War in iraq? liberals = traitors ?

[Mystic Cloud]

quote:Originally posted by BurningAngel

you decide. I for one think so. Im not entirely convinced that there are were any "strong" ties between iraq and any terrorist organizations, other than the fact that Iraq is in the middle east, and the terrorists "being middle eastern" were to. But regardless of whether or not there were any ties i think this war is a good thing. Its imperitive we show other nations we wont take s*** sitting down. Even if iraq didnt do anything to begin with, who cares? I think every now and then its "good practice" to show your might just so other nations dont screw with you. This may seem insensitive but i dont even care about the innocent people in iraq that are dying, I say bulldoze their homes and plant a wal-mart with an american flag on top, for no other reason than the fact that we can.

Yes I agree, throw more gasoline on the fire. Most of the world
already hates USA and many many more will follow.
If humanities future is indeed set to the 3rd shaking, it will be
interesting to see how it unfolds [}:)]

[Naiad780]

Hahaha!

You're from www.evilconservative.com, aren't you?

[Eric g]

quote:Originally posted by BurningAngel

you decide. I for one think so. Im not entirely convinced that there are were any "strong" ties between iraq and any terrorist organizations, other than the fact that Iraq is in the middle east, and the terrorists "being middle eastern" were to. But regardless of whether or not there were any ties i think this war is a good thing. Its imperitive we show other nations we wont take s*** sitting down. Even if iraq didnt do anything to begin with, who cares? I think every now and then its "good practice" to show your might just so other nations dont screw with you. This may seem insensitive but i dont even care about the innocent people in iraq that are dying, I say bulldoze their homes and plant a wal-mart with an american flag on top, for no other reason than the fact that we can.

Oh my gawd armchair warrior on the loose [xx(][xx(]

[Qui-Gon Jinn]

You are dead serious now Burning Angel?? ..jeeeeee........

[no_leaf_clover]

quote:Even if iraq didnt do anything to begin with, who cares? I think every now and then its "good practice" to show your might just so other nations dont screw with you. This may seem insensitive but i dont even care about the innocent people in iraq that are dying, I say bulldoze their homes and plant a wal-mart with an american flag on top, for no other reason than the fact that we can.

I'm trying to figure out whether this is sarcastic or what you actually think. It goes a good way towards showing how ignorant people with such beliefs can be.

We went to Iraq probably for a multitude of reasons, terrorism not being among the most important if it was a reason at all. George W. is known to have had a grudge against Saddam because of the relation between Bush Sr. and Saddam. willy Cheney has made millions of dollars from Halliburton since the Iraq War despite what he says about his connection to the company or its role in Iraq ( http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?040216fa_fact ). Oil is another factor, and forces in Iraq are planning on controlling oil there ( http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/030703_us_intentions.html ). I have also read previously that troops are even being stationed outside of Iraq over potential oil fields, but that was an article from a while back and I wasn't able to find it again just now, though I may try finding it again later.

US intelligence before the war in Iraq is known to have reported to the Bush Administration that there was no evidence for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. What a surprise it is now that we have yet to find any.. but of course that's no longer the reason we invaded Iraq. Now it may be a host of other reasons, from Saddam being a bad leader to the possibility of supporting terrorists monetarily (which similarly has no supporting evidence) to - and get this - they had the ABILITY to make weapons of mass destruction. Excuse me, but, wt*?  Iraqi scientists questioned by the government reported that while they had the means to produce weapons, the facilities for such operations hadn't been in use and there were no longer any chemical weapons in Iraq.

On a sort of contradictory note to the whole 'possibility that they could have made them', OUR government was recently found to be manufacturing anthrax - against international treaties! This was revealed after the anthrax scares, when the anthrax was proven to be not from Iraq, as it was the original suspect (Bush Administration likely trying to find an excuse to invade Iraq again here), but from plants here in the US. This forced the military to admit that they had been manufacturing it illegally. Coincidentally, by the time this was realized, the anthrax scares had stopped, the Patriot Act had been successfully passed after, *coincidentally*, the two democrats responsible for most of the opposition to the bill returned after being the only two senators that had had anthrax sent to them (Daschle and Leahy), and the media dropped the whole situation over a brief period of time as more troublesome issues were introduced to draw attention away.

