Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum

View Poll Results: Should the Iraq war be considered legally justified?

Voters
80. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    17 21.25%
  • no

    63 78.75%
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 128

Thread: Iraq War -- Illegal? Legal?

  1. #51
    Banned Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    08-10-05
    Posts
    154


    Country: Russian Federation





    I'm sorry,but - as though from time of Soviet propoganda...?
    9/11 - tipical exampel of this...believe me...

  2. #52
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Silverbackman's Avatar
    Join Date
    05-03-05
    Posts
    102


    Country: United_States



    The problem is that people, especially Americans, want simple answers to complex problems. We mouth clichs like “Tax the Rich” without understanding the economics of taxation and “Exit Strategy” without understanding the intricacies of Middle Eastern politics while pretending these and similar catch phrases have some sort of mystical power to change reality. They don’t.

    The fact is this is not the time to ask if we belong in Iraq regardless of if you agree with our presence there or not. I’m not saying this for jingoistic reasons as I’m not prone to spouting platitudes like “America: Love it or leave it.” In fact I loathe that kind of unthinking commitment to any cause. However due to the overwhelmingly complex nature of the Middle East and it’s history the time to have asked this question was – before – we went in. At the time both sides of the aisle said, “yes” but now we’re starting to second-guess ourselves. This is not a good idea in any situation but this is especially true in dealing with the Middle East. Not only that but it completely screws our global reputation. We don’t want the rest of the world to say, “The US will start something but when it gets tough they’ll scomper off.” Vietnam did enough damage to our credibility we don’t need to compound it by following it up with half-measures in Iraq. It is entirely inconceivable how bad it would be to leave at this point. Essentially we’ve committed ourselves to open heart surgery and half way through the procedure we’re getting “cold feet” and want to quit. This is bad for the doctor, bad for the patient, and bad for everyone involved. As much as I hate loosing soldiers the effects of leaving would result in far more deaths in a far shorter period of time. Remember we’ve lost around 2,000 men in the years since we invaded Iraq while we lost over 3,000 people in a single day on September 11, 2001. If loosing a couple hundred people a year trying to rehabilitate the Middle East saves thousands, hundreds-of-thousands, or even millions of lives in the long run then I think it is a cause that warrants our support.

    The thing I love about this Iraq situation is that people in the US, much less around the world, are silly enough to think we had a choice once we got the intelligence that they were trying to build a nuke. Now I'm not a big fan of Baby Bush but you try playing president under the following circumstance:

    1. 9/11/01 just happened

    2. You get intelligence that Iraq is trying to purchase fissionable material that can be used in the construction of a nuclear device. (This turned out to be false but Bush didn’t know this until after we invaded – he didn’t lie – we were duped - to be honest I’m not sure which is worse).

    3. You know that Uncle Ronny and Daddy Bush (idiots) sold technology to make chemical and biological weapons to Iraq back in the 80’s and Saddam used them in the Iran / Iraq war (we know they had WOMD’s because – we’re - the ones that gave them to them in the first place).

    4. Iraqi reports to the UN demonstrate that even by their own estimates thousands of gallons of chemical and biological agents are unaccounted for (these likely ended up being accidentally / intentionally dumped into the local water supply via the Tigris / Euphrates rivers which explains elevated levels of birth defects found down stream from these depots).

    5. Saddam is putting out speeches about (paraphrase) the "heroes of 9/11" that this is "Only the beginning" and other inflammatory rhetoric designed to stoke Islamic hatred.

    6. UN weapons inspectors found hundreds of shells filled with mustard gas that Iraq denied having. Tests on these shells indicated the weapons were still over 90% effective even though they were vintage shells stockpiled since World War II.

    7. How any of you can want such an evil man like Saddam in power to stop "anarchy" is beyond me. Saddam is the worst type of person, he killed close to a million people. He didn't just rule with an iron fist, he killed people who were innocent. His all-time favorite idol was Joseph Stalin, as if that is anything of a suprise.

    Some of you say that there is a high amount of Iraq casuality in Iraq, but the truth is it doesn't come near to the amount of people Saddam killed and the many more people he would have killed if he was still in power.

    He has been killing ever since he was a kid. He killed if first man when he 10 years old believe it or not. The more you study Saddam the more you see this guy was as worse as Hitler and Stalin! Yes he did not kill as much people, but that is because he did not have the area of land that the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany have. If he did he would have had as much killing IMHO. And unlike Stalin and Hitler, he actually witnessed many of the crimes he committed and almost enjoyed watching the death, sorrow, and destruction.

    Right now the US is facing vile evil that is trying to threaten the peace of the Iraqis but when it is all set and done Iraq will live in peace as a democracy. It will take time but if we give up now or never tried at all many more people would have been killed under the radicals threatening or even worse, Saddam!

    This is only a fraction of the situation but it will suffice. So with all this in mind and even more than I’ve outlined Bush is faced with two options:

    1. Invade and make sure the WOMD’s are secured and if they don’t exist he gets egg on his face.

    2. Not invade but if Baby Bush ignores all of this and Iraq walks a nuke across our exceedingly porous (essentially unpatrolled) Southern boarder and turns LA, Chicago, or some other city or cities into radioactive craters it would be what we in science call “bad.”

    So he didn’t have a choice. I would have made the same call, as would anyone with a measurable IQ, so it didn’t matter who was in the White House – it had to happen. Bush, Gore, Kerry, Hilary Clinton or even Teddy F’ing Kennedy would have had to do the exact same thing and gotten the exact same egg on their face. If we’re going to kick Bush for something let’s kick him for something he actually has some control over like his F’d up domestic policies or that fact that he ignores the illegal immigration problem. Iraq is a nonsequitur.

