President Bush

[Adamaja456]

Do you agree or disagree with that actions Bush has taken during his 2 terms in office? Do you think Bush has proper justification on the war in Iraq or do you think the war is pointless?

Discuss

[DARKSAMUS]

Bush is making a right choice. But think about what kind of pussys we would be leaving this war and allowing al-queda to continue bombing other countries (including us) Terrorist can't be left around killing everyone. If we back out of this war now like the Liberals want, this whole war then would probably be pointless like you had said before adam.

[smartdude1212]

Pointless.
He wants money, power, and the oil in the middle east.
There'd probably be a more stable situation in Iraq if there wasn't all this fighting.
But I'm Canadian, so what should I care.

[All_That_Chaz]

what kind of question is that? too broad. there are a few things i agree with to go along with the things i disagree with. no child left behind is garbage, i'll say that. and there's a lot of environmental concerns that he should have addressed but didn't. the supreme court seems to be more about partisan bull**** than actual law now because of him, but i suppose you could say that whenever a justice is added.

as for the war, we shouldn't have done it without the un's approval. it's good that saddam isn't in power anymore, and I sympathize with the president in that for an operation like this, it's not really possible to create a timeline for bringing the troops home. and we should remain there until the countries stabilized, but i just don't know when/if that will ever happen. i never saw the connection between 9/11 and iraq and i think it's despicable that it was used as the impetus.

just to get the ball rolling, i'll go ahead and make a bad blanket statement: The war in Iraq is unwinnable, it's another Vietnam and we can't fix it.

*waits for guido*

[Adamaja456]

I guess the first question is pretty broad, thats why i added that Iraq war because i was hearing alot of that in the democratic and republican debates

[ledwix]

"al-queda" (Al Qaeda) which you speak of has never directly attacked the United States. I believe Bush's actions are continuing the stupid US policy of disturbing international affairs and becoming a world police. Surveys show that the number of Iraqis who are happy about their situations in their country has dropped significantly since the US invasion in '03. Don't say, "Mission Accomplished" in a war and then continue sending tens of thousands of your troops to battle, not to mention killing so many civilians. Most of the troops that have been sent overseas are of a lower social class and have less opportunities and education. Meanwhile, congressmen and politicians are usually richer and given a better education, and their sons and daughters are usually exempt from going to war. If Bush had children who went to war and died, perhaps he would realize how people feel about disturbing such a far away area at the expense of the lives of young people, creating a hatred against Americans, and getting nearly nothing done, seemingly, over a four-year span. Bush wants power and oil in the Middle East, as stated before. He says that this is not the main reason, and that scientists are working on developing hydrogen-powered cars. However, he won't reveal the reality that hydrogen-powered cars are actually extremely inefficient machines and would require an astronomical amount of money to slow pollution significantly. Was Saddam Hussein wrong in his ideologies? Yes. Should he have been overthrown? Yes. Should we have interfered with Iraqi politics, allegedly staged fake elections, forced people to submit to our type of political regime, and engaged in combat AFTER getting rid of the dictator? Nope.

[WeissPraline]

I'll say this first:

I'm a republican. But I dislike Bush...a lot.

I was young when the war started, so i don't know much about it. I do know this, though- We started the war, so we might as well finish it. If we don't, then everyone who died for the war will have died in vain, and they joined the army to fight what the beleive in.

That's my take on the war. I'm glad we got rid of the terrorists, but I agree with whoever said it was unwinnable. It's kinda pointless, terrorists will always be around.

I don't think bush did it for money, though.

I do think he should have done more for the envorioment. We're running low on oil; this isn't something new. People need to stop thinking about now, and worry about our kids, and our kids' kids- we're messing up, and they'll have to pay for it.

My biggest thing with Bush is how he banned gay marriage. It honestly disgusts me to say I'm a republican now that he did that- It goes against American values. What happened to being free? Isn't that what our god da*n country was founded for, freedom?

Call me crazy, but weather you like gays or not, prohibiting them from marrying and joining the army does NOT sound like freedom to me.

[DARKSAMUS]

"al-queda" (Al Qaeda) which you speak of has never directly attacked the United States.
Idiot what do you think 9/11 was when the world trade center collapsed to the ground because of terrorists from Al-Queda.

[WeissPraline]

Idiot what do you think 9/11 was when the world trade center collapsed to the ground because of terrorists from Al-Queda.

That's nice. Call him an idiot because he doesn't agree with you.

Niceee.

If I recall correctly, wasn't it BIN LADEN who staged 9/11, and isn't he in Afghanastan? That's what I remember hearing, anyways.

[trillobyite]

There's no point arguing over the reasons of entering Iraq in the first place. It was clearly a major mess-up, but what the USA has to focus on now is either getting out or stabilizing the country. Unfortunately it seems like both are almost impossible.

Iraq is not some country under siege and occupation by evil Americans, and I get really pissed when that is said. The tensions existed under Saddam, but with his regime toppled, the hatreds that exist between Shiites and Sunnis and Kurds are exploding. Whether you believe an opressive dictatorship which commits genocide against its own people is better than a nightmarish chaos in which each side slaughters the other is up to you. But both suck, and right now it is in the state of the latter. The US is the only force trying to bring peace, rather than conflict, to the region.

Most of the civilians, in fact, almost all, dead in Iraq are killed by Iraqis themselves, by car-bombs, by the blowing up of funerals, by the blowing up of rescue workers at blown up funerals, by blowing up restaurants, building fences around communities of certain ethnicities..yadayadayada. And nations like Iran, which were previously hateful of countries like Iraq (100,000 dead in Iraq-Iran war) see this oppurtunity as ripe for exploitation; they send arms and men to whatever side they support regularly, and then blame others for the problems caused there.

And the worst, is that 70% of Iraqis, by the polls think it is too early for the US to leave. In another poll, 70% of Iraqis feel it is justified to attack US soldiers. Now you tell me how the hell to interpret that.

WeissPrailine, Bin Laden is the leader of Al Qaeda, his associates and the hijackers were members too.

[devonin]

Idiot what do you think 9/11 was when the world trade center collapsed to the ground because of terrorists from Al-Queda.

Don't flame someone just because you don't like what they have to say.

Terrorist organizations take credit for all manner of things that they weren't necessarily responsible for. Yes, there are more than enough links between the terrorists who were responsible for that attack and Al Qaeda, more than enough for me to say "Yes, Al Qaeda was responsible for carrying out that attack" But not necessarily enough for everybody. Try to keep your objections calm and rational.

The part I find ironic about 9/11 as a justification for any of this conflict is that the two countries that were attacked "Because of" 9/11 (Afghanistan and Iraq) had nothing to do with the actual attacks. Of the terrorists involved, the vast majority (Might even have been all of them, I'm not positive) were Egyptian and Saudi Arabian, and yet nothing was done to those governments for "supporting terrorism"

[jewpinthethird]

You know, I could waste a bunch of time explaining why I don't like George W. Bush as a president, but really, it isn't going to change a damn thing.

...not like George W. Bush would care what I think anyway.

[WeissPraline]

WeissPrailine, Bin Laden is the leader of Al Qaeda, his associates and the hijackers were members too.

Whoops. xD My mistake. I didn't know that. As I said, I'm not to hip on the war on Iraq- I don't really know what's going on. Probobly shouldn't pass judgements, should I? =/

[Master_of_the_Faster]

I don't like President Bush at all period. My views are clearly democratic and his are republican. There has been clear evidence that voting polls were rigged in favor of Bush by the voting machine company Diebold. He wanted to go to war because of "weapons of mass destruction" which resulted in removing and killing Suddam Hussein. Many people didn't like Suddam, but the people felt that his existence in Iraq gave more protection than the Americans who are now in Iraq. Suddam should have been handled in a different method. Bush even claimed to have had a "mission accomplished" even though I see nothing done. Atleast I will give him the gratitude of finding some terrorist suspects of the Al Quida though he hasn't found Osama Bin Laden. I clearly feel as though this war is pointless, but that democrats and republicans (especially republicans because Bush started this) should work togather to eventually find a peaceful solution in Iraq.

[trillobyite]

I don't like President Bush at all period. My views are clearly democratic and his are republican. There has been clear evidence that voting polls were rigged in favor of Bush by the voting machine company Diebold. He wanted to go to war because of "weapons of mass destruction" which resulted in removing and killing Suddam Hussein. Many people didn't like Suddam, but the people felt that his existence in Iraq gave more protection than the Americans who are now in Iraq. Suddam should have been handled in a different method. Bush even claimed to have had a "mission accomplished" even though I see nothing done. Atleast I will give him the gratitude of finding some terrorist suspects of the Al Quida though he hasn't found Osama Bin Laden. I clearly feel as though this war is pointless, but that democrats and republicans (especially republicans because Bush started this) should work togather to eventually find a peaceful solution in Iraq.

Are you sure....? I remember a bunch of lawsuits and attacks on Diebold, but not for specifically rigging the election, rather exposing flaws and irregularities in the voting equipment.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

No... I am very sure about the fact that Diebold rigged the election, but I'm still looking for the documentry that showed this. Even still, if I am wrong about this (which I'm most likely not), the main issue is about what people feel about his presidency and the justification of the war in Iraq.

[smartdude1212]

You know, I could waste a bunch of time explaining why I don't like George W. Bush as a president, but really, it isn't going to change a damn thing.

...not like George W. Bush would care what I think anyway.

And sometimes people don't like reading gigantic blocks of text.

[devonin]

If people don't want to read a large block of text that actually explains a position with reasoning and evidence, then they should be looking elsewhere.

[xWnLx Crisco]

No... I am very sure about the fact that Diebold rigged the election, but I'm still looking for the documentry that showed this. Even still, if I am wrong about this (which I'm most likely not), the main issue is about what people feel about his presidency and the justification of the war in Iraq.

You prove your point well...........

Well to the people that do not live in the United States most of the opinions about President Bush are false or just what they are......opinions.

From having to choose over Kerry and Bush, it wasn't a very hard choice.

So far the 9-11 attacks, Iraq death rate, and gas prices are all blamed on president bush. Which is hilarious to me because some people have forgotten the 3 government branches we have that can rule another out.

Congress is who declares war; The President can veto a bill (which he has done recently if any of you watch the news) and the Supreme Court.

Let’s start with Oil,

First of all it’s Dick Cheney that has shares in major oil companies but he sure doesn't decide if he wants an increase or not.

The Oil Industry is not government regulated like it is in other countries so they have a free range to charge what ever they feel. They use marketing skills to "scare" the public into thinking that there will be shortage or the winter was to harsh for oil companies so they have to raise it for the summer months. It’s all a scam and it works great, think about it this way they could charge up to $6.00 a gallon and I would still have to pay for it because I have to go to work.