To add to the suggestion that the anthrax scares were internal with the government, the notes sent with the anthrax said things such as 'Praise Allah'. When the anthrax was proven to be from US plants, the FBI tried to pin sole responsibility upon a single former employee, Steven Hatfill, when they later admitted there was no more evidence that he had done it than they was for anyone else, and they had went after him especially out of sheer frustration. The only supposed evidence the FBI had was that they supposedly found traces of anthrax at Hatfill's home and on his job site. Well, the place in which he worked reported that the FBI had never been there, and his apartment was simply ransacked with no evidence anything was found other than the FBI's word, which as we can see now is obviously flawed unless Hatfill's place of employment had reason to lie.

Having no reason to commit such crimes, and having no connections to Al Qaeda or the middle-east (besides, as you might see from an FBI report, he worked with at least one middle-eastern guy when he was with the government), there is no reason to believe that he wrote any letters praising Allah along with lethal doses of anthrax. Nor did Al Qaeda claim anything to do with the anthrax, and if they were responsible they would of course have no reason to be hush-hush about it, since they candidly admitted responsibility for 911 and the Madrid Bombings among many other terrorist acts. This suggests that neither Hatfill or Al Qaeda was responsible, and the fact that the two democrats opposing the Patriot Act were the only two senators sent anthrax simply makes one wonder. Of course, after they were sent anthrax, and returned to congress, a new, extremely length version of the Patriot Act was passed 98 to 1 that sacrificed a basic freedom or two, temporarily of course, in the name of national security from the barbaric muslims that surely must have sent the anthrax.

I've rambled on and strayed from the subject I think, but what I was getting at is that we didn't go to Iraq for the right reasons. The soldiers volunteered for what they hopefully thought was the right thing to do, but that does not mean that we cannot question the reasons for going into Iraq to begin with. If you don't support the war in Iraq, it doesn't mean you're not patriotic. If you want our soldiers in Iraq to die, that may very well be unpatriotic. But being against the reasons the government is sending the troops into Iraq towards possible death is quite democratic if not completely logical if you ask me.

Afghanistan by itself to take out Al Qaeda cells would've been alright, handled correctly. But then invading Iraq, and making it the primary situation at the cost of figures like Bin Laden more leadway into escaping US forces, is in my opinion utterly ignorant. Saddam wasn't the threat before or after 911, it was, and still is, Bin Laden. Yet he's still out there hiding and preaching death to the infidels while the big situation is now in decimated Iraq, for whatever reason........

Yeah, woo! We went in and pwned Iraq with our all-powerful military! Now... what threat was he posing again? Oh, that's right, there was a possibility that he might've been making weapons... maybe.. the ones we still haven't found... Or was it because he was just a bad guy? One of those two. I guess.

[Jenadots]

Hi, war issue is confusing as normally, I am totally against war as a failure of diplomacy.  But it seems that no one -- and I mean no world leader or UN official thought Saddam didn't have all sorts of weapons of mass destruction.  None have been found - so where is the stuff they all knew he had?  Perhaps they never existed or perhaps he sent them out of the country.

Saddam out of power is a good thing for most of the Iraqi's.  That they expected their country to be rebuilt in a day was unfortunate. That the looting that took place destroyed almost as much as the bombs was also unfortunate.  However, I am certain there are many Iraqis alive today who would not have been if Saddam & sons were still in power.  Certainly there are far fewer raped and mutilated girls and women.  

And they are trying to build their own government in the face of terrorists who have become assasins.  That any of them have to courage to line up to take those offices is to be admired.  They know what is at stake for them.  They can go forward or go back to another dictatorship or fundamentalist state of some sort which would be just as bad as Saddam's regime.  I only hope their courage holds out over the next few years - they will need it.

Oil?  where is it?  I haven't noticed any decrease in gasoline prices around the world.

Chenney & Halburtin?  He made millions before and he will again when he is out of office.  There are not a whole lot of companies in the world who can rebuild oil fields and equipment.  And better it be an American company than one from somewhere else - it is our hard earned tax dollars that are paying for the rebuilding of Iraq.  They will end up with a better infra-structure than most cities in the USA.

The "world" needs no excuse to hate the USA - Islamic fundamentalists need no reason to kill us - they just want to. It is about power and money and recruiting basically powerless people as terrorists.  Combine that with some outrageous religious fervor -- and you get people willing to blow themselves up just to kill someone else.

The rest of the world is not safe from the terrorists.  Al Queda and other terrorist groups are active in over 60 countries in the world.  
They are not in those countries to meet and greet and learn about the culture - they are there to plan and committ murders.  

