War In Iraq Debate

[a_majoor]

the Bush administration is all about oil and money and not about humanitarian aid.Look whats happening in darfur.Any money there? nope. what about Korea? nope, none there.
Ukraine? no wait, no money.

Colin Powell, US Secretary of State, upbraided the UN for not taking action to stop the Genocide in Dafar. The Multilateralists are currently debating what is the definition of Genocide so they can then hold another meeting...

The Bush Administration is attempting to hold multi-lateral talks between North Korea and the surrounding nations to resolve the various difficulties (including the threat of Nuclear blackmail), but the "Dear Leader" has so far rebuffed attempts to resolve these situations to the satisfaction of the neighboring nations. The Clinton approach of offering aid in return for cessation of nuclear weapons development foundered because only the Americans were "straight up", the DKRP took the food, money and oil and happily went on building Nukes

The United States is currently monitoring the situation in the Ukraine, and so far refuse to recognize the elections there as valid.

Since we don't live in a universe of "friction free" economies, the US is applying their blood and treasure against the areas which have demonstrated direct threats against them. Afghanistan and Iraq were perhaps the biggest reservoirs of Jihadis and biggest cash sponsors respectively, but Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia and several lesser lights are probably in the gunsights right now. Should the situation change , the main effort of the United States will change as well.

 

[muskrat89]

And just to be on the safe side and avoid death-by-Muskrat

;D

48 - First of all, Mods aren't circling, just waiting to pounce...  Next, when someone is tip-toeing along the gray areas of decorum, the mods consider past posts, attitudes, contributions, etc., of the poster, before deciding what to do or say (if anything)

Calling someone (including me) a redneck, coming from you, isn't going to spur me into action. 

Even when I don't agree, generally, I enjoy your posts....  carry on!

 

[48Highlander]

;D

48 - First of all, Mods aren't circling, just waiting to pounce...  Next, when someone is tip-toeing along the gray areas of decorum, the mods consider past posts, attitudes, contributions, etc., of the poster, before deciding what to do or say (if anything)

    Yeah, I know the majority of the members here are reasonable human beings, and that the mods are amongst the best of any forum I've ever taken part in.  Just thought I'd play it safe.  I've taken to occasionaly posting on leftie forums like www.indymedia.org just to see what the other side has to say, and their mods tend to go into temper tantrums at the mere hint of a racial term, regaurdless of context.  Ofcourse, they wouldn't consider anything derigatory of Americans to be a racial term, but use a phrase like "camel jockey" and you're labeled a war-mongering baby-bayonetting imperialist nazi.  And summarily banned from the site.  It never ceases to amuse me how a website/organization dedicated to free thinking and freedom of speech is ten times quicker to censor someone than a website run by us warmongers and faschists   Anyway, like I said I was pretty sure nobody would take offense to what I said, so thank you for proving me right

 

[Brad Sallows]

>If the US for some unfanthomable reason did decide to invade Canada, both American and Canadian soldiers would be equaly reluctant to take up arms against eachother.

I was waiting for someone to state the obvious.  The "test that should never be taken" applies equally to both nations after so many years of shared culture and history.  It would take almost unimaginable incompetence and stubbornness on the part of politicians in both countries to cast us into something which with hindsight would probably look more foolish than the opening moves of WWI.  It would be ironic were the soldiers to make a peace which the politicians could not maintain.

 

[Dogboy]

not that all the insergens are good guys but you've got to admirer they guts tho

So dogboy you admire people that cut the heads off of people and shoot women in cold blood. You must be a lot of fun at parties.   :

sorry bin away for a bit

with the logic in your statement I can assume that you support illegal detention touchier and human rights abuse along with the unnecessary killing of civilians?


did i say i supported the people doing the beheading?
NO don't lump me in like that

all i say is don't call something black and wight when its clearly not

their are people fighting the US believing their defending their home land (a valid point and brave SOBs)
and their are other who do the beheading thing (ssimpleterror)
their not all the same group


their was a interview on the CBC last week from a Australia feed that was with a few "insurgents" and i fond it rather enlightening

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Busy boy, spreading your disjointed prose all over the forum. Stay in one spot, answer your problems, then move on. Either that, or go to bed and start fresh tomorrow. Maybe we'll make some sense of you then.

 

[Slim]

Though I'm not to sure this board continues to represent "What's wrong with University campuses today"

We're not into self-flagelation and self-victimization if thats what you mean...

Here's something else to consider.

Imagine, if you will, what it would be like living in a militant Muslim State and under the conditions you have described...

Do you really think that the average person is all that excited about their living conditions under that regime? don't you think that they would want a CHANGE of government, instead of propping up the extremist leaders there now?!

Unless, of course they're (the general population that is) are being LIED TO about who's fault it really is! If thats the case then another country would see the plight of those people and help them out, don't you think?

Oh wait, the States has done that with Iraq already and all the peace-loving Hoohaw's didn't carte for that

Hmmm, what to do, what to do?

Maybe all the peaceniks and University professors want an extremist state here in N.A...And you think that they're whining now...