Next we shall start with his decision to go into Iraq,

Now we can sit here and argue about how the threat of WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) was the encouragement for the war to take place. But if you disagree the fact that there weren't any at all then you are false. Iraq was warned in the late 90s about having to remove all of the possible WMD and put them out of commission. Now one thing that is debatable is what is a WMD? There could or couldn't of been WMD in Iraq after 9-11 but the fact that we went in to get rid of the problem before it was a problem. I hope you remember that Bill Clinton launched hundreds of Cruise Missiles into Iraq for a warning about the WMDs so let’s not blame President Bush for starting the war. President Bush did what HE thought was best for my country instead of sit and wait until another 9-11 happened. I felt that his decision was part of what he promised when he ran for President and he never let me down. The situation that we have now is that there are car bombers, 9 year olds with AK-47s, land mines, you name it they are out there killing UN Soldiers every day and we can't do anything about it. For those that think the Iraqis hate the US Soldiers then please go talk to one that just came back from a tour or actually pack your bags and visit it. There has been great progress but it’s the simple fact that if we left now what we just built will fall and be open to any kind of terrorist organization.

I’m not Republican or Democrat because I choose what I want for my country out of each and every candidate and choose the one that had the most of what I like. It is not possible to have a perfect president so sorry to disturb your parade. President Bush has put his foot down and led a country which I can freely say right now that none of you could mentally handle. We are alive, we are not in a depression, the stock market is booming with record highs and so on. To say president bush is the worst leader we have had is a false statement and should result into getting slapped in public.

[ledwix]

Idiot what do you think 9/11 was when the world trade center collapsed to the ground because of terrorists from Al-Queda.

Excuse me; I meant to say that Iraq has never threatened to attack America or attacked America, which is more relevant to the subject. Iraq is what we are talking about, not Al Qaeda, so I hope you read the rest of what I wrote.

[g4z33b0]

Ignorance.

We have killed more then the terrorists. Grow up and learn about politics.

We bombed Iraq to hell to find and kill a man that we once funded and gave chemical weapons. Great job America. Bush lied to the entire nation, he's just another one of the racist, fake Christians.

[Tps222]

I don't think people know enough about the current state of affairs to be allowed to vote in the next election. There needs to be some sort of intelligence test added in order to vote. I don't care if the south doesn't get represented because of this, perhaps their teachers should have learned them more.

In all seriousness, I am in full support of the war and not pulling out. I agree with All That Chaz. I wish we would have waited for UN support before going into war. Now we are kind of shone in a bright light, but it is our duty to mediate the violence in the middle east.

Edmund Burke once said "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing". If one has the power to do good, but does not, that person is promoting violence, even if unintentionally. Standing idly by as the middle-east tears each other apart is a terrible thing, and it's main reason of support is "It doesn't concern us". "Why should our men die for no reason".

This is why certain people shouldn't be allowed to vote. Ignorance and bigotry is rampant throughout the nation, and I blame it on schools, parents, and education as a whole. The masses are immensely under-educated when it comes to modern affairs. I bet you could ask 9/10 adults what the difference between and a Sunni and Shiite was and they would not know. Hell, half the ****ing people in this nation can't find Iraq on a map. It's ****ing pitiful and people need to shape the **** up if they want democracy. Democracy should be a privilage, not a right. Hell, half the ****ing people don't even go and vote. They don't understand the extremely fortunate situation they are in, where voting can bring about change. They don't watch the news, pay attention to global affairs, and do you know why? "It doesn't concern them". What.The.****. Ignorance is the true demise of civilization. I once read a quote from a former French Premier, and it's true. Paraphrased, "America is the only nation in history to go from barbarism to degregation without the usual civilisation inbetween".

Now, I do not hate America. America is the greatest country in the world, and I wish more countries would adopt a similar constitution to us. I just don't like the general population. There are some who are intelligent and informed, opinionated and tolerant, open-minded. This is a minority, and luckily they run our government. Before anyone else says anything in this thread, do some ****ing research to make sure you don't sound like an uneducated ignorant jackass who doesn't know what the **** he's talking about and is just spewing misinformation and media bull****.

9/11 and Iraq are not connected people. Killing Bin Laden will not solve anything. Stop ****ing saying "We need to go back to Afghanistan to kill Bin Laden, then everything will be better, what are we doing in Iraq"?. No, it won't be better. Killing Bin Laden will do absolutely nothing to Al Qaeda. Anyone who knows what Al Qaeda is (which is few), and how they operate know that Al Qaeda runs in regional cells, and that they have regional leaders. If anything were to happen to Bin Laden, the next man in line would just move up, and we will have accomplished nothing. (Zarqwiwi (sp) was next in line, but we bombed him).

So in conclusion, to answer the thread. President Bush started his presidency out terribly by not waiting for the UN, but has responsed brilliantly since. He has managed ignore the ignorant public and stay on the course of rightneousness. I agree with him, 40 years from now we will be saying how right he was. He is a smart man.

Aside from the war, I do feel he needed to persue environmental solutions.CO2 emisions, alternate energy, nuclear power for general electric use. Saving wildlife and forests. These were all things that needed attention, and still do.

I'll conclude this post with a smarmy quote from Steven Colbert "President Bush: Great, or greatest"?

[devonin]

I don't think people know enough about the current state of affairs to be allowed to vote in the next election. There needs to be some sort of intelligence test added in order to vote. I don't care if the south doesn't get represented because of this, perhaps their teachers should have learned them more.
The Ravens APT and The Test Agency (One of the UK's leading publishers and distributors of psychometric tests) ranked each state in the United States in "IQ And The Wealth of Nations" by which presidential candidate they voted for in the 2000 presidential election. 1-16, 18, 21, and 24 by IQ voted for Kerry. Obviously such tests prove nothing, but still...that the study was done and supports the opposite stance to your point amuses me if nothing else.

In all seriousness, I am in full support of the war and not pulling out. I agree with All That Chaz. I wish we would have waited for UN support before going into war. Now we are kind of shone in a bright light, but it is our duty to mediate the violence in the middle east.
It is only your duty to mediate the violence in the middle east to the extent to which you are responsible for its current state of violence (Which, in all honesty, with the support of Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel in the American political past, is "quite a lot")

Edmund Burke once said "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing". If one has the power to do good, but does not, that person is promoting violence, even if unintentionally. Standing idly by as the middle-east tears each other apart is a terrible thing, and it's main reason of support is "It doesn't concern us". "Why should our men die for no reason".
You're saying, however, that the United States has some objective universal knowledge of what "evil" and "good" are in the world. From the standpoint of the thousands of families killed, made homeless and terrorised by US attacks on their country, it is quite the opposite. Even if the existing state of affairs was worse, the lesser of two evils is still evil.

This is why certain people shouldn't be allowed to vote.
Which kinds of certain people? Be specific. You can't make a statement like that without being willing to say some pretty objective things about how and who whould be disallowed.

I bet you could ask 9/10 adults what the difference between and a Sunni and Shiite was and they would not know. Hell, half the ****ing people in this nation can't find Iraq on a map.
A non-trivial number of Americans also coudln't identify a random US state on a map with all the names removed, if it wasn't one of the "obvious" ones like texas, florida, california etc.

Before anyone else says anything in this thread, do some ****ing research to make sure you don't sound like an uneducated ignorant jackass who doesn't know what the **** he's talking about and is just spewing misinformation and media bull****.
No offense, but 36 *s in a post are what makes people sound like an uneducated ignorant jackass. If you tone down the rhetoric and the volatility a little, maybe people will be more inclined to give what you have to say a fair shake.

9/11 and Iraq are not connected people.
Then why was Iraq invaded after an invasion of Afghanistan also failed to yield results? -JUST- the WMD thing? Funny how it wasn't presented that way.

Killing Bin Laden will not solve anything.
There at least, we agree.

Stop ****ing saying "We need to go back to Afghanistan to kill Bin Laden, then everything will be better, what are we doing in Iraq"?. No, it won't be better. Killing Bin Laden will do absolutely nothing to Al Qaeda. Anyone who knows what Al Qaeda is (which is few),
From whence comes your deep intimate knowledge of the inner workings of Al Qaeda?
If anything were to happen to Bin Laden, the next man in line would just move up, and we will have accomplished nothing. (Zarqwiwi (sp) was next in line, but we bombed him).
But by killing Saddam Hussein, once the US leaves, and the country runs its own democratic election, there's no chance of a similar thing happening?

He has managed ignore the ignorant public and stay on the course of rightneousness.
Yeah, nothing says "Perfectly functioning democracy" quite like "He has managed to ignore the public"

[GuidoHunter]

We bombed Iraq to hell to find and kill a man that we once funded and gave chemical weapons. Great job America.

Yeah, because Middle Eastern political climates are static.

he's just another one of the racist, fake Christians.

Uh.... what?

EDIT: Oh, for what it's worth, Dick Cheney isn't affiliated with Halliburton in any way.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[bobbycat73]

1) the United Nations will never support us in this war
2) a "war on terror" would be endless, there will always be terrorists
3) we are making life worse in Iraq, creating tension in all of the Middle East
4) the terrorist pilots behind 9/11 were from saudi arabia, but we have too good of relations with them (oil)
5) stephen colbert is satire

[tsugomaru]

You know, when the Iraq war first started, I completely disagreed with it. What if Iraq has WMDs? They wouldn't be able to fire it anyways, if they did, we'd fire ours and if we did that, then the world would fire theirs on us. In short, no one wins, everyone loses, there is no "who loses the least" concept in any of this.

However, as time progressed, as the average uninformed American, I, thought the war was justified because we were getting rid of a ruler that abused his people. Of course, America just doesn't know when to pull out, we already helped them try to reestablish their government, but now, we are controlling it. Iraqis want us out and some even want Suddam back.

~Tsugomaru

[bobbycat73]

Okay, okay, okay. So the main reason we're in Iraq is to make life better for the Iraqis? We're just creating more tension there, and we're making it worse. Plus, does that mean we should invade other countries that are in worse conditions than us? What about Black Hawk Down in Somalia? History repeats itself.

[tsugomaru]

Well, that was probably one of our side goals, but now, I believe we're purely there for the oil. We don't really care what's going on in Iraq anymore as long as we get the oil and keep the business men happy.

~Tsugomaru

[devonin]

America can't possibly be there for the oil. As of -last year- around this time, so much money had been spent in the military actions there that if they then engaged in full, destructive abuse of the oil system, trying to eke out as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time, they would still need -years and years- to even -start- to recoup the costs of this action.

It might have started with that goal in mind, but they've dumped such a disgusting amount of money into it that they can no longer even pretend that "the oil" is going to make it all better.

