|
|
#1 |
|
FFR Player
|
I know that this is a old subject, but I have to see if there is any1 that believes what i believe.
I say that the war should have ended before we sent any of our troops ing. We should have trunned the country into radio-active dust when we had the chance. What do the rest of you think? |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Falcon Paaaauuuunch!!!!!!
|
We should have just never done the war. That's what I think. Plus, if we're supposed to be helping them, I don't see how turning their country into radioactive dust helps.
__________________
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
FFR Player
|
It shows the world we mean business. If we let one little country mock us then the rest of the world will turn on us. Sacerfice one country gain the fear of the rest of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 117
|
haha your either mentally deranged, 11 years old, or just stupid...
i pick the third one but i offer my humbe apologies if it is one of the first two. I cant even put into words arguments against you, coz they would just sound so obvious and silly... |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
is against custom titles
|
I never had a problem with the war in the first place, but we pussyfooted around too much. We really just needed to go in there, kick a bunch of ass, and then be left with much fewer problems, collateral damage be, for the most part, damned. What we did was a pretty clear example of how not to carry out such a war.
--Guido http://andy.mikee385.com |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
sunshine and rainbows
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 38
Posts: 1,987
|
I think in order to address this issue properly, we really need to know WHY the States went into Iraq in the first place. It sure as hell wasn't because of weapons of mass destruction, or an issue of immediate public safety (ie: terrorism), or for want of helping the poor, backwards people in Iraq. It seems much more of a resource and political issue than anything, IMO, which is, granted, not nearly as informed as I'd like it to be.
Bombing the heck out of a country isn't going to 1) give the States hands-on political power in the middle-east or 2) secure oil. It will also 3) make the rest of the world hate the States more than they already do, and could start WW III or something, with the USA being the bad guys. As far as going in there and kicking some ass, what's the point of doing that? And how would that leave less problems than before, when the problems from before with regards to Iraq specifically were practically non-existent? It is also immutably morally wrong to bomb the heck out of Iraq for whatever the reason claimed is, and that, by far, should leave any other quibbling over the situation in the dust. Unfortunately, some people still believe it best to kill people to show off power. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1
|
I think we should have never gone 2 war. I mean, my brother is supposed 2 go 2 Kuait sometime next year. Its stupid how George W. thinks we have 2 stay.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
FFR Player
|
From a non-American point of view... people like Phyro989 are the reason people don't like the USA.
Thats all i have to say.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: I live somewhere.
Age: 33
Posts: 213
|
Quote:
- Control over a dense oil-based country to show that we would not be dependant on other middle-eastern countries who dislike our point of view and have an economy primarily based off of light sweet crude. - Political kickbacks to Halliburton and other contract-based companies that can get monopolistic no-bid contracts for work. - Vendettas against leaders that attempted to have a certain former president and current president's father assassinated. - The thought that the war in Iraq would go as smoothly as it did (for a while) in Afghanistan. - The War on Terrier Most of these are pretty stupid reasons based on cherry-picked information and the misrepresentation of knowledge and resources. Whether the administration wants to admit it or not, it's become obviously clear that the war should've never been started, and even moreso--Bush should've never managed the war. (And my opinion.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
(The Fat's Sabobah)
|
Thinking like the enemy, eh phyro989?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Milford, Connecticut
Posts: 339
|
We don't go around randomly attacking countries, are you an idiot? That would cause world-wide chaos, and maybe even spark a nuclear war.
I think George Bush didn't need to go into Iraq. We're going into countries to bring forced democracy where they don't want it. Venezuela is a good example for that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
FFR Player
|
This topic examplifies the common misperception of the war.
1. WE SHULD NUKE DEM LOL DEM DEY WILL ALL BE DEAD LOL 2. my relative is going to war g bush is dumb 3. The US is stupid, George Bush is stupid. Only a few of you in here know enough about the situation to give a valid opinion. The rest of you are uneducated citizens of a media bandwagon who need to wake the hell up and think logically, and read up on the war. |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
CHOCK FULL O' NUTRIENTS
|
Every time I see that as a logistical reason behind going to war, I have to laugh. Instead of sending an assasination squad, we just start a war! That'll teach em'.
__________________
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline." "Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback! |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 117
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: I live somewhere.
Age: 33
Posts: 213
|
Quote:
Straight up saying, I don't really like him as president. At all. I hope that somehow the 2008 ticket has Obama/Edwards (or vice versa). That'd be awesome. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
FFR Player
|
I think the next president is going to get us out of Iraq. But we have Sadom why arent looking for Osama. We are in Iraq because Bush is finishing what his Dad started. They both are dumb.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
CHOCK FULL O' NUTRIENTS
|
Quote:
My Dad built a shelf one time. While he was building it, he divorced my Mom. We threw the shelf out, we didn't finish it.
__________________
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline." "Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
sunshine and rainbows
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 38
Posts: 1,987
|
Ah Tps, I agree with you.
Seriously though, no one's really said a reason as to WHY the war is on in the first place. All I know is that, initially it was mixed into the war on terrorism, and that weapons of mass destruction were being looked for. Also, as to forcing democracy onto a country that doesn't want it...well, firstly, that's highly undemocratic right there, and secondly, that explains nothing as to why Iraq in particular was chosen out of the multitude of un-democratic countries. Also, and purely on what has been said on this forum, (I have no idea what's going on in Venezuela), but I DO know that Venezuela produces its own oil, and sells it to their citizens for dirt cheap compared to the rest of the world, and if the US is trying to force democracy onto them (I don't even know what type of government they currently have, its sad), I strongly suggest that the US is simply trying to get it's hand on a precious resource. I don't think its not so much as not paying attention to the media, but simply thinking critically about what's going on. I don't read a heck of a lot of media about the war in Iraq (or anything else), but whenever I do, I find myself frustrated with lack of information. I get confused easily about what's going on, mainly because I don't get why things are going on, and I often rely on opinions of others who make an argument and take some form of explanation. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
FFR Player
|
Trying to find one cause or reason for the war is kind of hard to do. There are a multitude of reasons why we went, and right now I don't think it really matters. It's not like we can time-travel, so we have to deal with the current situation at hand. Trying to put the blame on someone only detracts attention from the situation at hand that needs to be dealt with.
As soon as we made the war in Iraq one for Iraq freedom, a plan for the future should already have been set in place. The US took too long in deciding how they wanted to handle the situation. If a decisve decision was made, it may have gone over much smoother. Personally, I felt we were heading in the right way during the first couple of years in the war(from a strategic and logistic viewpoint anyways). Once the major fighting was declared over is where the turn for the worse occured. The procedure for handing over the government to a US friendly system became increasingly difficult because of the lack of organization on our part. We needed to set up guidelines, increase the amount of troops overseas(Which I blame on the American public. I don't understand how you can call yourselves American and not realize the situation we are in over there.) If we were able to buff troop size, and crush any form of opposition as the Iraqis built up their own army, we wouldn't be in the mess we are in today. Baghdad is in constant disarray, and all the American public wants to do is pull out and run. We can't pull out right now, any form of reducing the troops will prove catostrophic for Iraq and all the nations around it. Iran and Syria are constantly funding(secretly) opposing factions within Iraq, and us leaving would help them gain some influence within that nation. In my opinion, we need to send over hundreds of thousands of troops over there now. We need to regain complete control over the region. Crush the opposing factions, and set up a government that will work, and be stable. I realize a democracy is hard to upkeep when not all of the citizens want it, which is why US occupation is required for the next century or so. We need a strong base of support in the middle east before we can deal with the other growingly dangerous situations going on there. Now, I know what some of you are thinking "Why do we need to be involved at all". Well, I agree with you here. I would like to not be involved as well, but once we decided that it was America's job to police the world, we were stuck in that position. I believe it was Roosevelt who issued his Corrolary(sp?) that stated we would police the world. Pearl Harbor and WW 1 and 2 strengthed this. Once WW2 ended, and we played a part in creating Israel from Palestine(which much of the American public is far too uneducated in to realize why there is fighting over there) we were pretty much cemented in our role. The Cold War made us police more(policy of containment(Truman Doctrine)). Overall, I don't see this issue in Iraq being stable for at least a few decades. We can't pull out know, so what we need is the American people to unite behind the future leaders, and to help Iraq become stable. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|