• 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.

Iraq war!

Do you support the war in Iraq?


  • Total voters
    50

teacher

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
30
Location
Nomad.Got a couch,beer,meat,cute daughters,Batman
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
On this site over and over there are those who quote polls taken from the American public. These polls don't come close to canvasing 1% of the population. I dare say here on this site the education level and news savyness is much greater than the American unwashed masses. And we should be able to get a greater than 1% return. All reasons for going aside. Legalities aside. Simple question. Let's see how the folks on this site answer.
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,587
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I was ambivalent about going to war. We all now know that ties between Al Quaida(sic) and Sadam were tenuous at best, but that does not change the fact that he did in fact harbor and fund terrorists through-out his years.

We are there now, and I support our troops 100 percent. We can't cut-n-run now, we have to finish this. There are good things coming out of Iraq, but if anyone wanted to put a time-table to this war they are delusional. Practically every country we ever had a conflict with has American troops stationed and situated within their borders.

I think we could have went about this war a different way, but that's a moot point at this juncture. Supporting the war at this time is about one of the only issues I agree with this administration on. I just know that terrorism is a world wide problem and we can't ignore it anymore. Now, trying to spread democracy to a region where they enjoyed a tribal government for thousands of years is a different story, but we can't remain apathetic to this plight(terrorism) anymore.
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
23,135
Reaction score
8,377
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
SixStringHero said:
...that does not change the fact that he did in fact harbor and fund terrorists through-out his years.
Nor does it change the fact that Team Bush et al are funding and trying to get US taxpayers' money to fund the exact same international terrorists that Saddam was supporting and harboring.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
teacher said:
On this site over and over there are those who quote polls taken from the American public. These polls don't come close to canvasing 1% of the population. I dare say here on this site the education level and news savyness is much greater than the American unwashed masses. And we should be able to get a greater than 1% return. All reasons for going aside. Legalities aside. Simple question. Let's see how the folks on this site answer.
All reasons for going aside? Legalities aside?What else do we have to consider..how well the soldiers are shining their boots? Those two must be included in the opinion...they're part of the war.
 
Last edited:

teacher

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
30
Location
Nomad.Got a couch,beer,meat,cute daughters,Batman
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
All reasons for going aside? Legalities aside?What else do we have to consider..how well the soldiers are shining their boots? Those two must be included in the opinion...they're part of the war.
What I said. Your own personal take on the reasons. What YOU think is right or wrong. Not what say the pundits or politicians. How you feel this is gonna go down. The end result in your view justifies or not this war.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
teacher said:
What I said. Your own personal take on the reasons. What YOU think is right or wrong. Not what say the pundits or politicians. How you feel this is gonna go down. The end result in your view justifies or not this war.
Oh good. I voted correctly then. :smile: ;)
 

Jquest

New member
Joined
Aug 14, 2005
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
Under the Sun...
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Iraq No. Afghanistan Yes. The main threat is still in Afghanistan and will continue to operate from there until the next Admin decides to go after Osama.
Then there are those that say he's in Iran. :shock:
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
teacher said:
On this site over and over there are those who quote polls taken from the American public. These polls don't come close to canvasing 1% of the population. I dare say here on this site the education level and news savyness is much greater than the American unwashed masses. And we should be able to get a greater than 1% return. All reasons for going aside. Legalities aside. Simple question. Let's see how the folks on this site answer.
I wrote this before, but who the heck knows when...I saved it to notepad for a rainy...or, in this case, 95 and sunny, day...

I think the UN was under the assumption that sanctions
would be imposed, the inspectors would come in and
monitor the destruction of chemical & biological weapons
that he already had, and then the sanctions would be lifted.

But Saddam threw in the monkey wrench...He STOPPED the
inspections and kicked the inspectors out. The UN sanctions
didn't have the intent they thought it would, but the UN would
look incredibly stupid if they lifted them after Saddam
removed the inspectors, so to save face, they left the sanctions on.