    In the scheme of things freeing the Iraqi people from Saddam is really unimportant. “Operation Iraqi Freedom” is nothing but an excuse after the fact in an attempt to reduce the size of the omelet cooking on Baby Bush’s face due to the lack of WOMD’s. Now here’s the kicker. If Bush had advisors with two brain cells in their heads they would tell him to quit squirming around trying to minimize the blame and take a page out of Truman’s book by stepping up and saying, “The Buck Stops Here.” Every time he opens his mouth about Iraq he sound like a kid making excuses for getting bad grades on his report card. He needs to get that stupid smirk off of his face and talk clearly, plainly, and sincerely about the Middle East as a whole and our future in that region. We – can’t – get out of Iraq, much less the Middle East because – they won’t let us. Until someone points out this incredibly salient fact then the debate about “getting out” will continue as if it has some importance while in reality it is entirely pointless. We went in and now we’re stuck. In fact, we’ve been stuck with this since the Britt’s promised the Jews their own homeland in the Middle East after World War I and our debt has only grown since then because we’ve kept putting off the inevitable but no one has either the intelligence or intestinal fortitude to point this out so people think the superficial issues the talking heads keep yammering about are important when they’re simply a canard.

    Before someone brings up “US greed for Oil” it has nothing to do with “US greed for Oil.” We get around 10% of our oil from the Middle East and we could easily cover this loss using domestic sources (around 50% of US oil consumption) or with imports from Canada and Latin America (around 30% of US oil consumption). On the other hand Europe gets around 35% of its oil from the Middle East while Japan gets around 75% (maybe more) of it’s oil from the Middle East. Now for those not keeping up on current events Japan and Germany make up the second and third largest economies on Earth. What happens if these economies loose access to oil on such a grand scale? Here’s a clue: Global Economic Disaster. So it isn’t just the US that benefits from stability in the Middle East. Is it “altruism” that leads the US to take a stand? Nope. Just a healthy dose of self-interest since we’re the ones that are going to have to pull everyone’s fat out of the fire after the fact if we allow things to fall into the crapper. It appears that World War II finally taught the US that it is better to take a proactive approach than a reactive one. Thank the Supreme Being, whoever he (she?) is. If Europe doesn’t like it, screw them. The last intelligent idea that came out of Europe predates Constantine (with the notable exception of England electing Churchill Prime Minster – see they can make a good decision). This isn’t a case of “Manifest Destiny.” The US doesn’t want Iraq we just want to send a message to the Islamic nutters that every time you F with us we’re going to invade a Muslim nation and turn the Mosques into McDonalds. If they want to fight a cultural war we’re going to win because our culture is more appealing and they know it, which is why they hate us so much. Give a kid the choice between a pair of loose fit Blue Jeans and a Burqua the answer is guaranteed 99.99% of the time with the other .01% representing the suicide bomber demographic. The war on terror isn’t going to be won with weapons; it is going to be won by indoctrinating them into the global socioeconomic culture that is currently run by Europe and the US. Why do you think Osama chose the World Trade Center? Do you think he’s is an idiot? He may be a fanatic but he’s a damned smart fanatic. Never underestimate the enemy.

    For those that want to pull out of Iraq the fact is that we can’t without making the situation worse. All it will do is embolden the terrorist fringe by giving them a “victory.” The only way we can win in Iraq is to turn it into a paradise that other countries in the region aspire to duplicate while also sending a clear message to the region that when you kick the US we’ll cut off your head and maybe someone else’s while we’re at it. Two Islamic centers of power were crushed after 9/11. What do you think Osama’s opinions are on the matter? Do you think he feels better or worse? Sure he dealt a blow to the “Great Satan” but the “Great Satan” evicted the Taliban from control of Afghanistan and installed a friendly government as well as getting rid of Saddam and enforcing our influence on Iraq while just about every other nation in the region is doing Olympic level political gymnastics to make us happy. He did far more to damage fundamentalist Islamic control in the Middle East by initiating 9/11 than he did to the US by blowing up a couple of buildings. Did anyone see Yasser Arafat on 9/12? He looked like someone had kicked him in the nads. He’s also one of the few Islamic leaders that admonished his people not to celebrate the attack. Guess why? Because he knew what was coming. He spent his entire life kicking the crap out of Israel while tying the hands of the US in a Gordian knot in the UN and Osama showed up and cut through all his work in a single stroke. The Israeli’s should build a shrine to him. As long as the Muslims were blowing up inside of Israel the US and the rest of the world really didn’t care but once 9/11 happened it gave the US Carte Blanch to do whatever we damn well pleased. Yasser didn’t want the Palestinians to be part of the collateral damage but it was too late. By removing US pressure on Israel not to retaliate in force when some Palestinian suicide bomber blew up it gave the Israeli’s an excuse to invade Palestine (which is why Yasser spent the last months of his life hiding under a desk with Israeli tanks surrounding his compound), build the “Great Wall of Judea”, and pretty much justify anything they want to do in the name of “security against terrorist action.” The “funny” thing will be if these Islamic nutters actually do manage to do something substantive such as setting off a nuke somewhere. At that point it will galvanize the world to such a point that just about any counter atrocity will be justified. What happens after that? I’m thinking pretty much every flavor of bad there is.

    As to World War II, Churchill was worried about the Germans until the US got into the war which is why he spent a great deal of time from 1939 to 1941 pestering Roosevelt to come up with an excuse – any excuse – to get into the war. As it was even Churchill said it was a near thing and he was happy to see Hitler attack Russia rather than crossing the channel. While you can point to many lucky breaks we got over the course of the war, one of the biggest was Hitler abandoning Sea Lion and initiating Barbarosa. If you don’t agree all you need to do is come up with a source that would be considered better informed about the British situation than Winston Churchill. Strangely, I can’t think of anyone that I would consider more authoritative in regard to that particular topic.