There is every reason to believe that they did have some sanctuary in Iraq - not as much as in Afghanistan or in some other countries that give them lots of money - but there were some connections.  In any case, they are certainly there now.

And I don't think it made us a bigger target than we already were - How many times in the past 10 or 15 years did terrorists attack this country and we did next to nothing in response.  This country hasn't even taken the gloves off yet in responding to terrorists and countries that threaten us.  And Saddam made many threats - if he was bluffing, he was damned stupid and I am sure regrets it as he stares at the walls of whatever cell they have him in.

I am basically an isolationist - I want all our troops to come home and take care of our own borders.  I want all our tax money spent here - rebuilding our infra-structure for a change. We need to get out of all these foreign entanglements as George Washington called them.  We can trade with the rest of the world, but I certainly don't beleive we can or should be involved militarily in it. I don't really care if the rest of the world hates us.

Of course it did get the Libyan dictator to change his tune as he thought he would be next.  More likely it will be that insane - and he is insane - dictator in North Korea.  This is a man who is building nuclear weapons while his own people starve to death.  Japan, China, and the USA are not about to let that nutcase out of the box.

I think Iraq was just a warm up for the big one with North Korea.  

Unfortunately, every day more little kids are being trained as fanatical terrorists in the Islamic world.  So it could be a least a generation before we see the last of them.  They will not stop no matter what the USA does or doesn't do. Taking away their sources of money and their lives is probably the only thing that is going to stop them.  

Or we could just capture as many as we can and humanely give them all lobotomies and send them home to their families to take care of.  They might be trainable and lead somewhat more productive lives than just training to go on suicide missions, capturing truck drivers to behead, or blowing up buses and restaurants.

Not that I blame most of them for their rage at their lives which in so many places are truly awful existences - but that rage is being misdirected at everyone but their own leaders, religious and otherwise.  

I often wonder if there will ever be a generation of people on earth who do not experience war somewhere.  It makes no sense to me.

[BurningAngel]

quote:George W. is known to have had a grudge against Saddam because of the relation between Bush Sr. and Saddam.

I dont blame bush for doing this. Saddam threatened his family...and i know if you threaten MY family, I collect your f*c** head. So i say let bush protect his family.


I dont agree with you either jenadots. But what caught my eye was this part of what you said.

quote:Unfortunately, every day more little kids are being trained as fanatical terrorists in the Islamic world. So it could be a least a generation before we see the last of them.

my mind went completely numb after reading this. Do you honestly believe that there is a "finite" stash of terrorists in the world? And that we will "Get the last of them" ever? Im discusted at the actions of republicans in how they hide behind "we are helping the iraqi people bs". We dont give a damn about the iraqi people.


Do you ever wonder why the united states doesnt have a bombing every week like israel? It would be very easy for a terrorist to make a bomb out of fertilizer like old tim mcvey did, so you wouldnt even need to difficult to attain materials. Israel is more trigger happy than the US, so its not because of fear. Plus what would a terrorist blowing himself up have to worry about in the first place, he would be dying in the incident. You comment here just doesnt make sense to me. These people are happy to die in the name of their cause so fear isnt even an issue to them. if these guys are one thing....its that they are hard-asses. They are hard-asses to the extreme.

quote:Oil? where is it? I haven't noticed any decrease in gasoline prices around the world.

The largest stash of oil in the world is under iraq. Why wouldnt we want it? But perhaps a better question is.....why shouldnt we take it?

quote:Chenney & Halburtin? He made millions before and he will again when he is out of office. There are not a whole lot of companies in the world who can rebuild oil fields and equipment. And better it be an American company than one from somewhere else - it is our hard earned tax dollars that are paying for the rebuilding of Iraq. They will end up with a better infra-structure than most cities in the USA.

Again your missing the point, and i cant believe im agreeing with the hippy above you, but you need to be carefull about letting corperations chum up with the military. All in all its a bad idea to let corperations chum up with the military , American company or not. I dont believe that america is somehow magically more benevolent than the iraqi's. if we didnt have the constitution bush, or any other leader wouldnt think twice about doing the things that saddam did (in my oppinion anyways).

