- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 13,534
- Reaction score
- 1,000
- Location
- Denver, CO
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Kelzie said:So I was talking to a vet from the beginning of the Iraq War, and he painted a different picture than what the media does. According to him, he has never met an Iraqi that wasn't glad the US was there. He was very proud of the fact that we were there, despite the hardships (he lost two of his men in Fallujah), and he honestly believes we are doing good.
Now I personally don't believe we went there with the Iraqi people in mind. But if we had, I think I would have been okay with the war. Howbout everyone else? If the US had honestly gone into Iraq to free the Iraqi people, would you be okay with it? Is it okay for the US to invade a sovereign country if their people are being abused?
Navy Pride said:I believe Saddam violated 17 UN resolutions.....That is good enough reason to take him out.....................
Kelzie said:What if the population can't fight their own battles? What about the women in the middle east? Where would the get the kind of ammunition they would need to overthrow the government, even if they wanted to?
Napoleon's Nightingale said:The Iraqi people chose to accept defeat. The revolutionaries refused to accept defeat against one of the greatest military powers in the world and with the aid of France and they won. France didn't fight every single battle of the revolution for us. They only supplied the means for us to win, they didn't win it for us. In France only the people of France were responsible for overthrowing the monarchy and establishing a new government. If the Iraqi people wanted it bad enough they would have fought for it themselves with some aid instead of depending on a foreign power to do it all of it for them which is why they will NEVER be independant or soveirgn because we spoil them.
Kelzie said:*sigh* I know. It just sucks what these people (especially the women...sorry I'm biased) have to live with. What's wrong with fixing it for them?
*sigh* I know. It just sucks what these people (especially the women...sorry I'm biased) have to live with. What's wrong with fixing it for them?
__________________
Navy Pride said:I believe Saddam violated 17 UN resolutions.....That is good enough reason to take him out.....................
Kelzie said:So I was talking to a vet from the beginning of the Iraq War, and he painted a different picture than what the media does. According to him, he has never met an Iraqi that wasn't glad the US was there. He was very proud of the fact that we were there, despite the hardships (he lost two of his men in Fallujah), and he honestly believes we are doing good.
Now I personally don't believe we went there with the Iraqi people in mind.
But if we had, I think I would have been okay with the war.
Is it okay for the US to invade a sovereign country if their people are being abused?
Napoleon's Nightingale said:No. I don't have a problem with supporting an Iraqi opposition to Saddam with money, guns, and amunition, and possibly SOME military help, but going in and fighting their war against Saddam for them is the wrong thing to do.
Kelzie said:So I was talking to a vet from the beginning of the Iraq War, and he painted a different picture than what the media does. According to him, he has never met an Iraqi that wasn't glad the US was there. He was very proud of the fact that we were there, despite the hardships (he lost two of his men in Fallujah), and he honestly believes we are doing good.
Now I personally don't believe we went there with the Iraqi people in mind. But if we had, I think I would have been okay with the war. Howbout everyone else? If the US had honestly gone into Iraq to free the Iraqi people, would you be okay with it? Is it okay for the US to invade a sovereign country if their people are being abused?
Kelzie said:So I was talking to a vet from the beginning of the Iraq War, and he painted a different picture than what the media does. According to him, he has never met an Iraqi that wasn't glad the US was there. He was very proud of the fact that we were there, despite the hardships (he lost two of his men in Fallujah), and he honestly believes we are doing good.
Now I personally don't believe we went there with the Iraqi people in mind. But if we had, I think I would have been okay with the war. Howbout everyone else? If the US had honestly gone into Iraq to free the Iraqi people, would you be okay with it? Is it okay for the US to invade a sovereign country if their people are being abused?
Strange enough you should ask, I was watching a documentary about the LURDS of Liberia (during the Civil War, recently) they were able to purchase Ak-47s for about $20 a pop. If the Iraqi people really wanted to over-throw their government they could have easily been supplied.What if the population can't fight their own battles? What about the women in the middle east? Where would the get the kind of ammunition they would need to overthrow the government, even if they wanted to?
Bergslagstroll said:Personaly I think the answer is clearly yes if Iraq was one of the last dictaturship and the victory there would be a walk in the park. But that is not that case making the answer more tricky.
Napoleon's Nightingale said:No. I don't have a problem with supporting an Iraqi opposition to Saddam with money, guns, and amunition, and possibly SOME military help, but going in and fighting their war against Saddam for them is the wrong thing to do. Without shedding sweat, blood, and tears of their own in a fight against Saddam they can never fully appriciate the sacrifices made for their government. If they fight for it themselves they would be less inclined to sit back and do nothing if radical islamic fundamentalists take over their government. The Iraqi's are far too passive in the grand scheme of things which makes their government weak and open to a coup de ta. As long as their dependant on a foreign military power to do their fighting for them they will never be able to have complete independance and soveirnty.
connecticutter said:In terms of invading another country to help the people - I'm not sure how many of you have seen a movie that came out recently called "Hotel Rwanda." It is about the massacres that took place in Rwanda in 1994 and the lack of reaction from anyone else. I think this shows that intervention can be a good thing in extreme circumstances.
cnredd said:Wow...The Little Train THAT CAN'T...
If it's easy, do it...If it's hard, don't...
Why didn't Lance Armstrong just stay home?!?!?
stinger said:So exactly how were we going to create this army, train them and equipt them to fight the 7th largest army in the world? Where were we going to do it?
stinger said:The best way to fight the terrorist and insurgenents who want to reinstitute facisim is through freedom and liberty.
IValueFreedom said:To arch enemy: Did you create a new account so you could post your opinions under two names??? I noticed "Bergslagstroll's" post was edited by arch enemy.
Kelzie said:He's a moderator. Like me! We're able to edit other people's posts. I'm guessing there was something in it not kosher (spamming, etc...). We don't do it very often.
(Shorten down)IValueFreedom said:You're comparing apples and oranges here. This isn't about how hard it is to whether we should do it or not, it's about if the benefits outweight the costs. If 100,000 people died in order to "free" 10,000, is it not possible to think that it's not worth it? Because the outcome would be worse than the benefit created.
Umm... IF you are hinting that spreading democracy in Iraq is the best way to fight terrorism, then you're wrong. Period. Democracy is the perfect breeding grounds for terrorism.
To arch enemy: Did you create a new account so you could post your opinions under two names??? I noticed "Bergslagstroll's" post was edited by arch enemy.
I glad you asked this question. Because it really brings to light the hypocrisy of our government and ultimately us as a nation. There are many country's in the world that have suffered oppression at the hands of their government that we consider allies. But we don't go invading them. Were OK with these governments. If we weren't, we would be attacking, right. Whether the governments are democratic or oppressive, our support or lack of, is corporate driven. This time we have taken out an oppressive leader, last time we put one back in power. As an example, look no further than Kuwait. We ousted a tyrannical dictator and re-installed a just as tyrannical monarchy. Kuwait is no democracy. Neither are the Saudi's. Were not massing on their borders.Originally Posted by Kelzie:
Now I personally don't believe we went there with the Iraqi people in mind. But if we had, I think I would have been okay with the war. Howbout everyone else? If the US had honestly gone into Iraq to free the Iraqi people, would you be okay with it? Is it okay for the US to invade a sovereign country if their people are being abused?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?