    If the Russians had decided to put an end to the Allies in Western Europe things would have been bad. In the short term Russia likely could have overwhelmed Allied forces in Continental Europe but I don’t think they could have taken out England since they didn’t have a navy worth discussing and the allied air force was far superior to anything Russia could have mustered. Meanwhile the US was out producing the rest of the world combined and only had a fraction of the number of men under arms that we could have put on the field. I think we had something like 16 million men under arms by the end of the war (most of which never saw action) but under duress I see no reason that the US couldn’t have conscripted multiples of this number if they were needed. By the time Russia became a problem we were already mopping up the Japanese so they wouldn’t have been a concern. However the US supplying China with weapons would certainly have been very bad news for the Russians (I’m also wondering what it would have done to the internal struggle against Mao’s communists? Who knows what the world would look like if that had happened?). It seems likely to me that if the Russians had proven to be a serious threat rather than testing Little Boy on Hiroshima, Moscow would have been the preferred target. I leave it to you to decide what this would have done to Russian morale but I’m thinking the loss of the capital along with Joey Stalin in addition to their inability to defend against such an attack while lacking such a devastating weapon in their own arsenal would have put an end to any expansionistic aspirations the Red Army might have held. It is quite possible that if Stalin had made this decision that it would have resulted in the defeat of Communism in the Soviet Union and / or the strengthening of the Democratic government in China thus preventing Mao from taking control. I wonder what the world would look like in such an alternate reality? One can only wonder.

  3. #53
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    24-06-03
    Location
    canadian
    Age
    43
    Posts
    174


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    The problem is that people, especially Americans, want simple answers to complex problems. We mouth clichs like gTax the Richh without understanding the economics of taxation and gExit Strategyh without understanding the intricacies of Middle Eastern politics while pretending these and similar catch phrases have some sort of mystical power to change reality. They donft.
    I find the Bush administration's continued use of catch phrases like "stay the course" to be much the same, made even worse when you consider the status of the person making it.

    Quote Originally Posted by silverbackman
    The fact is this is not the time to ask if we belong in Iraq regardless of if you agree with our presence there or not.

    ER...so when American troops are in Iraq is not the time to ask if American troops should be in Iraq? When would be the appropriate time then? When American troops are in Sweden?

    Quote Originally Posted by silverbackman
    However due to the overwhelmingly complex nature of the Middle East and itfs history the time to have asked this question was – before – we went in. At the time both sides of the aisle said, gyesh but now wefre starting to second-guess ourselves. This is not a good idea in any situation but this is especially true in dealing with the Middle East.
    I disagree with this completely. When it becomes apparant that you have made a collosal error in judgment second guessing yourself (or to use a less loaded phrase, 're-thinking your position') makes perfect sense. If your thinking was wrong in the past, then why just stubbornly stick to the same course of action without questioning whether, given the unexpected change in situation, it makes sense to do so anymore?

    Quote Originally Posted by Silberbackman
    Not only that but it completely screws our global reputation.
    Not to be rude, but America's global reputation got flushed down the crapper a long time ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    Vietnam did enough damage to our credibility we donft need to compound it by following it up with half-measures in Iraq.
    If that were even remotely true then you would expect that the old 'domino theory' would have been actualized. But it wasn't, the biggest damage to American credibility in Vietnam was its stubborn insistence on drawing out the conflict years after it had become apparent it was a loosing cause.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    It is entirely inconceivable how bad it would be to leave at this point. Essentially wefve committed ourselves to open heart surgery and half way through the procedure wefre getting gcold feeth and want to quit. This is bad for the doctor, bad for the patient, and bad for everyone involved.
    Yes, but if the doctor is using infected instruments that not only aren't improving the condition of the patient but risk making his condition much worse, then what good is being done?

    Quote Originally Posted by silverbackman
    As much as I hate loosing soldiers the effects of leaving would result in far more deaths in a far shorter period of time. Remember wefve lost around 2,000 men in the years since we invaded Iraq while we lost over 3,000 people in a single day on September 11, 2001. If loosing a couple hundred people a year trying to rehabilitate the Middle East saves thousands, hundreds-of-thousands, or even millions of lives in the long run then I think it is a cause that warrants our support.
    yes, but that is all hypothesizing and there isn't much reason to believe that the violence Iraqis will suffer from an American withdrawal is going to be any worse than the violence Iraqis will suffer from America staying in Iraq.

    Quote Originally Posted by silverbackman
    1. 9/11/01 just happened
    A year and a half previous and in no way related to Iraq.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    2. You get intelligence that Iraq is trying to purchase fissionable material that can be used in the construction of a nuclear device. (This turned out to be false but Bush didnft know this until after we invaded – he didnft lie – we were duped - to be honest Ifm not sure which is worse).
    Only they didn't "get" intelligence, they just looked through the same old intelligence they'd had lying around for years and cherry-picked the stuff that made Iraq look dangerous while ignoring the much more convincing intelligence that suggested Iraq posed no threat. That is as good as lying by any objective standard.


    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    4. Iraqi reports to the UN demonstrate that even by their own estimates thousands of gallons of chemical and biological agents are unaccounted for (these likely ended up being accidentally / intentionally dumped into the local water supply via the Tigris / Euphrates rivers which explains elevated levels of birth defects found down stream from these depots).
    Pretty big leap to say that because they can't be accounted for they must not only still exist but also pose a threat to the US. Especially when you've got convincing reasons to believe that A) most of them have in fact been disposed of and B) Even if some haven't you KNOW that Saddam has absolutely no way of using them against you or his neighbors to his advantage.

