Why the US "needs" to continue fighting in the Middle East

[Conrad]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,270306,00.html

I dont think this is GWs or Americas fault..

[M@]

That's horrible. This world is full of fucking hate. :(

[Loud_Scott]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,270306,00.html

I dont think this is GWs or Americas fault..

HUH? based on this logic the world "needs" to fight us because someone killed a bunch of people at one of our Universities...

[M@]

That's a damn good point, Quiet_Scott.

[Weston-work]

We've spent $456 billion on waging war in Iraq, and terrorism in the middle east has only gone up. We're not exactly being a positive influence over there. We could wipe out starvation world-wide for less than the Iraq war is costing us, but instead we would rather kill people and destroy their country, without any justification that holds water.

[Weston-work]

HUH? based on this logic the world "needs" to fight us because someone killed a bunch of people at one of our Universities...


:werd:

[stu]

Don't buy into the idea of being able to wipe out starvation, because that's not true. Maybe we could feed everyone in a third world country for one day, but they'll just get hungry again. The best way to cut down on starving, is to have less children.

[DrJones]

That's a damn good point, Quiet_Scott.

No, it's not a good point at all.

The guy at VT (and others at other shootings) had various motives for what they did. Most of them were fucked up pretty majorly in the head. That isn't something you can 'fight'. That is just something you can try and protect yourself against.

There are many many many more of these extremist Muslims than there are school shooters. The extremists often target things like schools, weddings, etc. The motivation in it all? Religion.

Being fucked up in the head and killing random people to take it out on the world is one thing. Using religion as a weapon to target people of another religion is a totally different thing. The kid at VT likely knew he was fucked up, but choose to go on with what he did anyway. The people in stories like the one from that article believe they are honestly doing Gods work.

IMO that is something we can and should fight against.

Don't get me wrong, I've met plenty of Muslims here in the US that are great people. However, there are far to many extremists elsewhere. Yes, we have extremist religious people here in the US, but they don't go around killing people. IMO we need to just go in there and do what we can to stop this. I'm sorry, but when you are using your religion to kill other people simply because of their religiion, than in my book you do not have the freedom to practice it. The world will be better without it, and we should do what we can to remove it.

These people do what they do because they fear nothing, they will be rewarded in the afterlife. As long as that is how it is, they will go on doing what they are doing. If we want to stop this we need to do what needs to be done. I think that is capturing a few of their leaders and burying them in the carcass of a pig. People who blow themselves up have no fear. However, if we start taking the remains of them and wrapping them in Bacon and coating them with pigs blood, many might think twice about what they are doing. If they are going to use their religion as a weapon against you, your only choice is to turn the tables and use it back against them. A lot of these guys fear things much more than they would a bullet.

[M@]

Okay, well that's a good perspective as well. Not much more I can say in response to that, because you kind of hit the nail on the head.

[chris_venturini]

if the US went to every country where extremist religious types were a serious problem then we would be pretty fucked, i gaurantee you that muslim extremists are NOT the reason we are there. religious wars are rampant and MUCH worse in africa, kinda odd that we dont care nor have we ever intervened in these countries that have no potential economic gain for us being there. Hate to tell you "911 super patriots" on here but our govt could care less if some kids die in another country, regardless of what they tell you.

[Weston-work]

if the US went to every country where extremist religious types were a serious problem then we would be pretty fucked, i gaurantee you that muslim extremists are NOT the reason we are there. religious wars are rampant and MUCH worse in africa, kinda odd that we dont care nor have we ever intervened in these countries that have no potential economic gain for us being there. Hate to tell you "911 super patriots" on here but our govt could care less if some kids die in another country, regardless of what they tell you.

:werd: We're not exactly the humanitarians that we claim to be.

[chrisbarnett01]

Being fucked up in the head and killing random people to take it out on the world is one thing. Using religion as a weapon to target people of another religion is a totally different thing.

Those are both the same thing.

Two nutcases with some BS justification that to them, feels very real and very justified, but in reality is just a perception problem on their part.

[Weston-work]

Those are both the same thing.

Two nutcases with some BS justification that to them, feels very real and very justified, but in reality is just a perception problem on their part.

:werd: Murder is murder.

[Loud_Scott]

I don't understand how the two examples of "being fucked in the head" are any different. It doesn't appear that most school shooters fear anything either, as most take their own lives.

And religous nuts killing other religous/not religous nuts in a different country is of little to no concern to me. We have things in OUR country that need to be fixed. Let them bomb eachother off the face of the planet. As long as they're doing it over there Guilliani will just have to wait for his "New 9/11"

[DrJones]

Those are both the same thing.

Two nutcases with some BS justification that to them, feels very real and very justified, but in reality is just a perception problem on their part.

No, there is a subtle yet important difference.

VT guy was fucked up in the head. He came up with a plan because of that, he executed it.

Extremist Muslims might also be messed up in the head, but they don't come up with it on their own. They are lead into what they are doing by believing in a book that is (based on their interpretation) more or less instructing them what to do.

First situation is a guy acting of his own accord. Second situation is a guy making a decision, but not doing it solely by himself. He's doing it because there is a group he belongs to that is giving him what he needs and sending him in to do what they define as his job. There are very obvious outside influences and motivations that lead him to do what he is doing. His decision is based more on external factors than internal ones.

There is no one going around recruiting US kids to shoot up their schools.

We didn't start a war with these terrorists, we are simply joining one that was already taking place.