[smartdude1212]

The United States wants the oil because they are the largest consumer in the world.

Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, that area has the largest deposits of oil in the world.

It just so happens that the United States had a verifiable enough reason to attack Iraq, and once they fixed their reason of being there and made sure that Iraq had a stable government in place, the United States should have pulled out.

However, if they have control over Iraq then they have access to all those oil deposits and don't have to pay a lot of money to them.

So, I believe the main reason that the United States is still in Iraq is for the oil.

[Master_of_the_Faster]

I just wanted to reply to what tsugomaru said "...we were getting rid of a ruler that abused his people." How in the world does a bad ruler (which might I say wasn't even threatening America directly) need an entire war fought on its behalf? I mean honestly Suddam Hussein was different from Hitler (aside from the fact that Suddam learned a bit from Hitler about torcher). We could have most definatly approached this better, but it didn't happen because we were so consumed with fear in 9/11 that we would do just about anything to stop terrorists. Now its up to a solution that will come out of this mess hopefully.

[tsugomaru]

Nono, Devonin is quite right, he's put things in new light for me. =\

Master_of_the_faster, I still haven't quite figured out why we are in Iraq in the first place. However, I think we can all agree that we screwed things up in Iraq to the point where a ruling Suddam would've been better.

~Tsugomaru

[devonin]

I'll also point out, just to put another nail in the "It's for the oil" coffin, that the US actually gets most of its oil from Canada, followed by Mexico, followed by Nigeria.

Iraq is down in 7th, after Angola and before Algeria.


And now, on the more socio-political front: The whole "Well Saddam is a bad guy" argument.

1/ Unlike the Taliban in Afghanistan, Saddam was elected. Even if the election was potentially fraudulent, the Taliban as an organisation was based outside Afghanistan and took over. They were foreigners who took control. Saddam was not a foreigner, and so even if he -was- elected through shady means, the Americans can't cry "Freeing the victims" in the same way they did for Afghanistan.

2/ What rule where obliges all world leaders to be kind, benevolent friendly people, such that anyone who isn't should somehow be -forcibly- removed from office? I don't remember the UN saying "Oh...and you can't be a jackass"

3/ What right does a country have to say to another one "OH...we think your leader is a bad guy, we'll just invade, kill him, replace him with someone we think is a good guy, and you can thank us later"? Even -if- a majority of people in the country are happy for the service, you set a -very- dangerous precedent of "It's okay to depose you because we don't like your style"

I grant you, he was not a good person, he did many very objectionable things, but I know -I- wasn't party to electing Team America, World Police.

I guess that is my main problem with President Bush. For god sakes man, you invaded because the leader was unfriendly to America, and you wanted to replace him with someone who would give the Great Satan a more square deal, and you were pissed off that he repayed your arming and training his country by using those resources against you.

Fair enough...just -say so-

I'm going to disagree with the military action in Iraq regardless, but at least if you stop trying to pretend there is some genuine humane peace-loving reason guiding you, and just admit what you're doing, I can at least respect you while I protest.

[xWnLx Crisco]

What about Fidel Castro?

He was elected in Cuba and America has had many conflicts over there but I don't see people crying about that.

Or North Korea's Kim Jong-il that showed off nuclear weapons to the world but later gave an apology to America.

The point of going into the Middle East was the threat from an uncontrollable area. Unlike Cuba or North Korea with one leader and a huge army, the Terroist groups in the middle east are scattered and hidden in cities. It was known that Saddam had a link with the al-Qaeda and President Bush felt that he wanted to act from that knowledge instead of it coming into America. It was a huge risk that he took and the results from both sides were not what I like to call positive but in my opinion having us (American Military) set up a government and help a democracy build in Iraq instead of having a terroist group invade America or any other country was a damn good decision. I can say now that if a terroist group attacked another country that same country would be joining arms next to the American Troops.

[devonin]

What about Fidel Castro?

He was elected in Cuba and America has had many conflicts over there but I don't see people crying about that.
That would be because Fidel Castro never came up in the discussion. Bay of Pigs was a total fiasco, and the US had no business having anything to do with it. It was just one more proxy battle between the US and the USSR during the cold war.

It was known that Saddam had a link with the al-Qaeda and President Bush felt that he wanted to act from that knowledge instead of it coming into America.
Considering that the american government never successfully proved this link to the satisfaction of the UN, I'd appreciate some evidence of said link please?

having us (American Military) set up a government and help a democracy build in Iraq instead of having a terroist group invade America
You know, somehow I think there are more options than just those two. Further, I don't think that overthrowing the Iraqi government is in any way shape or form going to -stop- terrorists from attacking America, unless by 'stop' you mean 'encourage'

[xWnLx Crisco]

That would be because Fidel Castro never came up in the discussion. Bay of Pigs was a total fiasco, and the US had no business having anything to do with it. It was just one more proxy battle between the US and the USSR during the cold war.

Its still an issue to this day just like the Middle East has been. Haven't you ever heard of the 1000 year war? I am sure you have so it should be no surprise to you that a country is trying to help stop the madness.


Considering that the american government never successfully proved this link to the satisfaction of the UN, I'd appreciate some evidence of said link please?

Kind of how there was no proof of WMDs when they "searched" for them but back in the late 90s there was proof of them? Iraq was told to get rid of the WMDs in early 2001 a second and final warning and late 2002 guess what happened, they let the UN inspectors to go there and found nothing. Oh wow thats shocking, if you can tell me now that there is no way you could hide a WMD in 2 years than you are not intelligent. For proof of the connection between the too it is between Iraqi and Iran governments. It has never been proved to be official evidence but it doesn't mean it couldn't have been or still be true. I know it must sound like a weak arguement but the possibility at this point is enough to be looked under.

You know, somehow I think there are more options than just those two. Further, I don't think that overthrowing the Iraqi government is in any way shape or form going to -stop- terrorists from attacking America, unless by 'stop' you mean 'encourage'

Options? What options, that was the plan from the get go when invaded iraq. The riddance of the WMDs and with Iraq and its politically correct government would help keep it that way. There was never a "true" government there to over throw, we went in there to establish one but as you can see its not as easy as it was said on national tv. Heres were being a country that has no threat on a daily basis vs a country that is filled with crime, mass murdering, threats from nuclear weapons get you, we will always have a group that hates america. Always and theres nothing I can do about it. Some of the "missions" from the al-Qaeda is to get rid of non muslim countries and guess what we are the biggest.

[purebloodtexan]

Here's what I saw from the whole Middle-Eastern situation.

Devonin, you are an intelligent being and often point out things that we need to make clear (Not insulting you), so just say something if I am indeed unclear.

9/11: A crapload of fear swept across my body when I got to daycare and our counselor told us that America was under attack. I was supporting the attempt to find Osama, and often made political comics due to my "comic-fetish" from grades 4-7 (They were completely unintelligent, however, but definitely had the message that I wanted Osama gone).

Now, I'm seeing very little progress in our hunt for Bin Laden. On rare occasions, I've heard "He might be....." or "The whitehouse thinks that....." but nothing on actual progress. It also seems to me like we're doing very little to catch the man that, atleast according to the government and media, caused the whole Middle Eastern warzone in the first place.

Iraq War, which I used to (unintelligently) support; I don't mean to sound biased when I say "excuse."

Excuse #1: I basically heard "WMD's, Saddam is threatening."

As far as we know, we attacked before the UN went in to do the inspection. That was a bad move, IMO. Had we known that there were no weapons in there before we attacked, my support for the war might've dithered then and there.

Excuse #2: No WMD's, Saddam is still threatening.

OK, I'm seeing the Iraq troops surrendering, we're getting through the ME, etc. Still no Saddam, deaths are piling up, and the loyal militia that Saddam still has is causing trouble; no more support for this war. I'm disliking Bush now.

Excuse #3: We've killed Saddam, but now must clean up the mess we've made.

Well, the last thing we needed was more fighting, but we've got it now. Insurgeons aren't only attacking us, but are turning on themselves. It's horrible. Deaths in the thousands, we're in the middle of a holy war in which I think we should've stayed out of; seing KIA's on the news are typical news to me now. This had made me think "What if this happened, what if that happened?" A particular question was this: Although Saddam was indeed a ruthless leader, but he kept the fighting sides as separate as he could. I was thinking that if he had a next-in-line, and we kept an eye on him, what you might call a "state of peace" would stay. Problem was, all his next-in-line's are either dead or in hiding. We might've reversed this in what atleast sounds like a simple way: Had we waited for the UN inspection before we dropped the bomb, we could've tried to find a better solution to get a next-in-line to take Saddam's place on the throne. May not sound simple, but it atleast SEEMS like a good idea; feel free to criticize me if it sounds wrong.

So now, we're cleaning up a mess we made, and I can't see us pulling out until we restore peace. I hope it ends well.


Another question I have is the comparisons and contrasts between the situation we were in when we tried to clean up the African genocides and the ME. I've seen Black Hawk Down; I've read about the Somalian Revolution; I've learned about the war in Darfur, and many other horrible things in Africa. I'm in no form or fashion saying that we're being wusses, but I'm rather pissed about our government saying that Africa is too dangerous, due to us suffering heavy losses. However, the ME is probably almost as dangerous as Africa, and we're suffering many more losses right now.

I find our dive into Africa similar to our dive into the ME: We went into an unstable country, we're suffering losses, and we're watching, debating, and making jokes on the sideline.

However, IMO, the African genocide is looking much worse than what's going on in the ME. So I'm asking this: Why aren't we in there? I mean, the people of Iraq were still somewhat stable before we pulled in. There is, however, millions of deaths and counting in Africa. I think we're much better off in Africa than in the ME.

[jewpinthethird]

I stopped paying attention after the whole Mission Accomplished deal. Seriously. Mission Accomplished.

[purebloodtexan]

I'm doing some research on the Islamic faith. I'll go ahead and "highlight" things and state my beliefs on them.

They do not They do not regard Muhammad as the founder of a new religion, but as the restorer of the original monotheistic faith of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and other prophets. Islamic tradition holds that Judaism and Christianity distortedthe messages of these prophets over time either in interpretation, in text, or both.

When comparing religions such as Christianity and Budhism, you can't get much of a connection between them, or see how one proves that the other is supposedly wrong. When you're comparing Islam to Christianity, however, not only are Muslims extremely devout to their religion, but part of their religion is the belief that our faiths are wrong. This might be a good reason why a good portion of the Middle East hates us.

The schism developed in the late 7th century following disagreements over the religious and political leadership of the Muslim Sunni and Shi'a.

Now I see why there are two branches, and it might be part of the reason they're fighting right now.

