• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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.

Dems politicizing the Iraq War

Jack Dawson

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
I see Kennedy, Boxer and other wack jobs on the left continue their assault on Bush and Rice while totalling ignoring the fact these TERRORISTS are killing even their OWN people with no remorse, no feeling, no caring, just killing. Boxer and Kennedy by their own words are saying let's pull out and watch the masacre continue.

When you hate a President so bad you take the SIDE of Terrorists killing their own instead of the American Soldier and what they are trying to do to FREE the WOMEN, CHILDREN and EDUCATORS in Iraq to become free thining and doing people it makes me plain an simply want to PUKE.
 

heyjoeo

Active member
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
380
Reaction score
1
Another prime example of why Jack Dawson should never make a topic in this forum again.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
6,023
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
*hands heyjoeo a chill pill*

Everyone here has a voice - they just need to be in the correct forum. ;)

Moving topic to US politics.

I agree Jack, it is very disturbing how Kennedy was for the war and now against... all for political gain.
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
Considering the fact that our own US military is using torture just like they are, I don't see how we are any different.
It makes no difference if the person is a civilian or a terrorist. Every person has rights, and they shouldn't be violated with unnecessary torture.

Also consider the fact that going into Iraq was exactly what Osama wanted us to do. Because of it, now everyone in Iraq has reason to believe we ARE trying to build an Imperial Empire and we ARE horrible people that torture them and that we DO deserve to all die.

The reason they don't like us is because they think we are going to MEDDLE with them, screwing up their lives and trying to make them conform to our standards.
So what do we do to prove them wrong? We MEDDLE with them, screw up their lives and make them conform to our standards....

War was not the answer. All it did was prove their point, lose us and them countless innocent lives, and strain all of our pocketbooks.
 

heyjoeo

Active member
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
380
Reaction score
1
I realize this Vague, but some people shouldn't voice theirs :p
 

pwo

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
205
Reaction score
1
Location
Illinois
Jack Dawson is right Gabo. It seems if some Dems (not all) would like it if we got our butts kicked. Just so they can make a point that the war was wrong. Does everyone in Iraq want us to die? It seems as if you are justifying what the terrorist are doing. You say that going to war proved their point. So, whose side are you on. Do you believe the terrorist should win? Should Saddam still be in power? Are you peacemongering?

When I was in high school the Iraq war started. Some guy in the school newspaper wrote something along the lines of, "I hope the US starts a war with a powerful nation and we lose." That was about the most Pissed off I have ever been.

A question to dems: Last october, the economy was starting to go up. How happy were you? Did you want the economy to do good under Bush? I think the answer is no.
 

heyjoeo

Active member
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
380
Reaction score
1
That's wrong. Nobody wants to see us get "our butts kicked" in Iraq. It was a mistake to go there. Now we better clean up the mess, with the least amount of casualties as possible.

Whoever wrote that in the paper deserves to never write in a paper again.

I always want the economy to do good(sic). :p. But look at the freakin' deficit!
 

pwo

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
205
Reaction score
1
Location
Illinois
Heyjoeo,
You're right. But, picture this....

What if the economy soars, we get out of the deficit in three years (i know it is impossible), we get osama, terrorism worldwide dies, the iraq election is a success, other nations move towards democracy, US approval rating worldwide goes up, Bush's approval rating goes up, palestine and isreal come to peace, we never see war for the rest of our lives...

What would you have to say about Bush then, huh? You don't want these things to happen because you would be proven wrong.
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
pwo said:
It seems as if you are justifying what the terrorist are doing. You say that going to war proved their point. So, whose side are you on. Do you believe the terrorist should win? Should Saddam still be in power?
Going to war was one of the WORST possible choices. Osama, Saddam and them WANTED us to go to war. All it does it drain all our resources (like they said it would and wanted), and makes it easier for the common people in Iraq to agree that we indeed ARE trying to create an Imperial Empire. These terrorist groups need to get their money from somewhere, and the support of the general people can help them a great deal.

However, if the US remained calm and didn't invade Iraq, acting so much like the Imperial Empire terrorists warned them against, there would be no reason for people to believe what these terrorist groups said. They would no longer have support of the people. The reason they hate us so much is because we are nosy and mind everyone's business. Going to war is not going to prove that we aren't nosy, its going to further add flames to the bonfire.

The war has accomplished nothing so far, at our dear taxpayers expense. We've had plenty of casualties, not caught Osama, hurt plenty of Iraqi civilians, and further proved their point about us being horrible people.
 

pwo

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
205
Reaction score
1
Location
Illinois
Gabo,
Here's a question:
Why did Osama attack us on 9/11? I really don't think he had a reason.

