346 replies to this topic

[Selena]

Pakistan.... who we sell weapons and fighter jets to.

[Reflectionist]

...cheaply.

[Reflectionist]

So?

Just because somebody is a terrorist isn't a good reason to go kill them. I'm sorry to burst your overpatriotic bubble. It's called being isolationists until attacked, like in WWII. And then, we beat the hell out of everyone. But we for the most part stayed out of everything. That's what we should do now.

[Black Knight]

He supposively had weapons of mass destruction, which bush felt that they could potentially nuke us so he decided to go to iraq instead.(even though there weren't any weapons of mass destruction.)

Why should the US have the right to carry nukes while countries that they dislike do not? Even if Bush thought that they might have weapons, it is not a good reason to attack.

[Oberon Storm]

But the point i'm trying to make is, saddam was a terrorist just like al quada and osama bin laden.

See as how Bin Laden's boys actively go out and run airliners into buildings and all Saddam ever did to us was look at us wrong, not so much.

[Black Knight]

Even running an airliner into a building is nothing compared to how many people America killed in this war.

[Ogmios22188]

Actually, one could say that we caused terrorists to come about in the first place. First of all, we supported the invasion of Palestine by Zionists to establish a Jewish state. Needless to say, Muslims weren't very happy about this, which is why a series of wars was launched against Israel. Israel came out on top in all of them, causing Muslims to be more pissed. Granted, these wars were fought by tyrannical leaders of Muslim nations, so I could care less about them. What I care about are the people. Unfortunately, lots of terrorists are common people; at least the ones who go out and blow themselves up because the big guys told them to. Terrorists movements have come about due to Israel's policies towards Palestinians, the U.S.'s attempts to Westernize the Middle East, particularly Iran, where the U.S. deposed a popular leader and imposed a dictator, which is why hostages were taken at the embassy, and corporate imperialism. Basically, one of the main reasons why terrorism exists in this world is because of Western nations sticking their noses where they don't belong and trying to shape the world as they see fit. No terrorist movement just started because they said "Hey! That United States, I don't like them, and for no reason at that!" No, the issues are far more complex than that. The U.S. went into countless areas of the world to further its goals of increasing the wealth of its businesses, and spreading its influence all over. No Islamic country came knocking on our door before we kicked down theirs. Now, don't get me wrong; I don't support the means the terrorists use, but I agree that we don't have the right to tell other people how to live. If Middle Easterners hate the way they live so much, they'll change their lives themselves. We don't need to be the big paternalistic Westerners who think we know what's good for everyone.

[Reflectionist]

Very easily Muscle E, see, first, I put my fingers on the home keys... and then I type them out.

And for the last time, stop with the name calling. Not that I'd rather be a thick headed liberal than a blind conservative.

Now, i still support the iraq war because we found saddam and broke his regime and now we are bringing peace to that area of the region.

Uh... no. We're not. Sorry. We're just killing random Iraqis and hoping they're terrorists.

Remeber Osama Bin Laden? Unless he is in Iraq, under no circumstances should we be there. At all. This is the sort of arrogant bullshit that is going to get America nuked to hell. And as much as I'd hate for it to happen, I'm gonna be the one booking to canada to say "I told you so."

Maybe all of this is due to America's location. We're pretty isolated from Europe, Asia, and Africa. So, why not instigate there? Well, really, why not? This seems to be the trend, as none of our European allies agree with Bush in sending troops to Iraq. The only people there are reporters.

And I mean, come on... Bush, is just really stupid. Like Korhend said once, in a quote by somebody who I can't remember right now... uh... "Never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity." Very good point.

It still doesn't help the president.

So, explain the chain of events here....

Bush the first has some battles with Saddam Hussein. They go at it back and forth, until nothing happens. Then, over 6 years later, apparently, Osama Bin Laden, in Afghanistan, attacks the United States. Many people die, and we get pissed off. So, we... attack and bomb and send troops to.... Iraq??

What the hell?

Does anybody else see how stupid this is??

[Oberon Storm]

If Saddam was a problem for the Iraqis it is because we made him one. The united States gave him his weapons. We supported him in the 80's. We though, "Hey! A secular leader in the mid east! Can't be bad!" What we either didn't bother to look at or just conveniently ignored is how Saddam came to power. Not through elections, but by knocking off his cousin president.

Saddam didn't like terrorist. Terrorists didn't like Saddam. The whole idea there might have been terrorist in Iraq is absurd. As for the weapons, if he had them it was because we gave them to him in first place. But we had no hard intelligence that says he did have weapons. The guy Bush sent to ask around if Saddam was looking for nukes from Africa came back and said no. We had no reason to go into Iraq.

[Dryth]

Sorry to jump in, but...

So, going into Iraq and overthrowing saddam wasn't a good thing?

You pick your battles. There are a lot of bad people in the world. US armed forces are stretched thin. There are worse people in the world than Saddam Hussein. Pinning the small, fragile bully at school then proclaiming that this is the future for all the other umpteen larger bullies is foolish, regardless of how mean-spirited said fragile bully is.