[Conrad]

if the US went to every country where extremist religious types were a serious problem then we would be pretty fucked, i gaurantee you that muslim extremists are NOT the reason we are there. religious wars are rampant and MUCH worse in africa, kinda odd that we dont care nor have we ever intervened in these countries that have no potential economic gain for us being there. Hate to tell you "911 super patriots" on here but our govt could care less if some kids die in another country, regardless of what they tell you.

I hate to tell you but I did serve time on deployment in the horn of africa... and yes there are still US there. But with the huge expanse of country its hard to deter violence. We mainly tried assisting the UN forces.

[Conrad]

:werd: We're not exactly the humanitarians that we claim to be.

if you dont know... dont make assumptions.

[Conrad]

I don't understand how the two examples of "being fucked in the head" are any different. It doesn't appear that most school shooters fear anything either, as most take their own lives.

And religous nuts killing other religous/not religous nuts in a different country is of little to no concern to me. We have things in OUR country that need to be fixed. Let them bomb eachother off the face of the planet. As long as they're doing it over there Guilliani will just have to wait for his "New 9/11"

We still havent found those who did the first 9/11..... Action vs Reaction...Complacency is what kills this country...

If there are all these things at "home" that need fixed what are "you" doing to fix them?

I am not trying to make this an argument. I just think its a fairly "hippish" way to handle issues...

"Well thats happening there and doesnt effect me"

[Conrad]

Look at the video that Al-Zawahri just released... He is claiming exactly what Bush has said will happen... The world is looking at the US right now, if we pull out that whole region of the world will go into turmoil far worse then it was before.

[V8SpankR]

Look at the video that Al-Zawahri just released... He is claiming exactly what Bush has said will happen... The world is looking at the US right now, if we pull out that whole region of the world will go into turmoil far worse then it was before.


This whole mess is the incompetent Bush admin's doing so of course he's going to predict the worst.
Bush is the worst president this country's ever had and I'm embarrassed as a country of his actions. We had no business in Iraq.

There is no easy solution but it is getting old watching our soldiers die for what??????

Collosal waste or our resources and soldier's live's and I said this back in '02 and was right.

[Conrad]

This whole mess is the incompetent Bush admin's doing so of course he's going to predict the worst.
Bush is the worst president this country's ever had and I'm embarrassed as a country of his actions. We had no business in Iraq.

There is no easy solution but it is getting old watching our soldiers die for what??????

Collosal waste or our resources and soldier's live's and I said this back in '02 and was right.

Totally agree that Bush is a lowsy president... not for being in iraq but for not getting the job done. As commander and chief he is responsible just as any General would be and they can be relieved of command for not getting the job done.

Something that I dont understand is when people say "waste of soldiers lives"

NO SOLDIER'S LIFE IS A WASTE... this is a fully VOLUNTEER army and they are doing what they believe in. If they joined for any other reason they are to blame not the reason they are there.

[Conrad]

People argue about.... "Well I was about fighting terrorism, but not Iraq." "There are no ties between al qaida and hussein."

Terrorism is supported by most muslim ran nations. Especially the ones that have so so organized govt. Such as Iran, Syria, Iraq....etc..

Why would we not want a US presence in the middle of the whole sha-bang.

[Conrad]

I see one of the major problems with being in Iraq is the whole "going it alone" mentality. The problem though that came up is that the UN doesnt have any real power to make a country submit to the rules setup by the counsel. Bush decided to do it for them. This wasnt a wake up one morning and decide to invade Iraq.. I sat on the Iraqi border for 5 months while the UN tried and tried and tried to get hussein to allow weapons inspectors in.

[chrisbarnett01]

My entire point is that they are following their beliefs.

It does not matter if someone else instilled those beliefs into them, or if they came up on them on their own.

[doogie06]

People argue about.... "Well I was about fighting terrorism, but not Iraq." "There are no ties between al qaida and hussein."

Terrorism is supported by most muslim ran nations. Especially the ones that have so so organized govt. Such as Iran, Syria, Iraq....etc..

Why would we not want a US presence in the middle of the whole sha-bang.

It is pretty amazing how misery loves company. The list of terrorists detained is quite astonishing since we've been in Iraq. This war may not be a complete success but at the same time, one can not really call it a total failure.

[Loud_Scott]

We still havent found those who did the first 9/11..... Action vs Reaction...Complacency is what kills this country...

If there are all these things at "home" that need fixed what are "you" doing to fix them?

I am not trying to make this an argument. I just think its a fairly "hippish" way to handle issues...

"Well thats happening there and doesnt effect me"

You say "action vs reaction" i say "innocent until proven guilty" -- You want to kill them all before they break any laws??

oh and "I'm" doing what "I" can -- voting for people who care about AMERICA; and not people who just want to invade every country run by brown people.

I think you're looking for "hippYsh" as your slam btw --
Oh... and FYI America was sorta founded upon this principle -- "these english bastards won't let us be/worship/do what we want -- let's go find someplace new"

How ironic that now we are the "big brother" who tells people what/how they can/can't live THEIR lives in THEIR country....

BTW corny, here's what your "action vs reaction" or "minority report policeing" causes. This kid was arrested and kicked out of school for making a video game map of his school (http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/05/02/1839251) because he made a map of his school for a shooter game.. he MUST be planning to shoot people, at his school, right?? I mean arrest him! kick him out! It's better to ACT than RE-act.........right???

[Conrad]

First off Scott... Typical liberal reply by going way out of context on what was said.

Who are you saying is innocent? Hussein? Insurgents in Iraq?

Im happy that you vote.. but I was talking of a more personal approach to fixing the problems you see at home...

