Author Topic: War In Iraq Debate  (Read 24635 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Scotty

  • Army Chit Chatter
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -160
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 737
War In Iraq Debate
« on: February 05, 2004, 22:25:00 »
Me and a couple of my buddies were having a discussion about the war in iraq today.  I personally was always in favour of it.  Today one of my friends brought up a good point.

September 11, approx. 3000 people were killed by terrorists.  The attitude of America was kill those pieces of s--t that did this.  They go to war in Afghanistan and everybody supports it (mostly).

Saddam Hussein in the decades he was in power inprisons, tortures and executes hundreds of thousands of people, he invades two countries, he uses chemical weapons on his own people, he launched scuds at Israel, he violates UN resolutions and he fails to prove he destroyed all his chemical weapons.  All this and most a large percent of americans say "Oh leave him alone he hasn‘t done anything to us."  

The problem with the US is that alot of them are self centered.  They don‘t realise that the people in Iraq didn‘t have the freedom to protest agains their government.  The US is really the only country that can do anything significant to help them.  It doesn‘t matter if he didn‘t have any WMD‘s before the war because he had and used them in the past.  Saddam is gone for good.  The Middle East and the entire world are safer now.


There‘s not really a point to this thread, I‘m not asking any specific questions.  I just thought it was something interesting.  I would like to hear your thoughts about americans only caring about themselves and how attitudes changed from the war in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq

L/MCpl_Argyll_ Kurrgan

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2004, 22:42:00 »
Well, the US gave those chemical to Iraq in the 80‘s to fight the Iranians.  Back  in the 80‘s the US liked Saddam and didn‘t like Iran.  So the US supported Hussien, along with some other guys you were fighting the US enemy‘s of the 80‘s.  Hint Hint...its Osama.  There are pictures of Donnie Rumsfeld and Saddam shaking hands and javing a laugh.  Back then old Donnie had a lot less grey hair.  So really, behind all this freeing Iraq reasoning.  It‘s really the US trying to get their toys back.

Paul F

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2004, 08:23:00 »
Quote
Originally posted by L/MCpl_Argyll_ Kurrgan:
[qb]   Back  in the 80‘s the US liked Saddam and didn‘t like Iran.   [/qb]
I wouldn‘t say the US liked Saddam per say, more like he was seen as the lesser of two evils.

Offline Another Recce Guy

  • Just a guy that wanted to serve Canada.
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 1,255
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 453
  • Armour Forum Moderator
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #3 on: February 06, 2004, 10:08:00 »
Let's not forget that every country will act in their own best interest first.  That's the job of any government.  If the Americans choose not invade Iraq during those dark years, it was because it was not in their best interest.  The bad guys in Afghanistan became their best interest after 9/11.  I'm sure that if 9/11 hadn't happened, then they wouldn't give a rat's buttocks what happened in Afghanistan, either.  
Just because the U.S. have invested in their military and choose to be the big kid on the block doesn't make them obligated to do any thing for anybody who choose not to invest in their own militaries.  It's like if I don't invest in a lawn mower, why should my neighbour be obligated to come over and cut my grass for me UNLESS it bugs him so much that he can't stand it.  Then he's acting in his own best interest, not mine.  The result is the same; I get my grass cut but it's on his terms, not mine.
So if we don't bother to invest in our military, why should the Americans be obligated to help us out UNTIL it becomes in their best interest and then they will do it on their terms, not ours and we only have ourselves to blame.
How will you answer your grandchildren when they what you did in the war?

Also, be careful of those that mistake authority for leadership.

Offline Ex-Dragoon

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 46,382
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 9,009
  • dealing with life not that active here anymore
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #4 on: February 06, 2004, 11:15:00 »
Hey ARG would that work as well with dishes for the wife?   :D
I will leave your flesh on the mountains and fill the valleys with your carcasses. I will water the land with what flows from you, and the river beds shall be filled with your blood. When I snuff you out I will cover the heavens and all the stars will darken. Ezekiel 32:5-7
Tradition- Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid
Former RCN Sailor now Retired

Offline Another Recce Guy

  • Just a guy that wanted to serve Canada.
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • 1,255
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 453
  • Armour Forum Moderator
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #5 on: February 06, 2004, 12:08:00 »
Hasn‘t so far.
How will you answer your grandchildren when they what you did in the war?