Cheers

Slim

 

[CivU]

Bograt,

Apology accepted.  When alcohol is involved I feel accountability is difficult to hold someone to...people say things. It happens.

48,

"Is Israel also responsible for Canadian ghettos?"  I don't know where this came from. At the expense of bandwith and people's time you should probably keep comments relevant to what people actually stated in their posts.


"Oh, I don't know, how about American forces fighting to implement a fair democratic regime instead of letting Iraq be run by extrimists"

We will see how fair and democratic the next regime in place is.  Not unlike many other military interventions the United States has been involved in, the next leader will be essentially hand picked to rule the country in accordance with their interests.

"What suggests life has improved?  Nothing.  What's the point of your question?  Did you expect life for them to improve the day the first American tank rolled over the border?  Or do you suppose it's a proccess which, like most things in life, will take a lot of hard work and time before it has a positive effect?"

We're approaching two years...let me know when you find something...

 

[Slim]

We're approaching two years...let me know when you find something...

I think that you'll find that the average Iraqi citizen is VERY happy that the US has taken Sadam away from power. These people were living ina country ruled by fear. People dissapearing in the night, women raped, fathers and husbands tortured...No rights for anyone. Now the Country is trying to change. Women are allowed to go to school for the first time ever and I can't see, for the life of me, how and why you and all the other students out there think that this is a bad thing.

By the way I have friends in the country working for PMC's who are constantly approached and thanked for having the courage to what they're doing to try and keep the country away from extremism...That you won't see on the news because it doesn't make for a good story "the West doing good" and all.

Do you really want Iraq to return to the dark ages?

That makes no sense at all...CIVU there comes a time when you must turn and fight. If you're going for a soldier you need to learn that or you will not do very well at all!

Slim

 

[CivU]

"I think that you'll find that the average Iraqi citizen is VERY happy that the US has taken Sadam away from power"

I don't understand what this is based on.  Iraq remains a country filled with incredible violence and destruction, and from what I have read, while many Iraqi people are pleased with the removal of Saddam (an act in of itself I don't disagree with in principle) they are not pleased with the continued American occupation of the country.

"That you won't see on the news because it doesn't make for a good story "the West doing good" and all."

I'm pretty certain Fox News or CNN would gladly put this sort of story on air.  It would certainly project a better image than the present death toll statistics and colour coded terror monitor that fills the gaps between Crossfire and Wolf Blitzer on CNN and the latest marry a transexual midget reality show on Fox...

"Do you really want Iraq to return to the dark ages?"

I'm not sure how this would happen?

"there comes a time when you must turn and fight. If you're going for a soldier you need to learn that or you will not do very well at all!"

I agree with you completely; except that the decision made in March 2003 was not the right time or for the right reasons...

 

[Slim]

agree with you completely; except that the decision made in March 2003 was not the right time or for the right reasons...

What makes you think, as an officer cadet in a civilian university abd being taught by leftist professors, that you know ANYTHING about the right time to turn and fight?!

 

[CivU]

"What makes you think, as an officer cadet in a civilian university abd being taught by leftist professors, that you know ANYTHING about the right time to turn and fight?!"

What makes you think as a retired Armoured Cpl of 35 years of age and the opposite political viewpoint of mine that you know ANYTHING about the basis for American foreign policy decisions?!

This line of reasoning is irrelevant as anyone could question anyone's knowledge on the nature of one situation or another.  With the exception of an area where someone is a particular expert, of which neither of us are on the items being debated here, nobody on this forum has anything other than their own background and knowledge gleemed from that to ascertain an opinion...

Also, what makes you think I'm being taught by leftist professors? What makes you capable of making a judgment on my knowledge of anything, including "the right time to turn and fight", based on information from a bio on an internet forum?  I could easily have more life experience than you in any number of areas, just as you could over me.  But that doesn't make either of our opinions meaningless... 

I think you need to take this discussion, as that's what it is, and recognize that every post is not a personal attack on your credibility as a human being...

 

[mdh]

A lot of this discussion reminds me of the old Cold War debates during the 1980s when the moral equivalency crowd was busy making every excuse for the Soviet Empire they could muster. And blaming America first. Those of us "of a certain vintage" will remember how outraged leftists took to the streets when NATO responded to the stationing of SS20 missiles in the Eastern Bloc with the Pershing.  Interestingly, most of the so-called intellectual leaders who led that fight have reconstituted themselves as critics against the war on the terror - including that darling of the academy Noam Chomsky and his sidekick Edward S. Herman.  Chomsky disgraced himself by denying for years that Pol Pot had precipitated a class-based genocide in Cambodia, but I digress. CivU has decided to line up with the propagandists who are doing their best to undermine the US war in Iraq and dismiss the war on terror as a creation of US imperialism. He has highlighted the work of an individual (William Blum) who believes that Reagan, Clinton and Swartzkopf are war criminals who should be treated the same way as Japanese war criminals who conducted biological warfare experiments on alllied prisoners in WW2; CivU has said he disagrees with Mr. Blum's analysis in this instance, but has signally failed to denounce Mr. Blum himself as a irresponsible buffoon and psedo-intellectual. In the end it doesn't matter that much.  The war of terror is the great moral question of our time - some will choose sides that are reprehensible, most will do the right thing and understand that Islamo-fascism is one of the scourges of our time.  As Castro said, "history will absolve me" - or not.