[The AlphaOmega]

Ya, God bless war and destruction *sarcasm*.  Listen, I'm no liberal.  A war for a good cause, like freedom, has to be faught.  It's very good that we are freeing people from Saddam's sick ideals.  A good thing has come out of a war started for a bad reason.  The terrorist attacks gave Bush the reason he needed to go to war.  His reason was politics.  He didn't send troops over there to fight terrorism, he sent them to find and destroy weapons of mass distruction and stop the regime that was making them.  But there were none.  How much time is being spent looking for Osama?  Most of it is going towards rebuilding a new government.  If you don't agree with the war we are in, that doesn't necissarily classify you as a traitor, because there are a number of reasons why this war never should have started in the first place.  Many are comparing it to Vietnam.  I think that our soldiers are doing an excellent job at what they can and the fight for freedom is the only justifiable fight.  Our military is doing the right thing... Bush is not.  Can't wait to see him leave office!

[Fat_Turkey]

The only people that seem to think that war is for a good cause are the Americans tricked into thinking it works that way. Calling "liberals" traitors is just suppression. It's like executing people for turning Hitler's picture to face the wall. Oh yeah, that's another thing: Bush's tactics to get everyone to support the war is just like Hitler's tactics to get everyone to support the Nazi cause. Don't believe me? Do some research then. You'll be pleasantly surprised.

I don't need to look far to find lots of places that show how full of excrement America is about this war. The only people who don't believe what they have to say are too dimwitted or snowblinded by their patriotism.

Try www.theboywhocriediraq.com for starters. Oh and, if you still think the war is for freedom, and not for oil or political gain, you're wrong[]

~FT

[Fat_Turkey]

quote:you decide. I for one think so. Im not entirely convinced that there are were any "strong" ties between iraq and any terrorist organizations, other than the fact that Iraq is in the middle east, and the terrorists "being middle eastern" were to. But regardless of whether or not there were any ties i think this war is a good thing. Its imperitive we show other nations we wont take s*** sitting down. Even if iraq didnt do anything to begin with, who cares? I think every now and then its "good practice" to show your might just so other nations dont screw with you. This may seem insensitive but i dont even care about the innocent people in iraq that are dying, I say bulldoze their homes and plant a wal-mart with an american flag on top, for no other reason than the fact that we can.

Wow. Materialistic horseshit at it's best. How very patriotic and Roman of you. Yeah that's right, ROMAN. Look back into history and see how many similarities there are. Let's turn the world into uncultured pigs that care only about making fun of asians and playing video games all bonking day. Oh wait, they also eat too much McDonald's and care nothing about spiritual values. What am I talking about? That's right!! 60% of Americans AT LEAST.

And one more thing, the video footage of the bastards who pulled off 9/11 were caucasian. In fact a lot of terrorists are white. You think they're all middle eastern? I used to live there, and they aren't very bad people at all, you prejudice f)(*&

[Fat_Turkey]

Little story I have now. I know I'm bugging you with repetitive posts but when I'm ticked I forget about things that are very important to say. Here goes:

An American aircraft was downed over China because it has been doctrined under treaty to be a no-military zone. They didn't kill or destroy the craft, they only downed it. They offered to America, freely, to hand the pilots over, on the condition it never happened again. What does Bush do? I'll tell you what he did.

He almost started World War bonking Three. The first World War started because a few political disputes, a lot like this one, but come on. What a god damned idiot. An officer at the pentagon had to call Bush Sr to tell his son to calm down. He was going to declare war on China over a friggin plane. Now if you STILL think he has legitamate reasons to go to war, just think of this: HE CAN'T READ.

~FT

[Veccolo]

quote:Originally posted by BurningAngel

you decide. I for one think so. Im not entirely convinced that there are were any "strong" ties between iraq and any terrorist organizations, other than the fact that Iraq is in the middle east, and the terrorists "being middle eastern" were to. But regardless of whether or not there were any ties i think this war is a good thing. Its imperitive we show other nations we wont take s*** sitting down. Even if iraq didnt do anything to begin with, who cares? I think every now and then its "good practice" to show your might just so other nations dont screw with you. This may seem insensitive but i dont even care about the innocent people in iraq that are dying, I say bulldoze their homes and plant a wal-mart with an american flag on top, for no other reason than the fact that we can.

Fool.