Also, be careful of those that mistake authority for leadership.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 169,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,196
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2004, 12:14:00 »
I‘ve given this example before, but I think it is a good analogy.  Was Lend-Lease morally wrong in the fact that it supported Stalinist Russia, a regime that was on par with Nazi Germany?

 
Quote
Well, the US gave those chemical to Iraq in the 80‘s to fight the Iranians. Back in the 80‘s the US liked Saddam and didn‘t like Iran. So the US supported Hussien, along with some other guys you were fighting the US enemy‘s of the 80‘s. Hint Hint...its Osama. There are pictures of Donnie Rumsfeld and Saddam shaking hands and javing a laugh. Back then old Donnie had a lot less grey hair. So really, behind all this freeing Iraq reasoning. It‘s really the US trying to get their toys back.
I would like to see the proof on this.  I can‘t see the American‘s giving Saddam WMD as well as arming Israel at the same time.  If I recall, the Soviet Union was the number one military supplier to Hussein (those weren‘t burnt out M-60‘s in the sandbox).
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

tmbluesbflat

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2004, 06:14:00 »
You have to go back a few years to see who the players are, The US is about oil not about humanitarian etc. Sadam bad as he was, was not as bad as who put him in power and who gave him the weapons and who helped him in the use thereof. The US put him there so that the IRAQI people could be controlled in the interests of the US not in their own interests, and of course they are not Arabs, so they were a convenient force to be used against any Muslims who were against the US stealing their assets such as Iran etc. It helps if you read something in the way of honest reporting, a difficult thing to do in these days of the politically correct censorship.

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 169,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,196
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2004, 12:15:00 »
Please, provide us with an example of some honest reporting than.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 169,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,196
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2004, 19:45:00 »
Quote
The US is about oil not about humanitarian etc
On another note, please tell me where I may find oil in Kosovo.

 
Quote
Sadam bad as he was, was not as bad as who put him in power and who gave him the weapons and who helped him in the use thereof.  
On a third note, please tell me where I can find mass graves containing the victims of state sponsered terrorism in the continental United States.

Tmbulbisburntout, unless you are willing to provide a reasonable argument in a coherent sentence (hopefully utilizing punctuation and periods), refrain from bombarding us with your crappy, juvenile conspiracy theories.
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

Offline muskrat89

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 25,972
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,481
    • Desert Rat
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2004, 19:49:00 »
I can‘t remember - was there oil in Somalia?
The standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

Paul F

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #11 on: February 09, 2004, 19:59:00 »
Quote
Originally posted by Another Recce Guy:
[qb]   The bad guys in Afghanistan became their best interest after 9/11.  I'm sure that if 9/11 hadn't happened, then they wouldn't give a rat's buttocks what happened in Afghanistan, either.  
[/qb]
Actually, I would argue that. The US government reportedly was negotiating with the Taliban for them to expel Osama bin Laden from Afghanistan. Repordedly they asked the Taliban to expel him 30 times before 9/11 - 27 under the Clinton administration and 3 under the Bush administration.

Offline Slim

  • Just sliding along...
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 255
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,170
  • Daylight in the swamp
    • Canadian Coast Guard Auxiliary
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #12 on: February 09, 2004, 20:03:00 »
Quote
Originally posted by muskrat89:
[qb] I can‘t remember - was there oil in Somalia? [/qb]
No... Somalia was about humanitarian aid, period.

No oil or other commodities that could be exported to pluck the country out of the crappy place it is now.

Just civil war, and it‘s all "whose got the guns".

Slim
"The only thing required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

Edmond Burke

Paul F

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #13 on: February 09, 2004, 20:08:00 »
Quote
Originally posted by tmbluesbflat:
[qb] The US is about oil not about humanitarian etc.  [/qb]
If the US is all about oil, why did they go half way around the world to get it in Iraq, spending billions on removing Saddam and even more money on rebuilding Iraq when millions of Americans didn‘t want the war in the first place? The USA could easily have gotten this oil they are "about" in Alaska for a cheaper price in terms of money, and human life.