Also, don't believe everything on CNN. The overwhelming majority of the Iraqi people are happy that we saved them from Saddam. On sunday they will get to vote. Most are thankful for this. It just takes a few insurgents to cause problems.

We haven't accomplished anything so far? I think that getting Saddam out of power is something. But, for the most part you are right. You can't see the accomplishments because it will take years for them to take effect. Bush is right, countries that are democratic don't start wars with other democratic nations. One less tyrant is a good accomplishment and a good reason for people to like us. As a taxpayer, I am glad to see my money go to the Iraq war.

Plus, you didn't answer my last question: are you peacemongering? peacemongering is a term that I made up on this web site a while back. It means encouraging peace so much that it hurts your own country.

PS: We are not horrible people. I know what kind of a person I am. I know what kind of people are troops are. What kind of a person are you.
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
pwo said:
Gabo,
Here's a question:
Why did Osama attack us on 9/11? I really don't think he had a reason.
Well, he thinks we're building an Imperial Empire. Based on the fact that we have troops stationed in like every country in the world, he DOES have reason to believe we are building an Imperial Empire. Heck, even I'M afraid of what Bush has planned next.

pwo said:
Also, don't believe everything on CNN.
I don't watch CNN.

pwo said:
We haven't accomplished anything so far? I think that getting Saddam out of power is something. But, for the most part you are right. You can't see the accomplishments because it will take years for them to take effect. Bush is right, countries that are democratic don't start wars with other democratic nations. One less tyrant is a good accomplishment and a good reason for people to like us. As a taxpayer, I am glad to see my money go to the Iraq war.
As someone who believes freedom is the most important part of life, I believe what we have done is wrong and contrary to everything in our constitution. We should not be FORCING democracy on any nation. You can't force people to be governed however you like. They all deserve freedom of their own choice, not whatever we think is best for them.

pwo said:
Plus, you didn't answer my last question: are you peacemongering? peacemongering is a term that I made up on this web site a while back. It means encouraging peace so much that it hurts your own country.
On the contrary, the thing thats hurting our nation IS the war. We've wasted tons of money, lost plenty of troops, and drained our resources (all just like they wanted us to). If our country had stuck to our isolation principles all the way from the beginning, I doubt this would be happening to us.

pwo said:
PS: We are not horrible people. I know what kind of a person I am. I know what kind of people are troops are. What kind of a person are you.
I'm the kind of person who won't stand back and watch others FORCE things onto people in the name of "freedom". Freedom cannot be FORCED upon anyone, as its entire purpose is the absence of FORCE. I'm the kind of person that doesn't stand for the government stealing from each and every citizen constantly to fund unnecessary government regulators that prohibit our would-be free economy. I'm the kind of person that thinks freedom truly is the key to a successful country, and I'm not afraid to admit our country's freedom is diminishing fast. I'm the kind of person that is trying to bring government back down to its original purpose of retribution for the violation of rights. I'm the kind of person that wants America to be free.
 

skabanger13

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2005
Messages
238
Reaction score
0
Location
texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Terriorst dont have rights, thay kill even the inocent civellions. Thay dont follow the genave convention in ther tactics and polices, why sould we? Thay are killing ther own people not just the bombs but beheading presioners.I say thay have no Human rights, you have to be human first.By standing up for the rights of thes animals your are showing that you are unAmerican and belong over in france whith the rest unAmerican people. Oh and rember red is positave black is negative and make sure the wires are conected firmley to the testacils beffor you let it rip. :fu
 

pwo

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
205
Reaction score
1
Location
Illinois
Gabo: I tried to write a reply like two days ago. During it I lost my internet connection. Sorry it took so long.

Here are some questions for you and random thoughts in no real order.

1. Was Osama justified for his attack?
It seems that you agree that we are an Imperial Nation. I think that Imperialism died in the early 1900's. No one believes that we went to Iraq for oil or Afghanistan for the same reason. We go there to protect our selves.

2. Are you sure that you don't watch CNN?
Im just playing. It seems, though as if you think that everything in Iraq is totally bad.

3. How do you force democracy on another nation?
Democracy is the willingness to be free. Are you trying to say that all of Iraq doesn't want to be free. You're trying to say that they, as a majority, would rather have saddam there than have a democracy.

4. "They all deserve freedom of their own choice, not whatever we think is best for them."
Gabo
What's up with that? They had no choice!!! It was tyranny or freedom. Please explain what there choice of freedom was.

