• 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.

Iraqis Progress in Conditions for Troop Withdrawal, Official Says

seems taht he never mentioned that all Nazi tactics are being used by the the US gov, just some.
 
SKILMATIC said:
Did you know that part of the nazis tactics were illiminating races off the face of the earth? Well now you do.

Yes but I never said we were doing it at least at not time in our most recent history.
 
Yes but I never said we were doing it at least at not time in our most recent history.

O so when did we ever try to eliminate races off the face of the earth? Please enlighten me my good fellow.
 
American indians? How could that be they are american? I asked when have we ever tried to eliminate a race and you propose our own race(yes they were a different ethnic group but I said race). Germany tried to extenguish a whole human race. The only people that would be left would be blond haired blue eyed and between 6ft and 6ft4in men. That my friend is extermination. We didnt even try to exterminate the indians we were trying to move them out of america casue we didnt want to share the land(which to this day I think was wrong of us to do that).

Yes we killed alot of indians but our intentions were not to exterminate them from the face of the earth. They were to try to get them to move away so we didnt have to share the land. They refused so there was plenty of confrontations of course.
 
SKILMATIC said:
American indians? How could that be they are american? I asked when have we ever tried to eliminate a race and you propose our own race(yes they were a different ethnic group but I said race). Germany tried to extenguish a whole human race. The only people that would be left would be blond haired blue eyed and between 6ft and 6ft4in men. That my friend is extermination. We didnt even try to exterminate the indians we were trying to move them out of america casue we didnt want to share the land(which to this day I think was wrong of us to do that).

Yes we killed alot of indians but our intentions were not to exterminate them from the face of the earth. They were to try to get them to move away so we didnt have to share the land. They refused so there was plenty of confrontations of course.

Yeah a vast majority of the people Hitler tried to eliminate were Germans...you made a moot point. Yeah and Hitler relocated millions of jews before murdering them...do you have a point? Our plans were not to eliminate them?? So charging into peaceful american indian settlements and massacring their inhabitants isn't trying to eliminate them? Even though some of these settlements had already been relocated? Encouraging everyone with a weapon to kill any "red skin" they could find wasnt trying to eliminate them? Take a look at the propaganda of the time on the indians..it wasn't different than Hitlers. Genocide is genocide. The push into the west involved eliminating the indians.
 
Last edited:
I would request that somebody post the order, mandate, law, or regulation from the U.S. government (or any state) targeted at committing genocide on the Native Americans. As far as massacres and raids involving women and children, both sides were guilty. As far as our treatment of the Indians once they were militarily subdued, our policies were abysmal and inexcusable. But so was slavery. So were law prohibiting women from voting. Etc. We have grown and learned from our past sins and we now invest blood and treasure to restore all conquered enemies.

We went to Iraq because in the opinion of the administration and Congress it was the next logical step in the War against Terrorism. The inspectors, virtually all members of the U.N., the previous administration, most of the free world believed Saddam had WMD and would use them. The prospect of nuclear weapons in the hands of a Saddam Hussein was unthinkable. After weeks of fruitless negotiations with the U.N.--plenty of time to hide, bury, move stuff--we invaded and found huge caches of arms and remnants of WMD, but no WMD. We did find the torture chambers, the mass graves, and other evidence of Saddam's tyranny. And since we were there, and with the consent of the Iraqis, we set about to restore Iraq and help it to become a democracy. The terrorists do not want a free, independent, and prosperous Iraq. We have already seen evidence that even such a prospect puts ideas and hope of freedom into the hearts and minds of others. Freedom and terrorism don't mix at all.

As someone said, if we lose in Iraq now, all our brave young men and women who gave their lives for this cause will have died in vain. Iraq will fade into another tyrannical dictatorship and it will all have been for nothing.

Despite all the negative gloom and doom featured in the liberal media, the liberals in government, and the liberal blogs on the internet, things are better in Iraq and get better daily. It's just that most people nowadays don't remember how much better it is to win wars than it is to just fight them.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I would request that somebody post the order, mandate, law, or regulation from the U.S. government (or any state) targeted at committing genocide on the Native Americans. As far as massacres and raids involving women and children, both sides were guilty. As far as our treatment of the Indians once they were militarily subdued, our policies were abysmal and inexcusable. But so was slavery. So were law prohibiting women from voting. Etc. We have grown and learned from our past sins and we now invest blood and treasure to restore all conquered enemies.