Where the Kurds are concerned, Saddam viewed the Kurds as enemies. And not without good reason; they were sided with the Iranians during the Iraq-Iran war. Gassing the Kurds was Saddam's own little war on terror in his own country. And since the US was supporting Saddam at the time, the US administration initially denied that the gassing took place outright. When absolute proof was finally presented, the US administration placed mutual blame on Iraq and Iran. They became collateral damage.

And yes, gassing the Kurds was a horrible thing, but welcome to war, and invading Iraq leads to more of the same.


Iraq will become a nice place to live. Not because democracy will be achieved; that takes generations and reformation of the ingrained social ideology of all Iraqi people. Democracy is a bold goal, sees itself being cast aside in favor of something resembling populism even in countries wealthy enough to actually sustain democracy and with its principles preached for centuries.

No, Iraq will become a nice place to live because it will become precidence. Every Iraqi given a silver spoon at the expense of the American tax payers until it becomes politically unpopular or economically infeasible.


What's funny - and what absolutely blows my mind - is how people believe that the attempt at manufactured patriotism required to produce instant-noodle democracy will win out over the raw irrational hatred and fear that gives birth to terrorism despite all that's happened. Historically, hatred and fear win if only for being immediate and tangible.

[Black Knight]

the terrorists haven't attack us at home because i believe we have put pressure on them back in iraq.

When will you get it? There were no terrorists in Iraq that wanted to attack America. It was SAUDI ARABIA where almost all of the 9/11 terrorists came from.

[Ogmios22188]

Did it ever occur to you that the terrorists went to Iraq AFTER we toppled the government? Saddam didn't agree with terrorists and they didn't like him. It seems likely that Hussein would've killed terrorists in his country. Now that he has no power, and there's a power vacuum in Iraq, countless different groups are trying to take hold; like terrorists. Isn't Abu Masab al-Zarqawi from Jordan? Most of the terrorists leaders aren't Iraqis. However, it wouldn't suprise me if a lot of the terrorist footsoldiers are, because they are being used by the leaders for their own selfish ends. Basically, most leaders of any type of group are out to achieve their own ends. Terrorist organizations exploit people just as our governments exploit us.

[Dryth]

Then how do we keep on catching alqada officals in iraq? If there were none, then explain this report.

Go back and read the link you just posted.

1. Abu Abbas is not an Al Qaeda official.
2. He was only directly involved in the murder of one American...
3. ... Twenty years ago...
4. ... For which he apologized ten years ago.
5. And there are no outstanding convictions against him in America.

Not that I deny there haven't been other, more relevant terror suspects captured. Abbas just makes for a pretty poor example of the sort of terrorist one would go to war over.

[Black Knight]

You just destroyed his argument, Dryth.

There weren't any terrorist organizations taking shelter in Iraq. Sadam Hussein even refused to help Bin Laden; and never took part in any attack on America. The two had very different philosophies.

[Alakhriveion]

But... so did we.

[Dryth]

Okay, if you say that abu abbas did all that stuff, then do you still consider him a terrorist? He still killed innocent lives, and therefore is deemed a terrorist.

He was a terrorist. While the nature of some organizations he deals with could be brought into question, he hasn't committed a known act of terrorism in quite some time. Longer than most forum members have been alive.

He wasn't an imminent threat, and magnitudes more have been killed in the invasion of Iraq than he ever had a hand in. He isn't a reason to invade Iraq, but rather a convenient consequence. It's a wonderful thing that he's being brought to justice, but if he were a focal point for the invasion then the means become so much worse than the ends.

Start invading every country with individuals that have at some point committed acts of violence against foreign individuals and you'll find yourself invading nearly every country on earth, including the US.

[Korhend]

Actually if you narrow it down to people who committed acts of violence against foreign individuals, for political aims you still come to the justification that China has the right to invade america by your logic. Three words "Luis Posada Carrile"

[MK.]

This is my first thread i've created, and i want some of your guys opinions. I think we should continue fighting in Iraq and maybe bomb the cities a little bit more, but that's just my opinion. I say drop the nuke, but maybe you think differently, and if you do, tell me.

Nuking Iraq is not the answer, we are NOT trying to destroy Iraq, we're trying to help rebuild it.

USA will continue to hunt down the terrorists there who want to stop a peaceful Iraq. Evil people hate peace.

One good thing about this war is this... The USA has shown we're not all talk. So, the other terrorists of the world have reason to fear us. They know now, that, we're serious. If we say we'll invade you unless you disarm, we mean it!

-MK

[Alakhriveion]

USA will continue to hunt down the terrorists there who want to stop a peaceful Iraq. Evil people hate peace.

I find this is rarely true. I can only think of two evil people actually opposed to peace and one of them is fictional.

[MK.]

I find this is rarely true.  I can only think of two evil people actually opposed to peace and one of them is fictional.

What do you call all the bad guys who are shooting at our men and women in uniform? What do you call suicide bombers? Oh yeah REAL peaceful they are...

[Alakhriveion]

But they're not opposed to peace or anything. Are you saying it's unreasonable for them to resist an invader?

[Oberon Storm]

I call some suicide bombers desperate people tired of being treated like a second class of human.

[Alakhriveion]

Also, as to why it's possible they might hate us: The Pentagon, defending itself from accusations of abuse of the Qu'ran at Guantanamo, said one of the instances refered to a completely accidental wetting of the book which occured while urinating on detainees. This is their DEFENSE, mind you.