Those who Those who distorted or ignored the Qur'an or converted to another religion are engulfed in hellfire

Another way to stay more devout to your faith. Also, I recently heard a report that a woman fell in love with a man of another faith. She didn't seem to change faiths, but she got stoned for it. So I guess this belief fuels the Muslims to believe that those of different faiths (Who atleast try to intervene with their beliefs or people) deserve to die.

[JangBoGo]

President Bush may be the smartest president in the US history... and I am not kidding...

[devonin]

Its still an issue to this day just like the Middle East has been. Haven't you ever heard of the 1000 year war? I am sure you have so it should be no surprise to you that a country is trying to help stop the madness.

"Helping" to stop an issue to which you have contributed in no small way is called 'cleaning up your own mess' not 'being some international hero'


Kind of how there was no proof of WMDs when they "searched" for them but back in the late 90s there was proof of them? Iraq was told to get rid of the WMDs in early 2001 a second and final warning and late 2002 guess what happened, they let the UN inspectors to go there and found nothing. Oh wow thats shocking, if you can tell me now that there is no way you could hide a WMD in 2 years than you are not intelligent.
Oh wow...do you not see what you just said? Let's go through this step by step:
1/ Iraq "has" WMDs
2/ Iraq is told "Get rid of your WMDs"
3/ After a time, inspectors look around and find no WMDs

You know...I think it is -just- as likely that maybe -they listened to what the UN told them- I love how absolutely nobody in the United States seems willing to admit the possibility that the actual reason the inspectors didn't find anything is because Iraq COMPLIED WITH THE UN.

Iraq doesn't have the luxury of being the world's greatest superpower, capable of ignoring anything that is done to it by the international community. The US can point and laugh at the UN because, honestly, what are they going to do about it? But Iraq would be -crushed- by trade embargos, it has almost no chance of standing up on its own without the abilty to trade its oil reserves for needed supplies. Is it really that crazy to suppose that they actually just did what they were told?

For proof of the connection between the too it is between Iraqi and Iran governments. It has never been proved to be official evidence but it doesn't mean it couldn't have been or still be true. I know it must sound like a weak arguement but the possibility at this point is enough to be looked under.
Last I heard, the "Axis of Evil" was widely regarded by non-americans to be a very funny joke. Historically Iraq and Iran -HATE- each other. If either of them thought they could get away with it, the other one would have been invaded solidly ages ago. The Iranians have always percieved Iraq as a pathetic western-wannabe, trying to copy American as much as possible while still claiming to hate the western world. Iraq has historically been of the opinion that Iran is too stuck in the past, unwilling to move forward in the ways needed to being the Middle East into the glory that they most of them feel they deserve.

Further: Even -If- Iraq and Iran were somehow connected...so? Last I checked, the attacks were blamed on "Al Qaeda" which uh...isn't Iran and certainly isn't Iraq.


Options? What options, that was the plan from the get go when invaded iraq. The riddance of the WMDs and with Iraq and its politically correct government would help keep it that way.


There was never a "true" government there to over throw, we went in there to establish one but as you can see its not as easy as it was said on national tv. Heres were being a country that has no threat on a daily basis vs a country that is filled with crime, mass murdering, threats from nuclear weapons get you, we will always have a group that hates america. Always and theres nothing I can do about it. Some of the "missions" from the al-Qaeda is to get rid of non muslim countries and guess what we are the biggest. Well, for one, Yes there was a true government, just one that you didn't like, and even if you grant that it was one that a lot of the people there didn't like, it was a government and it governed. For two: What gives you the right to decide to go in and establish one? For three: plenty of countries, including America have groups that hate America, going to invade all of them? Lastly: Once again, Al-Qaeda is not Iraq, they are not the same and you have no business claiming one is the other.

[xWnLx Crisco]

"Helping" to stop an issue to which you have contributed in no small way is called 'cleaning up your own mess' not 'being some international hero'

Then instead of argue about having a quick pullout, let the Americans fix the problem.

Oh wow...do you not see what you just said? Let's go through this step by step:
1/ Iraq "has" WMDs
2/ Iraq is told "Get rid of your WMDs"
3/ After a time, inspectors look around and find no WMDs

You know...I think it is -just- as likely that maybe -they listened to what the UN told them- I love how absolutely nobody in the United States seems willing to admit the possibility that the actual reason the inspectors didn't find anything is because Iraq COMPLIED WITH THE UN.

Iraq doesn't have the luxury of being the world's greatest superpower, capable of ignoring anything that is done to it by the international community. The US can point and laugh at the UN because, honestly, what are they going to do about it? But Iraq would be -crushed- by trade embargos, it has almost no chance of standing up on its own without the abilty to trade its oil reserves for needed supplies. Is it really that crazy to suppose that they actually just did what they were told?

Yes it is crazy because if someone got away with it once they are most likly going to do it again.

Last I heard, the "Axis of Evil" was widely regarded by non-americans to be a very funny joke. Historically Iraq and Iran -HATE- each other. If either of them thought they could get away with it, the other one would have been invaded solidly ages ago. The Iranians have always percieved Iraq as a pathetic western-wannabe, trying to copy American as much as possible while still claiming to hate the western world. Iraq has historically been of the opinion that Iran is too stuck in the past, unwilling to move forward in the ways needed to being the Middle East into the glory that they most of them feel they deserve.

Further: Even -If- Iraq and Iran were somehow connected...so? Last I checked, the attacks were blamed on "Al Qaeda" which uh...isn't Iran and certainly isn't Iraq.

So your saying there is no al-Qaeda influence in Iraq? Whens the last time you were there fighting againt infidels?



Well, for one, Yes there was a true government, just one that you didn't like, and even if you grant that it was one that a lot of the people there didn't like, it was a government and it governed. For two: What gives you the right to decide to go in and establish one? For three: plenty of countries, including America have groups that hate America, going to invade all of them? Lastly: Once again, Al-Qaeda is not Iraq, they are not the same and you have no business claiming one is the other.

Its the same right as trying to keep the world from becoming a giant free for all nuclear winter.

If the group becomes a big enough problem that invasion is given thought then yes they will most likly be taken care of. Remember congress declares war not the president.

If it wasn't for America's military and direct actions this world would not be the same and possibly would not exist.

[purebloodtexan]

President Bush may be the smartest president in the US history... and I am not kidding...

Explain please.

Back up your statements in CT.

[JangBoGo]

Do you seriously think that he is THAT dumb?? Bush sure has all of America fooled thinking that he is nothing but a dumbass. Do you seriously think that Bush will tell the truth to the public? If the truth made it out to the public, enemies of the states would surely figure out a way to get us. Thats why his a brilliant actor. It is actually brilliant how we got into Iraq. We only had one purpose in Iraq and that is to drag Iran into a war they do not want to fight. It was suggested that 500,000 troops should be sent into Iraq to accompolish all the missions in Iraq, and if he did this war would've been nothing. President Bush sent only 150,000. Thanks to this, the US soldiers in Iraq are still struggling. This is done because he wants Iran to think that he is indeed incompetent. The only reason why we are in Iraq is because we want the sunnis and the shias cause mass genocide against each other, and it will inevitebaly drag Iran and other surrounding muslim nations such as Saudi Arabia into a war. Iran will expend its resources to this war, and this will save the US the time for the "big one" against China. One can argue that the Camp David Accords was the begenning of World War III.

[archbishopjabber]

Look at how much money the guy has spent. Compare the condition of our country before he spent the money, to after he spent all of those resources.

I think I've made my point.

http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-31-03.html

We are capitalist people. It all boils down to money, and he has been wasting a whole lot of it. Casualties of the Iraq War are insignificant, as are the casualties of 9/11. Obesity and Tobacco kill about 200 times as many people on a yearly basis. The real tragedy is the potential the resources that he has squandered once had.

Instead of the Iraq War and Afghanistan and Homeland Security we could have:

Public Healthcare
Free College
Alternative Energy
Potential Cures to Life threatening Illnesses
Or just a very nice tax break

Either way, spending money to combat terrorists is simply ineffective. 9/11 was nothing more than a lucky shot. It's not worth the spending it takes to defend against it, plain and simple. I think Bush has been an awful president because he cannot manage resources. We need a president with a PhD in economics....

[JangBoGo]

^^^We are not really capitalistic.....because of the WTO....the WTO is actually quite communist....

[solopro]

No.

I hate what he's been doing.

[xWnLx Crisco]

Look at how much money the guy has spent. Compare the condition of our country before he spent the money, to after he spent all of those resources.

I think I've made my point.

http://www.cato.org/dailys/07-31-03.html

We are capitalist people. It all boils down to money, and he has been wasting a whole lot of it. Casualties of the Iraq War are insignificant, as are the casualties of 9/11. Obesity and Tobacco kill about 200 times as many people on a yearly basis. The real tragedy is the potential the resources that he has squandered once had.

Instead of the Iraq War and Afghanistan and Homeland Security we could have:

Public Healthcare
Free College
Alternative Energy
Potential Cures to Life threatening Illnesses
Or just a very nice tax break

Either way, spending money to combat terrorists is simply ineffective. 9/11 was nothing more than a lucky shot. It's not worth the spending it takes to defend against it, plain and simple. I think Bush has been an awful president because he cannot manage resources. We need a president with a PhD in economics....

Ohh Great Ideas

Public Healthcare- Would not work........look how well canadas health care is.

Free college- GREAT Lets just give anyone a peice of paper now so we can throw it in the face of the people that worked hard to get that peice of paper.

Alternative Energy- Wait.........How does President Bush cause a business to not create a alternative energy? Is he holding them down by sitting on them? There have been many car manufactuers trying to make these types of things but its proving to be harder than it sounds.

Potential Cures- again the same response, How is Bush making them not be able to create such things? Just because he spends $ to make sure our troops have the best feild armor and armored Humvees doesn't mean that the medicine scientist can't create new ways of treating people.

Tax Break- lol.........thats all I am going to say about that.

Also instead of homeland security we could have:

None........isn't that what your trying to say? I can't wait to hear your defense program in the upcoming elections.

You don't relise that President Clinton reduced the size of the American Military by cutting down its $. Do you know what happened? People lost their jobs and new recruitments were given less for a sign up bonus. Also we had less troops with proper armor and equipment. Is that something you want to be proud of? Thats your own version of genocide to the american military just because you don't want to give an extra $50 a month to serve your country and is too scared of actually going over there to fight.

[lord_carbo]

Alternative Energy
Potential Cures to Life threatening Illnesses
Money doesn't particularly make people think harder, nor is Bush affiliated in almost any way to the development of medical matters and alternative energy.

Plus, as pessimistic as it sounds, there's really very little hope for alternative energy for a long time to come minus wind, solar and nuclear power.

[archbishopjabber]

Free college- GREAT Lets just give anyone a peice of paper now so we can throw it in the face of the people that worked hard to get that peice of paper.