5. Are you sure that you aren't peacemongering?
It is easy to say now that you aren't. Here's an hypothetical situation: Let's say that it is '02 again. President Bush is thinking about going to war in Iraq, but decides not to because of protests from people like you. So, Saddam keeps on funding terrorism against Isreal. Many years later, he gives them WMD's that he has had a chance to work on. Those terrorists decide to go to the US. They attack your town, you peacemongered. No one knew what lies in the future so don't say that it couldn't happen.
Look, before WWII FDR was against the war. Some wanted us to get involved, some protested like Charles Lindbergh. What happend? We got attacked. What if Bush would have gone to Afghanistan before 9/11 some would have protested. I'm not saying you would, but you can't argue that some would. Sometimes war is nessisary.

6. Should we be isolationist?
Come on that doesn't work. We need to be involved with the world for our intrests and other countries intrests.

7. Do you not like the Iraqis?
You say that freedom is important, but they aren't allowed to have it. That's kind of selfish. Your main reasons against the war is for us, like our money. Be caring for a change. To help others we must make sacrifices. Of course, you won't admit it but you are a selfish man in some ways.

8. What is the government's purpose?
You say to keep our rights. I have always heard to keep order. Democracy has not been around forever, your rights are a privledge. A privledge that you take for granted. Others are not so lucky.

9. How are your rights diminishing? Explain.
Look, you think that the money that the goverment is using on the war is unnessisary. That's ok. But, they aren't stealing from you. We don't have a direct democracy, we have a republic. You choose the representitves, they choose how to spend the money.So, in a way you had a choice in how we spent our money. Your voice was heard. But it is majority rules. We can't let every citizen choose exactly where there money goes. Look, there are things that I don't like to pay for, but I don't say the gov't is stealing my money.

10. Who do you hate more, Osama or Bush?
Ok, I know how you are going to answer this question. Seriously, don't write back, but I want you to think about it. Seriously, look in the mirror for a while.

11. Do you seriously think that our rights are diminishing?
You can say what you want to can't you. At least you have more rights then the Iraqi people in the Saddam era. We don't realize how many rights we have sometimes.

12. Why are you so mad?
Seriously, its like you have a personal grudge against Bush. Its cool if you don't agree with him but you hate him. This upsets me because believe it or not Bush is looking out for you. You hate him, yet he loves you. Hating people will get you nowhere. To tell you the truth, you are probally the most anti-war anti-gov't anti-republican and most liberal person that I have ever talked to. That's kind of scary. I hope you don't hate me because even though I don't agree with you, you're still a good person and a fellow american.

Ok, those are my questions. Please read and answer carefully.

PS: The reason I ask questions, is to get you to think about why your idealology is the way it is. I could just straight up tell you why you are wrong, but you would just come back with some little remark.

PSS: Whats up with Skabanger13?
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
pwo said:
1. Was Osama justified for his attack?
It seems that you agree that we are an Imperial Nation. I think that Imperialism died in the early 1900's. No one believes that we went to Iraq for oil or Afghanistan for the same reason. We go there to protect our selves.
I'm not even sure if his attack was justified, as I don't know yet whether Bush plans to continue his world conquest. Our nosiness can be traced back for decades, and Osama just did what he thinks was right. He thinks we are trying to overtake them and the rest of the world, and even if he's wrong he isn't that far from the truth.

pwo said:
2. Are you sure that you don't watch CNN?
Im just playing. It seems, though as if you think that everything in Iraq is totally bad.
Of course I do. But I suppose it WAS necessary to crush Osama (which we never really did, although we made him go into hiding). After that, then is when everything went wrong.

pwo said:
3. How do you force democracy on another nation?
Democracy is the willingness to be free. Are you trying to say that all of Iraq doesn't want to be free. You're trying to say that they, as a majority, would rather have saddam there than have a democracy.
When we come in and say, "Ok Iraq, you're going to be free whether you like it or not. We're putting people up for a democratic election and whoever wins gets to lead this new 'free' country, even if the majority of people don't want it." I don't see that as giving much choice to the Iraquis. And I don't think they would rather have a dictator, but they needed to realize their own potential freedom for themselves. If we have to 'come to their rescue' this time, who knows how many other times we will have to. Doing it for them makes them the little kids that can't take care of themselves and us the parent who spoils them.

pwo said:
4. "They all deserve freedom of their own choice, not whatever we think is best for them."
Gabo
What's up with that? They had no choice!!! It was tyranny or freedom. Please explain what there choice of freedom was.
There choice was: live with a dictatorship or create a rebellion.