We went to Iraq because in the opinion of the administration and Congress it was the next logical step in the War against Terrorism. The inspectors, virtually all members of the U.N., the previous administration, most of the free world believed Saddam had WMD and would use them. The prospect of nuclear weapons in the hands of a Saddam Hussein was unthinkable. After weeks of fruitless negotiations with the U.N.--plenty of time to hide, bury, move stuff--we invaded and found huge caches of arms and remnants of WMD, but no WMD. We did find the torture chambers, the mass graves, and other evidence of Saddam's tyranny. And since we were there, and with the consent of the Iraqis, we set about to restore Iraq and help it to become a democracy. The terrorists do not want a free, independent, and prosperous Iraq. We have already seen evidence that even such a prospect puts ideas and hope of freedom into the hearts and minds of others. Freedom and terrorism don't mix at all.

As someone said, if we lose in Iraq now, all our brave young men and women who gave their lives for this cause will have died in vain. Iraq will fade into another tyrannical dictatorship and it will all have been for nothing.

Despite all the negative gloom and doom featured in the liberal media, the liberals in government, and the liberal blogs on the internet, things are better in Iraq and get better daily. It's just that most people nowadays don't remember how much better it is to win wars than it is to just fight them.

Since when does something have to be written policy to be considered condoned by the government? The government encouraged and propgated it.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I would request that somebody post the order, mandate, law, or regulation from the U.S. government (or any state) targeted at committing genocide on the Native Americans. As far as massacres and raids involving women and children, both sides were guilty. As far as our treatment of the Indians once they were militarily subdued, our policies were abysmal and inexcusable. But so was slavery. So were law prohibiting women from voting. Etc. We have grown and learned from our past sins and we now invest blood and treasure to restore all conquered enemies.

We went to Iraq because in the opinion of the administration and Congress it was the next logical step in the War against Terrorism. The inspectors, virtually all members of the U.N., the previous administration, most of the free world believed Saddam had WMD and would use them. The prospect of nuclear weapons in the hands of a Saddam Hussein was unthinkable. After weeks of fruitless negotiations with the U.N.--plenty of time to hide, bury, move stuff--we invaded and found huge caches of arms and remnants of WMD, but no WMD. We did find the torture chambers, the mass graves, and other evidence of Saddam's tyranny. And since we were there, and with the consent of the Iraqis, we set about to restore Iraq and help it to become a democracy. The terrorists do not want a free, independent, and prosperous Iraq. We have already seen evidence that even such a prospect puts ideas and hope of freedom into the hearts and minds of others. Freedom and terrorism don't mix at all.

As someone said, if we lose in Iraq now, all our brave young men and women who gave their lives for this cause will have died in vain. Iraq will fade into another tyrannical dictatorship and it will all have been for nothing.

Despite all the negative gloom and doom featured in the liberal media, the liberals in government, and the liberal blogs on the internet, things are better in Iraq and get better daily. It's just that most people nowadays don't remember how much better it is to win wars than it is to just fight them.

Stop putting things into such easy terminology!...Some on the left might start to believe the truth, and we wouldn't want THAT!...:rofl
 
cnredd said:
Stop putting things into such easy terminology!...Some on the left might start to believe the truth, and we wouldn't want THAT!...:rofl

Hmmm I suppose thats why the US army was used to slaughter them. Interesting.
 
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
Hmmm I suppose thats why the US army was used to slaughter them. Interesting.

"I suppose America did THIS!....I suppose America's at fault!...I suppose America is to blame again!...No other mention of another country doing anything wrong!"

Ever a sunny friggin' day in your world?!?!?

All you have to do is ask yourself two questions...

1) Overall, has America done more good than bad?
2) Do I portray that percentage with my posts?

Even if you gave #1 a "10%" good, that STILL 10% more than you publicly give this country credit for.

You're the one who will complain that I put a bruise on your chest after 25 minutes of CPR...

You're the one who wins a house and refuses it because of the wallpaper...

You're the one who will continue to point out the minor wrongs in view of the major rights....

Dude; you're just one down-in-the-dumps, pessimistic, brooding bum...

Remind me not to invite you to a party....You'd bring your own rain....
 
cnredd said:
"I suppose America did THIS!....I suppose America's at fault!...I suppose America is to blame again!...No other mention of another country doing anything wrong!"

Ever a sunny friggin' day in your world?!?!?

All you have to do is ask yourself two questions...

1) Overall, has America done more good than bad?
2) Do I portray that percentage with my posts?

Even if you gave #1 a "10%" good, that STILL 10% more than you publicly give this country credit for.

You're the one who will complain that I put a bruise on your chest after 25 minutes of CPR...

You're the one who wins a house and refuses it because of the wallpaper...

You're the one who will continue to point out the minor wrongs in view of the major rights....

Dude; you're just one down-in-the-dumps, pessimistic, brooding bum...