 

[Tach9]

most will do the right thing and understand that Islamo-fascism is one of the scourges of our time. 

Thank you!

 

[CivU]

What is Islamo-fascism?  You seem to have connected one word that has become negative for a lot of people, Islam, and attached to it a word with justified negative connotations, fascism.  I have yet to hear this term used outside of your post.

"Chomsky disgraced himself by denying for years that Pol Pot had precipitated a class-based genocide in Cambodia"

Did Bush disgrace himself by failing to recognize that there were in fact no weapons of mass destruction?

"has signally failed to denounce Mr. Blum himself as a irresponsible buffoon and psedo-intellectual"

Mr Blum has a degree in economics and worked for the US State Department before resigning over his contention with American involvement in Vietnam.  He has been a freelance journalist since this time and continues to publish books, papers and scholarly articles.  I'm not sure your level of education, so I am not going to assume anything, but I think it is fitting to say Mr. Blum is undoubtedly an intellectual and most certainly not a buffon, whether you disagree with what he has to say or not.  Because someone's views are not consistent with yours does not mean their intellectual capacity is inferior...

 

[Slim]

What is Islamo-fascism?   You seem to have connected one word that has become negative for a lot of people, Islam, and attached to it a word with justified negative connotations, fascism.   I have yet to hear this term used outside of your post.

"Chomsky disgraced himself by denying for years that Pol Pot had precipitated a class-based genocide in Cambodia"

Did Bush disgrace himself by failing to recognize that there were in fact no weapons of mass destruction?

They were all gone buy the time that the US invaded...Siria, I believe, was the recipient of those weapons.

Look, is there any point to this at all...You're just arguing for the sake of argument. You've never been over there and haven't been around long enough to know what the score really is. Lots of people who've taken the timne to answer you know what they're on about.

Face facts sometimes you don't know what the real situation is, do you!

Stop talking for awhile and learn something...

 

[Infanteer]

Did Bush disgrace himself by failing to recognize that there were in fact no weapons of mass destruction?

I guess all of these guys are a disgrace as well?



"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."

President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998



"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998



"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998



"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."

Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998



"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998



"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998



"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."

Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov.10, 1999



"There is no doubt that .. Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of an elicit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."

Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001



"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."

Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002



"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

AI Gore, Sept. 23, 2002



"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

AI Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

 

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and

developing weapons of mass destruction."

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002



"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."

Sen. Robert Byrd (D, VW), Oct. 3, 2002



"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-if necessary-to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002



"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002



"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."

Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10,2002



"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002



"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."

Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002



"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."

Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

As for the fact of "no weapons of mass destruction", these Kurds are happy to hear that....

 

[48Highlander]

Did Bush disgrace himself by failing to recognize that there were in fact no weapons of mass destruction?

    Sure, why not.  So did the head of every nation that's supported UN sations against Iraq for the last 12 years, as well as the UN itself.  Lots of disgrace to go around!

Mr Blum has a degree in economics and worked for the US State Department before resigning over his contention with American involvement in Vietnam.  He has been a freelance journalist since this time and continues to publish books, papers and scholarly articles.  I'm not sure your level of education, so I am not going to assume anything, but I think it is fitting to say Mr. Blum is undoubtedly an intellectual and most certainly not a buffon, whether you disagree with what he has to say or not.  Because someone's views are not consistent with yours does not mean their intellectual capacity is inferior...

    So he's an intelectual buffon.  Frankly, I'd prefer someone who's undeucated but open minded over some closed-minded fool who thinks he knows everything.  His education is irrelevant; if he insist on comparing any of the US leadership to the Nazi regime, "buffoon" is too kind a word to describe him.  This individual proves that you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him think  ;D

 

[48Highlander]

hey, thanks infanteer!  People like this are always claiming that "nobody else" beleived there were WMD in Iraq.  I've never gotten around to collecting up a list that proves otherwise.  I'm deffinitely saving your post.

 

[CivU]

Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Last time I checked I'm not the only one asking this question...

As far as,

"Face facts sometimes you don't know what the real situation is, do you!

Stop talking for awhile and learn something..."

I'm not sure any of us know the "real situation" as all our information is secondary sources; however, I don't suggest you know any more or any less than I do.  As far as learning anything, I don't think an internet forum is the place for that.  I will continue to read books, articles, newspapers, etc. at my local library to broaden my scope of learning.  In fact, if you'd like to suggest any that you think will help enlighten me to "the real situation" that you are aware of, then by all means, I'm always willing to listen.

Your use of  "People like this" lacks respect for anyone of differing opinion.  Short of calling myself, or anyone who wishes to address the reasons for the US invasion of Iraq idiots, you are being insulting to anyone who wishes to post on this board with an opinion different than your own.  It's difficult for a person to acknowledge someone else's opinion when they don't project an image that allows someone to respect them first. 

I digress, I'm on a plane in a few hours and won't be online for some time.  Everyone enjoy the holiday period wherever you are...