pwo said:
5. Are you sure that you aren't peacemongering?
It is easy to say now that you aren't. Here's an hypothetical situation: Let's say that it is '02 again. President Bush is thinking about going to war in Iraq, but decides not to because of protests from people like you. So, Saddam keeps on funding terrorism against Isreal. Many years later, he gives them WMD's that he has had a chance to work on. Those terrorists decide to go to the US. They attack your town, you peacemongered. No one knew what lies in the future so don't say that it couldn't happen.
Look, before WWII FDR was against the war. Some wanted us to get involved, some protested like Charles Lindbergh. What happend? We got attacked. What if Bush would have gone to Afghanistan before 9/11 some would have protested. I'm not saying you would, but you can't argue that some would. Sometimes war is nessisary.
Saddam had absolutely no WMD at all. He was not doing anything. The reason they didn't like us is once again because we are nosy to the point where they believe we're building an imperial empire. If we, responding to 9/11, withdrew all our troops from every country and destroyed all barriers for trade between all nations and us, they would have no reason to think we're trying to conquer the world.

pwo said:
6. Should we be isolationist?
Come on that doesn't work. We need to be involved with the world for our intrests and other countries intrests.
Isolationism worked for us for the longest time. It works for all countries that use it. Isolationism doesn't necessarily mean pretending everyone else isn't here. Isolationsim is being friendly towards all countries, but creating alliances with none. This way everyone knows we're with them, but we don't need to station all these troops in every country in the world, and we don't need to steal from our people to pay for bureaucratic monsters like the UN.

pwo said:
7. Do you not like the Iraqis?
You say that freedom is important, but they aren't allowed to have it. That's kind of selfish. Your main reasons against the war is for us, like our money. Be caring for a change. To help others we must make sacrifices. Of course, you won't admit it but you are a selfish man in some ways.
They can have it when they decide to have it. If and when they decide they want their freedom they would rebel against Saddam and start a revolution. I'm saying that WE should not be deciding when its time for them to have freedom. That's nosy and further proves their point that we want to control them.

pwo said:
8. What is the government's purpose?
You say to keep our rights. I have always heard to keep order. Democracy has not been around forever, your rights are a privledge. A privledge that you take for granted. Others are not so lucky.
Rights are not a privelage, they're....... RIGHTS. Something everyone in the world deserves to have, so long as they are willing to fight for them. We earned our rights so long ago, however they are diminishing fast under our current government rule. And keeping all our rights IS what keeps order in the country.

pwo said:
9. How are your rights diminishing? Explain.
Look, you think that the money that the goverment is using on the war is unnessisary. That's ok. But, they aren't stealing from you. We don't have a direct democracy, we have a republic. You choose the representitves, they choose how to spend the money.So, in a way you had a choice in how we spent our money. Your voice was heard. But it is majority rules. We can't let every citizen choose exactly where there money goes. Look, there are things that I don't like to pay for, but I don't say the gov't is stealing my money.
Why shouldn't every citizen decide where their money goes? What is so wrong with that? Our country is not utilitarianism (majority rules), at least its not supposed to be. We are supposed to be democracy (everyone rules). With majority rules, only some people get to express their views and have what they want. With everyone rules, each person decides for themselves.

pwo said:
10. Who do you hate more, Osama or Bush?
Ok, I know how you are going to answer this question. Seriously, don't write back, but I want you to think about it. Seriously, look in the mirror for a while.
It's an extremely hard decision. Bush isn't alone for the people who caused 9/11. With him is every president who has supported our annoyingly nosy ways. Osama on the other hand at least did what he thought was right, even if it was an extremely skewed vision of right.

pwo said:
11. Do you seriously think that our rights are diminishing?
You can say what you want to can't you. At least you have more rights then the Iraqi people in the Saddam era. We don't realize how many rights we have sometimes.
Whenever I bring up the fact that our rights are diminishing, people ALWAYS compare us to another country. I don't think that's quite fair, considering our CONSTITUTION calls for us to have LIBERTY TO THE FULLEST EXTENT, whereas their's calls for no such thing. At least they aren't getting less than their government promises.

pwo said:
12. Why are you so mad?
Seriously, its like you have a personal grudge against Bush. Its cool if you don't agree with him but you hate him. This upsets me because believe it or not Bush is looking out for you. You hate him, yet he loves you. Hating people will get you nowhere. To tell you the truth, you are probally the most anti-war anti-gov't anti-republican and most liberal person that I have ever talked to. That's kind of scary. I hope you don't hate me because even though I don't agree with you, you're still a good person and a fellow american.
I hate anyone that illegally supports the reduction of my rights. Considering its inhumane and against the law, I think it is wrong. Our nation of the "free" continues to lobby for more rules and regulations, all of which limit our rights for no reason other than the fact that SOME people want it. SOME people want to control everyone else, tell them what is right and wrong. And because that SOME makes up the majority of the population, that's what happens, despite the fact that its ILLEGAL ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION. Just because you don't mind the government stealing your money for its own desires doesn't mean everyone in the US believes that.
 

pwo

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
205
Reaction score
1
Location
Illinois
Nevermind.