That doesn't even make sense. Free college would only make that "piece of paper" more valuable because money would no longer be an avenue to obtain it. Now, only academic achievements and hard work could lead to getting a decent degree since socioeconomic standing would have no impact.

Our military hasn't defended us since World War II. It is proving to be an archaic government institution that is costing much more than it is paying back. I personally think we should leave defense to the private sector, which could take care of it more efficiently and with less Bureaucracy. The only reason it remains is because we are a culture of fear. The "Terrorists" hate each other just as much as they hate America and if we leave the middle east alone they will duke it out amongst themselves.

9/11 can be traced back to us directly supporting terrorist groups to fight the Russians so if we simply cut of military we would cut of much of the cause for such attacks. This was all a result of fear to, but fear of communism. Our fear of communism has now become a fear of terrorism. Both are completely irrational.

[xWnLx Crisco]

That doesn't even make sense. Free college would only make that "piece of paper" more valuable because money would no longer be an avenue to obtain it. Now, only academic achievements and hard work could lead to getting a decent degree since socioeconomic standing would have no impact.

Our military hasn't defended us since World War II. It is proving to be an archaic government institution that is costing much more than it is paying back. I personally think we should leave defense to the private sector, which could take care of it more efficiently and with less Bureaucracy. The only reason it remains is because we are a culture of fear. The "Terrorists" hate each other just as much as they hate America and if we leave the middle east alone they will duke it out amongst themselves.

9/11 can be traced back to us directly supporting terrorist groups to fight the Russians so if we simply cut of military we would cut of much of the cause for such attacks. This was all a result of fear to, but fear of communism. Our fear of communism has now become a fear of terrorism. Both are completely irrational.

Wow you are totally oblivous if you think with out a military we would be "safer". I am guessing you support Obama and Hillary too don't you?

Yeh lets "trace" a mass suicidal attack on american soil to the Russians. Thats logical...............

Its funny that you think so simple that if we don't have a fear or present a fear in another country that we will be left alone. But thats probably what you want and then we can all dance in the streets with our Toyota Prius and save the ecosystem. Until we get invaded by another country but guess what you banned all the military and weapons so uh oh looks like we loose. You know what I am just going to shoot myself now because of the fact there might be a person out there that thinks like you.

BLAME BUSH HE MAKES KIDS KILL EACH OTHER AND TERROISTS WANT TO KILL AMERICANS!

That sounds like something you would have tattooed on your lower back.

[jewpinthethird]

I want to make out with the big GWB. Stick my tongue right in his ear and swirl it about his ear lobes. Tease him a litt- ugh, I kind of vomited in my mouth just now.

[devonin]

I want to make out with the big GWB. Stick my tongue right in his ear and swirl it about his ear lobes. Tease him a litt- ugh, I kind of vomited in my mouth just now.

Yeah, I'm out too. The sheer volume of ignorance, fear-mongering and drawing of conclusions that have -no- bearing whatsoever on the evidence presented to back up those conclusions have made this completely into a chit-chat forum sort of topic. There's virtually no critical thinking going on in here at all.

[purebloodtexan]

Look at how much money the guy has spent. Compare the condition of our country before he spent the money, to after he spent all of those resources.

I think I've made my point.

According to my mother, our national debt is currently in the trillions. I'm not blaming it completely on Bush, but he is indeed throwing a lot of money out there.

[archbishopjabber]

Wow you are totally oblivous if you think with out a military we would be "safer". I am guessing you support Obama and Hillary too don't you?

Yeh lets "trace" a mass suicidal attack on american soil to the Russians. Thats logical...............

Its funny that you think so simple that if we don't have a fear or present a fear in another country that we will be left alone. But thats probably what you want and then we can all dance in the streets with our Toyota Prius and save the ecosystem. Until we get invaded by another country but guess what you banned all the military and weapons so uh oh looks like we loose. You know what I am just going to shoot myself now because of the fact there might be a person out there that thinks like you.

BLAME BUSH HE MAKES KIDS KILL EACH OTHER AND TERROISTS WANT TO KILL AMERICANS!

That sounds like something you would have tattooed on your lower back.

You are possibly one of the most irrationally fearful people on this forum. No one is going to invade us. The terrorists successfully navigated a plane into a building, this doesn't mean they have any actual war making capabilities. They used our military training and our planes to get the job done. They really don't have anything in terms of military standing. If we simply pull out and stop delving into middle eastern affairs, age-old hatreds will kick in and they will resume killing each other.

The military is meant to defend, not attack. The only purposes I see it serving at this point is to help during natural disasters or impose quarantines during plagues.

[Izzy-chandess]

I, personally, agree with the political cartoons and various other media that Bush is, simply, an idiot. We are in Iraq for no reason now. He frustrates me to no end... He is one of the worst Presidents ever. In my opinion, he is far from a Reagan.

[xWnLx Crisco]

You are possibly one of the most irrationally fearful people on this forum. No one is going to invade us. The terrorists successfully navigated a plane into a building, this doesn't mean they have any actual war making capabilities. They used our military training and our planes to get the job done. They really don't have anything in terms of military standing. If we simply pull out and stop delving into middle eastern affairs, age-old hatreds will kick in and they will resume killing each other.

The military is meant to defend, not attack. The only purposes I see it serving at this point is to help during natural disasters or impose quarantines during plagues.

Keep telling that to yourself. Next time you visit North Korea and China tell me how much fun you had.

If we "simply" lol how is it simple to pull out 160 THOUSAND TROOPS (which are doing their jobs which by they way you want them to be job less) so that they can go back and doing what they "normally" do.

How about this just to help your cause lets just stop sending supplies to the middle east and let my troops die out there. I said my because you have no support for any person that is currently over there. Then we can just take all of out air planes and leave all the troops there to die because for you thats like killing 2 birds with one stone. Less military and we won't be invading Iraq anymore. Yay for murder isn't that right?

[purebloodtexan]

I think we should just stop using military as our primary source of international intervention, that's all. As I said before, we shot off rounds before the U.N. even went in to inspect for WMD's, which there were none, therefore eliminating what was probably our first cause to go in there in the first place. We then hopped from excuse to excuse (Again, not trying to sound biased).

Going over our military history in the last decade(s).

In all honesty, I'm thinking that Panama and Desert Storm are things that could atleast have an attempt at peace first. I think that the whole reason why we were in Mogadishu is because U.N. personnel were restoring peace to Somalia, and needed a force of Marines to back them up due to Somalia being unstable. After Marines left, Aidid started to attack peacekeeping forces and left 43 dead, including a few American troops. We then, apparently, had the need to go in and stop Aidid's militia.

Also, I'm paying attention to the genocide in Darfur. We obviously can't go in, due to our national debt and us being tied up in the ME, but I don't see any other nations helping, other than African Union troops, who are suffering losses. Are they too used to our military intervening in international crises?

Another thought is how the U.N. are involved with the civil wars. Many of us have said "Why don't we just leave them alone and let them duke it out?" (which, in all honesty, isn't a bad idea) but the U.N. probably doesn't allow this. Although it's already our mess, the U.N. is going to ask atleast ONE nation to send their military and bring the peace. Seeing as we have one of the strongest militia in the world, we're probably called on the most.

[8Shade8]

Wow, all of you have a lot to say. I was just having a conversation about the war a few minutes ago, with a friend on AIM. I respect all of the opinions of all of you. This is exactly what I am willing to die for. I am willing to fight for people, a country if you will, that can accept the fact that every one has there own opinion.

There are people in other countries that can not stand the fact that we can make decisions of our own free will, and not live in fear. They cannot stand the fact that we can sit there and tell our "leader" in his face that he F****** sucks, and get away with it. They can't stand all of the freedoms we have.

Then there are the people that live in those countries who can accept their life. The accept that they live in a 3rd world country, and they just drive on. They try to get as close to Allah (God) as possible. Their entire lives revolve around their family and Allah. They try to live as normal a life as possible, and they want what we have. Peace. They are not jealous though, because their religious beliefs tell them not to. They live to let others live. They live to enjoy life and, pray that the after life will be better.

Then there are the Jealous people mentioned before them. They can not stand the Americans. They are jealous beyond all reason. They think we are an abomination to Allah. They want us to suffer as they do, because they spent more time trying to please Allah than us, and look, we get the good life and they don't. Yes we may be more sinful in our culture, but they can't just accept they fact that we may not be as close to Allah as them. They want to see others suffer now.

These angry people manipulate the peaceful people into joining their terrorist groups. How you might ask? By hitting them with their own religion. They instill the jealousy that they hold towards us, into these peaceful people. They threaten to kill their brother's families if they don't believe that people of other countries are bad, and that there is no way that we should continue living.

Yes we got mad when they blew up the world trade center. Yes we lit their asses up for it. Yes it was wrong, because there were innocent people there. There is no excuse for killing innocents, but there is a rebuttal to this. We are over there to help the people who want it. Maybe the majority of them don't, but there are still people who do. They do not want to live in a country ruled by terrorists, threatening to take away their children to serve Allah, in their f***** up, twisted manipulation of a religion. We are over there to attempt to rebuild their country; we are there to eliminate this treat that rises over innocent people. There are accidents, on both sides. People over there get scared and shoot at an American soldier for example. They have been told their entire lives that Americans are tyrants.
We assume that the person shooting may be a terrorist (seeing as there is absolutely no way to tell if they are an innocent or not), and we then shoot the person. This happens every day. It is something that is going to happen weather we like it or not.

For those of you who have read in the bible, prophesies of holy wars, these are those wars. For those of you who don't have a religion, respect those who do, and vice-versa; for if you don't, you are just as bad as a terrorist.

The great thing about our country is that we can respect each other (or have the freedom to) no matter what. We need to exercise that awesome freedom, and appreciate that we have it.

Another freedom that Americans have is the freedom of speech. If you have a political standpoint, tell your congressman. If you have a GREAT idea for our country, TELL SOMEONE! We have the right and privelage as Americans to act. If you want to gripe about something, make sure you have a solution to the problem, otherwise you are just adding to it.


I encourage EVERYONE who has good ideas for our country to express it. It's just a simple letter. If it is a good idea, who knows, you may of contributed to making this country better.

Hope all of you keep writing.