    Quote Originally Posted by silverbackman
    5. Saddam is putting out speeches about (paraphrase) the "heroes of 9/11" that this is "Only the beginning" and other inflammatory rhetoric designed to stoke Islamic hatred.
    Empty rhetoric spews out of people's mouths everyday, it is hardly a reasonable excuse for starting a war.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    6. UN weapons inspectors found hundreds of shells filled with mustard gas that Iraq denied having. Tests on these shells indicated the weapons were still over 90% effective even though they were vintage shells stockpiled since World War II.
    Thus proving the effectiveness of the UN weapons inspectors the Bush administration was so eager to displace in favor of war.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    7. How any of you can want such an evil man like Saddam in power to stop "anarchy" is beyond me. Saddam is the worst type of person, he killed close to a million people. He didn't just rule with an iron fist, he killed people who were innocent. His all-time favorite idol was Joseph Stalin, as if that is anything of a suprise.

    Some of you say that there is a high amount of Iraq casuality in Iraq, but the truth is it doesn't come near to the amount of people Saddam killed and the many more people he would have killed if he was still in power.
    This ignores a lot. Saddam killed lots of people, but the last time he had done (or been in a position to do) anything overly horrendous was over a decade before the invasion. IN 2003 he wasn't commiting massacres nor was there any ground or fear to believe that he could or would do so anytime soon. True, he was killing political opponents and torturing people, but not on a level that would have differentiated him from any other regime in that region. If the humanitarian excuse for the war is to have any validity, you must be able to show that the situation now in Iraq is probably better than it would have been had Saddam stayed in power. The tens of thousands of Iraqis killed in this was are way more than any reasonable estimate of what Saddam's vicims would have numbered over the same period- and that isn't counting the future victims as the number of Iraqis killed in violence continues to spiral upwards.


    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    1. Invade and make sure the WOMDfs are secured and if they donft exist he gets egg on his face.

    2. Not invade but if Baby Bush ignores all of this and Iraq walks a nuke across our exceedingly porous (essentially unpatrolled) Southern boarder and turns LA, Chicago, or some other city or cities into radioactive craters it would be what we in science call gbad.h
    There is just absolutely ZERO basis in reality for this scenario. The logic fails on so many levels. Lets ignore for the moment the fact that Saddam didn't have any WMDs. THe fact remains that its not easy to make nukes and there wasn't any real danger that he would produce them after 1991. The process would have taken years (probably decades), required technical skills and facilities Iraq didn't have, required resources Iraq didn't have and would have no way of acquiring and would have had to be undetectable to 24 hour US surveillance. Then the bomb would have to be somehow smuggled out of Iraq - no easy task -and into the US -again no easy task.

    But even that isn't the end of the ludicrousness of the scenario. What the hell would Saddam have to gain by doing this? NOTHING, and the only foreseeable consequence would be his instant annhiliation by US retaliation. Then there is the even further point that even in the one in a billion chance that Saddam ever were able to produce a nuclear weapon the only possible situation in which he would use it would be if the US invaded, so how the hell invasion can be justified along the lines of preventing an Iraqi attack just confounds me.

    Quote Originally Posted by silverbackman
    So he didnft have a choice. I would have made the same call, as would anyone with a measurable IQ, so it didnft matter who was in the White House – it had to happen. Bush, Gore, Kerry, Hilary Clinton or even Teddy Ffing Kennedy would have had to do the exact same thing and gotten the exact same egg on their face. If wefre going to kick Bush for something letfs kick him for something he actually has some control over like his Ffd up domestic policies or that fact that he ignores the illegal immigration problem. Iraq is a nonsequitur.
    Like hell he didn't have a choice. He had a choice, he made it and now people are paying the consequences. He isn't going to get off the hook on that one.


    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    Before someone brings up gUS greed for Oilh it has nothing to do with gUS greed for Oil.h We get around 10% of our oil from the Middle East and we could easily cover this loss using domestic sources (around 50% of US oil consumption) or with imports from Canada and Latin America (around 30% of US oil consumption). On the other hand Europe gets around 35% of its oil from the Middle East while Japan gets around 75% (maybe more) of itfs oil from the Middle East. Now for those not keeping up on current events Japan and Germany make up the second and third largest economies on Earth. What happens if these economies loose access to oil on such a grand scale? Herefs a clue: Global Economic Disaster.
    Of course its the oil, for reasons you've just explained but failed to notice. The US doesn't need middle east oil but the rest of the world does, making control of the middle east undoubtedly the largest focus of American foreign policy for the past 50 years. The political and economic power American dominance of the region creates is immense and would be greatly enhanced by the permanent establishment of US military facilities in Iraq, which is one of the planners of the war's main objectives.

  4. #54
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    24-06-03
    Location
    canadian
    Age
    43
    Posts
    174


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    The US doesnft want Iraq we just want to send a message to the Islamic nutters that every time you F with us wefre going to invade a Muslim nation and turn the Mosques into McDonalds. If they want to fight a cultural war wefre going to win because our culture is more appealing and they know it, which is why they hate us so much.
    Turning mosques into McDonalds? This is going to be America's contribution to the "Cultural war"?

    Quote Originally Posted by silverback
    Give a kid the choice between a pair of loose fit Blue Jeans and a Burqua the answer is guaranteed 99.99% of the time with the other .01% representing the suicide bomber demographic.
    Our clothes are better than theirs? What are you, 10,11 years old?

    Quote Originally Posted by silverbackman
    For those that want to pull out of Iraq the fact is that we canft without making the situation worse.
    Maybe, but there has also been a trend that has seen the violence increase the longer US troops remain and there isn't much reason to think that trend is going to reverse itself anytime soon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    All it will do is embolden the terrorist fringe by giving them a gvictory.h
    Every time they blow up another humvee they get a victory. Its way too late to be worrying about denying them the wins, every day they get dozens.