And the difference is Queen Elizabeth didnt send in a boat load of suicide bombers into Boston Harbor.

Big Brother was the UN... you know that governing body of all nations!

Yes I also agree with you that some things can get out of hand when you are reacting vs acting.. Just like the retardedness of the Mooninite invasion in Boston.

[Loud_Scott]

First off Conrad... typical conservative approach by making sweeping generaliziations to throw people off, and automatically label me. You follow Guillani's lead very well..... "OMGZ noez don't elect a democrat...we will ALL DIE!"

I didn't say hussein or "insurgents" are innocent. Although what we call "insurgents" are really just people trying to protect their country from foreigners. Kind of like us vs the british, back in the day...

I don't understand this next point? I don't have the power to fix all these problems. I can't fix the homeless population, I'm not bill gates. I can't fix the drive-by shooting problem, I'm not a judge who can take gang-bangers and put them in a small hole where they get butt-fucked for 3 weeks strait before we hang them. I can't MAKE Bush stop spending money on a ridiculous war when the most important people in the US get paid 30k a year or less (teachers by the way)
In fact if i TRIED to do any of these; I would be arrested, and branded a traitor.

Queen Elizabeth sending in suicide bombers? she also didn't have nukes, or land-to-air missiles, or heat seaking radar or yadda yadda yadda..... war changes as technology changes. Kinda like leisure time; we don't spend time playing "wash our clothes" anymore; we spend time playing "video games" -- it's technology -- it changes shit....

If Big Brother is the UN and the UN said "no we're not gonna goto war with them" then ytf did we say "F YOU! we're going to war" -- oh right... cuz WE'RE big brother. and if you think we're all over the world (africa like you said earlier) for "peace keeping missions" then I got some ocean front property in AZ for a fuckin steal....

[DrJones]

My entire point is that they are following their beliefs.

It does not matter if someone else instilled those beliefs into them, or if they came up on them on their own.

I disagree. I think there is a HUGE difference between those two cases. Yes, they are both following their beliefs, but that is no more significant than the fact that they are both human or both have hair.

Do you think that WWII and the holocaust would of been nearly as bad if it was just those people who previously hated jews participating? No, it wouldn't of. One of the reasons it was such a tragedy was because Hitler was unmatched when it came to spreading his ideals and views to a group of people to convince them to see things the way he did. Was Germany just this place of evil people that Hilter managed to take advantage of? No. Yes, there was a lot of antisemitism and other hatred there before he rose to power, but him uniting them and propagating that belief system among his followers is what created the issue that it became.

There will always be random people who "follows their beliefs" to kill a bunch of people. The issue is, that when those people convince themselves, they are very hard to catch beforehand and thankfully, not all that common.

However, when you have an organized group (Usually political or religions) taking it upon themselves to recruit people into believing that, it is a MUCH more dangerous situation, and I don't see how anyone can disagree with that. You have more people committing more acts of terrorism with more access to the resources they need to do so. That is a much larger and very different situation than someone shooting up a school because they are pissed at the world.

The second situation is much more dangerous than the first. Thankfully, it's also one that we can fight since there is an actual target.

[Conrad]

First off Conrad... typical conservative approach by making sweeping generaliziations to throw people off, and automatically label me. You follow Guillani's lead very well..... "OMGZ noez don't elect a democrat...we will ALL DIE!"


First off... Its the only way democrats can take what Guiliani REALLY said.

“if a Democrat is elected president in 2008, America will be at risk for another terrorist attack on the scale of Sept. 11, 2001. But if a Republican is elected, he said, especially if it is him, terrorist attacks can be anticipated and stopped.”

This comment isnt "OMGZ noez don't elect a democrat...we will ALL DIE!"

He is simply saying.. Based on what democrats have all said... The patriot act is too oppresive on american rights, and that they will pull out of Iraq.
If he is elected he will continue those agendas... And the patriot act has prevented terroristic plots...

I didn't say hussein or "insurgents" are innocent. Although what we call "insurgents" are really just people trying to protect their country from foreigners. Kind of like us vs the british, back in the day...

No... what you are saying is since Democrats are in power now, Its ok for Republicans to suicide bomb civilians. Its not Iraqi citizens against US forces.. Its sectarial violence against different sects, being backed up by terrorist supporting nations.

I don't understand this next point? I don't have the power to fix all these problems. I can't fix the homeless population, I'm not bill gates. I can't fix the drive-by shooting problem, I'm not a judge who can take gang-bangers and put them in a small hole where they get butt-fucked for 3 weeks strait before we hang them. I can't MAKE Bush stop spending money on a ridiculous war when the most important people in the US get paid 30k a year or less (teachers by the way)
In fact if i TRIED to do any of these; I would be arrested, and branded a traitor.

No all I am saying is dont bitch if you arent helping the problem.. Take it a step farther.. Learn about what is really going on. Run for office of somesort... Support a democratic rally... go collect signatures.. Dont sit on your couch and bitch " I voted for the other guy! "

Queen Elizabeth sending in suicide bombers? she also didn't have nukes, or land-to-air missiles, or heat seaking radar or yadda yadda yadda..... war changes as technology changes. Kinda like leisure time; we don't spend time playing "wash our clothes" anymore; we spend time playing "video games" -- it's technology -- it changes shit....

No, terrorists attacked this nation and we retaliated... Technology has nothing to do with tactics.. We werent the aggressors. We are just taking it to the fore front of the actions... Muslim Extremests call the middle east home.. So we went there.