Remind me not to invite you to a party....You'd bring your own rain....

I was specifically asked to provide 1 example of genocide commited by America. I did.
 
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
I was specifically asked to provide 1 example of genocide commited by America. I did.

I'm not talking about the last 4 posts....I'm talking about the last 4 days!

Why don't you go to the Playboy mansion and tell Hef the grotto isn't deep enough for ya....
 
cnredd said:
I'm not talking about the last 4 posts....I'm talking about the last 4 days!

Why don't you go to the Playboy mansion and tell Hef the grotto isn't deep enough for ya....

:lol: I'm pessimistic when I'm given a good reason to be. I hardly think that deciet, massacre, and bombs warrants optimism in humanity. I'm dissapointed that you try to justify genocide by pointing out our charities. By the way, how many charities does it take to make genocide ok? Unfortunatley for you history chooses to recall the few evil deeds more often the many good works. For all you know Hitler saved his best friend's life as a child but that doesn't excuse him from his genocide spree.
 
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
:lol: I'm pessimistic when I'm given a good reason to be. I hardly think that deciet, massacre, and bombs warrants optimism in humanity. I'm dissapointed that you try to justify genocide by pointing out our charities. By the way, how many charities does it take to make genocide ok? Unfortunatley for you history chooses to recall the few evil deeds more often the many good works. For all you know Hitler saved his best friend's life as a child but that doesn't excuse him from his genocide spree.

Read the thread title....NOW you have a good reason not to be....

As for your "genocide" comment, which is beyond laughable, I ask you....

Take all of the "genocides" that have ever happened...What's the worst one from the US?...And where does that rank compared to the rest of the world?....I assume Stalin's USSR would come in at #1...
 
Last edited:
cnredd said:
Read the thread title....NOW you have a good reason not to be....

Uh no I don't. They can withdrawl troops but the floodgates for terrorists will remain open.
 
cnredd said:
Read the thread title....NOW you have a good reason not to be....

As for your "genocide" comment, which is beyond laughable, I ask you....

Take all of the "genocides" that have ever happened...What's the worst one from the US?...And where does that rank compared to the rest of the world?....I assume Stalin's USSR would come in at #1...


Again..you're saying that because someone else's genocide was on a larger scale the fact that we commited genocide is less abhorent. For a country spewing moral hogwash all over the face of the earth I'd say that it is worse..because hypocracy and failed great expectations are involved. You'd expect someone like Stalin or Hitler to do something like that but America has always supposed to have been about tolleration, acceptance, and equality. Genocide is genocide.
 
cnredd said:
Read the thread title....NOW you have a good reason not to be....

As for your "genocide" comment, which is beyond laughable, I ask you....

Take all of the "genocides" that have ever happened...What's the worst one from the US?...And where does that rank compared to the rest of the world?....I assume Stalin's USSR would come in at #1...

I have an interesting question for you. Are we supporting terrorism by buying oil from countries which allow terrorists to roam freely and whos governments commit humanitarian crimes on a daily basis?
 
Napoleon's Nightingale said:
I have an interesting question for you. Are we supporting terrorism by buying oil from countries which allow terrorists to roam freely and whos governments commit humanitarian crimes on a daily basis?

Yes.

It this because of something recent? No

Is this because we've gone to bed with the Middle East since FDR? Yes

Are we now reaping what we have sown? Yes

Is it because America has an insatiable thirst for oil? Yes

Is terrorism an adequate way to stop our "reaping"? No

Is "buying oil from countries" the only reason there is terrorism? No

If Bush43 did the same as the last four Presidents, would things change? No

Would it be worse? Yes

Should he do something about it? Yes

Is going into Iraq part of it? Yes

Will it help in the short run? No

Will it help in the long run? Yes

If the Middle East ran out of oil tomorrow, would there still be terrorism? Yes

If the USA invented a new energy source, and didn't need any more oil, would there still be terrorism? Yes

If every government the USA was "in bed with" was gone, would there still be terrorism? Yes

If every foreigner left the Middle East, would there still be terrorism? Yes

So oil defines us, but it does NOT define the terrorists? Yes
 
cnredd said:
Yes.

It this because of something recent? No

Is this because we've gone to bed with the Middle East since FDR? Yes

Are we now reaping what we have sown? Yes

Is it because America has an insatiable thirst for oil? Yes

Is terrorism an adequate way to stop our "reaping"? No

Is "buying oil from countries" the only reason there is terrorism? No

If Bush43 did the same as the last four Presidents, would things change? No

Would it be worse? Yes

Should he do something about it? Yes

Is going into Iraq part of it? Yes

Will it help in the short run? No

Will it help in the long run? Yes

If the Middle East ran out of oil tomorrow, would there still be terrorism? Yes

If the USA invented a new energy source, and didn't need any more oil, would there still be terrorism? Yes

If every government the USA was "in bed with" was gone, would there still be terrorism? Yes

If every foreigner left the Middle East, would there still be terrorism? Yes

So oil defines us, but it does NOT define the terrorists? Yes

Would acts of terrorism be significantly reduced? Yes.