    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    The only way we can win in Iraq is to turn it into a paradise that other countries in the region aspire to duplicate while also sending a clear message to the region that when you kick the US wefll cut off your head and maybe someone elsefs while wefre at it.
    Well the war has already been a complete and utter failure on that count. Even in the highly unlikely event that the US does turn Iraq into a "Paradise" as you put it, the fact that it will have taken years of bloody mayhem, tens (probably hundreds by the time its over) of thousands of lives and economic devastation that will take an entire generation to overcome to get there will be more than enough to dissuade anyone from trying to follow the Iraqi 'example".

    Quote Originally Posted by silverbackman
    Two Islamic centers of power were crushed after 9/11.
    1. Iraq had a secular, not Islamic government. 2. Afghanistan is one of the poorest, weakest countries in the world and by no stretch of anyone's imagination counts as a "Center of power".

  5. #55
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    24-06-03
    Location
    canadian
    Age
    43
    Posts
    174


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    What do you think Osamafs opinions are on the matter? Do you think he feels better or worse? Sure he dealt a blow to the gGreat Satanh but the gGreat Satanh evicted the Taliban from control of Afghanistan and installed a friendly government as well as getting rid of Saddam and enforcing our influence on Iraq while just about every other nation in the region is doing Olympic level political gymnastics to make us happy.
    Which countries exactly are doing olympic gymnastics to make America happy? Now that the US military is hopelessly bogged down in Iraq they know that the Americans won't be invading their countries anytime soon, so I think they would breathe a lot easier. Iran especially. They are the ones who have the most influence in Iraq today, now that the Shi'ite look set to dominate the country. Thats a pretty big ace up their sleeve for the Iranians when dealing with the US, as they can make things a lot more difficult in Iraq anytime they want.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    He did far more to damage fundamentalist Islamic control in the Middle East by initiating 9/11 than he did to the US by blowing up a couple of buildings.
    I agree with you here but would add that Bush has done more to advance Islamic radicalism and damage American prestige by invading Iraq than anything any Islamic radical could dream of doing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silverbackman
    Did anyone see Yasser Arafat on 9/12? He looked like someone had kicked him in the nads. Hefs also one of the few Islamic leaders that admonished his people not to celebrate the attack.
    The fact that Arafat was a Muslim does not make him an "Islamic leader" anymore than, say, Tony Blair's being a Christian makes him a "Christian leader". The PLO is a secular organization that includes Christians and has fought some bloody battles with the Islamic radicals.


    Quote Originally Posted by silberbackman
    The gfunnyh thing will be if these Islamic nutters actually do manage to do something substantive such as setting off a nuke somewhere. At that point it will galvanize the world to such a point that just about any counter atrocity will be justified.
    I fail to see the humor.

  6. #56
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Ardeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    10-11-04
    Posts
    14


    Country: United_States



    Quote Originally Posted by senseiman
    The US doesn't need middle east oil but the rest of the world does, making control of the middle east undoubtedly the largest focus of American foreign policy for the past 50 years
    And you, sir, hit the nail on the head with that one.

  7. #57
    Banned Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    08-10-05
    Posts
    154


    Country: Russian Federation



    P.S. I have writtenn 9/11...as wrote about the same film...

  8. #58
    Banned Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    08-10-05
    Posts
    154


    Country: Russian Federation



    P.S.-2 Carelessness - the reason of many misunderstanding...
    I have written 9/11 - and only...It could be and date and simple figures...
    The Conscious innuendo...For a polysemy...
    But "someone" has replaced my smailies...
    If people could more attentive to Saddam Hussein he not receive in due time the chemical weapon and world be another today...
    So,that now about it to speak...
    The reasons give to consequences...
    And the fear kills soul...
    It is our world...

  9. #59
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    28-06-05
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    29


    Ethnic group
    Polish-Irish-Austrian-English
    Country: United States



    End in sight?

    I hope we are seeing "the light at the end of the tunnel".

    The Iraqi Parliament has voted for America to state a timetable for withdrawel.

    The Pentagon has hinted at a probable major withdrawel of troops, starting after the December 15 election.

    Representative Murtha, Democratic Party from Pennsylvania, has tabled the proposition that America withdraw its troops, starting within 6 months. A Republican proposal for an IMMEDIATE, unconditional withdrawel, was voted down...??? 97 to 3 however.

    Ex-President Bill Clinton has admitted to an Arab audience that invading Iraq was wrong, ill-advised.

    I think the world is voting overwhelmingly... America must set a timetable for withdrawel, then leave.

    So was it legal or illegal, with a tyrant in place like Saddam Hussein, I voted it was probably "Legal" based on the information we thought we knew and the mass-killer that Saddam was, but now it is time to wind down and leave.

    Will it be the end of wars in the middle east, or the world?

    Nobody believes that. But do I praise American troops who fought based on bad information, and bad political decisions, yes, I absolutely do, if their conduct was with integrity.

    Is America safer now because of their sacrifice? Yes, I believe it is.

    Could Iraq also be safer, if they "agree to agree"?

    Yes, I believe it is.

  10. #60
    gunjin Achievements:
    1 year registered
    Carlson's Avatar
    Join Date
    30-10-05
    Location
    Tokyo
    Age
    33
    Posts
    47


    Country: Japan



    there is no end. if not iraq something else or someplace else....

    war will go on long after were just a memory...
    Picture Tokyo

    Catholic - which I was until I reached the age of reason.
    I've found him, I have Jesus in the trunk. - George Carlin Religion Quotes

  11. #61
    dead loss. yup, thats me! Achievements:
    1 year registered
    yakutatazu's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-10-05
    Age
    30
    Posts
    11


    Ethnic group
    Irish
    Country: United Kingdom



    I've heard rumors about there being secret group who decides things about USA, like, "there should be a war now", "yeah, it'd do the economy good, guns can be sold and it would get the army to do something".

    also there was supposed to be a group that only if you're a member, you can get to be president. would explain a lot, seeing bush.
    http://gprime.net/video.php/presidentialspeechalist
    brilliance

    This would then be my favorite ablum ever.