The sad thing is that its not all muslims, But the peaceful muslims dont "police" their own. You dont see catholics killing jews... or chanting america must die.

If Big Brother is the UN and the UN said "no we're not gonna goto war with them" then ytf did we say "F YOU! we're going to war" -- oh right... cuz WE'RE big brother. and if you think we're all over the world (africa like you said earlier) for "peace keeping missions" then I got some ocean front property in AZ for a fuckin steal....

Like with most of your debate you dont stick to what "really" happened. The UN did "threaten" Iraq with military action if he didnt open his borders to UN inspectors... 3 times... and 3 times Hussein told them to kiss his ass. The US is one of the only countries that really has the resources to do the job. And on top of that America was still smelling the fresh blood of 2500 dead in new york. But like I said the US probably shouldnt have went on their own... But the UN should have enforced their rule.

Oh and if you want a world list of deployments for humanitarian aid done by the military I will be happy to show you.

[john]

I will preface this post by saying I've read none of the previous posts in this thread.

The US needs to get out of the middle east. It is NOT our issue, problem, etc. It's not patriotic to be there. It's not our fight. It's not our politics. And it's not our oil.

How many kids have died because of this "war"? It's bullshit. It's a mistake. And if we don't get out now, we'll never get out. Iraq is not the 51st state.

[HondasTrail]

I will preface this post by saying I've read none of the previous posts in this thread.
Why would you want to read it anyway? It's not like it's going to change your mind anyway.

[myshtern]

We've spent $456 billion on waging war in Iraq, and terrorism in the middle east has only gone up. We're not exactly being a positive influence over there. We could wipe out starvation world-wide for less than the Iraq war is costing us, but instead we would rather kill people and destroy their country, without any justification that holds water.
$456 billion will be nothing when chaos reins over the middle east.

It seems to me that there are two large groups of people arguing against the war in Iraq. Those who feel there is no justification and those who feel it is not in American interest.

How one could think that maintaining order in the the petrol fields of the middle east is not in America's interest is beyond me. Some of you may be thinking that what's going on there isnt anything close to order. Compared to blood bath it will be if American troops leave, Iraq right now looks like a beautiful sunny day.

There are other people who compare Iraq to Vietnam. What happened in Vietnam when a public time frame was set for a pull out? This is when the worst brutalities of Vietnam happened. What happened when the Soviet Union set a time frame for pulling out of Iran? People's heads were rolling. Those who pretend to remember history, seem to forget the quite important nuances.

If the economics and politics of it arent reason enough, when was the last foreign terror attack in America? Oh that's right, nearly 6 years ago.

I much prefer US troops being exposed to attacks in Iraq than citizens of major cities like Denver.

[john]

Exactly. The title grabbed me and I had to comment.

Why would you want to read it anyway? It's not like it's going to change your mind anyway.

[Weston]

Why would you want to read it anyway? It's not like it's going to change your mind anyway.

What!? You mean that this thread, like all political threads, is just a bunch of people blowing hot air and not changing anyone's mind? Say it isn't so! :D

[DrJones]

What!? You mean that this thread, like all political threads, is just a bunch of people blowing hot air and not changing anyone's mind? Say it isn't so! :D

While it might be quite difficult to change someone's mind in the large picture, people are at least somewhat open minded when faced with strong arguments :)

That's a damn good point, Quiet_Scott.


Okay, well that's a good perspective as well. Not much more I can say in response to that, because you kind of hit the nail on the head.

[97CivicNick]

What!? You mean that this thread, like all political threads, is just a bunch of people blowing hot air and not changing anyone's mind? Say it isn't so! :D


the fact that someone who has actually been to Iraq (and thus would have more knowledge and first had experience of whats REALLY going on) beleives in, and stands up for the war, would sway my beliefs more then a little bit.

Im 100% with Conrad on everything, but especially with the whole, If you dont like it, do something about it. Dont just sit around and bitch.

[Martian]

I don't think the reasons for being in Iraq are justified. However I also don't think anything good will come out of pulling all of our troops out either. My biggest issue with this right now is Bush continues to try and sell this to the American people daily as "Do or Die". I also have a problem with his relentless need to send more and more troops over there. I think money and lives would be better spent if we gave the troops already there better equipment rather then further extending our "Human resources".
Now just food for thought on this whole argument over muslim terrorists. They've been hijacking planes for well over 30 years now. Terrorists have alway be around, there is no eliminating them.

Both Hussein and Bin laden are products of U.S.training, funding and backing. We created the monster to begin with. Its our job to get it back in its cage.

[STIBungy]

The US just likes to stick it's nose in everyone else's civil wars.

[Conrad]

I don't think the reasons for being in Iraq are justified. However I also don't think anything good will come out of pulling all of our troops out either. My biggest issue with this right now is Bush continues to try and sell this to the American people daily as "Do or Die". I also have a problem with his relentless need to send more and more troops over there. I think money and lives would be better spent if we gave the troops already there better equipment rather then further extending our "Human resources".
Now just food for thought on this whole argument over muslim terrorists. They've been hijacking planes for well over 30 years now. Terrorists have alway be around, there is no eliminating them.

Both Hussein and Bin laden are products of U.S.training, funding and backing. We created the monster to begin with. Its our job to get it back in its cage.

Justification smutification... the american congress voted and approved... Hes as justified as it gets. Did he push to invade Iraq? Sure he did, but he went to the UN himself along with Powell to get them to act as the governing body they are supposed to be.