[The AlphaOmega]

As extreme as it sounds, Fat Turkey is definately correct.  Hitler's propoganda is frighteningly similar to Bush's tactics to gain American support.  Ignore the names.  When people see the name Hitler they get angry and defensive, unless they're skin head KKK, but it's really true.  If you've ever read a passage from "Mein Kampf" as some of you may have had to read in college, you will see that Hitlers idea's about propoganda in war is what made Nazi Germany a powerful force.  Hitler was a monster and a tyrant, but an extremely intelligent one.  Though I wouldn't go so far to call Bush intelligent, when it comes to rallying a nation to support his cause, he may as well have taken advice from the German tyrant himself.  Not something I noticed at first, but good observation Fat Turkey!

[BurningAngel]

hey great points,im a fair man so i think i agree with allot of what you said......in thinking about this though im confronted with another issue, is whether or not a war is "just" or not, based on the final outcome?

is a war started for wrong reasons with a positive outcome, better than a war started for the right reasons with a bad outcome?....hmmmmmmm

[Hannah b]

some facts for some blind fools:
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/overview.html

and go and see Fahrenheit 9.11

[Mystic Cloud]

I think BurningAngel has created more than an excellent thread
here []

As for Fahrenheit 9/11, I've heard some rumours that Moore
has come up with things that are not facts but more fiction.
I'm wondering if anyone know what these rumours are?

[Hannah b]

well, first of all is a rumour something that we actually see??
I'm talking about situations where someone said something and it has been recorded on a camera. the fact is that Moore did a brilliant job putting it all together and connecting all the dots.
I've read about all the "hidden truth" months before the film was out
on the nexus magazine.Ofcourse they can also be lying, but i'd rather trust an objective group of people (it's a magazine where articles are written by many different people, with many different points of view and very very objective).
Finally, if it's all a lie then why doesn't Bush contra-attack Moore, and "say hey this and this is a lie... Here are the documents, it's all clear black and white..."well I believe that Moore is not lying, because his arguments are very clear and logical, and most importantly you can "see and hear" people saying certain things straight to the camera...like Bush saying to the cameras while being on a golf course:.."Yes we must fight terrorism, we must stop theses murdurers...pause.....and now watch this shot!!!!"and he shoots the golf ball..on th enews you'll see everything except the part where he says "now watch this shoot" because it would make mr Bush look like an idiot. To me he is one and film like this made me ever sadder. we know nothing.
I'll try to find some reliable info for you Mystic Cloud, because I'm no expert.
All the best

[Hannah b]

ok..


http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/overview.html.I posted this before.

http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/OilDrugsTerrorism.html
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/hiddenterror.html
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/bushcheney.html
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/terror.html

and a contra to my beliefs..a contra to the film
http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/
http://www.davekopel.com/Terror/Fiftysix-Deceits-in-Fahrenheit-911.htm

and about the film from the Washington post
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2290-2004Jun24.html?g

so put it all together and take what you want from it. I know what I believe in.

[Jenadots]

Hi, all.  Michael Moore in many recent interviews has said himself that the film represented just his opinions, not news or a balanced account.  Keep in mind that this is also the man who announced to a European audience that "Americans are stupid" at the film festival.  He got a standing ovation.  

It always amazes me how willing so many people are to buy into anything that someone famous espouses, true or not, fictionalized or not, with little if anything to back it up.  Any given set of facts contain contradictions and conflicting evidence and events.  The more complex the issue, such as war and terrorism, the more conflicting information exists.  And two sets of conflicting facts can be equally true.  For example, it may be true that bad intelligence led to the invasion of Iraq.  But it may also be true that the invasion will yet have a positive result within that country and region.  

Also, I find it extreme to call Liberals "traitors" and Bush "Hitler".  It is not treason to disagree with a policy.  Nor have I noticed Bush trying to eliminate a whole race of people or sending people who disagree with him to be executed.  

In too many segments of our society, political debate has become the equivalent of 9 year olds fighting in the schoolyard with all the "I hate him's__________________-pick the candidate of your choice -and Liar Liar pants on fire.  It seems to have degenerated into the old "You a fool - No, You a fool" argument.  

So maybe Moore was right when he said most of us are stupid. In the meantime, he is laughing all the way to the bank.  

