• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

A great day For the Iraqis

Priorities:

1) Train as many Iraqi policemen and soldiers as possible.

2) Get the heck outta there! ;)
 
To Ms. Franklin... It IS the war on terror. The "insurgents" that we are fighting ARE terrorist.Their leader Alarway(noway can I spell that name) is Benladen's righthand man which Benladen claimed himself on a video. The war in Iraq was a continuation of the Gulf War. The head thug dictator Sadam Husein ignored conditions of serender that he agreed to to save his neck. No lies. It took several months of wasting time with the UN to get to the war. I think that was plenty of time to bury WMDs or move them to somewhere that we can't go - Seria. Husien WAS a Hitler wannabe gaining power. The world is safer with him out. I am glad we did not ignore the threat until he was a major threat to the world and have a 3rd world war.
 
Gabo said:
Priorities:

1) Train as many Iraqi policemen and soldiers as possible.

2) Get the heck outta there! ;)

Yes, but we can't just get out. We have to do the hard work and make this thing work. These calls to get out now are completely without thought.
 
Pacridge said:
These calls to get out now are completely without thought.
No, cuz we train them first! :D

Then we leave!
 
Pacridge said:
How exactly is it an "illegal occupation?" Bush went to congress, congress approved. How is this illegal?


He flouted the UN.
But like most Americans, you are arrogant enough to believe YOUR law applies to the world.
 
Last edited:
Urethra Franklin said:
He flouted the UN.
But like most Americans, you are arrogant enough to believe YOUR law applies to the world.

Ah, we did our job to well after WW2. Apparently the nanny-states you Europeans so love has robbed you and your kind of a backbone.

This war was not illegal by any means. The UN is not the 'world's goverment', nor does it define the rule of law for the rest of the world to follow.

If you wish to go by the UN then fine; by UN regulations and resolutions, as well as American law, this war was legal in all aspects.
 
Last edited:
USNavyman said:
Ah, we did our job to well after WW2. Apparently the nanny-states you Europeans so love has robbed you and your kind of a backbone.

I find that offensive to say that Europeans have no backbone, we just love peace - is that a crime???

Say that to the British soldiers as they fight and die by your side. Say that to the French and the Germans who once conquered most of Europe. Say that to the Roman War Machine or the blood thirsty vikings! Say that to the Greeks who conquered 95% of the known world. HA!

Europe has seen many wars on her own soil (including Two World Wars) and we are sick of the sight of it. Ever since WW2 nations in Europe have decided never again on our soil!

Tell me has anyone in the Bush Adminstration been on the line of duty? Yet they send people like you to die, while they sleep in double-poster beds? Who are the real spineless?
 
GarzaUK said:
Tell me has anyone in the Bush Adminstration been on the line of duty? Yet they send people like you to die, while they sleep in double-poster beds? Who are the real spineless?

You bring up an interesting point. Much like your signature quote from a Roman Officer, one of my favorite US Presidents once said something very similar. Giving a graduation address at a college in the mid-west he said:

“No law says our President has to have been in combat, but such service would certainly make a better President. It gives (him) the perspective that is so lacking in those who would misuse our troops in some ill-conceived plan for world domination.”

War can be such an appealing option for those who haven't lived it's wrath.
 
Pacridge said:
You bring up an interesting point. Much like your signature quote from a Roman Officer, one of my favorite US Presidents once said something very similar. Giving a graduation address at a college in the mid-west he said:

“No law says our President has to have been in combat, but such service would certainly make a better President. It gives (him) the perspective that is so lacking in those who would misuse our troops in some ill-conceived plan for world domination.”

War can be such an appealing option for those who haven't lived it's wrath.

What president said that? I agree, to an extent. I think the point is that we shouldn't have some idiot as president. It's quite OK if the pres has had no military service, as long as he is somewhat intelligent.
 
anomaly said:
What president said that? I agree, to an extent. I think the point is that we shouldn't have some idiot as president. It's quite OK if the pres has had no military service, as long as he is somewhat intelligent.

That's a quote fromEisenhower. He also said:
“Farming looks mighty easy when your plow is a pencil and you're a thousand miles from the corn field.”
 
anomaly said:
What president said that? I agree, to an extent. I think the point is that we shouldn't have some idiot as president. It's quite OK if the pres has had no military service, as long as he is somewhat intelligent.

Better luck next election! :violin
 
Pacridge said:
That's a quote fromEisenhower. He also said:
“Farming looks mighty easy when your plow is a pencil and you're a thousand miles from the corn field.”

Eisenhower. Too bad there aren't many good Republicans like him left. The problem with today's Republicans is that they hide behind their cloak of ignorance. They refuse to listen to liberals, even when presented with facts. And if you ever say to one of these neo-cons that you're a socialist, watch out. It's quite funny to hear Hannity and Coulter (and the like) try to critique liberals or socialism. If you know anything about the latter two, that's the point when you know these neo-cons are full of ****.
 
anomaly said:
Eisenhower. Too bad there aren't many good Republicans like him left. The problem with today's Republicans is that they hide behind their cloak of ignorance. They refuse to listen to liberals, even when presented with facts. And if you ever say to one of these neo-cons that you're a socialist, watch out. It's quite funny to hear Hannity and Coulter (and the like) try to critique liberals or socialism. If you know anything about the latter two, that's the point when you know these neo-cons are full of ****.

It’s really become somewhat of an odd phenomenon. You have people, like the two you’ve mentioned, as well as other’s like O’Reilly, Rush et el. They all engage in this ongoing constant dishonestly with their viewers and listeners. Many of whom are perfectly aware of their deception and dishonesty. It’s almost like they prefer the fabrications over reality. I find it all very strange.

As for: “Too bad there aren't many good Republicans like him left.” I think there are several good Republicans out there today. Though the afore mentioned media personalities usually end up painting them in negative terms. It’s a tactic the “Neo-Cons” have nearly patented over the past few years. Fall in step with us or end up on Fox News or Hannity’s and Rush’s radio shows; all at the same time as some weird cartoon character of your former self. They'll get some sound bite or clip, usually, take it out of context and play it repeatedly. They do this until most viewers could not possibly have anything but a negative opinion of the person. It's all very effective. It’s the same tactic they use to vanquish opponents. And they’ve proven over and over their willingness to use it on their own.
 
Pacridge said:
Luck has little to do with elections, dishonesty and greed are the driving forces that control the winners any more.

So that is how Clinton was voted in 2x.
 
vauge said:
So that is how Clinton was voted in 2x.

Certainly could be, but when you speak to most Dems you get the idea he ran some honest grass roots campaigns. Which just how a lot of the GOP talk about GWB. My position would be that neither could be farther from fact. Politics has become dirty. The only way to win is to play dirtier then the other guy.
 
Back
Top Bottom