Pulling out is the worst possible solution, although I agree with a democratic congress on setting bench marks that the Iraqi govt needs to abide by. I also believe they should be apart of making those benchmarks. We dont need to pull completely out of Iraq to take most of our troops out of dangers direct way.

My plan would be a fazed withdrawl from major cities... pull back to the bases on the Iran and Syria border and control the borders from insurgents and terrorists. Let the Iraqi army and police handle each major city as soon as each city has enough law enforcement to hold it. Go with marshal law in those cities till there is a resemblence of peace.

During that time US represenitives need to be leaning on the middle east countries to come together on peace accords. Perhaps even having iran and syria putting armies on their borders to help control borders. They are part of the problem so they HAVE to be part of the solution.

I believe if we can get to a general, with lack of a better term "lock down" of iraq and a show of the US reaching for a coalition on Iraq we can bring in UN forces to help keep the country reletively calm, and quell uprising.

[V8SpankR]

Iraq was better off before our idiot,weorthless president went in based upon lies and even if we stay we won't be controlling any oil.

I remember a few of you guys totally supporting Bush and the war and how we were going to have cheap gas by now.

This was a huge mistake and I honestly don't know what's best for them or us but getting out isn't going to cause our country to be less safe and any of you that think we will be less safe has just fallen under the Bush admin's ploy to make american's afraid.

I definetly don't feel free if our government wants us to be paranoid. With Bush out of office we wil be less of a terrorist target.

[stu]

I supported the president and the war, but I never once thought that we'd have cheaper gas.

[DrJones]

I still support the President and the war.

I'm not a patriotic redneck Christian who blindly follows Bush. And yes, I have seen all the same info you have, and likely thought about it all just as much, if not more than you. I just didn't draw the same conclusions as you.

[V8SpankR]

Why do you support the prez still?

He's proven to be a liar and the whole Bush cronies have abused their power for their agendas. We didn't go to "war" for the right reasons and the Iraq thing was a no-win situation to begin with.

Bush is arguably now proven to be the worst president in history and this country is in worse shape than it was prior to his becoming president.

His whole presidency seems to have been a shady deal from his questionable win back in '00 to the lies and betrayal to the American people. It seems a lot of Bush supporters now have reversed their support or are just ignoring the facts right in front of them.

We have a corrupt government right now period.

I remember back in the '90s this country talked of prosperity and progress and with Bush these words have become almost extinct.

[Weston-work]

Why do you support the prez still?

He's proven to be a liar and the whole Bush cronies have abused their power for their agendas. We didn't go to "war" for the right reasons and the Iraq thing was a no-win situation to begin with.

Bush is arguably now proven to be the worst president in history and this country is in worse shape than it was prior to his becoming president.

His whole presidency seems to have been a shady deal from his questionable win back in '00 to the lies and betrayal to the American people. It seems a lot of Bush supporters now have reversed their support or are just ignoring the facts right in front of them.

We have a corrupt government right now period.

I remember back in the '90s this country talked of prosperity and progress and with Bush these words have become almost extinct.

:werd:

George W Bush himself said it best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A

[Loud_Scott]

the fact that someone who has actually been to Iraq (and thus would have more knowledge and first had experience of whats REALLY going on) beleives in, and stands up for the war, would sway my beliefs more then a little bit.

Im 100% with Conrad on everything, but especially with the whole, If you dont like it, do something about it. Dont just sit around and bitch.

and yet, both of you can be found here, "sitting around and bitching" at people who's opinion differs from your own -- :confused:

And to the guy who's spouting the war as keeping the fight off American soil; before 9/11 when was the prior terrorist attack in America?? ...oh that's right 8 years before

and before that... ???

[DrJones]

Why do you support the prez still?

He's proven to be a liar and the whole Bush cronies have abused their power for their agendas. We didn't go to "war" for the right reasons and the Iraq thing was a no-win situation to begin with.

First off, there are many many reasons on why we went to war. You obviously disagree with many of them. I don't. There are quite a few that alone I feel would of been enough justification.

I know that it might not be our place, and many people will disagree that we should get involved in things, but IMO it was fine to go to war simply to remove Sadam from power. He might not of been working with Bin Laden, and he might not of been a threat to us, but he was for sure a threat to Iraq. Our soldiers have done some pretty nasty things since they have been there, but it pales in comparison to what was done while he was leader.

Yes, we might not of found any WMDs there, but our intel (much of it obtained while Clinton was in office) said it was there. What I really don't like, is the aftermath of that situation. It has caused a majority of the American public to put more faith in Holywood celebrities than the President of the United States.

A no-win situation to begin with? How can you back that up? Wining isn't a one dimensional parameter that is easily calculated. IMO taking out Sadam was 'wininng.' Giving people freedom they haven't had before is 'winning.' It's a bloody job, and one that isn't done yet. I think it's worth doing, many people don't.


Bush is arguably now proven to be the worst president in history and this country is in worse shape than it was prior to his becoming president.


It's hard to listen to anyone who says this. There are so many decisions a President makes. Regardless of what the media now says, he is probably the most influential person on the course of history. It's pretty much impossible to judge how good of a job they did until after their presidency on many issues.

What are you basing this on? Opinion polls? I'm sorry, but I put less faith in those than you put in Bush. I could care less what the public thinks of him. His job is not to appease the public. His job is to lead the country. Democracy is what elects him, the people decide who is in office, not what happens when they get there. There is a reason it works that way.