Now Saddam knew the UN buckled...the ball was in his court...
He'll get the sympathy vote from the Arab nations that the big,
bad UN had killed the little children. Not that he really cared.

So the UN went for Round 2...Inspection time again!

First, the UN would put on that "determined" look and ratify
Resolution 1441, which says, "Saddam's been screwing up; if he
continues to screw up, we might do something extreme." Saddam must've
hurt his abdomen laughing at that one...The only thing they've done
in ten years was put on sanctions, which he was getting around anyway...
What were they going to do next? Put up a billboard saying, "Saddam's
not a very good person"?

This time, Saddam said he would allow inspectors as long as the head
of the inspection team was not American...Guess what?...The UN said "OK"!

Since when was any of the UN demands negotiable?...The UN, as the world
speaking with one voice, should've said "NO...YOU do things OUR way...
not the other way around." The Buckle Boys are VERY consistent...

Meanwhile, the US said, you know what?...These sanctions aren't hurting
the regime...they're hurting the people...and if the UN is stupid enough
to keep this 3-card monte game up, we're gonna have to do this ourselves.

But Bush knew the American people are fickle. If he told them that he
was going into Iraq to free the people and get the sanctions off of
the people's back, the Americans would've yawned and said, "Keep it
down...I'm watching Sex & the City."

So he used data from the previous administration that was outdated and
incomplete recent data and stirred up the troops with the "threat" angle.
It was a complete roll of the dice, and, as we've learned, came up craps.

It probably would've shocked him if WMDs were actually found, but by this time,
he had what he wanted...An open window to get rid of a bad guy and to plant
the seeds of Democracy. Just like childbirth, he knew it was going to be painful,
both in military and political policies, but he knows that, long term, the world will
be better off for it...Let the critics bitch & moan...

Hell, Abe Lincoln was elected President for a second term with only 39% of
the vote! Nine states had ZERO votes for him! And I don't think Abe get
crapped on for what he did, does he? Bush is following the same form...

Hate him now...hate him all you want...but in about 20, 30, or even
50 years from now, when most, if not all, of the dictatorships in the Middle
East are gone and Democracy rules the roost...look back to April, 2003...
Watch the Saddam statue coming down...then you'll know why this was all started.

insert picture of waving flag with a Sousa march in the background...
 
Last edited:

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I am in total support of the war.......Even if Saddam didn't have WOMD (and no one knows for sure whether he had them or not) he would have evnetually gotten them and either sold them to a terrorist organization or tried to use them himself.......................

Like President Bush has said it is better to fight terrorism in the streets of Baghdad then in the streets of New York.................
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
cnredd said:
I wrote this before, but who the heck knows when...I saved it to notepad for a rainy...or, in this case, 95 and sunny, day...

I think the UN was under the assumption that sanctions
would be imposed, the inspectors would come in and
monitor the destruction of chemical & biological weapons
that he already had, and then the sanctions would be lifted.

But Saddam threw in the monkey wrench...He STOPPED the
inspections and kicked the inspectors out. The UN sanctions
didn't have the intent they thought it would, but the UN would
look incredibly stupid if they lifted them after Saddam
removed the inspectors, so to save face, they left the sanctions on.

Now Saddam knew the UN buckled...the ball was in his court...
He'll get the sympathy vote from the Arab nations that the big,
bad UN had killed the little children. Not that he really cared.

So the UN went for Round 2...Inspection time again!

First, the UN would put on that "determined" look and ratify
Resolution 1441, which says, "Saddam's been screwing up; if he
continues to screw up, we might do something extreme." Saddam must've
hurt his abdomen laughing at that one...The only thing they've done
in ten years was put on sanctions, which he was getting around anyway...
What were they going to do next? Put up a billboard saying, "Saddam's
not a very good person"?

This time, Saddam said he would allow inspectors as long as the head
of the inspection team was not American...Guess what?...The UN said "OK"!

Since when was any of the UN demands negotiable?...The UN, as the world
speaking with one voice, should've said "NO...YOU do things OUR way...
not the other way around." The Buckle Boys are VERY consistent...