[Hannah b]

hi Jenadots,
just in case some of your thoughts were pointed at me let me make a little explanation.
1. I bease my beliefs not on one point of view, like for example mr Moore's film, but on many different things that I see and hear during my life.This is because I have my own brain and I try to use it as much as I can.
2. I don't know if you have seen the film, but to me and many others that have seen it it is a film way beyond simple things like stupidity of G.Bush and his administration. To me it's a film about our weaknesses, our narrow mindness and how easily we fool each other. Also to me it's a film about the beauty of living...if you see all this hell on the screen, a person like me will thank God for the ability to breathe and live.
3. Apart from the political side, fahrenheit 9/11 is a very good film under all conditions. It's dramaturgy, music, amazing editing and a very interesting structure. I base my knowledge here on my 6 year Colledge Film Education and I can't even imagine how much work has been put into it.
4. I'd rather have Moore laugh all the way to the bank where he get's his money for a real piece of art, than Bush and his Administration making really big bucks on the war. another quote from the film (during some elite meeting where G.Bush says "to some you are the elite. To me you are my base")...One of the buisnessmen says:.."hey don't you know?? There is no other better way to make big money, than take part in a war".

I truly feel sorry for all of you my American friends, because from what it seems your president pushed you into some deep trouble and it will take years and lots of money before you'll be able to leave Iraq.
If it cheers you up, the Polish president didn't look at this from a wider angle either.
thanks

[BurningAngel]

quote:I truly feel sorry for all of you my American friends, because from what it seems your president pushed you into some deep trouble and it will take years and lots of money before you'll be able to leave Iraq.
If it cheers you up, the Polish president didn't look at this from a wider angle either.
thanks

lol

[Utmost Certainty]

BurningAngel's comment is disgusting.  However, so is a lot of the dogma I see being floated around on this thread, so I feel compelled to rectify this vast stream of misinformation.

The Iraq War had nothing to do with the Hussein regime's assassination plot against his father.  You honestly think the entire Congress as well as over a dozen other nations (Britain, Italy, Spain, Poland, etc.) could have been galvanized to commit to a war against Iraq based on that motive alone?  Please.  There was STRONG intelligence not only from the US, but from British, Russian, and Israeli sources that Iraq was actively pursuring development and deployment of WMD.  By the terms of the ceasefire, Iraq was not supposed to be doing this.  Indeed, the nature of this evidence was so strong, and so telling, that to NOT act on it would have been a severe derelection of duty by our leaders.  And there is no doubt in the minds of anyone who pays at least scant attention to world affairs that the Saddam regime was cooperating with terrorist elements around the globe to inflict harm on the US and it's other stated enemies.  Did everyone forget the WTC '93 bombing that was facilitated by an Iraqi intelligence officer?  Did everyone miss the $25,000 payments Saddam was giving out to families of Palestinian suicide bombers?  Did you not bother to read the 9/11 Commission Report which details numerous contacts and connections between Saddam and Al-Qaeda operatives pre and post-9/11?  

There were also over 100 breaches of the cease-fire agreement that Iraq signed after the 1st Gulf War.  These included incidents of firing at our warplanes with surface to air missiles, atrocities against civillians (Kurds), not dispersing humanitarian aid (remember how much food and supplies were stocked up in those Ba'ath Party offices after the war?), as well as obstruction of the UN weapons inspections.  Did you conveniently forget how Iraq harassed the inspectors, barred them from certain locales, and even on more than one occaisson, kicked them out of the country.  Gee, think Iraq was trying to hide something or what?

Excluding Iraq's collusion with known terrorists (which could have inflicted serious on the US, Europe, and abroad), it is true to say that Iraq was contained.  We tried to resolve the Iraq situation for over 10 years via diplomacy.  We pressured them with embaros, we bartered them with aid.  We made some concessions.  Nothing was changing.  In addition, we initiated a heavy series of diplomatic efforts for a full year prior to the war, so don't tell me we never tried.  All efforts were exhausted and ended up getting nowhere, including appeals to the UN, who completely backed down on supporting their own rulings (albeit typical of the spineless UN).  Meanwhile, you have an entire populace that was living under the tyranny of the one of the most brutal, murderous totalitarian regimes you can imagine.  It wasn't going to stop with Saddam either.  He just would have elevated one of his sons to power before his death, and the cycle would have gone on forever.  We'd have fighter jets flying over the Persian Gulf on a daily basis like they were before the war, all the way into 2050.  

I doubt I'll even get a reponse on this, much less a cogent one, but I'll ask anyway.  What was the alternative to war?

[no_leaf_clover]

quote:The Iraq War had nothing to do with the Hussein regime's assassination plot against his father. You honestly think the entire Congress as well as over a dozen other nations (Britain, Italy, Spain, Poland, etc.) could have been galvanized to commit to a war against Iraq based on that motive alone?