I can't argue with you.

How can you say that it is a hard choice between bush and osama for who you hate more. You are in the dangerous type of liberalism. Seriously, you need help. I hope some dems read this and back me up. Your not helping liberals, your making them look bad.

By the way 72% voted in Iraq. How's that for forcing democracy on them?
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
pwo said:
Nevermind.

I can't argue with you.

How can you say that it is a hard choice between bush and osama for who you hate more. You are in the dangerous type of liberalism. Seriously, you need help. I hope some dems read this and back me up. Your not helping liberals, your making them look bad.

By the way 72% voted in Iraq. How's that for forcing democracy on them?
I am not a liberal.

I'm a libertarian.

Good for those 72%. Maybe they realized they would rather have at least some say in their FORCED government, instead of no say at all.
 

pwo

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
205
Reaction score
1
Location
Illinois
The real text book definition:

Libertarianism: a political idealogogy based on skepticism or opposition towards almost all government activities.

Damn, that's you.
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
pwo said:
The real text book definition:

Libertarianism: a political idealogogy based on skepticism or opposition towards almost all government activities.

Damn, that's you.
A harsh definition nonetheless. But I'm sure all the Republicrats agree with it, it sure won't be winning over any new members for us!

I prefer a calmer definition:

Libertarianism: a political idealogy based on support of all natural human rights, and the opposition of all who would violate these rights

That is more precise, kinder, and more accurate.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
6,023
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Why did Osama attack us on 9/11? I really don't think he had a reason.

Kenneth T. Cornelius said:
Israel. Oil. duh
How about pathetic religeous fanaticism?
 

heyjoeo

Active member
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
380
Reaction score
1
Probably shouldn't use the word "pathetic" even if you don't agree with the idealogy. Sure the ideas are extreme, but someone's religion is someone's religion. We are all biased (granted its justified) against the islamic fundamentalism in the mideast.
 

alienken

Active member
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
369
Reaction score
4
Location
near Houston, Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I have to respond to gabo...Have you watched the news recently?Inbetween the coverage of the Michael Jackson trial, there has ben stories about the Iraq elections,The people of Iraq choosing their own future. They will have the power to through us out and believe me, our troops will be happy to leave. This is our track record. We have done this before check out a history book. Japan,Germany,France,ect. The "Gabo" posts is so far off I suspect it's a plant by the admin. to incourage discusion.
 

Schweddy

Benevolent Dictator
Administrator
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
6,023
Location
Plano, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
alienken said:
The "Gabo" posts is so far off I suspect it's a plant by the admin. to incourage discusion.
You would be wrong in your guess. I only post under Vauge.

Gabo is definatly the most extream Liberitarian I have seen posted though.
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
alienken said:
I have to respond to gabo...Have you watched the news recently?Inbetween the coverage of the Michael Jackson trial, there has ben stories about the Iraq elections,The people of Iraq choosing their own future. They will have the power to through us out and believe me, our troops will be happy to leave. This is our track record. We have done this before check out a history book. Japan,Germany,France,ect. The "Gabo" posts is so far off I suspect it's a plant by the admin. to incourage discusion.
If we had absolute monarchy FORCED upon our nation, but were allowed to choose our king do you believe that is us choosing our own future?

Absolutely not! We would ultimately not have the control as we would be forced into the monarchy anyways!

We are doing the same to Iraq, sticking our noses in where they shouldn't be.

Why did we not hold elections in Iraq for what type of government they wished to hold? Wouldn't this be more fair and truly let them decide their own future? But instead we FORCED our style of democracy on them, only allowing them the choice of who heads up the government we choose.
 

alienken

Active member
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
369
Reaction score
4
Location
near Houston, Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Back to Gabo....We did not force anything on them. You can't force freedom just set them free. This is political double talk. Force freedom on them is like saying - I support the troops but I don't support what they are doing.WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?! Freedom is the best way to fight terrorism. Let a dictator in there and he could be payed off to protect terrorist. Not sticking our nose in and minding our our business is how we got Sep. 11. Our oceans don't protect us anymore.
 
Top Bottom