Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Operation Iraqi Freedom; Your view?
Topic Started: Jun 1 2006, 06:57 AM (1,117 Views)
otlset
Member Avatar
Dear Prudence
Saddam was the main WMD, from which all the rest of the torture, threats, payment to terrorist Palestinians, slaughter of his own people, and determination to eventually acquire WMD whatever the cost came from. And now he's impotent and in custody. The invasion accomplished this.

Unfortunately, it appears the various ethnic factions kept under control by the dictator are now free to resume their ages-old feuds with each other with savage results, not to mention the multitude of Muslim fanatics imported from other countries eager to blow themselves and all bystanders up in a fit of quasi-religious/political insanity. Just plain destruction and destabilization is their goal, and they're succeeding. If it weren't for them, the new Iraq would be well on its way to reconstruction of a modern, prosperous state, courtesy mostly of the US. Instead they act like spoiled children, blowing things up because they can't get the repressive medieval Islamic state they dream of.

I used to believe the Iraqi people would welcome the opportunity to finally come out from oppression and embrace a fair, representative democracy. I'm not sure they're up to it now. Perhaps a strongman dictator was necessary to keep a lid on ethnic tensions and squabbles -- based on how terrorists are now ripping the country apart.

In my view, they should somehow split the country into three separate states -- Kurdistan in the north, Sunnistan in the middle, and Shiastan in the south to give a homeland to each group, which would give each group incentive to cleanse themselves of terrorists and become a proud country on its own. For some reason, that option is rarely mentioned. Maybe it's because nobody knows who will get the oil wealth.
Posted Image
Vermeer rocks!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lee
Member Avatar
Elmore James
it doens't really matter anymore why we are there it's that we are there. that's all that matters at this point. you i heard soemthign on the radio that i've thought alot about in the past few weeks. what the guy said was "the world lets america down but america never lets the world down." we're just helping these people out right now hardly anyother nation gives a shit about these people or anyone else. soemones talking about darfur why the fuck should we go there? why the fuck doesn't russia, canada, italy, china or any other nation in the world go clean up that mess? we have to clean up the messes that are most important to us at this time. we're there now and we should finish what we started and not leave these people high and dry.
Posted Image
We'll see.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ihateguitarists
Member Avatar
v_v
lee
Jun 2 2006, 01:47 PM
it doens't really matter anymore why we are there it's that we are there. that's all that matters at this point. you i heard soemthign on the radio that i've thought alot about in the past few weeks. what the guy said was "the world lets america down but america never lets the world down." we're just helping these people out right now hardly anyother nation gives a shit about these people or anyone else. soemones talking about darfur why the fuck should we go there? why the fuck doesn't russia, canada, italy, china or any other nation in the world go clean up that mess? we have to clean up the messes that are most important to us at this time. we're there now and we should finish what we started and not leave these people high and dry.

You don't understand the point I was making about Darfur? It wasn't, "Why the fuck aren't we there?", but "Why the fuck aren't we there?". We are in Iraq to free and liberate the people from terrible tyranny, but if that's the case, that we want everyone to be free and democratic, why aren't we in Darfur? Because they don't have anything we want.

And why couldn't Russia, Canada, Italy, China or any other nation in the world start what we did in Iraq? Why did we have to be the ones to step up and solve this "problem"?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheSmashedGuitar
Member Avatar
Love Will Tear Us Apart, Again
otlset
Jun 2 2006, 09:46 AM
TheSmashedGuitar
Jun 2 2006, 08:19 AM



THey contradict themselves all the time. "We didn't know where the weapons of mass destruction were." BS. They said they were exactly where they were uderground around Tibet and Bahgdad.

I think you mean Tikrit, not Tibet.

The best that intelligence could provide at the time was that WMD would likely be found in these areas. My own theory is that if there were WMD, they were removed from the areas well before the invasion, possibly to Iran or Syria in the time the UN was dragging it's feet over doing anything in the face of Saddam's threats. However, there were many high-level plans for making WMD found in various areas, as well as components necessary for the making of WMD, clearly showing Iraq's intentions to have WMD as soon as they could.

....but we nver found any. :fear:

This is what I get from Iraq Countires that DONT have nucelar weapons get invaded, while countries that so DO NOT get invaded...i.e. North korea, Lebanon.


And yes I did mean Tikret. Thansk for correcting me, heh.


And I agree with lee now. I I don;t think it was right to go in the first palce, but now it's too late, we gotta fix this mess. So I;m for staying in. Pulling out right away is just stupid.

Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheSmashedGuitar
Member Avatar
Love Will Tear Us Apart, Again
Well this is confusing. I wasn't for it in the beginning, but now I am cause we kinda have to fix this mess...so what should I answer, yes or no? :crazy:

Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ihateguitarists
Member Avatar
v_v
I think I should merge the two topics. I mean, it'll still be a poll. It's just that people won't have to repost their arguments. Anyone in favor of that?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
lee
Member Avatar
Elmore James
nirvangela
Jun 2 2006, 05:10 PM

You don't understand the point I was making about Darfur? It wasn't, "Why the fuck aren't we there?", but "Why the fuck aren't we there?". We are in Iraq to free and liberate the people from terrible tyranny, but if that's the case, that we want everyone to be free and democratic, why aren't we in Darfur? Because they don't have anything we want.

And why couldn't Russia, Canada, Italy, China or any other nation in the world start what we did in Iraq? Why did we have to be the ones to step up and solve this "problem"?

well we can't be everywhere at once can we? we gotta fix one thing at a time then move onto the next thing. what's in afghanistan? what was in germany? what was in south korea? what was in south veitnam? what was in france? we've been to lots of countries to help out and we arent' there just because we want something.

the reason why we step up to plate is because that's what we do. we don't let the world down. we've been doing it for along time. some countries dont' have the reasources to do it, some don't give a damn, some just like to shit around and tell us what we coulda shoulda woulda done, and other countries like to follow the leader.
Posted Image
We'll see.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carpenter
Member Avatar
Avatar
Yeah good idea. Keep the poll aspect of it and merge it with the discussion. As the starter of this thread, you have my approval/vote to merge it.
Posted Image

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ihateguitarists
Member Avatar
v_v
Carpenter
Jun 2 2006, 08:29 PM
Yeah good idea. Keep the poll aspect of it and merge it with the discussion. As the starter of this thread, you have my approval/vote to merge it.

Shit, I merged them but the poll was lost. What were the choices again? I'll add them. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carpenter
Member Avatar
Avatar
nirvangela
Jun 2 2006, 09:43 PM
Carpenter
Jun 2 2006, 08:29 PM
Yeah good idea. Keep the poll aspect of it and merge it with the discussion. As the starter of this thread, you have my approval/vote to merge it.

Shit, I merged them but the poll was lost. What were the choices again? I'll add them. Sorry for the inconvenience.

It was just Yes or No.
Posted Image

Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
otlset
Member Avatar
Dear Prudence
TheSmashedGuitar
Jun 2 2006, 02:22 PM



And yes I did mean Tikret. Thansk for correcting me, heh.


Actually, now that I think about it, Tibet would be the perfect place to hide WMD!
Posted Image
Vermeer rocks!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
heybulldog
Member Avatar
Elmore James
Quote:
 
Some call him "The Worst President In American History". Now, you may not agree, but the fact that that some even consider him for that title means a lot.


that doesn't really mean a lot. Lincoln had some mighty low approval ratings, daily death threats, and was called the worst president in american history by some during during his time. All presidents were called the worst at one time or another.

And someone else was saying we should go back to the time when American troops were nowhere but our own country. WHEN has that EVER happened. Even in times of peace we have troops stationed in other countries, either guarding embassies, on peacekeeping missions, or in various other invasions/ wars that aren't talked about much now...like the ones under Clinton. (Bosnia, Haiti anyone?? no UN approval either.) Worst president ever...see, i just called him the worst president ever, just by the fact the some consider him for that title means a lot. :crazy:

I agree with the war, and think pulling out would be a HUGE mistake right now. I don't think Bush lied, and I seriously think he did waht he thought was best for the country. People are just SO used to instant gratification that any military operation that doesn't just involve dropping a bunch of bombs and leaving frustrates them over how much time it takes. I voted for Bush, and one of the key reasons I voted for him were his views on national security and foreign policy. If the election was held today, i would still vote for him.

p.s. we got al Zarqawi :nod:
When it rains and shines, it's just a state of mind
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
otlset
Member Avatar
Dear Prudence
heybulldog
Jun 9 2006, 05:38 PM


p.s. we got al Zarqawi :nod:

May everlasting torment be upon his soul (METBUHS), and may Allah cast him to the deepest recesses of hell for the suffering and deaths he has caused upon the innocent here on earth.
Posted Image
Vermeer rocks!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
TheSmashedGuitar
Member Avatar
Love Will Tear Us Apart, Again
otlset
Jun 10 2006, 08:58 AM
heybulldog
Jun 9 2006, 05:38 PM


p.s. we got al Zarqawi  :nod:

May everlasting torment be upon his soul (METBUHS), and may Allah cast him to the deepest recesses of hell for the suffering and deaths he has caused upon the innocent here on earth.

Amen to that!

Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tenniru
Member Avatar
Paperback Writer
First off, I'd like to say that the reason I despise Bush isn't entirely because of the Iraq war.