  12. #62
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered

    Join Date
    28-06-05
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    29


    Ethnic group
    Polish-Irish-Austrian-English
    Country: United States



    Global Political Power Group

    Yakutatuza... I happen to agree with you.

    60% of the world's fossil fuel consumption is the United States, though that percentage is dropping.

    Cut the oil? Western economies would collapse, followed by Eastern economies.

    Therefore, you are a Western political executive, and your primary interest is survival. Forget rules, forget laws, forget civil nicities... your primary goal is for your country to survive. Physically, then financially. Period.

    Compound that with other countries, say, second-tier countries, vowing to physically destroy other countries, depending on their own political agendas. No rational reason, but overwhelming greed.

    Compound these disruptive elements with the money elites in other countries who suppress all opposition amongst their own people, and hire mercenary armies to protect themselves against their own countrymen, so THEY CAN SURVIVE, at all costs. We are not talking millionaires here, we are talking MINIMUM billionaires, if not trillionare-ruling interests. And yes, periodic "trip-wire wars" are used to minimize the death and destruction... i.e., Saddam could have killed another million people, he does not give a damn, he is oblivious to the suffering he caused, to the Million+ Iranian dead, to the Million + Iraqi dead while he was in power. Meaningless numbers.

    So on one side you have a power group getting fabulously rich, but in truth, allowing poor slobs like myself and my family to eek out a living, paycheck to paycheck.

    In short, the net-net of the power game, allows myself and my family to have a life, which I enjoy. Call it "freedom", call it "socialism", call it anything you want. I am alive, generally content. Thank you.

    Now, the world that I described... do you love it as best you can, or do you hate it? Glass half empty, or glass half full?

    Power groups exist. Money groups exist. Oil mafias exist. I say we have to love it as best we can, and try to make it better, as best we can.

    With one slight asterisk... America should NOT DECIDE what is best for YOU, or for the whole world. America should decide what is best for America, and I think we realize that. Period. As best we possibly can, we should not attempt to rebuild whole cultures, or whole societies.

    That is my simple-minded opinion, and yes, I am a simple-minded person. Love, Peace, Harmony, Understanding to all people.

    Your thoughts?

    Ed Z

  13. #63
    Banned Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-12-10
    Location
    Brabant
    Age
    66
    Posts
    768

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a2* SNP P312

    Ethnic group
    Proto Celtic
    Country: Netherlands



    Europe and America are natural enemies, as looked on it in a strategical way.

    America tries to get European countries crossing swords with each other.
    The British did that for years and years too.

    Europeans want stability in Europe, and the Americans and Brits are doing the opposite. That's what is going on nowadays.

  14. #64
    aimless wanderer Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Mzungu mchagga's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-10
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    638
    Points
    12,109
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,109, Level: 33
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 541
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Reinaert View Post
    Europe and America are natural enemies, as looked on it in a strategical way.

    America tries to get European countries crossing swords with each other.
    The British did that for years and years too.

    Europeans want stability in Europe, and the Americans and Brits are doing the opposite. That's what is going on nowadays.
    no comment

  15. #65
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-10-10
    Posts
    390


    Country: Canada



    It was legal because the sadam hussain regeime made it legal, he needed to be taken from power. The resulting unrest was between religious nutcasses in Iraq. I fully support the war, and I'm glad it's a democracy now, one of the few in the region.

  16. #66
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    22-09-10
    Location
    ankara
    Age
    39
    Posts
    221
    Points
    3,785
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,785, Level: 17
    Level completed: 84%, Points required for next Level: 65
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    hun
    Country: Turkey



    Quote Originally Posted by Elias2 View Post
    ... and I'm glad it's a democracy now, one of the few in the region.


    http://www.alternet.org/world/123818...llion_orphans/

  17. #67
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    22-09-10
    Location
    ankara
    Age
    39
    Posts
    221
    Points
    3,785
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,785, Level: 17
    Level completed: 84%, Points required for next Level: 65
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    hun
    Country: Turkey



    this one is a small clue what US is doing there.

    Iraq airlines and Boeing of US reached an agreement for Boeing 737 and Boeing 787 (and 15 more with option) the leading time is 2019- 31.03.2008

    Iraq airlines is shut down - 31.05.2010

  18. #68
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,331
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Barbarian, try this. Let's say US after WW2 completely controls Germany and Japan, and from your previous posts we know that it totally controls Turkey too. Today Germany and Japan are 4 trillion economies each. It means that they produce a lot of shit and people are well off. Let's say that it should be a difficult thing for mighty and controlling USA to get 10% of their money. Like a good old fashion feudal tax of 10% on vassals. That gives US 800 billion dollars income a year.
    Now how big is Iraq's economy? 50 billion maybe a year? How much US had spent for war in Iraq, 1 trillion? It takes 20 years of stealing ALL Iraqi's money to just brake even! What kind of investment is this??? It doesn’t make sense.
    It's so much easier to make money on rich countries than the poor once. And as some here believe US controls half of the world, why the heck, being rich already, they would dick around fighting and dieing in Iraq and Afghanistan, and destroying their "good" image and reputation for poor of the poor of the world??? Not much money to be made their, lol, just pain and aggravation.
    If you want to convince me that US is in Iraq and Afghanistan for the money, then show me the money. Right now money and math shows me otherwise.

