Log in with a social network:
Log in with your username or email:
AHHHHH ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! Hang on... hang on... hahahahahahahahahaha! No no, wait, I`m going to make a point here... hahahahahahahahahahahhahaha! Sorry... too funny... can`t stop laugh---hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!
Potential threat... hee hee... too funny, too funny...
Well, they don`t like the idea of somebody using terror to force us to do what they want (never mind that the Bush administration has done nothing but use fear/scare tactics to keep the American people properly sheep-like), so they attack the country that they tell us is where all the terrorist countries come from.
Yes, these radicals are a threat, because they may attack us again, but that does not mean that it was SADDAM that was a threat, or that he ever was going to be. Neither were/are the radicals an IMMINENT threat, because after 9/11, how are they going to do something so massive again???
So, Rich, any comments?
And why is a war on a concept never a good idea??? Because, as Davy pointed out, A CONCEPT NEVER DIES. It is impossible to force a concept to surrender. It is impossible to force a concept to go to prison. It is impossible to invade a concept and take it over. So what does our government do instead? They attack the EMBODIMENT of the concept.
They don`t like the idea of people tearing up their own bodies, because it depleted society of those bodies (whether or not people stupid enough to do drugs should be part of our society is another issue entirely), and so they have the WAR ON DRUGS, and they attack any and all persons who think differently about even the tiniest drug.
Saddam was not a threat. He didn`ts have any WMDs. He didn`t have squat, actually. All he had claim to was George W. Bush`s hatred (passed down to him by his father), and a severely crippled country.
And don`t you think that people, when they are oppressed, will eventually rise up against those who oppress them? We Americans did it. The Canadians did it. Heck, even the minorities in our own country stood up for themselves after hundreds of years of oppression. Why doesn`t anybody ever bring up the idea that the Iraqis would have risen up in their own time as well? Every person killed in the cause of liberating their own people from oppression is a martyr, and nothing recruits better than martyrs.
Instead, we invaded and are making the guys that we want to go away into martyrs.
And you didn`t read carefully enough, either. We`re not using the suicide bombers, THEY are. And by the way, according to the psychological "puramid of needs", ideological and philosophical fulfillment (I.E. publishing political viewpoints, etc) comes about three steps AFTER you have fulfilled physical needs (I.E. eating), therefore, for the Iraqi people, it as better to be able to buy tomatoes while holding their tongues, than it is now to be able to say what they want while being too afraid of death to buy food to eat.
You can read about it here (from American CBS, not some crackpot liberal website BTW)
*** up to 650,000 Iraqi Civilians dead (in case numbers are a difficult subject for you, that`s over half a million), ***Wowee! I love the smell of wild-ass exaggeration in the morning!
***Sure the Iraqi people now have "Freedom". In theory you can now access whatever websites you want, publish whatever views you like (political or otherwise), and have fair elections.***You`re right! All that stuff is way overrated!
*** ...buy some tomatoes without fear of getting blown to bits by a suicide bomber. ***I didn`t know we were using suicide bombers in Iraq! I`m learning so much from your posts!
*** The "War on Terror" is bullpoo, just like the "War on Drugs" or "War on Crime". ** Yes, let`s just abandon all resistance. Enjoy the caliphate!
*** In Iraq, the CIA admitted that there was no link between Al-queda and Iraq ***Again, completely irrelevent. This war was to stop a potential threat, not avenge a past wrong. Saddam Hussein`s govt was in blatant violation of UN resol. 687 and 689 for years, that in and of itself provided all of the legal justifcation we needed to topple his government. He was very obviously an expansionist who would not have hesitated to kill us by the thousands/millions to enhance his standing in the Arab world.
Option 1: Stay in Iraq till the `job is done`. When will that be? The violence is getting worse every day, and the situation in Iraq will not improve just by using the same tactics (continuing occupation, keeping Coalition troops there4 for longer). All you American 13-17 year olds who keep spouting right-wing Conservative Republican bullpoo didn`t live through a similar unwinnable war. It was called "Vietnam". Look it up.
human lives are irreplaceable. 100,000 is equal to 500,000 when a life is at stake.Justifying killing is what you`re doing. It`s wrong for any lives to be taken.
Like most republicans, you must not pick up a newspaper very often.
Karen_Lumb: The fact is, we can`t simply change how things are in Burma and Zimbabwe by sending in aid and bitching about it. The Red Cross already sends care packages and has medical faucilities around the world, but its never that easy to simply change the mob violence in those countries.
"And in terms of casualties, I don`t see what people are whining about. (BigBonny)"-derangedingo
say that to the 3,000 families who will never see their sons/daughters/fathers/mothers again
So in effect, the war in Iraq is THREE TIMES what world war 2 was, it`s just that the scale is smaller.
He does make a lot of good points, and, hope to god, some of those situations don`t develop (such as a split Iraq), but that was taken in `94
Saddam was a potential threat in 2003.. we went in and we made sure he didn`t become one, plus we liberated the populace. Now we just need to set up a government that will last more than a few months and G.T.F.O.
And in terms of casualties, I don`t see what people are whining about. (BigBonny)We`ve been in Iraq for about 4.5 yearsWe were involved in WW2 for 3.5 yearsThere`s been about 3,000 US Military Deaths in IraqThere was over 300,000 US Military deaths in WW2There`s been about, what, 50,000 to 70,000 Iraqi civilians killed?There were millions upon millions of Japanese and German civilians killed, by US Bombing alone in WW2
But Gulf War 2 (AKA Iraq War) is completely worthless in terms of what we`re trying to get done.
But yeah, Id love to see him have to watch this clip now!