The public doesn't get briefed on major issues on a daily basis. The public doesn't have a team of people who's only job it is to research specific topics for them. The public listens to people like Michael Moore. Their opinion of how good of a job Bush is doing really doesn't mean anything to me. Much of the public (obviously not all) isn't nearly qualified enough to make any kind of intelligent judgment on Bushes actions, simply because they don't have the background on all the issues.

No one likely does. The world is a very complex place. The only people who really understand what is going on are the experts in the field. ie the Economists, Military Generals, etc.

Who would you trust more to make a decision that would have major impacts on the Economy? A random group of 100 people, or Alan Greenspan?

I don't think our president is doing a bad job. I've yet to see anyone make a statement strong enough (to me) to justify that. Yes, he might make a mistake here and there, but who doesn't? Being elected President doesn't elevate him to the position of God. He can't see the future, he can't know everything, and he can't do everything.


His whole presidency seems to have been a shady deal from his questionable win back in '00 to the lies and betrayal to the American people. It seems a lot of Bush supporters now have reversed their support or are just ignoring the facts right in front of them.

We have a corrupt government right now period.

I remember back in the '90s this country talked of prosperity and progress and with Bush these words have become almost extinct.

I wasn't a Bush supporter from the beginning. Since supporting him, I haven't reversed my support. I'm not ignoring the facts at all. I just don't draw the same conclusions from them that you do. You might think I'm ignorant or stupid for doing so, and I doubt I could convince you otherwise. Believe me, it's not because I can't see things in the same way that so many people do. I can see exactly where they are coming from, and follow their path to the conclusion they reach. I just don't agree with it because of a flaw they make along the way.

I still support the President because I have found flaws with every argument that has been given to me to prove the contrary. Peoples minds have become so clouded on any issue relating to this that they are almost willing to believe or disagree with any theory stated, regardless of how true or wrong it might be. Trusting in the president or not has become a religious endeavor, not a scientific one.

I fear the American people a lot more than I fear the administration or a terrorist attack. America is in a dangerous trend of thinking themselves smarter than they really are. People listen to people like Michael Moore and agree with him. The most important factor the American public is missing, is knowing their limits when it comes to understanding a complex issue. People have taken advantage of that. Our society is waaaay more corrupt than our Government. We have lost a sense of personal responsibility and accountability. Everyone is the center of their own universe, with perfect knowledge of everything they encounter, and the intellect and background to understand it all perfectly. It's a dangerous path we are headed down.

[Conrad]

and yet, both of you can be found here, "sitting around and bitching" at people who's opinion differs from your own -- :confused:

And to the guy who's spouting the war as keeping the fight off American soil; before 9/11 when was the prior terrorist attack in America?? ...oh that's right 8 years before

and before that... ???

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm

be a little more open minded... im not trying to sway your opinion.. just those who dont have a clue.

[Loud_Scott]

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm

be a little more open minded... im not trying to sway your opinion.. just those who dont have a clue.


? -- you have to go back to 1975 to get an act that was commited on "american soil" -- don't give me that BS about an embassy being "american soil" that's not what the other poster meant, and we all know it

Domestic Terrorism, January 27-29, 1975: Puerto Rican nationalists bombed a Wall Street bar, killing four and injuring 60; two days later, the Weather Underground claims responsibility for an explosion in a bathroom at the U.S. Department of State in Washington.


the war "keeping terrorism off american soil" can now be laid to rest. back to whether we are being humanitarians and doing "god's work" by forcing democracy on the entire world.... continue

[HondasTrail]

While it might be quite difficult to change someone's mind in the large picture, people are at least somewhat open minded when faced with strong arguments :)
Since when has HAI been open minded?

[Loud_Scott]

Since when has HAI been open minded?

before my "join date" --

[Conrad]

? -- you have to go back to 1975 to get an act that was commited on "american soil" -- don't give me that BS about an embassy being "american soil" that's not what the other poster meant, and we all know it



the war "keeping terrorism off american soil" can now be laid to rest. back to whether we are being humanitarians and doing "god's work" by forcing democracy on the entire world.... continue


So... since it happens so infrequently as you put it... We shouldnt do anything?

[Loud_Scott]

So... since it happens so infrequently as you put it... We shouldnt do anything?

No... all I'm doing is pointing out the argument that taking the war over THERE keeps it from being over HERE is flawed.

[Conrad]

No... all I'm doing is pointing out the argument that taking the war over THERE keeps it from being over HERE is flawed.

how so?

[V8SpankR]

Us being in Iraq isn't stopping terrorists from conducting an attack on the US and it's just a matter of time before the next incident. Bush's actions made us a bigger target then we ever were. Terrorists are probably everywhere except Iraq. We attacked Iraq with really no provocation and defied the wishes of the UN and the rest of the world. What benefit did the US gain from attacking Iraq?

This is Nam all over again.

[Conrad]

Us being in Iraq isn't stopping terrorists from conducting an attack on the US and it's just a matter of time before the next incident. Bush's actions made us a bigger target then we ever were. Terrorists are probably everywhere except Iraq. We attacked Iraq with really no provocation and defied the wishes of the UN and the rest of the world. What benefit did the US gain from attacking Iraq?

This is Nam all over again.

Why do you say it isnt stopping terrorism on the US? Why does Bush's action make us a bigger target? Why do you think terrorists are everywhere but Iraq.

The UN wishes were to use military action... but when Iraq defied them they didnt keep to the resolution they created.

I would say a benefit would be a democratic nation in the heart of the middle east is in US foreign interest.

[Loud_Scott]

how so?

connect the dots?