[devonin]

Wow, all of you have a lot to say. I was just having a conversation about the war a few minutes ago, with a friend on AIM. I respect all of the opinions of all of you. This is exactly what I am willing to die for. I am willing to fight for people, a country if you will, that can accept the fact that every one has there own opinion. I notice that you are saying you are willing to -die- for that, and yet are speaking in supprt instead, of people who are willing to -kill- for it. As Gandhi said (Great man that he was) "There are many causes for which I am willing to die - but none for which I am willing to kill"

There are people in other countries that can not stand the fact that we can make decisions of our own free will, and not live in fear. They cannot stand the fact that we can sit there and tell our "leader" in his face that he F****** sucks, and get away with it. They can't stand all of the freedoms we have. You know...you sound incredibly presumptuous and arrogant when you speak in that way. You just know, somehow, that millions and millions of people are somehow what, "Jealous?" (You use that term below) that you live in a country that is among the most interefring, and arrogant nations that enjoys dictating the world in terms of black and white? You know, that sounds a lot like the countries you are demeaning as horrible.

Then there are the people that live in those countries who can accept their life. The accept that they live in a 3rd world country, and they just drive on. They try to get as close to Allah (God) as possible. Their entire lives revolve around their family and Allah. They try to live as normal a life as possible, and they want what we have. Peace. They are not jealous though, because their religious beliefs tell them not to. They live to let others live. They live to enjoy life and, pray that the after life will be better.
A few things here: 1/ There are many third-world countries that are not muslim countries. 2/ There are many muslim countries that are not third-world countries, 3/ You have a very low opinion of the ability of these people to have lives and things which are important to them other than their church and their family.

Then there are the Jealous people mentioned before them. They can not stand the Americans. They are jealous beyond all reason. They think we are an abomination to Allah. They want us to suffer as they do, because they spent more time trying to please Allah than us, and look, we get the good life and they don't. Yes we may be more sinful in our culture, but they can't just accept they fact that we may not be as close to Allah as them. They want to see others suffer now. My highschool world religions teacher would fail you on the spot for this. "They hate us because they are jealous" is one of the most...unimformed *deep breath* opinions of the issues involving negative opinions of the United States. The people who are both religious and have a low opinion of American culture are a much greater number than "The bad muslims" you seem to be implying. By -most- world religious standards, the United States is a sinful, evil place. Where lust, greed, and hunger for power are the prime goals, where people spend all of their time engaging in worthless entertainments, concerned only with their own pleasure. Doesn't take a radical muslim to find a discrepency between that and the lessons of religion.

These angry people manipulate the peaceful people into joining their terrorist groups. How you might ask? By hitting them with their own religion. They instill the jealousy that they hold towards us, into these peaceful people. They threaten to kill their brother's families if they don't believe that people of other countries are bad, and that there is no way that we should continue living. As the country and primary religion that spawned the KKK, the United states is no stranger to the religious using religion in a way that many others find unacceptable. As an aside, that is the actual correlation between the two faiths. Muslim is to Islamic Fundamentalist as Christian is to the KKK. They are a -very- small but very devout subgroup of a subgroup, about which almost every other member of that faith as a horribly low opinion. You're coming so close to implying that you think all muslims are evil terrorists, you really need to watch how you phrase things.

We are over there to help the people who want it. Maybe the majority of them don't, but there are still people who do. So...you are invading a country where you will grant the possibility that the MAJORITY don't want you there? By your same logic, if there are -some people- who hate the American Government who live in America, terrorists are -EQUALLY- as justified to attack america as you are to invade those countries.


They do not want to live in a country ruled by terrorists, threatening to take away their children to serve Allah, in their f***** up, twisted manipulation of a religion. We are over there to attempt to rebuild their country; we are there to eliminate this treat that rises over innocent people. There are accidents, on both sides. People over there get scared and shoot at an American soldier for example. They have been told their entire lives that Americans are tyrants.
Americans have killed more civilans in Iraq and caused more damage to buildings in Iraq in the past year through these "accidents" you want to just laugh off that....ugh *breath again* Do you have any idea the full extent of the damage to global culture and history that has been perpetrated by the Americans in the Middle East? Some of the oldest and arguably most important pieces of historical architecure, cultural centres, collections of documents, artifacts, I mean...I've had professors who study classics in that exact portion of the world, who will tell you that the cost is -incalculable- this is not "some accidents" of "a scared civilian shooting an american soldier" this is just wanton destruction.

For those of you who have read in the bible, prophesies of holy wars, these are those wars. For those of you who don't have a religion, respect those who do, and vice-versa; for if you don't, you are just as bad as a terrorist. You've shown such a misunderstanding and lack of respect for a whole religion that I cannot believe you can give this admonition with a straight face.

The great thing about our country is that we can respect each other (or have the freedom to) no matter what. We need to exercise that awesome freedom, and appreciate that we have it. But not extend it to people not from your country? That seems a tad hypocritical to me.

I encourage EVERYONE who has good ideas for our country to express it. It's just a simple letter. If it is a good idea, who knows, you may of contributed to making this country better. I have a good idea: American needs to stop thinking that it has universal knowledge of good and evil, of right and wrong, and to stop advocating for the wanton interference in the lives of people it has no authority over.

[A2_Sauce]

I think George W. Bush has had the toughest term to "presidentiate" on, but c'mon, stop doing a piss poor job.

[devonin]

Anyone who thinks that this presidential term was the "most difficult" has a very low opinion of the great war, the second world war, and the cuban missle crisis, if nothing else.

Edit: Yeesh, what a disappointing 500th post

[8Shade8]

I don't laugh at these "accidents". In fact I fear the day that I shoot an innocent. You must understand that I am in no way ignorant of the islamic beliefs. I am trained on insurgents and terrorist ways day and night. I simply relayed to you information (that I am in no postion to give to you) about how propaganda, and how it is used to recruit innocents into terrorist organizations.

I am tired, and have to go to sleep. I will talk more on this tomorrow.

[devonin]

Um...you are trained "in" insurgents and terrorist ways day and night...good for you. if you think those things have the -least- bit to do with muslim religious beliefs, then you are propagandized so completely that there's not even much of a reason to try and tell you otherwise.

I mean is "People who use islamic religious thought as an excuse to murder people are NO DIFFERENT than the KKK or any other irrational hate group" such a difficult concept to communicate to people?

[8Shade8]

Um...you are trained "in" insurgents and terrorist ways day and night...good for you. if you think those things have the -least- bit to do with muslim religious beliefs, then you are propagandized so completely that there's not even much of a reason to try and tell you otherwise.

I mean is "People who use islamic religious thought as an excuse to murder people are NO DIFFERENT than the KKK or any other irrational hate group" such a difficult concept to communicate to people?

Redundant and hypocritical. I am assuming that you watch WAY to much of the news (which by the way is propaganda in itself) because you ignorance level is practically killing me.

Let me break it down without the "critical thinking" for you. I won't make ANY insinuations. THE INSURGENTS AND TERRORISTS MANIPULATE THE MUSLIM RELIGION TO GET INNOCENT PEOPLE TO DO WHAT THEY WANT FOR THEM!!! WOW, new concept huh? If you read my post I IN NO WAY defended the KKK or any other extremeist group. I STATED QUITE CLEARLY THAT WHAT THE TERRORIST DO WERE WRONG, AND YET YOU TRY TO CONTRADICT ME, QUOTE WHAT I SAID, SAY THAT YOU BELIEVE IT, AND THEN.................AHHHHHHHHHH. If you can not continue on with where I am going then you are hopeless...

[devonin]

These particular terrorists in this particular situation happen to be rabidly fundamental muslims...yes, I understand, I am not a moron. But what you are constantly implying if not outright stating is that "muslims" hate america, that "muslims" are terrorists and that "muslims" are ignorant, jealous people who "hate" that other countries are "free"

I mean...I understand that "orthodox, fundamentalist muslims" is a mouthful to say and type, and it is easier to just give in to the propaganda and lump a small, violent extremist subgroup in with the entire rest of the faith that dispises and reviles their corruption of the doctrine, but that way lies madness, hatred, and incredibly bigoted and ignorant results.

EDIT: Also, the idea that someone could be moved to a shouting, all-caps tirade in the middle of a discussion that he himself started by saying how much he respects everyone else's opinion and right to state it -also- being someone who is in the process of being sent overseas to where these people live makes me more than a little uneasy.

[talisman]

Been skimmin', something caught my eye.

Further: Even -If- Iraq and Iran were somehow connected...so? Last I checked, the attacks were blamed on "Al Qaeda" which uh...isn't Iran and certainly isn't Iraq.

So your saying there is no al-Qaeda influence in Iraq? Whens the last time you were there fighting againt infidels?

This almost makes my head explode.

1. Devonin was talking about 9/11, not attacks currently in Iraq.
2. You called the insurgents "infidels"... that's just a tad bigoted.

[jewpinthethird]

Yeah, I'm out too. The sheer volume of ignorance, fear-mongering and drawing of conclusions that have -no- bearing whatsoever on the evidence presented to back up those conclusions have made this completely into a chit-chat forum sort of topic. There's virtually no critical thinking going on in here at all.

This is how I see it. You have two sides shouting at each other that the other side is wrong. The argument is so loud and outrageous that no one can here each other over their own voices. Each side is openly praising the information that they receive that confirms their argument while entirely ignoring any information that disagrees with their view.

One could compare it to two people standing on opposite sides of a concrete wall, each trying to destroy it with a small hammer (keep in mind this wall serves absolutely no purpose). No matter how hard either of them hit the wall, the hammer just bounces off. The most each can do is hope to take a nice chunk of rock out of the wall. In the mean time, they are getting all hot and sweaty from whacking away at the wall all day.

In the end, everyone stops caring about the wall...and no one really knows why it was such a big deal.

With that said, chip away. No one cares.

[devonin]

This is how I see it. You have two sides shouting at each other that the other side is wrong. The argument is so loud and outrageous that no one can here each other over their own voices. Each side is openly praising the information that they receive that confirms their argument while entirely ignoring any information that disagrees with their view.

One could compare it to two people standing on opposite sides of a concrete wall, each trying to destroy it with a small hammer (keep in mind this wall serves absolutely no purpose). No matter how hard either of them hit the wall, the hammer just bounces off. The most each can do is hope to take a nice chunk of rock out of the wall. In the mean time, they are getting all hot and sweaty from whacking away at the wall all day.

In the end, everyone stops caring about the wall...and no one really knows why it was such a big deal.

With that said, chip away. No one cares.

You know, you're right. I keep getting drawn back in here like anything I say is capable of making a difference, but I really don't think it is.

[flawofhumanity]

You know, you're right. I keep getting drawn back in here like anything I say is capable of making a difference, but I really don't think it is.

Not completely true; you in junction with a few others in this thread have at least expanded my view on the current war and even somewhat altered my perception of the war and it's usefulness/how necessary it is/was. By the way, I thanks you and the others for that, so don't think all your time was wasted =P.

Now, there's not a lot about the subject that hasn't been said, but I would like to take a moment to discuss the mentality of the U.S. soldiers going overseas. Now, not to generalize, so I will state that this probably isn't widespread but this is what I've seen/heard from my room mate (who is in the army) and his friends/recruiters that I've met while at the armory, where I have been more than a few times.