    About Boeing plain deals. You'd probably agree that the best business deals are when the business/buying is constant and repetitive. Airline stays profitable and keeps buying plains for years to come, plain manufacturers keep producing and producing for years. That's the best deal for any company including Boeing.
    Did Iraq Air paid for plains in advance to Boeing, and then went bankrupt? Or Boeing invested in new production but didn't get anything because Iraq Air is gone? Do you know how the money went?

  19. #69
    Banned Achievements:
    3 months registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-12-10
    Location
    Brabant
    Age
    66
    Posts
    768

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b1b2a2* SNP P312

    Ethnic group
    Proto Celtic
    Country: Netherlands



    Quote Originally Posted by Elias2 View Post
    It was legal because the sadam hussain regeime made it legal, he needed to be taken from power. The resulting unrest was between religious nutcasses in Iraq. I fully support the war, and I'm glad it's a democracy now, one of the few in the region.
    Democracy? Don't make me laugh. It seems you don't have a clue about what democracy is.

    America is governed by a network of companies and military, we call the military industrial complex. There are several US presidents who warned for this to happen.

    Want names? Eisenhower was the last president that warned for it.

    Clinton managed to get American finance back to normal, but the Bush government turned American budget deficit to an all time disaster.
    And why? Several American companies are getting richer and richer every day at the cost of American taxpayers.
    Obama is there to close the eyes of the John Doe Americans.

    I reckon Obama is already handcuffed by the system too.

    Another fact.. France always had an anti American political course.
    And what do we see now? The Carlyle company (Bush) bought the French Newspaper Le Figaro some years ago. A right wing newspaper.
    French media were influenced by American capitalists..
    Sarkozy became president of France. And his family has interests in the American oil industry.

    The same goes for the former Dutch prime minister Jan Peter Balkenende, his brother has also a leading role in American oil industry.

    The Dutch Royal family has also ties with the Shell company.
    And Prince Bernard, was the first chairman of the Bilderberg secret meetings.

    Nowadays we see a complete idiot like Geert Wilders getting a lot of attention from the BOUGHT Dutch media. No surprise that Geert Wilders is financed by a ultra conservative American group.

  20. #70
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    22-09-10
    Location
    ankara
    Age
    39
    Posts
    221
    Points
    3,785
    Level
    17
    Points: 3,785, Level: 17
    Level completed: 84%, Points required for next Level: 65
    Overall activity: 0%


    Ethnic group
    hun
    Country: Turkey



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    Barbarian, try this. Let's say US after WW2 completely controls Germany and Japan, and from your previous posts we know that it totally controls Turkey too. Today Germany and Japan are 4 trillion economies each. It means that they produce a lot of shit and people are well off. Let's say that it should be a difficult thing for mighty and controlling USA to get 10% of their money. Like a good old fashion feudal tax of 10% on vassals. That gives US 800 billion dollars income a year.
    Now how big is Iraq's economy? 50 billion maybe a year? How much US had spent for war in Iraq, 1 trillion? It takes 20 years of stealing ALL Iraqi's money to just brake even! What kind of investment is this??? It doesn’t make sense.
    It's so much easier to make money on rich countries than the poor once. And as some here believe US controls half of the world, why the heck, being rich already, they would dick around fighting and dieing in Iraq and Afghanistan, and destroying their "good" image and reputation for poor of the poor of the world??? Not much money to be made their, lol, just pain and aggravation.
    If you want to convince me that US is in Iraq and Afghanistan for the money, then show me the money. Right now money and math shows me otherwise.

    About Boeing plain deals. You'd probably agree that the best business deals are when the business/buying is constant and repetitive. Airline stays profitable and keeps buying plains for years to come, plain manufacturers keep producing and producing for years. That's the best deal for any company including Boeing.
    Did Iraq Air paid for plains in advance to Boeing, and then went bankrupt? Or Boeing invested in new production but didn't get anything because Iraq Air is gone? Do you know how the money went?
    i hope my english will be enough to answer for this wonderfull question.

    before beginning to answer i must say i like america compared to other superpowers in history and superpower candidates in present day. but still, if you are superpower, you must be evil.

    i dont think US control germany economically. in contrast germany has economical power but needs political and armed force to be leading country against US dominance in the world. so they support EU to rach their aim. Why do you think they feed greece, portugal etc. to go to heaven?

    After WW2 japan is addicted to US, because japan is export addicted, they need market. and the last crisis shows that US is the main market and no other country can replace them at the moment. after china replace their position in US market, i believe, japan will leave the game.

    so the main question: why should US economy need Iraq? the answer: US in iraq because he wants the control of energy sources.

    what can america sell? car? steel? washing machine? ... i dont think they can sell anything industrial. they can sell hamburger, movie, shoe (made in taiwan)

    US spend lots of money on army to control the world they need money for this power, they have capital giants they need to feed them. since, those giants selects presidents each 6 years.

    US must sell weapon (see turkey, greece, iraq, egypt etc.), control narcotic market (see afghanaistan, pakistan), and dollar (see local and global crisis). dollar is very funny "stuff" you can print whenever you want but still works. and you can force other goverments to buy it (see turkey, ukraine and many more)

    lebrok, US is power, and this power is lack of real economy. it must sell weapon and dollar. any country who says no must be killed (see iran and venezuela soon). at the moment most of the middle east (or petrol and energy) is under the control of US, US wants turkey to be the leading country of region which will be under the control of US. they want to limit Russian dominance in caucasia by controlling, azerbeijan, ukraine, georgia. these regions are the energy source of the world. and EU limits themselves in the continent by leaving the control in these regions to US.

    PS. the boeing deal with iraq was for 5 bill dollar and deserves what boeing invested on politicians in washington on the middle of crisis.