Were we "at war" with the middle east between 1975 and 1993? I don't think we were, and definitely not for that entire time, yet there was no terrorist activity on US soil - according to the link you provided.

[Conrad]

To all... I am not trying to shoot down ideas.

Truly I just like the debate, and want to hear peoples reasoning on their beliefs.

[Conrad]

connect the dots?

Were we "at war" with the middle east between 1975 and 1993? I don't think we were, and definitely not for that entire time, yet there was no terrorist activity on US soil - according to the link you provided.

True...


I would say that this is probably because of our geographic location. Most democratic nations in Europe had consistent terroristic like attacks during those times..

And we were attacked in several instances overseas... Should we not protect our foreign interest?

[Loud_Scott]

Why do you say it isnt stopping terrorism on the US?


Ok Conrad. This period "." is an anti-tiger period. It's keeps tigers away. I just posted it and there aren't any tigers around me, so it must be working.


Why does Bush's action make us a bigger target?

Well... the fact that they told us "Elect not-bush and we won't bomb you again for nothing" during the election is a pretty good sign.

Also, because now we look like Big Brother. The UN didn't do it, so the US did... without any help from any other countries (britian is not a country, is a rainy, shitty, little island). It's not like 1 country told us no -- there were a multitude of them. It's like WW 2 only instead of the "allies" it's just "US" (ha ha i'm witty)


Why do you think terrorists are everywhere but Iraq.

Well..... if you were a terrorist and the US was invading Iraq would YOU stay??


The UN wishes were to use military action... but when Iraq defied them they didnt keep to the resolution they created.

That's how gov't works. Bush Sr. said "read my lips, no new taxes" then promptly started new taxes.


I would say a benefit would be a democratic nation in the heart of the middle east is in US foreign interest.

I'm sure there WILL be benefits, but at what cost, and where does it stop.? Like was mentioned in an earlier thread -- do we goto China next to make them Democratic?? Everyone deserves human rights, right??

[Conrad]

Ok Conrad. This period "." is an anti-tiger period. It's keeps tigers away. I just posted it and there aren't any tigers around me, so it must be working.
Im not even going to respond to that.



Well... the fact that they told us "Elect not-bush and we won't bomb you again for nothing" during the election is a pretty good sign.
I forgot that we give in to what terrorists want...

Really though Bush was only in for little more then a year when they attacked last time. What did Bush do to incite there rage that time?


Also, because now we look like Big Brother. The UN didn't do it, so the US did... without any help from any other countries (britian is not a country, is a rainy, shitty, little island). It's not like 1 country told us no -- there were a multitude of them. It's like WW 2 only instead of the "allies" it's just "US" (ha ha i'm witty).

Well you are wrong... There were only 3 main countries who were against us going to Iraq... France, Germany, Russia.

And the allies we had were
UK( i understand you dont think of it as a major country although I believe they have around the 6th or 7th largest GDP ) and have a permanent seat on the UN security counsel)
Albania, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Poland, Romania, South Korea, and Japan, Portugal, Singapore, Ukraine(but they didnt have troops... only had humanitarian help.)

So I guess all these countries dont count because the news likes to cause drama and you dont know what to believe other than what you are fed.


Well..... if you were a terrorist and the US was invading Iraq would YOU stay??
You would think they wouldnt but the US has caught several high ranking Al Qaida in Iraq! I think the muslim extremests inside of Al Qaida understand that a US backed democratic muslim nation would mean their way of operating would come to an end.


That's how gov't works. Bush Sr. said "read my lips, no new taxes" then promptly started new taxes.

Presidents dont make tax increases they just approve or disapprove.. and in some cases even when they disapprove they are denied by a congress that has a majority. But I will agree that he didnt keep to his word...


I'm sure there WILL be benefits, but at what cost, and where does it stop.? Like was mentioned in an earlier thread -- do we goto China next to make them Democratic?? Everyone deserves human rights, right??
Diplomacy is working in China... so that is the tool we use to "battle" with them. "Diplomacy" also worked in the cold war to bring down the Communist Giant. So drifting off topic, and asking questions where does it stop. I would say when we are all dead.... since we are human.

[Loud_Scott]

Im not even going to respond to that.


I don't know why not; this is the exact same logical fallacy as "The war in Iraq keeps terrorist activities from the US shores" when the logic was "well since the war there haven't been any terrorist activities in the US"


I forgot that we give in to what terrorists want...

Really though Bush was only in for little more then a year when they attacked last time. What did Bush do to incite there rage that time?

Who knows? There's a reason they're called "terrorists" -- but flying planes into a couple buildings doesn't make for WW 3; especially when it's "extreme muslim terrorists" that did it and not "The Nation of Canada" or something similar.


Well you are wrong... There were only 3 main countries who were against us going to Iraq... France, Germany, Russia.

And the allies we had were
UK( i understand you dont think of it as a major country although I believe they have around the 6th or 7th largest GDP ) and have a permanent seat on the UN security counsel)
Albania, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Poland, Romania, South Korea, and Japan, Portugal, Singapore, Ukraine(but they didnt have troops... only had humanitarian help.)

So I guess all these countries dont count because the news likes to cause drama and you dont know what to believe other than what you are fed.


You mention "only 3 major" countries refused to be a part of it, yet you only name 1 "major" country contributing: Japan.


You would think they wouldnt but the US has caught several high ranking Al Qaida in Iraq! I think the muslim extremests inside of Al Qaida understand that a US backed democratic muslim nation would mean their way of operating would come to an end.