Now, on that war... initially, I supported it. That's what I get for taking what the government told me at face value.
Now it looks like the intelligence leading up to the war was... well, very unsteady.

Let's give the Bush Administration the benefit of the doubt. Let's say they looked at EVERYTHING and EVERYTHING THEY SAW pointed at WMDs. We went in, found none.
Alright. Even so, the war could've been handled better. We should've known better than to assume the Iraqis would welcome us with open arms. We also should've realized that societys aren't always flexible enough (especially super-religious ones) to do a sharp shift from "totalitarianism" to "democracy, capitalism, and McDonald's".

We also should've taken into acount the fact that Saddam, despite being a brutal madman, was at least able to keep his country under control. Can we do that? Obviously not. The resulting deaths from the combat on the ground seem to look like the same number that would've died if Saddam remained in power. Does this mean we shouldn't stop him somehow? No, but rushing in with guns blazing doesn't work at all. This is the MIDDLE-EAST, folks.

We also should've taken the time to scope out how to keep order when we smashed the local police. The moment we went in, anarchy broke out. Museums were looted, entire cultural artifacts were lost... how would you like it if France suddenly invaded D.C. and most of the Smithsonian disappeared?

Housing. You'd think we'd bring some trailers with us to give to the people whose houses were lost. Did we? No, which makes them more dangerous. A guy with posessions and a home to return to is less likely to blow himself up. Then again, we can't even house the New Orleans evacuees.

Preperation for ethics problems. Guys, we are sending kids into a war. They are GOING to do something stupid; Abu Gharib is proof of that. Why didn't we keep a closer eye out for something like this happening?


Finally, the excuse that WMDs were made up for the sake of freeing Iraq... first, the government isn't that dumb. Second, if we really wanted to free a country, why not somewhere that needs it more? SUDAN, maybe? In fact, if we want to solve the world's problems, why not start at home? Stop fucking around with the environment, clear up the remaining cases of starvation (and there are), do something about the national debt, illegal immigrants, the like.

National defense? Oh, please; that's the same excuse as the one wiretapping uses. We can stave off terrorism with means that don't kill people OR infringe on civil rights. We could secure our borders; the millions of illegals leaking from Mexico are proof that any idiot terrorist with Ebola or a nuke could waltz on in and wreck a major city. We could get an airport security system that doesn't suck, doing things like actually GUARDING Tarmac doors, getting air marshalls on planes, the like. We could stop selling our ports to other countries. We could stop depending on the middle-east so much by using better energy sources; Brazil can cleanly, cheaply make it's own Ethanol using sugar cane waste, and they're energy-independent now. We could get auto-takeover remote-control systems in our airplanes to prevent hijacking and utilize genetic engineering to grow more of the chemical-sensing bacteria that scientists have already finished.
If we have our act on the inside clear, nobody outside would easily hurt us; nor will words on a phone blow up a building.


But quite frankly, that's the past. We have Iraq on our shoulders like an albatross and we have to do something about it. Do we toss off all past doubts at our current government? No, it's time to get a new one anyhow; if anything, to get the Iraqis to see that the guys at the helm are not the ones they hate for invading their country.
Rebuilding Iraq. Immediate withdrawal will only result in a civil war and bloodbath.

First, it's time to rebuild our image. Getting some other people in the government is instrumenal to that. Then, we might be able to convince other countries to come in and help. Pride won't win a war.
Then, with more manpower, we secure the Iraqi borders. These are job oppurtunities for not only us but Iraqis. The terrorists are charging in from a lot of other countries, so it's time to lock the place down. I'm talking about a fenced, walled minefield with a few guarded holes that people can leave through and only return after a background and weapons check.
Have some destruct keys so we can blow it up once we don't need it.

Then, with less fanatics from the outside, we can focus on the unhappy people on the inside. First, GIVE THINGS to Iraqis. Valuable possessions. Homes. All that. If a person has something to return home to and people depending on him, he's less likely to go on a killing spree.
Have a centralized census and record-taking system so we can know who is who, and where that person is. Less chaotic seperation, and it'd be easier to stop putting random innocents in jail.
Get countries that the Iraqi populations trust in on the act so they can give the OK to what we're doing, and help us bridge a culture barrier. Putting aside our conflicts with Iran, Palestine, and the like for a bit just to get the Iraqis to trust us important.

Once people like us, we'll find the number of terrorists has dropped. The Iraqi police, army, and government can be built without being blown to bits every time they step outside. I'd give it a decade for a unified, intact Iraq. Then we hand the government the keys to the minefield and go home.
Posted Image
---
YOKO FOREVER!
LONG LIVE "HER MAJESTY!"
DOWN WITH APPLE RECORDS!
GO NADER!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The News Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply