Political: Going Into Iraq/Bush

[GuidoHunter]

But then again, will getting rid of Saddam really stop the rape and torture?

Of course not, but we have rape and torture here, too (okay, so not as much on the torture, but that's something caused by people who have power, e.g. Saddam's regime). All we can hope to do is bring it down to normal/reasonable levels.
Take all the rape and torture that Saddam and his regime caused (and there was a LOT of it) and throw it out the window. That'll probably bring it down to a more reasonable level.

He's got a point.
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

So we need to abandon everything else and devote all of our funds and time to finding a cure for cancer, automobile accidents, heart disease, etc.? The "few" wouldn't be too happy about that.

how many people do you know that have died of terrorism, how many people do you know have died of cancer

How is that relevant? Do you WANT to live in fear of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction? I know that that threat can never fully be eliminated, but the removal of a large terrorism-supporting regime and the occupation of a terrorist hub can certainly deal a big blow to terrorists around the world.

Iron, regarding your stance about all news being propaganda: News is news. If it is all propaganda (which I don't believe it is), then you and I and everyone else around the world gets fed propaganda. We go with what we get. Nobody can find a completely credible source if you believe in such widespread propaganda techniques.

Oh, and Iron, please take Drac's advice and take the time to run your posts through a spelling/grammar checker. You make good points, but you were on the verge of incoherency at times, and it's hard to get a point across well if nobody can understand you.


--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com/

[jewpinthethird]

The fact that Saddam killed 100,000 people in 5 years is not the most important fact here. The fact is that the other 25 million Iraqi people lived in constant fear, worrying they might be next if they so much as refused to bow before a statue of Saddam.

You clearly don't understand the terror that existed in that country.

You clearly do not understand the terror that still exists in that country.

My opinion?

Afghanistan: Justified. We had solid evidence that Al Qaeda was linked to 9-11.

Iraq: Not Justified. The main evidence used to justify invasion was proven to be LIES. I dont get this, first, everyone in the Bush Administration blames 9-11 on intelligence failure...however GWB constantly says that the CIA is doing their job just fine. Everyone is too busy blaming 9-11 on one another, the true American way....

I am not saying that Saddam was good. I am just saying that the timing was not appropriate. YOU DO NOT REDECORATE WHEN YOUR HOUSE IS ON FIRE. Also, pack up from the U.N. would have been nice (funny thing about telling the U.N to fuck off...you never know when you might need their help again). Or maybe a PEACEFUL SOLUTION.

I dont care what anyone says. WAR IS THE LAST FUCKING RESORT.

Here is a list the the all powerful "coaliton":
Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Thailand, the Philippines, Romania, Slovakia, South Korea, Ukraine and the United Kingdom.

Most of which are either U.S commonwealth (ex. Phillipines), or are in need of U.S. support (ex. Japan with N.Korea).

And here is a list of those who died for "Iraqi freedom" which ironically isnt "free" yet and the "War" ended long ago:

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/

(note how it is updated regularly) My sympathy goes out to all the families who have lost Fathers, Mothers, Brothers, Spouses, Sisters, Uncles, Aunts, Friends, and Neighbors. If you support Bush's "war" so much, then you go fight it. Are you really willing to give up your life?

[jewpinthethird]

-1,220,000 people are diagnosed with cancer each year... 552,200 people die of cancer each year
-Over 43,000 people die from Automobile accidents each year.
-Every day, more than 2600 Americans die from cardiovascular disease, which amounts to 1 death every 33 seconds. That is about 949,000 people a year.
-In totally, that is 1,544,200 people a year. To put that in contrast approx. 11 million people died during the Holocaust which lasted about 6 years, and who were the "few"? Nazi Germany.

GEE, BUSH REALLY DOES HAVE HIS FUCKING PRIORITIES STRAIGHT, DOESN'T HE?!

Guido, I have read some really stupid, insensitve, ignorant, arrogant, and disgusting things on this forum. But by far "The 'few' wouldn't be too happy about that." has to be the worst thing I have ever read.

[GuidoHunter]

How is the fact (I knowingly chose that word) that a man like Saddam Hussein had access to weapons of mass destruction and harbored terrorists a lie? I think the potential threat on us and our friends by him and the terrorists he supported is justification for an invasion and removal from power.

The timing of the Iraq invasion was inappropriate? When would the apprpriate time have been? When they first showed threatening signs? GHWB took care of that time. Over the years 1992-2000? Clinton wouldn't have touched it, unfortunately. Since 2000? Well, GWB's taking care of that right now. Later? After Saddam's had time to do something huge and be responsible for the deaths of many, many people? Keeping Saddam in power any longer would have been a bad idea. Also, what kind of peaceful solution would you expect to happen when you're dealing with Saddam Hussein? He wouldn't even let weapons inspectors come and look around for WMD's, so why do you think he'd be up for a peaceful solution?

I don't care what you have to say, war shouldn't always be the last resort. It seems we're at odds here.

If you support Bush's "war" so much, then you go fight it. Are you really willing to give up your life?

That's what we have a military for. Anyone who joins it shows that they're willing. I, for one, believe in compulsatory military service and plan on joining the military for some period of time at some point in my life. When I serve, I will gladly put my life at risk for my country.

I certainly didn't mean that 'few' comment in any insensitive way... What I was trying to say is that resources should be split at times, now being a good example. With the WWII example, had we devoted all our time and resources to domestic issues (in which case the "many" would be our own people), the process of the war would have been considerably different. Had we completely focused on the war, Americans wouldn't have liked their government caring more about foreign peoples. "You shouldn't completely sacrifice the few for the good of the many" is probably a better way to put it.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com/

[perfect_fat]

The fact that Saddam killed 100,000 people in 5 years is not the most important fact here. The fact is that the other 25 million Iraqi people lived in constant fear, worrying they might be next if they so much as refused to bow before a statue of Saddam.

You clearly don't understand the terror that existed in that country.

That terror still exists. They have americans coming into their homes to take them away from their families if they don't believe in democracy. Same shit, different ideology.

Did you see the 60 minutes expose on american soldiers' treatment of iraqi prisoners?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1097471.htm

There's a link for you. Read it, then tell me about how these Iraqis have such a better life. And don't forget to read up on how the rebuillding of the sewage systems in the poor neighbourhoods in Baghdad is going.

[jewpinthethird]

I'm done with the arguing and whatnot. I am just going to stay out of it. Believe what you want. Just keep in mind that history repeats itself and it is our right, if not duty, as Americans to question authority. Do not always believe what you hear from anyone. Just because he is the President that doesnt make him right. Research both sides yourself. And try watching something other than Fox News.

[GuidoHunter]

Aww, that's too bad, Jewpin; this's been fun!

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com/

[peregrine]

I'll agree that Afghanistan was justifiable, and I'll agree that terrorism needs to be fought, hell, I'll even say that going into Iraq had decent reasons behind it (good enough reasons - I'm not so sure, but there were reasons).... of course it would have been better if Iraq just up and attacked... France or somebody (however unlikely it was) to garner more international support.

But what I can't stand is how the "war" is being handled, all this patriotism, hero-medal-handing-out and buzzwording (Operation Iraqi Freedom, Home Land Security.... shiest, what 3rd grader came up with these? At least "Desert Storm" sounded cool) is just driving me sick. Also, when you're fighting terrorists, you don't sit out in the open making yourself a target (like our soldiers are doing now), guerilla tactics require a change in strategy, and the fact that we've still got bodybags coming back daily shows something ain't goin right. As somebody previously said, "use a scalple, not a hammer," and I couldn't agree more. We should have assisted Iraq in rebelling against Saddam, not doing it for them. As far as the torture and mass-murdering goes.. no matter how horrible it was, if a populace won't rise against it, they probably can't govern themselves effectively.

Another point about how the war was/is being run... the cost. The figure being tossed around is 150 Billion, that's obscene. Not only were we in a economic depression, and GWB had just issued tax cuts, but now we've got a bill like that to pay off? There goes Clinton's headway into the national debt. Now our grandkids are going to be paying for all the defaceit spending going on.

[GuidoHunter]

It may disgust you, but you've gotta understand that all that patriotism, buzzwording, etc. exists because it works. It probably sounds ridiculous to the people who created it, but it gets support for the war. It's like any other advertising. You may thing you know the ins and outs of it and understand all the dirty tactics that advertisers may use, but ads get results from the people who aren't concerned about the tactics (and probably many of those who do to a certain extent, despite what they say). I'm not trying to tell you that you're subconsiously supporting this war in a way due to buzzwords, after all, this isn't some commercial, but that many other people are. My point is that this patriotism and stuff that you don't like isn't a way of handling the war, but rather a way of garnering support for it, like any leader does in a time of crisis. Public support is necessary, and that's just one way of attaining it.

The fact that we have bodybags coming back daily shows that we're in a war, and the other side doesn't like it too much, not necessarily that we're doing something wrong. Wars have casualties (Desert Storm was an anomaly and was under different circumstances).

Regarding the scalpel comment and helping Iraqis rebel, I couldn't agree more. The only problem is how do you go into another country and organize an effective rebellion with a people who are so politically repressed that they're scared to do anything. Saddam had eyes on his country, so there was little they could do by themselves, even with a little help from us. The only thing we could do was give them arms and troops, which crosses the scalpel to hammer line. The point is that sometimes the scalpel just isn't enough. Saddam was a tough opponent, and we needed force to bring him down.

Also, you're completely right about the populace being able to govern themselves, and that's why it's been so tough rebuilding there.

As for the cost of the war, yeah, that's a problem; wars aren't cheap. Hell, if the war was free, I'd be all up for going to kick the shit out of North Korea right now. Nobody wants deficit spending and debt, but the war in Iraq wasn't just some appropriations bill, it was something we needed to do. My solution? Slash domestic government programs, but that's another debate entirely. The fact is that this war has been costly, but that's just another obstacle to overcome.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com/

[peregrine]

The whole thing about the patriotism and all was more of a rant letting out steam... I understand how it works and how it's effective, it's just sickening whenever I see the mob-mentality at work. I find it pathetic.

As far as the casualties, I know wars can't be bloodless... it's just that it seems to be an ineffective strategy to use a heavy-handed military police force against an enemy that can organize in shadow and strike suddenly out of nowhere (in addition to some not having a regard for their own life). All this is to say I think a change of tactics is in order... something a lot more counter-terrorist and less domestic-police-force if you get my meaning.

A wild idea floating around in my head is if we were just to leave, or make a minimal presence in Iraq.. what kind of pecking order would arise from it? Order always comes from chaos somehow (as seen in organized crime or even the organization of these terrorist groups). The people seem to want freedom and "democracy" (I don't hold a high opinion of American government, sorry) any speculation on what would happen if we just left them to their own devices now that we've ousted and captured Saddam and most of his regime?

[GuidoHunter]

Points taken, peregrine.

As for what would happen if they were left to their own devices, I think Iraq would quickly degenerate, because a society that's as developed as theirs needs an enormous amount of constant maintenance. They've been so repressed and become so acquainted with being ruled by Saddam that they couldn't form an effective government in any short period of time, and after a while I think people would look into moving to other, stable, countries or just living in a run-down society.
What if some horrible thing happened to all of OUR government officials? I even find it hard to believe there'd be initial chaos because of our federalist system. There'd be someone to assume power, even in an ad hoc form. However, the Iraqi system most likely didn't allow for assumption of power. Anyway, that's what I'd think.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[DracIV]

A few of you guys, especially IronMonk and Jewpin need to calm down a bit a look at what you've just said.

Iron: They DID use a scalpel. No one has ever done a military invasion so precise, ever.

Jewpin: It wasn't intelligence error. It wasn't lies. Calm down! They had no idea at all about 9/11, that was just a rumor that was spreading. Also, the CIA has been doing fine. Bush tried to get backup from the UN, but they refused to follow through with their promises. We've spent the last 10 years looking for a peaceful solution. War was our last resort. He has his priorities straight. More money wouldn't do diddly for the research that is being done on those topics. Besides, the government isn't allowed to give money to those organizations. He has his priorities totally straight.

Perfect Fat: That's a blatant lie. America soldiers don't enter your home if you don't like democracy. They enter your home if you fired a rocket at them an hour or two ago.

You guys seriously need to do some research, and you especially Jewpin, need to calm down and look at things.

Bush went into Iraq with a $$ of about 70-80 Billion. He hasn't even come close to using that all up. They went in for a true surgical war and did it right. Now that we have things calmed down there isn't a military police, it is patrols of the fighting zones in only 3-4 cities. 99% of Iraq is living in perfect peace right now, it just seems otherwise because of the bias way every news channel has been presenting it. The money was well spent because nothing could be done to help cancer or electric cars, mostly because the government has given them all the money they need. As Jewpin said, 1.5 million die a year, but only one of his numbers is restricted to America. 1.5 million a year over the entire globe when we gain 3.2 million per year is nothing. I feel sorry for those people, but it is a different situation.

Oh, and perfect fat, I'm sorry to tell you but only 6 soldiers acting inappropriately is not even close to letting you generalize that statement. Iraqis do have a much better life, it is just that you guys seriously only listen to the TV news, which just happens to be the most bias source possible for this news. I suggest you check in on their newspapers for better info.

[jewpinthethird]

Sorry Guido, I am just too biased and tired to argue anymore. No matter how much I argue, nothing will change, no matter how much you argue, nothing will change. All I can say is wait to see what happens...just wait.

Also, "80 billion" would have helped a lot in Cancer research and Electric Car research (since electric cars are pretty much almost there: http://www.gmev.com/ )

[DracIV]

Jewpin, electric & hyrdogen (better) cars are already there. The only problem they need to work out is mass production and station distribution. Also, cancer research is looking for an answer we aren't even sure exists. They would have to find a way to disable specific genes in specific cells or kill individual cells without harm to the others. We don't know if we will ever get close to that kind of precision.

[perfect_fat]

Perfect Fat: That's a blatant lie. America soldiers don't enter your home if you don't like democracy. They enter your home if you fired a rocket at them an hour or two ago.

I like how you didn't reply to my link. Typical.

EDIT: New car I'm probbly buying is a Honda Civic Hybrid. WOO!