I don't think a US backed democratic muslim nation is going to stop terrorists. They care enough about their beliefs to fly a plane into a building and die for it.... we're always going to have trouble winning a fight where someone cares that much. They'll most likely just find a new country, then we can invade Syria to get 'em...


Presidents dont make tax increases they just approve or disapprove.. and in some cases even when they disapprove they are denied by a congress that has a majority. But I will agree that he didnt keep to his word...

i wasn't arguing the prez makes tax increases. i was just giving an example of another time when a bureaucratic entity didn't hold up to its word...


Diplomacy is working in China... so that is the tool we use to "battle" with them. "Diplomacy" also worked in the cold war to bring down the Communist Giant. So drifting off topic, and asking questions where does it stop. I would say when we are all dead.... since we are human.


diplomacy is fine; a great way to get things done. it doesn't change the fact that people have no rights over there, that children get killed, that "injustices" are done to thousands everyday -- which last i heard, was the "new" argument for staying in Iraq after no WMD's were found. For "the greater good" -- but China isn't controlling our oil...

I just want Bush to come out and say "Listen, my daddy lost when he was in office, so I wanted to avenge his defeat. We got Saddamn, and the cleanup was just a skosh more than I anticipated...ok?"

I can understand honesty and vengance, it's not the best reason to start a war, but at least it's a reason

[Weston-work]

This period "." is an anti-tiger period. It's keeps tigers away. I just posted it and there aren't any tigers around me, so it must be working.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: and :werd:

[V8SpankR]

Why do you say it isnt stopping terrorism on the US? Why does Bush's action make us a bigger target? Why do you think terrorists are everywhere but Iraq.

The UN wishes were to use military action... but when Iraq defied them they didnt keep to the resolution they created.

I would say a benefit would be a democratic nation in the heart of the middle east is in US foreign interest.


How is the war stopping terrorism on our shores? I don't believe it is or will stop another attack but now that we are (or I'd like to think) a smarter people and the attack will not be on the level of 9/11 because of our cautionary steps but it's just a matter of time. We have alot of equipement and men being tied up over there and not protecting our shores from here. There was minimal eveidence that there were terrorists in Iraq to begin with and no Iraqis were part of 9/11 but were Saudis.

I'd just like to think how Iraq and the US is better because of this police action. IMO things have gotten way out of hand and our goverment knows they are in over their heads. Our military is stretched thin and Bush has plunged us further into debt than we ever have been.

I hate the fact that Bush used scare tactics to get the US behind this "war" and IMO being free also means not being afraid.

What good things has Bush done outside of the war? He's basically an environmental terrorist himself with some of the actions he has taken against the environment.

For most of you barely in your mid 20s you're just used to being fucked in the ass for most of your adult lives by Bush economics and don't know any other way.

Obviously this country has been turning against Bush and his cronies since there's no way a Republican will win the next election by far. He's pretty mucha lame duck prez right now.


In the end Iraq will be in worse shape and we will not have any more control over what happens in the middle east than we did before.


(remember,this is just a heated discussion and am not trying to strain any relationships with anybody on this board so don't take any of this personal since it is just silly politics):)

[Conrad]

(remember,this is just a heated discussion and am not trying to strain any relationships with anybody on this board so don't take any of this personal since it is just silly politics):)

ditto...

[HondasTrail]

Whew man it's hot in here, must be all the hot air people are letting out of their mouths.

[stu]

Whew man it's hot in here, must be all the hot air people are letting out of their mouths.

You look like you have potatoes rolling off of your skin!!!!

[Conrad]

I guess what I dont understand is...

Fear... I'm not scared of getting blown up or terrorists coming to kill me but I chose to vote Bush.

As far as, has the war in Iraq helped protect us? I dont think I can answer eitherway. Not directly. But if the country can pull together it can deter future terrorism that I am sure of.

The National Security Advisor of the Iraqi Prime Minister is in Washington today, asking democratic members of congress for help! They know that they dont stand a chance at holding a govt until they can establish themselves.

If for no other reason to stay there, democrats say we made the situation in Iraq worse... Well then I believe its our responsibility to correct that.

Bush has given nothing but tax breaks and shelters to all types of businesses and people. So I would say thats a good thing.

[Loud_Scott]

Bush has given nothing but tax breaks and shelters to all types of businesses and people. So I would say thats a good thing.

:bsflag: in his first term he gave a "family" somethin or other tax break. people with kids got $175 back on TOP of their normal refund -- I believe it may have even been per kid (but not totally sure) --

WHERE WAS MY TAX BREAK THAT YEAR? People with kids ALREADY pay less in taxes because they can claim dependents. I got SCREWED. Don't cry me a river about families paying more because they have to provide for kids, yadda yadda yadda -- that's something you take on when you decide to have kids. If you can't afford it there are other avenues; this is specifically about a tax break

[Conrad]

:bsflag: in his first term he gave a "family" somethin or other tax break. people with kids got $175 back on TOP of their normal refund -- I believe it may have even been per kid (but not totally sure) --

WHERE WAS MY TAX BREAK THAT YEAR? People with kids ALREADY pay less in taxes because they can claim dependents. I got SCREWED. Don't cry me a river about families paying more because they have to provide for kids, yadda yadda yadda -- that's something you take on when you decide to have kids. If you can't afford it there are other avenues; this is specifically about a tax break

ok but clinton raised your taxes... Remember the republicans are about families.. Dont like it, have a family. Dont want the tax break dont have a family. I pay property taxes for the schools around me.. Me and my family havent ever used them. Dont know what to tell you there.