That being one of Bush's personal grievances against Saddam, but Bush himself is not the whole Bush administration, nor was that the main motive though it undoubtedly played some psychology role for Bush, or at least maybe let him better justify his actions if he even has a conscious. Congress did not have to agree on Iraq. Bush can send troops anywhere he likes despite the fact that he shouldn't really have the right to ( http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dorf/20020306.html ), and in the Iraq situation now I don't think Congress really voted.

quote:There was STRONG intelligence not only from the US, but from British, Russian, and Israeli sources that Iraq was actively pursuring development and deployment of WMD. By the terms of the ceasefire, Iraq was not supposed to be doing this. Indeed, the nature of this evidence was so strong, and so telling, that to NOT act on it would have been a severe derelection of duty by our leaders.

This sounds like one of Bush's unsuccessful speeches to get the UN involved in Iraq again. The intelligence we had is starting to come to light now, and as I said, intelligence reported that they only had the ABILITY to make weapons if they wanted, but this is nothing special to Iraq. Intelligence suggested that their programs had been abandoned for years; nothing to suggest recent usage. No weapons yet found despite being there for this long. There was and still is NO evidence, that Saddam had been making any more weaponry of any sort that he was not allowed to. If there was, it would definitely be exploited by now and everyone supporting the war would be rubbing it in everyone else's faces as a kind of half-butted justification for all this death.

quote:Did everyone forget the WTC '93 bombing that was facilitated by an Iraqi intelligence officer? Did everyone miss the $25,000 payments Saddam was giving out to families of Palestinian suicide bombers? Did you not bother to read the 9/11 Commission Report which details numerous contacts and connections between Saddam and Al-Qaeda operatives pre and post-9/11?

You bring up good points here, provided it's all accurate. I haven't read the 9/11 Comission's report and Saddam definitely wasn't trying to stomp out terrorism. The problem I have here is that Bin Laden, the unquestionable mastermind behind 9/11, was basically abandoned just to go get Saddam. There are still some guys looking around in Afghanistan, but we could do much, MUCH better at hunting him down. Maybe if our president and his administration hadn't been receiving so much money from his family... Who knows...

quote:There were also over 100 breaches of the cease-fire agreement that Iraq signed after the 1st Gulf War. These included incidents of firing at our warplanes with surface to air missiles, atrocities against civillians (Kurds), not dispersing humanitarian aid (remember how much food and supplies were stocked up in those Ba'ath Party offices after the war?), as well as obstruction of the UN weapons inspections.

I know this is going to make me sound like a stereotypical conspiracy theorist, but our government hasn't done much better here, though there has been a much greater effort to cover it all up.

As I brought up in my last post on this topic, we were illegally producing anthrax, and probably still are. This is against treaties we have signed but are obviously not honoring. If there were weapons inspections here... We'll, I'll put it this way: they'll never happen.

When it comes to atrocities, I think if you consider how the evidence that 9/11 was going to happen and the government was expecting it (foreign intelligence, notably from Putin himself, intercepted communication, procrastination in sending response to the hijackings on Sept. 11, sending unarmed craft to 'intercept' the hijacked planes and sending them from a remote air space when armed interceptors are ready 24/7 in DC, prior refusal to allow the military to practice what to do in situations of planes being flown into buildings (coincidentally, these excercises were authorized to be conducted on Sept. 11 of 2001.. what a brilliant way to further confound the military)...) , and yet no one in the government did anything to prepare for it, if they didn't actually try to advance it, there's an agreeable atrocity right there. Thousands of people would die and the government most likely knew exactly what was going to happen on the levels that mattered.

Not dispersing humanitarian aid. If that can be likened to the mysterious deaths of 15 or more world-renown microbiologists when research had began for a cure to anthrax as a reaction to scares in the US, and those deaths and even the anthrax itself can be linked to our government and military, I think we have our equivalent of not dispersing humanitarian aid too.

By the same token, you should probably want the United States to be invaded by a superior military force to crack down on all those corruptions and treaty breaches. I think it's extremely hypocritical to invade Iraq on those terms. Even the more wholesome countries of the UN, the ones you called 'spineless', such as Germany, Russia and France (obviously not spineless countries as their history would show, but have a history and experience with war and what it means in a way that our country does not) were against war in Iraq.

quote:Gee, think Iraq was trying to hide something or what?

If they were they must've did a damned good job.