I really liked the point you made about the difference between willing to die and willing to kill devonin, because it's true. I hear my room mate proclaim quite a bit that "I'm willing to die for my country," but I've called him out on a few times due to a few occurrences. For one, when he was meeting with his recruiters for the first time, I was with him (as I was his ride and wanted to listen to what they had to say) and they were actually discussing which MOS (or specialty) he could be, and he actually chose the one he chose solely based on the fact that his recruiters and him deduced that he was least likely to have to go overseas/get into actual battle due to this MOS. And this isn't a isolated occurrence, I've heard it from the majority of soldiers/potential soldiers that I've met, including officers.

Another thing that worries me about the army is the training. Now I realize, they aren't trained to be peace keepers or Gandhi or anything, but I think some things have exceeded the limit for propaganda even. For example, my town's army branch's slogan or chant is this:

"HOO AH, I WANNA HURT SOMEBODY, HOO AH, I WANNA KILL SOMEBODY, HOOOOO AAAAAAH."

Now maybe I'm taking too much out of it, but somebody is a pretty vague term, and I'm not quite sure the goal of the army is hurting and killing as many somebodies as possible.

Another thing that bothers me is every soldier pretending to be a cultural anthropologist as far as the middle east is concerned. I've seen way too many people pretend that they know everything about the Muslim religion, yet don't know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite.

PS. I realize that I don't have any real sources, thus this not holding a lot of weight in the CT, but I wanted to at least throw my experiences out there for discussion at the very least. Also, I am not anti-army, I'm just questioning the mentality that some of our troops are going over there with.

[8Shade8]

Not completely true; you in junction with a few others in this thread have at least expanded my view on the current war and even somewhat altered my perception of the war and it's usefulness/how necessary it is/was. By the way, I thanks you and the others for that, so don't think all your time was wasted =P.

Now, there's not a lot about the subject that hasn't been said, but I would like to take a moment to discuss the mentality of the U.S. soldiers going overseas. Now, not to generalize, so I will state that this probably isn't widespread but this is what I've seen/heard from my room mate (who is in the army) and his friends/recruiters that I've met while at the armory, where I have been more than a few times.

I really liked the point you made about the difference between willing to die and willing to kill devonin, because it's true. I hear my room mate proclaim quite a bit that "I'm willing to die for my country," but I've called him out on a few times due to a few occurrences. For one, when he was meeting with his recruiters for the first time, I was with him (as I was his ride and wanted to listen to what they had to say) and they were actually discussing which MOS (or specialty) he could be, and he actually chose the one he chose solely based on the fact that his recruiters and him deduced that he was least likely to have to go overseas/get into actual battle due to this MOS. And this isn't a isolated occurrence, I've heard it from the majority of soldiers/potential soldiers that I've met, including officers.

Another thing that worries me about the army is the training. Now I realize, they aren't trained to be peace keepers or Gandhi or anything, but I think some things have exceeded the limit for propaganda even. For example, my town's army branch's slogan or chant is this:

"HOO AH, I WANNA HURT SOMEBODY, HOO AH, I WANNA KILL SOMEBODY, HOOOOO AAAAAAH."

Now maybe I'm taking too much out of it, but somebody is a pretty vague term, and I'm not quite sure the goal of the army is hurting and killing as many somebodies as possible.

Another thing that bothers me is every soldier pretending to be a cultural anthropologist as far as the middle east is concerned. I've seen way too many people pretend that they know everything about the Muslim religion, yet don't know the difference between a Sunni and a Shiite.

PS. I realize that I don't have any real sources, thus this not holding a lot of weight in the CT, but I wanted to at least throw my experiences out there for discussion at the very least. Also, I am not anti-army, I'm just questioning the mentality that some of our troops are going over there with.

WOW! That is a legitimate concern, and I tell you, just as in the civilian world, there are annoying, smart, stupid, retarded as hell, geniuses etc. in the army.

Let me explain something to you. It is tough being in the army. Depression can take over a person easily. It really sucks being away from your family for long amounts of time. So how do we overcome it? With mottos and cadences. They remind us of who we are or in this instance, to remain motivated no matter what.

Here is how that motto is supposed to go:

Drill Sergeant(or any other leader): SOLDIERS, ARE YOU MOTIVATED?!


Soldiers: MOTIVATED, MOTIVATED, DOWN RIGHT MOTIVATED,
HOO AH, I WANNA HURT SOMEBODY, HOO AH, I WANNA KILL SOMEBODY, HOOOOO AAAAAAH

Lol, now you see what happens when you only see part of the story?

Not to say that 11B (infantry) isn't crazy, BUT they are trained to kill. That's it. Nothing else to it. They go in, find the enemy, take them out, leave.

Now, it is my job to identify the enemy. You see, devonin is so concrete in the head, that he can't read my post fully. He then belittles my job with a good for you, and tells me then that I think all muslims are out to get us. I remember making sections of people in my first post. There are insurgants who twist the muslim faith. They threaten others into following them. Some resist. Some don't have to. Guess why. Because we are there.


"small, violent extremist subgroup in with the entire rest of the faith that dispises and reviles their corruption of the doctrine"

Ok, ignorance level needs to go down before you post again. I respect opinions, but I can not stand uneducated opinions. The extremeist groups are not small. They are huge. I cannot disclose how many members, but know this, these groups run entire countries, so how can they be small?

Ok, I am going to have to stop there, because there are certain things I am not allowed to talk about. Sorry, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.


Edit: I kind of answered your question, but here is the answer straight up. A soldiers mentality is based off his training. I am Intel. I have a different mind set than a "lets kill the enemy" infantry. You see? But the infantry will only kill what the Intel tells them to....it has to be balanced. Now I am NOT saying that infantry are mindless killers, but someone needs to Identify the badguys. The mentality is balanced. There is no "guessing" in the army.

[purebloodtexan]

I'm not sure if it varies by Army branch, but I thought it was "Hooah!" rather than a long "Hoooooaaaaah!" sound.

[devonin]

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/centurion.htm

So tell me this then 8shade8, if these groups are so gigantic, just how large are they? What percentage of the population of Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and say...Saudi Arabia are 'evil terrorist insurgents' 10%? 20%? 90%? Give us a ballpark here. And short of the Taliban controlling Afghanistan (Which by the way, they claimed to have 12,000 members, a whopping 0.03% of the total population of Afghanistan, yeah you need a whole ton of people to take over a country) I deny that "they" are running "whole countries" when you give no evidence.

That's another thing: This is Critical Thinking, wherein you must support your statements with some kind of evidence, so lets have no more of this nonsense "I make a claim, and then claim that I'm "not allowed" to give any of the necessary evidence" style of discussion.

If you are privy to classified information, even implying to civilians that you know it is almost certainly a breach of military protocol. If you -CANNOT- support what you claim with any kind of evidence, just don't make such claims.

[Grandiagod]

I like how this thread hasn't deviated from it's original topic.

[Adamaja456]

I dont think it has. Bush invaded Iraq and many of the people in the Thread are talkin about Iraq and terrism and stuff of that sort =]

[xWnLx Crisco]

One sad thing I have NOT seen in this whole thread is support for any of the soldiers.

I support them 100% and if I was needed to go into active duty I sure as hell would.

Shade is speaking on part of what he does on a daily basis and how he was trained so what happens? People nit pick at his training and his job. I can guarantee that none of you would spit on a soldier in person like you do who says it how it is. If you want to keep the peace in the Middle East then go there and be sure to tell us what happens to you when you talk to a 14 year old boy with a AK-47 aimed at your head. These forums are so funny because you hide in a world you now nothing about but the stuff you hear from the internet or TV.

Devonin your country doesn't have soldiers so I am not expecting anything from you.

[Relambrien]

This is how I see it. You have two sides shouting at each other that the other side is wrong. The argument is so loud and outrageous that no one can here each other over their own voices. Each side is openly praising the information that they receive that confirms their argument while entirely ignoring any information that disagrees with their view.

One could compare it to two people standing on opposite sides of a concrete wall, each trying to destroy it with a small hammer (keep in mind this wall serves absolutely no purpose). No matter how hard either of them hit the wall, the hammer just bounces off. The most each can do is hope to take a nice chunk of rock out of the wall. In the mean time, they are getting all hot and sweaty from whacking away at the wall all day.

In the end, everyone stops caring about the wall...and no one really knows why it was such a big deal.

With that said, chip away. No one cares.

I know I haven't popped in on this thread, but I have to praise you for this post. It pretty much describes every heated debate topic perfectly well. People that are set in their beliefs are set in their beliefs, and will not change.

Personally, before reading this thread I wasn't sure what to think about Bush's administration or, particularly, the Iraq war. But now, after reading the arguments, I feel much more certain about what I believe. And to make this post legitimate, I might as well say what that is.

People kept bringing up the whole "Weapons of mass destruction" thing as a premise for entering the war. I don't think that was Bush's purpose at all, even in the beginning. That was just a guise that would appear valid so that he could go in and remove a government he didn't like. This isn't necessarily such a bad thing, however, as he didn't like the government because of how the citizens were treated, which is a perfectly valid concern. However, disguising the intention of the war in order to gain more support is something I cannot condone. If he had said it openly from the beginning, I'm sure more support from both inside and outside America could've been obtained. Obviously, I have no source for this claim, as it is an opinion I developed from reading this thread.

Still, I can't agree with it. I can see his point of view, but it's not our (I'm American) role to decide what other countries should do. Our military should not be used to instill our beliefs on other countries. We need one, obviously, because there are several groups that despise us. Even if they have no real war-making capability, if we have no military ourselves, they'll still be able to cause great harm to us. Thus, I support a military, but one that stays out of other countries' affairs and takes measures to stop incoming attacks against us. Not prevent them, as that would involve preemptively attacking another group, but to stop them as they are occurring. For instance, if we had another 9/11, shooting down the planes mid-flight, or better security measures to stop terrorists from even boarding. You get the idea.

The military, in my opinion, should be a deterrent, an item or entity used to discourage certain acts. In this case, those acts would be attacks on America.

Now, provided we somehow still manage to get ourselves attacked, I have no problems with us going out to eliminate those who attacked us. I supported the American effort to eliminate Al-Qaeda, because they are the ones who attacked us. However, I cannot support the effort in Iraq, because they posed no threat to us.

Now, some people will say, "But that shows weakness, that we aren't willing to go out and fight!" And to them I say this. What do you think our invasion of Iraq shows? "Oh look at us, we can't fix our own country so we're gonna go try to remove a harsh government in the Middle East to make us look strong!" It's the classic bully mentality, "I feel bad about myself so I'm gonna bully you to make me feel like I'm better than you." I don't mean to say the soldiers think this, but I think it's how Bush felt when he went into Iraq. Either that or he wanted to finish the job his father started in the first Gulf War.