Offline FUBAR(Banned)

  • Banned
  • Member
  • *
  • -30
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 124
    • http://www.wirtualny-poligon.prv.pl
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #14 on: February 09, 2004, 20:22:00 »
Infanteer, Iraq‘s WMD‘s were supplied by the US, France and Germany, there is no doubt in that. The US used Saddam as a tool to fight the fundamentalist revolution from spreading on to other middle-eastern countries without compromising the lives of americans. After the war Saddam was short on cash and suprisingly - crude oil (Iraq‘s key oil deposits around Basrah were bombed and destroyed by Iranians) so he invaded the helpless and wealthy Kuwait.


Somalia and Kosovo go to prove that with a responsible leader the US still can enforce peace and provide aid around the world.
"If you‘re so innocent, than why won‘t you admit, that you‘re not?"

Offline Infanteer

  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 169,715
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 15,196
  • Honey Badger FTW!
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #15 on: February 09, 2004, 22:55:00 »
Quote
Infanteer, Iraq‘s WMD‘s were supplied by the US, France and Germany, there is no doubt in that.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/cw/program.htm

I see that Iraq produced its own stocks.  Originally it imported the chemicals, but big deal, I could go to Costco and get most of those things.  Unless your going to offer positive proof that a Western country trucked in mustard gas, I still say your out to lunch.

 
Quote
Somalia and Kosovo go to prove that with a responsible leader the US still can enforce peace and provide aid around the world.
Hmmm...are you getting at Clinton?  Remember, Bush Sr. sent the troops into Somalia...it was Clinton who pulled them out as a knee jerk reaction to losses sustained by Task Force Ranger.  It is the same Clinton who responded to terrorist attacks on the US by firing a couple Tomahawk‘s into the middle of the Sudan.

Where‘s your hero now?
"Overall it appears that much of the apparent complexity of modern war stems in practice from the self-imposed complexity of modern HQs" LCol J.P. Storr

tmbluesbflat

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #16 on: February 15, 2004, 01:21:00 »
what is not generally known it appears is that the largest proven oil reserves in the world is in an area just north of Iraq, the are is Known As the Caspian Basin. What the US knows is that their reserves in Alaska are running out, gone completely in perhaps 40 years but of diminishing volumes every year until nada! This is or should be general knowledge by every man or woman in our society. The war is and will always be the oil! Also what is general knowledge in most places in our society, is that the Bin Laden family have been financial supporters of the Bush family since or maybe even before the 70‘s, yes including
Osama!

tmbluesbflat

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #17 on: February 15, 2004, 01:25:00 »
It is a shame to see people acting like a lynch mob, a very American trait by the way. I always thought Canadians were more inclined to follow the rule of law, it however appears that "Rambo" mentality rears it‘s stupid head all to often

tmbluesbflat

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #18 on: February 15, 2004, 01:30:00 »
I must apologize to one contributer here, I realise that the concept of a compound, complex sentence, is perhaps beyond the ken of more simple folk, I will try to restrain myself in the future.

Offline nULL

  • Full Member
  • *****
  • -145
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 421
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #19 on: February 15, 2004, 01:53:00 »
the war is over, politically. it‘s been done, no backing out now. why debate this? personal opinions on whether Joe XXX supported it are useless and irrelevant.

just my 2 pence

Offline Enzo

  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • -60
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 618
  • Meh...
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #20 on: February 15, 2004, 17:48:00 »
TM - " what is not generally known it appears is that the largest proven oil reserves in the world is in an area just north of Iraq, the are is Known As the Caspian Basin. "

"I realise that the concept of a compound, complex sentence, is perhaps beyond the ken of more simple folk, I will try to restrain myself in the future."


TM, I‘m sorry dude, but you are becoming your own worst enemy. Before you critique others you should preview your posts to correct your many grammatical errors. I raise this point to counter your condescending tone. Your demeanor affects the points upon which you are trying to base your arguments. As a certain politician recently highlighted, expressing one‘s views in anything other than an educated manner can reflect poorly upon that person.

Cheers...
"Most people would rather analyse risks than take them"

Wallace Kaufman

SFontaine

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #21 on: February 15, 2004, 22:27:00 »
(Apology in advance if some of this crap has already been shot down, I just skimmed through the post)

 
Quote
Iraq‘s WMD‘s were supplied by the US, France and Germany, there is no doubt in that.
Really?
  http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/IRQ_IMPRTS_73-02.pdf  

  http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/3/17/123424.shtml  


Try to learn the facts before spouting off left wing crap.