  21. #71
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-10-10
    Posts
    390


    Country: Canada



    The fighting for Iraq only lasted the first few months, the next years of chaos was caused by sectarian violence between sunni, shia, kurdish groups, and al-qaeda. To blame america for these lunatics actions is unjust. If they went through with their original plans to divide iraq three ways; sunni, shia, kurdish, things wouldn't have dragged along. This didn't go through because Turkey adn Iran fear of Kurdish seperatism and pressured america not to do it. Not to meantion Turkey made matter worse by bombing northern iraq.

  22. #72
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    07-10-10
    Posts
    390


    Country: Canada



    Quote Originally Posted by Reinaert View Post
    Democracy? Don't make me laugh. It seems you don't have a clue about what democracy is.

    America is governed by a network of companies and military, we call the military industrial complex. There are several US presidents who warned for this to happen.

    Want names? Eisenhower was the last president that warned for it.

    Clinton managed to get American finance back to normal, but the Bush government turned American budget deficit to an all time disaster.
    And why? Several American companies are getting richer and richer every day at the cost of American taxpayers.
    Obama is there to close the eyes of the John Doe Americans.

    I reckon Obama is already handcuffed by the system too.

    Another fact.. France always had an anti American political course.
    And what do we see now? The Carlyle company (Bush) bought the French Newspaper Le Figaro some years ago. A right wing newspaper.
    French media were influenced by American capitalists..
    Sarkozy became president of France. And his family has interests in the American oil industry.

    The same goes for the former Dutch prime minister Jan Peter Balkenende, his brother has also a leading role in American oil industry.

    The Dutch Royal family has also ties with the Shell company.
    And Prince Bernard, was the first chairman of the Bilderberg secret meetings.

    Nowadays we see a complete idiot like Geert Wilders getting a lot of attention from the BOUGHT Dutch media. No surprise that Geert Wilders is financed by a ultra conservative American group.
    You have a discourse with america because of certain money transactions which is fine, I would agree with you on the points you have made. But to say that Iraq is not more democratic now than when Saddam hussain was in power would be false. Oil was one of the reasons they entered Iraq, but not to "steal" it but to control when it goes. Having such a large monopoly of oil only nexted to the saudis was a national security intrest of america.

    People like to demonize america because they are a world power, but I would be more scared if china or Russia was more powerful than america, being corrupt anti-human right countries. The EU could be a world player but it needs to implement stricter laws so countries like Greece, ireland, eastern european countires can't just do the bare minimum.

  23. #73
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,331
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    [QUOTE=Elias2;362662]The fighting for Iraq only lasted the first few months, the next years of chaos was caused by sectarian violence between sunni, shia, kurdish groups, and al-qaeda. To blame america for these lunatics actions is unjust. If they went through with their original plans to divide iraq three ways; sunni, shia, kurdish, things wouldn't have dragged along. QUOTE]

    Good point. US won war with Germany and Japan and they rebuilt very quickly to be prosperous countries. Iraq is a mess because of internal and external factions fighting there, and not because US wants to keep Iraq a mess.

    US already spent a trillion dollars in Iraq, do you guys know how much oil you can buy for this money? Probably all Iraqi oil. So why would you go to the war instead of just buying? Same money and fewer people killed, right?
    The problem was the stability of prices and uninterrupted supply of oil, and Saddam that already caused two wars in the region. Saddam was sadistic and cruel dictator, but this reason was just an icing on the cake, when it came to getting rid of him.

    Barbarian, since WW2 US have army inside Germany and Japan, don't you think they would be the top candidates to control and benefit of them? hey are rich countries and this is where US could make the most bucks, right? Again why they would spend trillions to control poor countries, to loose money? Where is the sense of it. They could make a trillion a year taxing just Germany and Japan.

    Please show me where is the money in it. Money makes most of the sense of most situations in politics and economy. You said that US is good in printing dollars and world wants it. Why US would bother spending trillions and sacrificing lives, if they could just buy oil and gold etc, right? Wouldn't you take the easy way?

  24. #74
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,331
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta



    Quote Originally Posted by Elias2 View Post
    People like to demonize america because they are a world power, but I would be more scared if china or Russia was more powerful than america, being corrupt anti-human right countries. The EU could be a world player but it needs to implement stricter laws so countries like Greece, ireland, eastern european countires can't just do the bare minimum.
    Good point again. World always needed and will need a policeman. Today's world is lucky that US is in this role. If it was Communist Russia or China, you wouldn't even had a chance to express a free thoughts on this forum, period.
    Take a note that US won the cold war, and now Russia and China are following the successful pattern, especially in economy.

  25. #75
    aimless wanderer Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points
    Mzungu mchagga's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-09-10
    Location
    Berlin
    Posts
    638
    Points
    12,109
    Level
    33
    Points: 12,109, Level: 33
    Level completed: 23%, Points required for next Level: 541
    Overall activity: 6.0%


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by LeBrok View Post
    Good point again. World always needed and will need a policeman. Today's world is lucky that US is in this role. If it was Communist Russia or China, you wouldn't even had a chance to express a free thoughts on this forum, period.
    Take a note that US won the cold war, and now Russia and China are following the successful pattern, especially in economy.
    I wouldn't have believed you if you had told me this a few years ago. But as years have passed by, I got older and made a lot of thoughts, this is the sad truth I have to agree upon.

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Should abortion be legal?
    By Tsuyoiko in forum Opinions
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 18-11-19, 19:13
  2. Criminal Legal puzzlers
    By senseiman in forum World News
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 09-03-19, 19:06
  3. Legal logic is stupid
    By Index in forum World News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 15-03-05, 11:32
  4. Legal help
    By ax in forum Other Serious Discussion
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-01-05, 15:51

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •