'uprising' that Bush Sr. walked away from after pledging support.
Quote:
Even if Bush and the entire international intellegence community was wrong (which there's evidence to conclude they were correct, see prewar exports to Syria) that doesn't mean that the war was wrong.
Actually, it does mean the war is VERY wrong. See reasoning above.
And TCP, I do see a lot of sense in what you say. Granted, I don't think hardening our approach towards the Iraqis is the answer. I would actually IMMEDIATELY pull our troops out and let the UN do it's job, if it turns to sh!t (which I agree with you, it probably will). Send a couple of billions in reperations to the Iraqis with a warm hearted apology saying "Sorry are so-called 'intellegence' was wrong".
Didnt we also mess up Vietnam? Didnt we send them reperations when we tried to change their form of gevernment and also try to impose democracy? We pulled out and it fixed itself in Vietnam. As a result the Vietnamese don't see the US as good friends. We should expect the same from Iraq.
Quote:
As for an Assassin, that would have left his sons to step in and would not have changed much.
Easy. Kill them too. We would have really won the hearts and minds of the Iraqis this way FOR REAL.
BTW, what does this have to do with Kerry's speech?
Linear Mode