These are just my opinions and I don't expect anyone to agree, but that's not what I'm trying to do by writing this. I just want to get my views out there :D

Forgot to say, even if I don't support the war, I support the troops we have fighting it. They're doing what they believe in, which is all I can ask. I'll do everything in my power to make things better for them, but I won't go over there to fight myself. I don't believe in the war.

EDIT: Edited for clarification.

[ShAiOnEi]

I'm in the Airforce

[devonin]

One sad thing I have NOT seen in this whole thread is support for any of the soldiers. Also, a lot of presumption, and telling us what we do or do not believe, and what we are or are not capable offWe aren't discussing the soldiers, or their ability, dedication or drive. We are discussing the government and its decisions to carry out operations. I'm sorry you feel the need to connect the issue to the fact that there are people being made to deal with it, in order to use that as a means to deny other people's logical statements about whether the conflict -itself- is justified. OBVIOUSLY if operations are being carried out no matter what, we support the people who are made to do the work. We want every soldier to come back alive, and safe, and to imply that we think otherwise is incredibly insulting, arrogant and displays an incredible bias that anyone who is opposed to military action in Iraq is De Facto against the soldiers personally as well. To paraphrase Voltaire: "I disapprove of what you've been sent to do, but I will defend to the death your right to do your duty"

These forums are so funny because you hide in a world you now nothing about but the stuff you hear from the internet or TV. And you only ever give opinions on things about which you have complete, in-depth first hand knowledge? With this logic, nobody is EVER allowed to talk about ANYTHING that they aren't personally doing themselves. Where do you think the people who are -for- the hostilities get their information? Other aspects of the television and internet.

Devonin your country doesn't have soldiers so I am not expecting anything from you. So you criticize us for not showing respect to soldiers, and then denigrate an entire other army? Hypocrite.

The canadian military makes up 0.5% of our population. The american military makes up 1.3% of your population. You'll note that neither of these numbers is especially high. Just because we have a small military doesn't mean we have no military, we also have 1/10th your population.

Since 1947, the Canadian Forces has participated in more than 200 operations worldwide and has completed 72 international operations including the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan and the NATO stabilization force (SFOR) in Bosnia-Herzegovina. On any given day one third of the deployable force is preparing for, engaged in or returning from an overseas mission.

I'd appreciate it if you treat nations that are not your own with at least a modicum of respect. We're right in there fighting and dying alongside you, in every place you've gone that we agreed with. Just because we think this particular action is unjustified doesn't mean Canada has no respect for the american military. Please at least pretend to show us the same respect, this is a forum for intelligent discussion, not insults.

[8Shade8]

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/centurion.htm

So tell me this then 8shade8, if these groups are so gigantic, just how large are they? What percentage of the population of Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and say...Saudi Arabia are 'evil terrorist insurgents' 10%? 20%? 90%? Give us a ballpark here. And short of the Taliban controlling Afghanistan (Which by the way, they claimed to have 12,000 members, a whopping 0.03% of the total population of Afghanistan, yeah you need a whole ton of people to take over a country) I deny that "they" are running "whole countries" when you give no evidence.

That's another thing: This is Critical Thinking, wherein you must support your statements with some kind of evidence, so lets have no more of this nonsense "I make a claim, and then claim that I'm "not allowed" to give any of the necessary evidence" style of discussion.

If you are privy to classified information, even implying to civilians that you know it is almost certainly a breach of military protocol. If you -CANNOT- support what you claim with any kind of evidence, just don't make such claims.



First of all, the information you are asking is FOUO, and probably has a Secret classification. I have not violated any clearances so far, but you are pushing it. Second, your not American, and I would get in even MORE trouble for telling you those numbers.

I understand you have your own opinion, but in the future please don't insult my job as a way to try to get information from me. I know what you are doing and I don't like it. Insulting someone is different that stating your opinion.

If you are so interested in these numbers and you want to see the evidence that I have, but cannot post, I encourage you to join your army in the Intelligence field. It is relatively easy to do so. I don't know about Canada, but in America, if you join the Army as intel, you can later work for the CIA or any other 3 letter secret organization, provided that you get some kind of degree in Psychology or Intelligence.

You want to get into intelligence? Relatively easy. People think it is hard or something, when it is very simple. Here is how you do it through the army:

1. Talk to a recruiter (he/she will work out any problems you have had in your past and they can help you get some stuff expunged)

2. Make it through BCT (basic combat training)

3. Go through intel AIT

4. Serve your country. Not only do you get to protect your country, you also get a great job experience to apply for intel, and you get infinite college money while in the army. (I don't know about other countries)

5. Get a degree in intel or psychology

And thats pretty much it. If you want to see what's going on and want to help, than thats the best route.

Tell you what, I won't state any more facts that I am not allowed to post statistics. Let me remind you that people can post whatever the hell they want on the internet: Fake facts, exaggerated stories, etc. The media is no better.


Now, if you are American, I can tell you how to access more true stories. Go and talk to your local recruiter, and tell him you are thinking about joining the army. Ask him to hook you up with something that is called an AKO account. Army Knowledge Online. You will be able to sign up at www.us.army.mil and then read about what is going on overseas. Now, only do this if you don't mind being constantly bugged by the recruiter.

Other than that, I will have to ask my drill sergeant of a reliable source of info about what is going on overseas, and I will then post it so all of you can read it. I hate it when people are uninformed about things. This is my solution. I will have a link for a reliable, civilian accessable website in a few days hopefully.

[devonin]

That's all CT can ask, that you provide some kind of backup for the things that you state. it is just a little too convenient when you state things as facts, tell us you have proof, but then are unable to actually give any of it, that's the only critcism.

Saying "You're wrong, but I can't show you why" just doesn't really work. We're all aware of the fact that certain kinds of information just aren't civilian knowledge, and fair enough, but we can only work with what we've got and do the best we can with it.

[Grandiagod]

Hey guys. I have super secret information that Bush is actually a woman.

But I can't tell you my sources because they are super covert.

But it's true because I say it is.

Also, join the army join the army join the army.

I'm using this post to recruit you join the army join the army join the army come kill some Iraqis with us join the army.

[devonin]

Out of curiosity, do you do things that -aren't- troll?

[8Shade8]

Hey guys. I have super secret information that Bush is actually a woman.

But I can't tell you my sources because they are super covert.

But it's true because I say it is.

Also, join the army join the army join the army.

I'm using this post to recruit you join the army join the army join the army come kill some Iraqis with us join the army.

Wow, you blew what I am trying to do WAY out of proportion. Lol. I don't get paid enough to recruit people into the army.

[Grandiagod]

Out of curiosity, do you do things that -aren't- troll?

No I was pointing out the absurdity of telling someone to join Army intelligence so that they can verify that the information used in an internet debate is correct rather than actually using identifiable sources.

After all, being an intelligence officer he must know that information is only as good as its source.

Also, the post was basically the most blatant plug for Army recruitment I have seen, despite what he says.

[evilcowgod]

Do you agree or disagree with that actions Bush has taken during his 2 terms in office? Do you think Bush has proper justification on the war in Iraq or do you think the war is pointless?

Discuss
The war is ultimately pointless, George Bush and all the other republicans out there can kid themselves all they want, but the fact it, it's just another war like Vietnam.

The war has no point to it anymore, why are we trying to shove democracy down their throats? Every country is different.

The main reason why we went there was to get Saddam out of power. As if it makes any difference. OK Saddam is gone, but what now? Voting and democracy is great and all, don't get me wrong, but there's no point in trying to change the way a country works by going to war.

War is meant to be a last resort, a course of action taken when serious deputes arise between countries. It's been proven that there were no weapons of mass destruction within Saddam's reach, so therefore they're no threat to us anymore?

[jewpinthethird]

Fun Fact #361:

Before the United States invaded Iraq, it was a sovereign nation. Now, four years later, it's in the midst of a civil war, every morning the streets of Baghdad are littered with the tortured corpses of innocent Iraq civilians, we aren't any closer to finding Osama bin Laden, we never found any WMDs and this war has no end in sight.

I don't see this war having a happy ending.

[8Shade8]

The war is ultimately pointless, George Bush and all the other republicans out there can kid themselves all they want, but the fact it, it's just another war like Vietnam.

The war has no point to it anymore, why are we trying to shove democracy down their throats? Every country is different.

The main reason why we went there was to get Saddam out of power. As if it makes any difference. OK Saddam is gone, but what now? Voting and democracy is great and all, don't get me wrong, but there's no point in trying to change the way a country works by going to war.

War is meant to be a last resort, a course of action taken when serious deputes arise between countries. It's been proven that there were no weapons of mass destruction within Saddam's reach, so therefore they're no threat to us anymore?


Lol, well, you do have a point. I can agree that this war is slighlty pointless. Bush's "reson" for still being over there are the terrorists. It will take FOREVER to eliminate them. We are most likely going to get pulled out of Iraq when President Bush looses power. We are going to look like idiots and punks when that happens....

Btw. So far I have looked into good sources for the war that civilians can access. Now, the only way to see the truth behind the media, is to look at multiple sources and compare there stories.

Here are two you can compare:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/
http://www.foxnews.com

Edit: Still looking into sites that have really good information.

[Garthhh]

President Bush has been an arrogant bigot from the start. For the most part, he does things his way. He leaves little room for compromise or diplomacy. He rushed us into an unnecessary war for all the wrong reasons. He is also chipping away at the civil liberties that are the foundation of America. On top of that, he seems to support criminals (Libby) and seems to have a whole lot of scandals going on around him. Bush also acts harshly whenever someone is critical of him. Notice that there aren't too many Citgo stations around anymore? They started disappearing after the Venezuelan dictator called Bush "the devil." Citgo is Venezuelan gas.

Bush has been catering to the rich and been driving his buddies' companies profits skyward. Halliburton, for example. Dick Cheney used to be the president of it. He still holds stocks. Also, the rich have been getting tax cut after tax cut. One of the Republican-controlled Congress's last passed bills was a tax cut that gave the wealthiest 1% of America 38% of the total tax cut money. The second largest amount went to the wealthiest 10%. The rest went to the majority of America.

In the aftermath of Katrina, the Greeks offered to send over two fully equipped hospital ships. Bush, on the other hand, turned down this offer so that he could rent out two cruise ships from a company that is a huge supporter of the Republican party. Sounds like corruption on some level to me.

After 9/11, Bush and the government began to order record numbers of brand new, $300 million a piece fighter jets. What better way to fight box cutter wielding terrorists?