Meanwhile, the US said, you know what?...These sanctions aren't hurting
the regime...they're hurting the people...and if the UN is stupid enough
to keep this 3-card monte game up, we're gonna have to do this ourselves.

But Bush knew the American people are fickle. If he told them that he
was going into Iraq to free the people and get the sanctions off of
the people's back, the Americans would've yawned and said, "Keep it
down...I'm watching Sex & the City."

So he used data from the previous administration that was outdated and
incomplete recent data and stirred up the troops with the "threat" angle.
It was a complete roll of the dice, and, as we've learned, came up craps.

It probably would've shocked him if WMDs were actually found, but by this time,
he had what he wanted...An open window to get rid of a bad guy and to plant
the seeds of Democracy. Just like childbirth, he knew it was going to be painful,
both in military and political policies, but he knows that, long term, the world will
be better off for it...Let the critics bitch & moan...

Hell, Abe Lincoln was elected President for a second term with only 39% of
the vote! Nine states had ZERO votes for him! And I don't think Abe get
crapped on for what he did, does he? Bush is following the same form...

Hate him now...hate him all you want...but in about 20, 30, or even
50 years from now, when most, if not all, of the dictatorships in the Middle
East are gone and Democracy rules the roost...look back to April, 2003...
Watch the Saddam statue coming down...then you'll know why this was all started.

insert picture of waving flag with a Sousa march in the background...

You left out the bit about Bush kicking the inspectors out. Perhaps he new they wouldn't find anything and his war mongoring would be deemed unacceptable.
 

teacher

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
30
Location
Nomad.Got a couch,beer,meat,cute daughters,Batman
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
cnredd said:
I wrote this before, but who the heck knows when...I saved it to notepad for a rainy...or, in this case, 95 and sunny, day...
Good lord you beautiful ugly big lug of a brute, that was downright...poetic.

GySgt like. I'm....stunned. I think I'm pining for the fjords. Wait till I unleash the beast on those that (inevitably) follow.
 

teacher

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
5,980
Reaction score
30
Location
Nomad.Got a couch,beer,meat,cute daughters,Batman
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
You left out the bit about Bush kicking the inspectors out. Perhaps he new they wouldn't find anything and his war mongoring would be deemed unacceptable.
Don't give me that you snotty faced heap of parrot droppings. Shut your festering gob you tit. Your type really make me sick.You vacuous, malodorous, pervert.

I'll take the five days, with pride.

Gotta go on here.
Sport, why don't you think they found any WMD's?
UN knew they were there.
Clinton knew they were there.
Every body in the entire friggin world knew they were there.
The real question is, where the fuc*k are they now?

They're in Syria you dolts!
After years of Lebanon occupation, Syria just suddenly decides to pull out?

Here's how it went, at the highest levels. (Sorry those of you already indoctrinated to the wrath and logic of me, teacher, of the massive brain).

Big George: So we both know you got the WMD's. Look, here's our way cool satellite images proving such. Now here is what you're gonna do. (Whispers in ear).
Syrians: Yes Sir.

And then the Syrians magically pull out of Lebanon.

What part of this don't you understand you Bush haters?

Again, I call on you to find a flaw in my logic.

But you don't. Or can't.

You all glaze over my points and cry "Oh, yea, what about....."

I call you out time and time again.

Any wonder why I spend my time in the basement mocking you all?

Challenge my points with logic.

Challenge my points with logic!

Lemme guess.

(In the voice of Richard Pryor when he mocks white people)

Well you see....Bush lied. We win. Yea us.

Almost 1400 posts you people. I ask, over and over, find a flaw, but you don't

Let's start from scratch.

A population. Half can't vote, or learn to read, or work, or hold public office, or dress how they want, or drive, or marry who they want, or be given due representation under ANY body of law, or let it be known they know how to read, or have any say so in the society that they friggin LIVE IN.

In any other context they would be called SLAVES.

Is that how you would want half of your god damn society be represented?

But you friggin people so hate Bush you are willing to OVERLOOK that!

I'm sick and fuc*king tired of not having an answer to this simple question.

Are we, as a great and powerful, compassionate, society going to put up with this friggin bullshit?

No. No. Hell fuc*king no.

And we voted as a nation not to.

Fuc*k you people and your "It's not enough of a percentage to mandate such".

Our brave sons and daughters enlist DAILY knowing very well where they are going and what they will be doing to put an end to this nonsense.

They put their lives on the line and say so.

Not you people on this site.

What is this so called debate about?

Our best go willingly into the fray.

I have, like they now do, proudly raise their right hand an say "I do".

Spare me your sanctimonious bullshit. They sign the papers. EVERY FRIGGIN DAY.

Why do you people turn a deaf ear to what GySgt, that brave American hero, tells you so eloquently over and over and friggin over, almost daily, while faced with the prospest of going back, and will go, into the maw, to back those that have held their ink stained fingers high under the threat of death, says?

Shame.

One of you, any one of you, face me on this. 1400 posts folks. Not one of you yet. Go copy and paste. It's all there in vagues CPU.

You giant batch of fuc*king Pussie*s. Free the women.

Free the women.

Is this how you would want your women to live?

Bush won.

Get the fuc*k over it.

Billo, champs, and your ilk, you all suck.

This planet will never friggin change until all women have a say in their society.

Let the United god damn States of friggin America roll over those that would keep women oppressed with our fearsome and righteous might.

I might be gone for a while now, maybe forever, let it not be said that I, teacher, of the massive brain, did not speak his peace, right in the face of all you pusses. Go tattle now chump. We all know. I made sure of it.

Free the women.
 

GarzaUK

That European Guy
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2005
Messages
3,682
Reaction score
625
Location
Belfast, Northern Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
teacher said:
Free the women.
By the sounds of the new Iraqi constitution, rights for women in Iraq will actually get worse than under Saddam Hussein. Hussein was quite the secularist.

And congrats teach, your language has sucessfully put this thread in the basement. Also you have purposefully avoided the censorship on this website to show the swear words in full.
Save your foul mouthed rants for in there. You've been warned.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
teacher said:
Don't give me that you snotty faced heap of parrot droppings. Shut your festering gob you tit. Your type really make me sick.You vacuous, malodorous, pervert.

I'll take the five days, with pride.

Gotta go on here.
Sport, why don't you think they found any WMD's?
UN knew they were there.
Clinton knew they were there.
Every body in the entire friggin world knew they were there.
The real question is, where the fuc*k are they now?

They're in Syria you dolts!
After years of Lebanon occupation, Syria just suddenly decides to pull out?

Here's how it went, at the highest levels. (Sorry those of you already indoctrinated to the wrath and logic of me, teacher, of the massive brain).

Big George: So we both know you got the WMD's. Look, here's our way cool satellite images proving such. Now here is what you're gonna do. (Whispers in ear).
Syrians: Yes Sir.

And then the Syrians magically pull out of Lebanon.

What part of this don't you understand you Bush haters?

Again, I call on you to find a flaw in my logic.

But you don't. Or can't.

You all glaze over my points and cry "Oh, yea, what about....."

I call you out time and time again.

Any wonder why I spend my time in the basement mocking you all?

Challenge my points with logic.

Challenge my points with logic!

Lemme guess.

(In the voice of Richard Pryor when he mocks white people)

Well you see....Bush lied. We win. Yea us.

Almost 1400 posts you people. I ask, over and over, find a flaw, but you don't

Let's start from scratch.

A population. Half can't vote, or learn to read, or work, or hold public office, or dress how they want, or drive, or marry who they want, or be given due representation under ANY body of law, or let it be known they know how to read, or have any say so in the society that they friggin LIVE IN.

In any other context they would be called SLAVES.

Is that how you would want half of your god damn society be represented?

But you friggin people so hate Bush you are willing to OVERLOOK that!

I'm sick and fuc*king tired of not having an answer to this simple question.

Are we, as a great and powerful, compassionate, society going to put up with this friggin bullshit?

No. No. Hell fuc*king no.

And we voted as a nation not to.

Fuc*k you people and your "It's not enough of a percentage to mandate such".

Our brave sons and daughters enlist DAILY knowing very well where they are going and what they will be doing to put an end to this nonsense.

They put their lives on the line and say so.

Not you people on this site.

What is this so called debate about?

Our best go willingly into the fray.

I have, like they now do, proudly raise their right hand an say "I do".

Spare me your sanctimonious bullshit. They sign the papers. EVERY FRIGGIN DAY.

Why do you people turn a deaf ear to what GySgt, that brave American hero, tells you so eloquently over and over and friggin over, almost daily, while faced with the prospest of going back, and will go, into the maw, to back those that have held their ink stained fingers high under the threat of death, says?

Shame.

One of you, any one of you, face me on this. 1400 posts folks. Not one of you yet. Go copy and paste. It's all there in vagues CPU.

You giant batch of fuc*king Pussie*s. Free the women.

Free the women.

Is this how you would want your women to live?

Bush won.

Get the fuc*k over it.

Billo, champs, and your ilk, you all suck.

This planet will never friggin change until all women have a say in their society.

Let the United god damn States of friggin America roll over those that would keep women oppressed with our fearsome and righteous might.

I might be gone for a while now, maybe forever, let it not be said that I, teacher, of the massive brain, did not speak his peace, right in the face of all you pusses. Go tattle now chump. We all know. I made sure of it.

Free the women.
I challenge. If there were vast arsenals of WMDs where are they and why did Bush order our people to stop looking for them? Show me evidence they're in Syria and don't show me sattelite photos of teeny tiny trucks who's contents could be anything from condoms to soda pop. Besides such a vast arsenal would surely show up. They weren't any threat anyway. Nations around the world and our own government said they were nowehere near nuclear capability having the missle technology to strike any US territory for at least a decade. Conclusive evidence. After all if anyone posed an argument to you and said woops not here can't find it sorry um must have been hijacked to to Syria you'd criticize them.
Hmm a better cause? How about the Genocide in progress in the Sudan. The Sudaneese were brutalizing millions and all the president did was say too bad so sad oh look Iraq bombs and soldiers away! 2 million dead and 4 million displaced refugees because Bush turned a blind eye and chose to topple an inert dictator instead. I've said it before and I'll say it again..the Arabs should grow some balls and take matters in to their own hands. Firm governments are not made by foreign nations and quiet citizens. If they can't do as the Iranian students are doing despite the torture and threats then they aren't ready and they don't deserve it. Funny that when push came to shove Bush chose the inert dictator over what would have been a REAL humanitarian effort by halting the Genocide. But guess what? The Sudaneese don't get to taste democracy because they're DEAD, 2 million of them. The Iranians dont get to tast democracy even though they're they once shedding sweat blood and tears over it. No, it's the passive, yellow-bellied, cowardly Iraqis who didn't have the balls to finally stand up once and for all and say no more. I suppose they figured that eventually someone would do it for them. ha. At least the Iranians are fighting for their cause. Yeah people are enlisting but last I heard numbers are way down. Why am I not listening to them? Because when we toppled Saddam we oppened the flood gates to a torrent of terrorists and theres no end in sight. yeah they have a democracy but for how long? They obviously don't want it so badly or they would have earned it for themselves.It's not just Iraqis who are dying at the hands of terrorists to pay for their precious democracy. Americans :1800 Sudannese: 2 million

I'll ask you again. Fingerpaints or 2 million lives?
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
I challenge. If there were vast arsenals of WMDs where are they and why did Bush order our people to stop looking for them? Show me evidence they're in Syria and don't show me sattelite photos of teeny tiny trucks who's contents could be anything from condoms to soda pop. Besides such a vast arsenal would surely show up. They weren't any threat anyway. Nations around the world and our own government said they were nowehere near nuclear capability having the missle technology to strike any US territory for at least a decade. Conclusive evidence. After all if anyone posed an argument to you and said woops not here can't find it sorry um must have been hijacked to to Syria you'd criticize them.
Hmm a better cause? How about the Genocide in progress in the Sudan. The Sudaneese were brutalizing millions and all the president did was say too bad so sad oh look Iraq bombs and soldiers away! 2 million dead and 4 million displaced refugees because Bush turned a blind eye and chose to topple an inert dictator instead. I've said it before and I'll say it again..the Arabs should grow some balls and take matters in to their own hands. Firm governments are not made by foreign nations and quiet citizens. If they can't do as the Iranian students are doing despite the torture and threats then they aren't ready and they don't deserve it. Funny that when push came to shove Bush chose the inert dictator over what would have been a REAL humanitarian effort by halting the Genocide. But guess what? The Sudaneese don't get to taste democracy because they're DEAD, 2 million of them. The Iranians dont get to tast democracy even though they're they once shedding sweat blood and tears over it. No, it's the passive, yellow-bellied, cowardly Iraqis who didn't have the balls to finally stand up once and for all and say no more. I suppose they figured that eventually someone would do it for them. ha. At least the Iranians are fighting for their cause. Yeah people are enlisting but last I heard numbers are way down. Why am I not listening to them? Because when we toppled Saddam we oppened the flood gates to a torrent of terrorists and theres no end in sight. yeah they have a democracy but for how long? They obviously don't want it so badly or they would have earned it for themselves.It's not just Iraqis who are dying at the hands of terrorists to pay for their precious democracy. Americans :1800 Sudannese: 2 million

I'll ask you again. Fingerpaints or 2 million lives?
One paragraph on the possibility of WMD NOT going to Syria...followed by a subject change.

Wanna talk about the Sudan?...Start your own thread and have at it!
 

Arch Enemy

Familiaist
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2005
Messages
7,470
Reaction score
2,085
Location
North Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Navy Pride said:
I am in total support of the war.......Even if Saddam didn't have WOMD (and no one knows for sure whether he had them or not) he would have evnetually gotten them and either sold them to a terrorist organization or tried to use them himself.......................

Like President Bush has said it is better to fight terrorism in the streets of Baghdad then in the streets of New York.................
And do you know who Saddam was going to attack, once he re-built his military? That's right his old pal Iran. The enemy of my enemy is my enemy?
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Arch Enemy said:
And do you know who Saddam was going to attack, once he re-built his military? That's right his old pal Iran. The enemy of my enemy is my enemy?
I gotta see this theory...first time I've heard of it...

Go on...
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
cnredd said:
One paragraph on the possibility of WMD NOT going to Syria...followed by a subject change.

Wanna talk about the Sudan?...Start your own thread and have at it!
Uhh it wasn't just about them not going in to Syria. It was also about them apparently not going or being anywhere. It was about Bush kicking the UN inspectors out then kicking our own inspectors out. It was about Iraq being NOWHERE NEAR the capability to attack us and being NOWHERE NEAR anykind of nuclear capability. It was about the fact that Iraq did not pose an iminent threat the the US. It was about Iraq having "no collaborative relationship" with Al Qaeda. So, all of your reasons for going to war except one have been debunked.The Sudan I'm pointing out that if Bush was so bent on making a humanitarian war why didn't he go there instead of Iraq. There was no genocide in progress in Iraq. I love that you war mongars try to sweep this under the rug.
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,587
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"Funny that when push came to shove Bush chose the inert dictator over what would have been a REAL humanitarian effort by halting the Genocide. But guess what? The Sudaneese don't get to taste democracy because they're DEAD, 2 million of them. The Iranians dont get to tast democracy even though they're they once shedding sweat blood and tears over it."

^
You have to get real here. The UN has no intentions of stopping this and sits idly by while this happening. Likewise Clinton let a million plus Rawandans be slaughtered and did nothing as well. I'm a realist, if Bush went into Darfur without the UN's consent, and unilaterally, liberals would have a field day and it would be no different than Iraq except for the fact that they wouldn't have the diatribe mantra of "Haliurton, Haliburton, Haliburton" to chant to.
 

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
You have to get real here. The UN has no intentions of stopping this and sits idly by while this happening. Likewise Clinton let a million plus Rawandans be slaughtered and did nothing as well. I'm a realist, if Bush went into Darfur without the UN's consent, and unilaterally, liberals would have a field day and it would be no different than Iraq except for the fact that they wouldn't have the diatribe mantra of "Haliurton, Haliburton, Haliburton" to chant to.
bullshit...Iraq did not have an ongoing genocide. Sudan did.
 

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
don;t bring in clinton's faults to justify Bush's actions. We want someone who does better than what Clinton did with the Rwandan situation rite? Just because Clinton didn't care doesn't mean Bush should neglect the Sudanese.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
1,670
Reaction score
17
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
SixStringHero said:
"Funny that when push came to shove Bush chose the inert dictator over what would have been a REAL humanitarian effort by halting the Genocide. But guess what? The Sudaneese don't get to taste democracy because they're DEAD, 2 million of them. The Iranians dont get to tast democracy even though they're they once shedding sweat blood and tears over it."

^
You have to get real here. The UN has no intentions of stopping this and sits idly by while this happening. Likewise Clinton let a million plus Rawandans be slaughtered and did nothing as well. I'm a realist, if Bush went into Darfur without the UN's consent, and unilaterally, liberals would have a field day and it would be no different than Iraq except for the fact that they wouldn't have the diatribe mantra of "Haliurton, Haliburton, Haliburton" to chant to.
Hmmmm but going into Iraq without the UN's consent is ok? And because the UN is ignoring the genoside it's ok for the US to follow suit? Going into the Sudan would have been less controversal than going into Iraq turned out to be except because the reasons for going to war in the Sudan are all legitimate, clear, and defined.
 
Last edited:

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,587
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Personally, I can care less what the UN dictates at this point. Corruption and special interests has run amok in that organization.

I'm still not sure if we should be a world policeman anymore. It seems to get America nowhere, and it divides our already polarized nation that much further. If Clinton would have acted militarily in Rwanda conservatives would have pissed all over him for it just as liberals are ******* all over Bush right now. On one hand I say as a world super power it's our obligation to help those who cannot help themselves. On the other hand I believe that the government you are not willing to fight for is the government you deserve. Should we be helping everybody all the time?

Rhetorical questions aside, I only support our action at this point because terrorism has become a rampant and world wide problem. I don't for one second believe that America is hated more by Islamic fanatics today than prior to 9/11 because quite frankly, why the **** did 9/11 happen in the first place?

As for going into the Sudan I seriously doubt that would have been any less controversial. Both sides in this country are willing to use what ever means to politicize any issue that gains favor with their party. It sickens me, but such is the way of partisan politics.

Sometimes I pontificate what would happen to America if we were to become an isolationist country. Would things be any better? Would Islamic fanatics hate us any less? Would terrorist attacks in the world cease or become less frequent? Somehow I doubt it.
 

nkgupta80

DP Veteran
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
1,720
Reaction score
59
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
As for going into the Sudan I seriously doubt that would have been any less controversial. Both sides in this country are willing to use what ever means to politicize any issue that gains favor with their party. It sickens me, but such is the way of partisan politics.

don't apply the general arguments to party politics. Sudan when you look at it objectively is currently experiencing atrocities while Iraq wasn't. Iraq obviously was not the greatest terror threat in the Mid East. When people use the argument that we are stopping atrocities in Iraq as the reason for the war, shouldn't Sudan have been a more pressing issue considering there is genocide happening right now.?
 

SixStringHero

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 7, 2005
Messages
1,587
Reaction score
133
Location
Southwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
So you believe it's America's job to stop atrocities that are happening around the world.
 
Top Bottom