The diplomacy with Iraq was obviously mostly from Clinton. He was trying to deal with Iraq's problems diplomatically for most of that decade or so after the Gulf War. When the Bush Administration came in, Saddam was immediately said to have weapons of mass destruction without any real evidence. He was made to look as if he were hiding the Holy Grail, and in little over a year we had armed forces plowing through Iraq.

quote:What was the alternative to war?

The alternative to the war in Iraq was the removal of Saddam after the first Gulf War, the total liberation of Iraq then and there, and, after 9/11, the persuit of Al Qaeda operatives abroad and internationally, especially Bin Laden in Afghanistan, and not just as a side dish.

[Jenadots]

Dear Utmost, well said.  I don't know that there was an alternative, especially since Saddam's corrupt friends in the UN's Oil for Food program were well on their way to getting all sanctions lifted, no doubt so they could get even bigger kickbacks.  

I only wonder about the timing -- when the invasion started, I wondered if it had to be "now".  Why couldn't it have been tabled for a later date?  I thought it was bad timing, but it is done and the job ahead is to help the new government through its birthing stages and bring the troops home where we really need them, especially on our own borders.  

Iraq will become a much better country to live in if, and it is a mighty big IF - they can overcome the so-called, mainly outsider insurgents and the extreme fundamentalists who are doing everything they can to destroy a very new and fragile government.  

What bothers me is all the misinformation that is "out there" and being taken as fact.  

Oh, and Hannah, my remarks were not aimed at anyone in particular and war has always been about money.  Weapons producers always get rich during wartime.  Name the war and you will find a lot of people who made a lot of money from it.  Not all of them Americans.  Some of the Euro anger towards us comes from political leaders who are just ticked off that the big money contracts for rebuilding and updating Iraq's infrastructure went to American companies.  They hate us, but certainly had their hands out when it came to wanting some of that contract money.  How hypocritical is that?  

And Moore's movie -- it is just a movie, excellently done, but still a propaganda piece with some very skillful editing, and blending of just enough facts to make it believable with Moore's own political bias.  He is not the darling of the USA as he is in Europe and Hollywood.  If I were an extraordinary film maker, I could make anyone look like an idiot and convince anyone of a totally opposite point of view by using those same techniques.

And don't feel sorry for us....we will manage.[]

[BurningAngel]

i am still unconvinced there was ever a real threat in iraq. the bottom line is there were no WMDs found, period. we can talk all day about how magical fairies came down from never never land and took them away.



Heres the other bottom line, your either a peaceful individual or your not. there is no middle ground....you cant on one hand claim to want peace, and then on the other hand go to war. Either you want peace or you dont want peace. Either you want war or you dont want war. are you starting to understand? 0's and 1's are what govern the universe you idiots. In many ways saddam was more respectable than bush and many americans in his honesty. he was honest about how savage he was and didnt think twice. he didnt restrain himself to hide behind bovine excrement political agendas.


So when we talk about violence, there are only 2 ways to be completely honest......you either are 100 percent for peace, or you are 100 percent for war. The minute you become 99% for one side and 1% for the other you have just become a hypocrit.
Since its a fact that your either peaceful or your not peaceful, people who claim to be "forced into war" are full of excrement.

Ghandi was an honest man in that he did not believe in war at any time. The teaching of Ahimsa (non-violence) does not mean (non-violence while it suits me)...it means non-violence, period. You could slit ghandi's throat and he would appologize for bleeding on your shirt. Hitler was also an honest man, in that he did not give a rats butt about you, and he was 100 percent dedicated to taking over the world, and he would fight to the death to do that. I respect both of those individuals for their stances and see beauty in each. Not like todays excuse soaked society.
There is no such thing as a tasteful war and anyone that thinks their is is an idiot.

quote:Oh, and Hannah, my remarks were not aimed at anyone in particular and war has always been about money. Weapons producers always get rich during wartime. Name the war and you will find a lot of people who made a lot of money from it. Not all of them Americans. Some of the Euro anger towards us comes from political leaders who are just ticked off that the big money contracts for rebuilding and updating Iraq's infrastructure went to American companies. They hate us, but certainly had their hands out when it came to wanting some of that contract money. How hypocritical is that?

Even i think this is deplorable. this is the most materialistic bunch of garbage iv ever heard. you act as if its "acceptable" to behave this way. When i was fighting NHB i was willing to fight for FREE, because i love fighting. you act as if the fact that weapons manufacturers get rich during war time means nothing at all and is ok.