 
Quote
Somalia and Kosovo go to prove that with a responsible leader the US still can enforce peace and provide aid around the world.
Yup President George HW Bush  went into Somalia to help the Somalis and then all the efforts and sucesses of the missions were effed over by the Clinton Adminstration and their cowardice.

 
Quote
The US is about oil not about humanitarian etc.
Right. WW1 and 2 was for oil, Korea was for oil, Vietnam was for oil, Desert Storm was for oil, Somalia and Kosovo were for oil and Afghanistan.. Yup you guessed it. Oil.
   :rolleyes:  

 
Quote
All this and most a large percent of americans say "Oh leave him alone he hasn‘t done anything to us."
The reason the US cared about the plight of the Iraqi people and the threat Saddam Hussein posed AFTER 9/11 was because the US now genuinely fears that there are people out there who can do damage and people out there who kill civilians without due cause.
The way everything was percevied changed after 9/11

 
Quote
It is a shame to see people acting like a lynch mob, a very American trait by the way. I always thought Canadians were more inclined to follow the rule of law, it however appears that "Rambo" mentality rears it‘s stupid head all to often
That doesn‘t even make any sense
1) How are the defenders of the Iraq war being a lynch mob? We‘re just shutting down some of the uninformed BS that some of your little friends are spouting.

2) How are lynch mobs an American trait? I can tell you right now that during the Canadian-American Olympic Games a friend of mine said "I don‘t really like team Canada to be honest" and had to run from a group of roughly 10-15 people intent on hurting him.

Yeah very American trait.

Offline madpat

  • New Member
  • **
  • 50
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 25
  • Reservist
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #22 on: February 17, 2004, 15:51:00 »
Quote
Originally posted by SFontaine:
[qb] (Apology in advance if some of this crap has already been shot down, I just skimmed through the post)

   
Quote
Iraq‘s WMD‘s were supplied by the US, France and Germany, there is no doubt in that.
Really?
   http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/IRQ_IMPRTS_73-02.pdf  

   http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/3/17/123424.shtml  


Try to learn the facts before spouting off left wing crap.
[/qb]
Not quite sure what you were getting at with this first comments and the listing of web sites so I clicked them. Now how does a report titled "conventional arms sales" relate to weapons of mass destruction? The second article is even less useful, it fails entirely to mention WMDs. Near the end it justifies the giving of tacticle information to Iraq because the author claims that Ayatollah Khomeini was "the greatest fear in the gulf" the report then goes on to boast about how America gave Iran conventional weapons to beat Saddam. How kind. Never mentioned the chemicals that america gave to Saddam to support his WMD plans though. The best part of your post has to be that the first report disproves the second report. The basis of the second article is that no american items are in use in the Iraqi military but the sales report in the first documents helecopter sales. I laughed when I got to the bottom of the page and saw the link for boycotting France.
All generalizations are false.

SFontaine

  • Guest
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #23 on: February 17, 2004, 18:54:00 »
The second article explains all the weapons givin to Iraq by other countries, and America is not there. They‘d mentioned weapon supplies if the US had.

And do you have any concrete evidence the United States gave Saddam any such weapons anyway?

Offline bobthebui|der

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • -75
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,070
  • I got a axe
Re: War In Iraq Debate
« Reply #24 on: February 17, 2004, 19:10:00 »
Do you have evidence that the US didnt?

We the public dont know all the little details to situations such as these, and for good reason. its the countries duty to vote in someone they feel would handle such information with discretion and to the benefit of the country. The American people have voted in Bush and now they must deal with the fact that they arent going to be given every little snippit of info to satisfy them.

This is why Im baffled that these Anti-War activists actually feel they have a valid stand. The amount of information they base their position on is quite small.

Theres always more to a situation such as Iraq, and just because Bush doesnt come out with Documents from the Pentagon and read em over CNN, doesnt mean they dont have a reason to go to war.

People need to start trusting their leaders to do the right thing, after all..they did vote him in.

just my 2 cents.
The true measure of a man is how well he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good

Munit Haec et Altera Vincit

"2..4..6..8..tiptoe, sneak, and infiltrate, yaaaaaay, recce!" - Kat Stevens