Would we be safer? Yes.

Would it mean that those countries would no longer be able to hide their humanitarian crimes behind a barrel of oil? Yes.

Thats all I need to know. There will always be some nut somewhere who thinks that blowing people up is an acceptable way to express him/herself but if there's less money to use then it wont happen NEARLY as often.
 
Napoleon writes
Since when does something have to be written policy to be considered condoned by the government? The government encouraged and propgated it

and (from memory)

I suppose that's why the U.S. Army was used to slaughter them.

An unfortunate consequence of war is that it always kills people and breaks things. If you however can show me a single policy or any proof whatsoever that anyone in our government or any of our military intentionally targeted civilians in Iraq, I'll acknowledge it in bold face. I dare say you cannot do that, thus your statement seems to reflect a personal ideology and hatred of the current administration and/or the military that is typical of some on the left.

On the other hand, I can refer you to numerous websites with graphic pictures of the mass graves containing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children massacred at the hands of Saddam Hussein and his thugs.

Now tell me again how Iraq is worse off because the U.S. is helping the Iraqis to put together a free and independent nation with a representative government?
 
"I hardly think that deciet, massacre, and bombs warrants optimism in humanity."

1) What massacre...The 300,000 Kurds by Muslims in Iraq?...The 10,000 Kurds by MUslims in Iran?...The 400,000 Muslims by Muslims in Somalia? The 2 million Black Christians in Sudan by Muslims in just under a decade?...The 250,000 Muslims by Muslims in Zaire?

2) Some people (Fundamental Islamists) just need killing.

3) The liberal is also quick to point out America's past with regards to slavery...African slaves shipped to the Muslim world are estimated between 11.5 million and 14 million.

If the lords of terror dispense with displays of pity for their victims, it’s only because they haven’t yet attained the leftist’s level of hypocrisy. Reality has no weight for the ideologues who cannot live without the conviction that only the United States is ever guilty.
 
Last edited:
AlbqOwl said:
Napoleon writes


and (from memory)



An unfortunate consequence of war is that it always kills people and breaks things. If you however can show me a single policy or any proof whatsoever that anyone in our government or any of our military intentionally targeted civilians in Iraq, I'll acknowledge it in bold face. I dare say you cannot do that, thus your statement seems to reflect a personal ideology and hatred of the current administration and/or the military that is typical of some on the left.

On the other hand, I can refer you to numerous websites with graphic pictures of the mass graves containing hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children massacred at the hands of Saddam Hussein and his thugs.

Now tell me again how Iraq is worse off because the U.S. is helping the Iraqis to put together a free and independent nation with a representative government?


I was not reffering to Iraq. The united states cavalry was sent to wipe out indian settlements in the west during the push into the west of the North American continent. You've gone WAY off the subject.
 
Last edited:
GySgt said:
"I hardly think that deciet, massacre, and bombs warrants optimism in humanity."

1) What massacre...The 300,000 Kurds by Muslims in Iraq?...The 10,000 Kurds by MUslims in Iran?...The 400,000 Muslims by Muslims in Somalia? The 2 million Black Christians in Sudan by Muslims in just under a decade?...The 250,000 Muslims by Muslims in Zaire?

2) Some people (Fundamental Islamists) just need killing.

3) The liberal is also quick to point out America's past with regards to slavery...African slaves shipped to the Muslim world are estimated between 11.5 million and 14 million.

If the lords of terror dispense with displays of pity for their victims, it’s only because they haven’t yet attained the leftist’s level of hypocrisy. Reality has no weight for the ideologues who cannot live without the conviction that only the United States is ever guilty.

1. My point was all inclusive.

2. Killing people doesn't adress the base of the problem. If you don't address the base then it will continue..someone somewhere will always think that it's ok to express himself by blowing people up. He already knows he's going to die by blowing himself up and taking others with him so what makes you think that threatening to kill him if he tries will deter him? It wont because he already knows that he would die anyway.

3.You're justifying evil deeds by saying well someone else did it too. Things like this are not acceptable for ANY country to do.
 
"You're justifying evil deeds by saying well someone else did it too. Things like this are not acceptable for ANY country to do."

Not justifying....sharing the blame in spite of the liberal masses.
 
Back
Top Bottom