• 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.

PROOF Bush LIED about Iraq!

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
24,587
Reaction score
9,279
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aquapub said:
Count them, 1-2-3-4-5-6, 6 different independent, non-partisan committees have investigated the matter and found not one single piece of evidence that President Bush lied (and there still is no proof that Bush was even wrong, being that the WMD we know WERE there are still unaccounted for).
This talking point is as fallacious as it is ubiquitous.

Please provide the scope of these committees' investigations.

If you do, you will see that there's only been one single body that has been authorized to examine whether public statements and reports and testimony regarding Iraq by U.S. Government officials made between the Gulf War period and the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom were substantiated by intelligence information. That committee is the SSCI. This committee has yet to conduct this pahse of the investigation.

If you disagree, please provide the "terms of reference" or otherwise show wherein these committees' were charged w/ investigating what th epoliticos were telling us re Iraq.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Blake Johnson said:
it was blatenly obvious to anyone who bothered to listen, that Bush was lying when he attempted to present a valid case for invading Iraq.

If a guy trying to sell me a used car had been that insincere, id have walked off the lot immediately. I refuse to believe that anyone in their right mind believed his lies. It seems that all you have to do is repeat the words, "WMD's, Evil, Brutal, Freedom & Democracy" over and over and over, and the public will buy what you are selling.

Colin Powell has confessed to his lies at the UN about Iraq, once again it was so obvious at the time, im amazed anyone believed it.


There seems to be a golden rule amongst people who pigeon hole themselves as "left" or as "right". That rule is that they have to blindly support anything and everything that their "team" is saying. Regardless of whether it makes sense or not.

If people actually thought for themselves, there never would have been a wrongful invasion of Iraq.



BTW, Clinton first stressed the need to invade Iraq in 1998, it was on the basis that they had to force a regime change. Bush was just following up on what Clinton started. The whole left and right paradigm is just there to divide you all and fool you into believing you have a choice.


Bwahahaha! Well said.

By the way...Clinton was merely stressing what military analysts and regional experts have been saying since the mid 80's. The civilization in the Middle East is a danger to us if left unchecked and allowed to continue to digress under the status quo.
 

RealityCheck

New member
Joined
Dec 3, 2005
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
Bwahahaha! Well said.

By the way...Clinton was merely stressing what military analysts and regional experts have been saying since the mid 80's. The civilization in the Middle East is a danger to us if left unchecked and allowed to continue to digress under the status quo.

Or is the "civilization of the middle east" coined perhaps by the so called "experts" a danger to the interests of the Empire of the United States? Did you ever think that the status quo of the US is a danger to the Middle east? Perhaps not.

"Always Faithful" does not translate into "Always Correct", and there are growing numbers of prominent Marines who concur.

Keep an open mind.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
RealityCheck said:
Or is the "civilization of the middle east" coined perhaps by the so called "experts" a danger to the interests of the Empire of the United States? Did you ever think that the status quo of the US is a danger to the Middle east? Perhaps not.

"Always Faithful" does not translate into "Always Correct", and there are growing numbers of prominent Marines who concur.

Keep an open mind.

Perhaps you don't know me, because you have no idea what I stand for or my views. Perhaps you are just another new guy that jumped in over his head? This is apologist thinking and very backwards. This reflects an individual that is interested in exonerating the desperation of this civilization by wanting the blame they are erronously accusing us of.

Does America practice in religious persecution?
Does America subjugate their women?
Does America rule people through a dominating religion?
Does America look at everyone that is not a Christian as an enemy of God worthy of death?
Does America teach it's young about the heroics of men that would target women and children for God?
Does America raise it's children to become "martyrs" so that they can one day maybe drop a few skyjacked airplanes on Middle Eastern soil?

You can't stop progress. The entire globe is moving forward except one region. Coincidentally, it is the same region of whose civilization practices what is in the above questions. It is the same civilization that cannot compete with the world on any front, because of their own governments. They have stagnated and their revenge is to blame everyone but themselves.

The status quo in America? A growing number of prominent Marines that concur with your distortion? Funny..I don't know any.

Let me ask you a couple questions.....in what way has America ever been a threat to the Middle East? In what way have we oppressed them into the life that has given birth to Islamic extremism?

Keeping an open mind doesn't mean walking around ignorant and undecisive. The extremists and the terrorists of this civilization do not care if you "understand" their issues or that you have an "open mind."
 
Last edited:

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
Does America practice in religious persecution?
Does America subjugate their women?
Does America rule people through a dominating religion?
Does America look at everyone that is not a Christian as an enemy of God worthy of death?
Does America teach it's young about the heroics of men that would target women and children for God?
Does America raise it's children to become "martyrs" so that they can one day maybe drop a few skyjacked airplanes on Middle Eastern soil?

Does America invade other countries on false pretenses?

Does America have pornography all over the place?

Does America kill thousands of innocent Muslems?

Does America have a 50% divorce rate?

Does America lock people away indefinitely without charges or proof?

Does America lock away a higher percentage of its citizens than almost every other nation on earth?

Does America have a sexually promiscuous culture that glorifies sex in the media?

Does America provide equal economic and political access to its minorities?

Does America invade Muslems countries to try to change their government and culture?

Does America have a materialistically driven culture where you status is based upon how much money you make?

I personally do not disagree with you that IMO the culture and politics of the US are superior to those in the M.E., or that the M.E. has major problems that contribute to Islamic radical fundamentalism. However, despite our cultural arrogance, IMO it does not justify the invasion of a sovereign nation that did not attack us, when it was not necessary for self defense, or attack its neighbor, nor conduct itself in such a way that there was an international consensus that military intervention was warranted. Nor is such an invasion likely to be successful in demonstrating the superiority of American culture, politics, and values.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Iriemon said:
Does America invade other countries on false pretenses?

Does America have pornography all over the place?

Does America kill thousands of innocent Muslems?

Does America have a 50% divorce rate?

Does America lock people away indefinitely without charges or proof?

Does America lock away a higher percentage of its citizens than almost every other nation on earth?

Does America have a sexually promiscuous culture that glorifies sex in the media?

Does America provide equal economic and political access to its minorities?

Does America invade Muslems countries to try to change their government and culture?

Does America have a materialistically driven culture where you status is based upon how much money you make?

I personally do not disagree with you that IMO the culture and politics of the US are superior to those in the M.E., or that the M.E. has major problems that contribute to Islamic radical fundamentalism. However, despite our cultural arrogance, IMO it does not justify the invasion of a sovereign nation that did not attack us, when it was not necessary for self defense, or attack its neighbor, nor conduct itself in such a way that there was an international consensus that military intervention was warranted. Nor is such an invasion likely to be successful in demonstrating the superiority of American culture, politics, and values.


None of your questions have anything to do with us being any kind of a threat to the Middle East. No innocent Muslims would have been killed if their civilization wasn't a threat to us and have been attacking us for decades.
 

Herophant

Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
No innocent Muslims would have been killed if their civilization wasn't a threat to us and have been attacking us for decades.

Yea sure, the middle east is a threat to the USA, which middle eastern countryes have invaded the USA in the last decades? Oh and which undemocratic goverments have stayed in power by US suport?

As you probaby are going to mention 9/11 how do the deaths there justify the killing of atleast 28000 civillians in iraq?
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

Probably more as the military convienently states:
“We don’t do body counts”
General Tommy Franks, US Central Command

Watch the lecture by the 2005 nobel price winner Harold Pinter
he should place things in perspective.

USA is a threat to countries which doesnt fit with American domination, not the other way around.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Herophant said:
Yea sure, the middle east is a threat to the USA, which middle eastern countryes have invaded the USA in the last decades? Oh and which undemocratic goverments have stayed in power by US suport?

As you probaby are going to mention 9/11 how do the deaths there justify the killing of atleast 28000 civillians in iraq?
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

Probably more as the military convienently states:
“We don’t do body counts”
General Tommy Franks, US Central Command

Watch the lecture by the 2005 nobel price winner Harold Pinter
he should place things in perspective.

USA is a threat to countries which doesnt fit with American domination, not the other way around.
Great. Another new guy that wants the wheel re-created.

It's not a matter of what country has attacked us. It's a matter of what civilization has sent "martyrs" to attack Americans and other civilians over the last thirty years.

9/11? Just a symptom. Bin Laden? Just a symptom. Saddam? Just a symptom. Khomeini? Just a symptom. Khudafi? Just a symptom. Al-Queda? I can name you fifty more. You don't know the threat, because you hang off of every word provided to you by this administration and every reporter with an opinion. Maybe you should educate yourself on the culture and the region that is determined to hate you - no matter what we do. There have been plenty of books and researches conducted looong before Bush entered the White House. He is presenting nothing new.

While you mire yourself in the mundane details of "Bush lies", "It's all for oil," "the body count," and "9/11 and what did Saddam have to do with it?"... the current administration is dealing with the bigger picture. Something other administrations knew about, but ignored. It obviously escapes you.
 
Last edited:

oldreliable67

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
4,641
Reaction score
1,102
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
THe only credible testimony in this issue comes from former Ambassador Joe Wilson.

Omigod! Surely you jest!?!? You just cannot, cannot be serious. Pat Roberts, Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence was joined by Senators Bond and Hatch in saying this about Wilson in the Committee's July 2004 "Report on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq""

"During Mr. Wilson's media blitz, he appeared on more than thirty television shows including entertainment venues. Time and again, Joe Wilson told anyone who would listen that the President had lied to the American people, that the Vice President had lied, and that he had "debunked" the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa. As discussed in the Niger section of the report, not only did he NOT "debunk" the claim, he actually gave some intelligence analysts even more reason to believe that it may be true. I believed very strongly that it was important for the Committee to conclude publicly that many of the statements made by Ambassador Wilson were not only incorrect, but had no basis in fact."


Source.

For more info on Wilson's perfidy, go http://www.nationalreview.com/may/may200407121105.asp.

Joseph Wilson and "credible testimony": what a contradiction!
 

Herophant

Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2005
Messages
192
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
Great. Another new guy that wants the wheel re-created.

It's not a matter of what country has attacked us. It's a matter of what civilization has sent "martyrs" to attack Americans and other civilians over the last thirty years.

9/11? Just a symptom. Bin Laden? Just a symptom. Saddam? Just a symptom. Khomeini? Just a symptom. Khudafi? Just a symptom. Al-Queda? I can name you fifty more. You don't know the threat, because you hang off of every word provided to you by this administration and every reporter with an opinion. Maybe you should educate yourself on the culture and the region that is determined to hate you - no matter what we do. There have been plenty of books and researches conducted looong before Bush entered the White House. He is presenting nothing new.

While you mire yourself in the mundane details of "Bush lies", "It's all for oil," "the body count," and "9/11 and what did Saddam have to do with it?"... the current administration is dealing with the bigger picture. Something other administrations knew about, but ignored. It obviously escapes you.


What you percive as a threat may be true, but its not an attack, its a response. Europa has meddeled in the middle east until after the secound world war. Now its place has been taken by the USA.

Fighting for democracy you say? Why did America help owertrow the democraticly elected goverment of iran?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

Why do you think USA supports a dictatorship in Sadi Arabia?

Why did america suport autoritarian goverments in afganistan and iraq?

Answer me how this fits with the picture of america fighting for freedom?

The fact is the US have wreced havock in middle eastern political life long before bin laden....
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
None of your questions have anything to do with us being any kind of a threat to the Middle East. No innocent Muslims would have been killed if their civilization wasn't a threat to us and have been attacking us for decades.

By attributing the guilt for all terrorist attacks upon the entire Islamic world, you justify any action against any Muslem as being the fault of their civilization. And therefore invading based on false pretext and killing innocent Muslems is OK because we are not a threat to them.

That sounds like a hard sell to the Islamic world to me Sarge.
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Herophant said:
What you percive as a threat may be true, but its not an attack, its a response. Europa has meddeled in the middle east until after the secound world war. Now its place has been taken by the USA.

Europe had created this mess by drawing lines where ever they pleased. America has done things to maintain stability, because the world's oil supply is located in their lands.

Herophant said:
Fighting for democracy you say? Why did America help owertrow the democraticly elected goverment of iran?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax

I don't know. Perhaps you should ask President Truman or President Eisenhower and their administrations. This was 1953. Shall we discuss Europe's history? It is no accident that the core countries of "Old Europe," France and Germany, oppose us. Between them, they have been responsible for every major European conflict since the Napoleonic era. Those who now accuse us of aggression bear the weight of hundreds of millions of corpses. We're all hypocrits. Jump off of the bandwagon and try not spotlight America.

Herophant said:
Why do you think USA supports a dictatorship in Sadi Arabia?

This is where you have it wrong. America does not "support" the dictatorship of Saudi Arabia. America maintains a presence to protect oil reserves. These would be the same oil reserves that much of the world receives oil...not just America. Our crime with the desperate fanaticism in the Middle East is that as long as the oil flowed, we have looked the other way while they oppressed and ruined their societies. Because of this oil, we are sworn to protect those bazaars of terror in which much of the world benefits while they cast hypocritical smug looks.


Herophant said:
Why did america suport autoritarian goverments in afganistan and iraq?

Because communism spreading into Afghanistan was not in our interests and Iran was a bigger threat than Iraq. Again...it's not about "support." America allied with Russia during WWII. Does this mean America "Supported" communism and what occurred behind the Berlin Wall? America allied with Saddam against Iran. Does this mean America "Supported" what he did to his people? America helped Afghanistan against the soviets. Does this mean America "supported" Bin Laden and the Tali-Ban? America is allies with France. Does this mean we "support" their treatment of their Muslims?

Answer me this. Have you ever had a friend who screwed over another person? Did you remain his friend and if you did...did you "support" what that friend did?

Nations do not have friends—at best, they have allies with a confluence of interests. We imagine a will to support our endeavors where there is only a pursuit of advantage. Such is government.

Herophant said:
Answer me how this fits with the picture of america fighting for freedom?

You obviously are not aware of the attrocities made by the soviets on Muslims in Afghanistan. You are obviously not aware of life inside Iraq before Saddam's regime was shattered. Never before has any Muslim nation been allowed to vote on the laws and government that will govern them. Focusing on matters like oil and American incentives and interests while completely dismissing any noble effort that accompanies it is irresponsible and only a recipe to appeasement. A nation of people shouldn't use mistakes and inevitable errors to exonerate them from doing the right thing.

You expect perfection. America stands for freedom, so this means that we must be perfect. It's hard to be perfect when one entity leads the way all over the world and it is easy to point out mistakes when the focus is on the sole janitor. It is also an impossible thing to declare all that is wrong with the world and begin a venture to destroy all dictators and oppressors. For one...we have allies that have interests in countries that are less than honorable. Besides looking after allies...America would be in a never ending war with no support from anyone else. When facing Saddam and declaring him a tyrant that needs to go, instead of Europe doing the right thing, they decided to do nothing. They use the excuse "Saddam's not the only dictator so why do it?" The truth is, if America declared war on all dictators around the world, Europe would find another excuse to do nothing. "Old Europe" has devoured American lives and consumed our wealth. The regressive societies of the Middle East are sick—and contagious— with hatred, jealousy, and congenital disrepair and Europe knows it. Whenever the United States is forced to engage cultures whose glory days are behind them, we win, but we often pay a bitter price. Answer me this...what does Europe stand for?

Herophant said:
The fact is the US have wreced havock in middle eastern political life long before bin laden....

The fact is that Europe wrecked havoc in the Middle East and America has been doing things ever since to maintain stability. Europe has wrecked havoc through colnialization in Vietnam, Somalia, Bosnia, and everywhere else around the globe where Americans have been sent to. In doing so, we have made mistakes along the way. But at the heart of this problem in the Middle East is not Europe or America. This civilization is determined to stagnate. Islamic extremism, Bin Ladden, Saddam, Khudafi, Khomeini, and others are symptoms of decay. This civilization is failing and they blame everyone but themselves. Israel is why they're societies are failing. America is why their civilization is failing. It's everyone else's fault they have not one world class university - Israel does. It's everyone else's fault that there is no democracy in the Muslim world - Israel does. It's everyone else's fault that there is no industry or competitive front on any level with the world. - Israel does. Jealousy is very much a natural occurence in human nature. When it affects an entire civilization, of whose narcotic of choice is blame, it is tragic.
 
Last edited:

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Iriemon said:
By attributing the guilt for all terrorist attacks upon the entire Islamic world, you justify any action against any Muslem as being the fault of their civilization. And therefore invading based on false pretext and killing innocent Muslems is OK because we are not a threat to them.

That sounds like a hard sell to the Islamic world to me Sarge.


Wow. Let's do it...AGAIN..shall we?

The Islamic world is not the problem. We are not at war with Islam. Where have you ever heard this? The civilization in the Middle East is the problem. The Islam practiced in the Middle East as prescribed by Arab Mullahs is a blasphemy to Islam. Islam preaches equality among women and children. Muhammed preached against the very actions that the extremists in the Middle East cling to. Skyjacking, torture, beheadings and oppression is not the way of Muhammed. Islam is not hateful in it's essence. Don't believe me? Find a Muslim and ask him if he believes in the things that his Islam's extremists believe in. After he tells you "no,"..reflect upon the millions of Muslims in the Middle East that do and cheer for thei "martyrs."

Do you see the difference here? See how I can see the issues because I do not lump all of Islam and all of the Muslim world into one basket? This is what you do. This is how you project confusion. The world seems less ignorant than you, because the world sees what is in front of their face. The world sees it in France, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Indonesia, Spain, Germany, Russia, China. I guess they all have it wrong too. maybe a few bombs going off in your American neighborhood by men who come from all over the Middle East will help you see it too.

Where you are having difficulty is that you do not agree with invading Iraq, so you are allowing every single mundane detail obstruct your vision. It would appear that what the extremists are selling wasn't a hard sell to you.
 
Last edited:

Billo_Really

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by GySgt:
Wow. Let's do it...AGAIN..shall we?

The Islamic world is not the problem. We are not at war with Islam. Where have you ever heard this? The civilization in the Middle East is the problem. The Islam practiced in the Middle East as prescribed by Arab Mullahs is a blasphemy to Islam. Islam preaches equality among women and children. Muhammed preached against the very actions that the extremists in the Middle East cling to. Skyjacking, torture, beheadings and oppression is not the way of Muhammed. Islam is not hateful in it's essence. Don't believe me? Find a Muslim and ask him if he believes in the things that his Islam's extremists believe in. After he tells you "no,"..reflect upon the millions of Muslims in the Middle East that do and cheer for thei "martyrs."

Do you see the difference here? See how I can see the issues because I do not lump all of Islam and all of the Muslim world into one basket? This is what you do. This is how you project confusion. The world seems less ignorant than you, because the world sees what is in front of their face. The world sees it in France, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Indonesia, Spain, Germany, Russia, China. I guess they all have it wrong too. maybe a few bombs going off in your American neighborhood by men who come from all over the Middle East will help you see it too.

Where you are having difficulty is that you do not agree with invading Iraq, so you are allowing every single mundane detail obstruct your vision. It would appear that what the extremists are selling wasn't a hard sell to you.
Do you get tired of repeating yourself?
 

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Billo_Really said:
Do you get tired of repeating yourself?


This is a fantastic and insightful question, because this is what I think as I type anymore. The answer......hell...yes.

I hate that I always have to entertain a derailment in the conversation because the same individuals will say something that is not the case just to derail the conversation.:doh
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
Wow. Let's do it...AGAIN..shall we?

The Islamic world is not the problem. We are not at war with Islam. Where have you ever heard this? The civilization in the Middle East is the problem.

The Islam practiced in the Middle East as prescribed by Arab Mullahs is a blasphemy to Islam.

From what I understand, there are many versions of Islam, just as Christianity.

Do you see the difference here? See how I can see the issues because I do not lump all of Islam and all of the Muslim world into one basket? This is what you do. This is how you project confusion.

You confused me when you talked about their civilization. But OK, you are still doing the same thing -- By attributing the guilt for all terrorist attacks upon the entire Islamic civilization, you justify any action against any Muslem as being the fault of their civilization. And therefore invading based on false pretext and killing innocent Muslems is OK because we are not a threat to them.

The world seems less ignorant than you, because the world sees what is in front of their face. The world sees it in France, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Indonesia, Spain, Germany, Russia, China. I guess they all have it wrong too. maybe a few bombs going off in your American neighborhood by men who come from all over the Middle East will help you see it too.

I must be ignorant, I haven't heard for the call to the crusades except from our own Government and those who support it.

Where you are having difficulty is that you do not agree with invading Iraq, so you are allowing every single mundane detail obstruct your vision. It would appear that what the extremists are selling wasn't a hard sell to you.

Where we disagree is that that by lopping a small group of radicals that don't even control a country as the basis for a condemnation for an entire civilization, you are justifying acts that IMO are otherwise unjustifiable, thereby (IMO) encouraging more to join or sympathize with that small group of radicals. You're theory because of self-fulfilling justification. We wrongly invade a country and they fight back, and for you there's more proof of their failed civilization. I think it is an over-simplification to condemn an entire civilization for the acts of a few.

Having said that, I agree with you that about problems with ME radicalism and its sources. I agree we should support democracies, human rights, and economic freedom and movements in the ME. IMO, we are not supporting a respect for human rights when our government locks people away and tortures them without providing them basic human rights. IMO, we are not going to do these things by turning a blind eye to the worst governments because we are too terrified we might not have enough gas for our SUVs. IMO, we are not going to successfully encourage democratic governments but sending the crusaders in and forceably changing the government by occupation. To the contrary, doing that IMO makes many in the civilization even madder at us, with good reason to suspect our motives, and our integrity, and provides those who oppose us good arguments to attack us, moves more people to embrace the very radicalism we are trying to fight.

Your theory is that the Iraqis will put aside centuries of ethnic disputes and embrace our government, and be a beacon of change in the ME. Seems pretty unlikely to me. More likely is that it is backfire, and make more muslems resentfule at western intervention by the crusaders. It sure hasn't worked as promised so far. You seem to recognize it too, because you acknowledge it will take generations. Somehow I just don't see how spending generations killing muslems in Iraq is going to discourage those who oppose us and help the liberal elements we want to encourage.
 
Last edited:

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Iriemon said:
From what I understand, there are many versions of Islam, just as Christianity.

I have stated as much. Shall we re-invent this wheel as well?


Iriemon said:
I must be ignorant, I haven't heard for the call to the crusades except from our own Government and those who support it.

Oh really? You haven't heard that you are an infidel worthy of death by this civilization's extremists? You've heard instead that we are off to slaughter Muslims for the grace of God?

Yes...you are ignorant or playing dumb.


Iriemon said:
Where we disagree is that that by lopping a small group of radicals that don't even control a country as the basis for a condemnation for an entire civilization, you are justifying acts that IMO are otherwise unjustifiable, thereby (IMO) encouraging more to join or sympathize with that small group of radicals. You're theory because of self-fulfilling justification. We wrongly invade a country and they fight back, and for you there's more proof of their failed civilization. I think it is an over-simplification to condemn an entire civilization for the acts of a few.

Having said that, I agree with you that problems with ME radicalism and its sources. I agree we should support democracies, human rights, and economic freedom and movements the favor that in the ME. IMO, we are not supporting a respect for human rights when our government locks people away and tortures them without providing them basic human rights. IMO, we are not going to successfully encourage democratic governments but sending the crusaders in and forceably changing the government by occupation. IMO, we are not going to do these things by turning a blind eye to the worst governments because we are too terrified we might not have enough gas for our SUVs.

What you believe and what is real are two different things. Study the region for yourself.

Supporting democracies, human rights, and econimic freedom and movements is not an option without our involvement. Saddam was never going to allow this in Iraq. Iran can change on their own and so can Syria. With the impossible being done (Saddam's Iraq becoming a democracy), they are that much encouraged to do so. sending the "crusaders" in is exactly whatthis civilization has demanded. We can no longer wait for them to do it for themselves. Airplanes are not the weapon of choice. I guarantee that if an extremists group from the Middle East got a hold of a nuclear bomb, you would see it in America. If Iran had nuclear power, we could have easily seen a mushroom cloud in New York vice a couple airplanes. Shall we continue to wait for this or force an inevitable change. Our government has the obligation to protect our soil. Waiting as we have for two decades endangered us.

Saudi Arabia will change on its own as the time presents itself. It's not a matter of American oil. The world gets oil from Saudi. There is more to reality than good and evil...right and wrong....and black and white. This will take generations. What we don't do today...we may wind up doing in a decade.
 

Iriemon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
19,405
Reaction score
2,187
Location
Miami
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
GySgt said:
I have stated as much. Shall we re-invent this wheel as well?

Sorry, I was just agreeing with you.

Oh really? You haven't heard that you are an infidel worthy of death by this civilization's extremists? You've heard instead that we are off to slaughter Muslims for the grace of God? Yes...you are ignorant or playing dumb.

Yes. So what? There are extremists in every culture, including ours. The goal is not to encourage more of them.

What you believe and what is real are two different things. Study the region for yourself.

That is a good idea. Because the neocon views like you espouse has been proven so wrong so many times that I know I can't rely on that.

Supporting democracies, human rights, and econimic freedom and movements is not an option without our involvement. Saddam was never going to allow this in Iraq.

I can see why, based on our experiences there. But that is their business. Unless Iraq represented a legitimate threat to us so that we were acting in legitimate self-defense, we had no right to walk in and dictate to the Iraqi people what kind of government they should have.

What basis does a nation have to unilaterally invade another just because they don't like their form of government? That was the view espoused by Hitler in '38 and '39.

Iran can change on their own and so can Syria. With the impossible being done (Saddam's Iraq becoming a democracy), they are that much encouraged to do so. Sending the "crusaders" in is exactly whatthis civilization has demanded.

Any country can change. Look at Eastern Europe, Russia, Iran.

[/quote]=We can no longer wait for them to do it for themselves. Airplanes are not the weapon of choice. I guarantee that if an extremists group from the Middle East got a hold of a nuclear bomb, you would see it in America. If Iran had nuclear power, we could have easily seen a mushroom cloud in New York vice a couple airplanes. Shall we continue to wait for this or force an inevitable change. Our government has the obligation to protect our soil. Waiting as we have for two decades endangered us. [/QUOTE]

Again, you think going into one country -- and one that was probably the most secular at that -- based on false pretenses and killing muslems daily is going to improve our odds. I don't see it. I see us effectively creating and training more terrorists. The men whose wives, sons, mothers, dads or brothers killed by our erroneous war may not strike us this year, or next or in 10 years, but they will be the ones carrying that nuclear bomb.

Saudi Arabia will change on its own as the time presents itself. It's not a matter of American oil. The world gets oil from Saudi. There is more to reality than good and evil...right and wrong....and black and white. This will take generations. What we don't do today...we may wind up doing in a decade.

They are the worst. The Wahhabism their government supports is the most radical and dangerous. Their citizens attacked us on 9/11. And you want to give them a bye? That seems totally inconsistent for the justification you are arguing for Iraq. Why shouldn't we be invading Saudi Arabia and setting up a democracy there?
 

Billo_Really

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally Posted by GySgt
This is a fantastic and insightful question, because this is what I think as I type anymore. The answer......hell...yes.

I hate that I always have to entertain a derailment in the conversation because the same individuals will say something that is not the case just to derail the conversation
Don't you think that if they (or I) post reasons for thinking what they (or I) think, that it is really not a derailment? You will have to pardon me if I jumped into the middle of something, I haven't had time to read the previous posts. So, at the moment, I am just speaking in general terms while trying not to be too specific. I will say, I do know the point of your angst. Of which, I am sure I have contributed too.
 

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
GySgt said:
Airplanes are not the weapon of choice. I guarantee that if an extremists group from the Middle East got a hold of a nuclear bomb, you would see it in America. If Iran had nuclear power, we could have easily seen a mushroom cloud in New York vice a couple airplanes.
Akyron said it in less words. He's still in the lead.

Saudi Arabia will change on its own as the time presents itself. It's not a matter of American oil. The world gets oil from Saudi. There is more to reality than good and evil...right and wrong....and black and white. This will take generations. What we don't do today...we may wind up doing in a decade.

Hey, I say generations, you say maybe our grandchildren will see it. Don't be stealing my thunder. You seen how I treat Billo. You want some of that?
 

Attachments

  • My guys 011.JPG
    My guys 011.JPG
    53.6 KB · Views: 4

MSgt

Stabler Genius
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
26,272
Reaction score
11,626
Location
Highlands Ranch, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Iriemon said:
Yes. So what? There are extremists in every culture, including ours. The goal is not to encourage more of them.

This is obtuse and smacks of eagerness to ignore the problem away. Christian, Hindu and Jewish civilizations do not raise their children to hate an imagined enemy. They do not teach their children that non-believers or "infidels" are enemies of God. They do not cheer by the millions when a Christian, Jewish, or Hindu "martyr" murders for their Gods. The goal is to deal with them and I believe the professionals that have spent years and years and years studying said problem might know better than you.

Iriemon said:
I can see why, based on our experiences there. But that is their business. Unless Iraq represented a legitimate threat to us so that we were acting in legitimate self-defense, we had no right to walk in and dictate to the Iraqi people what kind of government they should have.

This is where you fail yourself. As long as this civilization breeds hate and venom towards our world for absolutely no reason, their business is our business. The Saudi Government, the Syrian Government, the Iraqi Government, the Iranian Government, and Palistinian Government have never attacked us. Until they do and represent a "legitimate" threat, are we to do nothing as their millions of terror cheerleaders cheer for their legion of murderers and the violence continues to escelade into the nuclear age? Of course if we did, then it would be all about how our government is inept and did nothing to prevent it...right?


Iriemon said:
What basis does a nation have to unilaterally invade another just because they don't like their form of government? That was the view espoused by Hitler in '38 and '39.

Hitler wanted to rule, reign, conquer, and destroy anyone not in his envisioned perfect. Our world is full of encouraged prosperity on ebvery level and in every religion and in every race. We want this civilization to prosper under their own governments and stop using us as a scapegoat for their own failures, because their failures to roll up their sleeves is killing our people. Big difference.

As far as what basis...what basis does a person have to interfere in something that is not his business and save someone in need? What you are refusing to see is that there was more than a few reasons for Iraq. Helping oppressed and abused people was among them.


Iriemon said:
Any country can change. Look at Eastern Europe, Russia, Iran.

More obtuseness. Eastern Europe (which our government, along with European allies, screwed over after WWII through appeasement of a forcasted future enemy) wasn't breeding a civilization of violent zealots. Russia wasn't breeding a civilization of violent zealots. Iran isn't ruled by a tyrant and the people are allowed a voice, despite the oppression that exists. Iraq could not change and would not have. Besides this, we no longer are afforded the time to wait for them to do for themselves.

Iriemon said:
Again, you think going into one country -- and one that was probably the most secular at that -- based on false pretenses and killing muslems daily is going to improve our odds. I don't see it. I see us effectively creating and training more terrorists. The men whose wives, sons, mothers, dads or brothers killed by our erroneous war may not strike us this year, or next or in 10 years, but they will be the ones carrying that nuclear bomb.

It's not a matter of what "I" think. This is also where you fail yourself. Do you think you know better than men that have been there? Men that have visited numerous Muslim countries and have experienced the pulse? Men who have spent a wealth of time studying and writing books and conducting surveys and future planners that have been supported by social reformacists? Study the region. Study the past. Study the social issues within this civilization. Study the turmoil within Islam. That guy you watch on TV that feeds you every horror story he can dig up for the sake of viewers that tune in know as much about the Middle East as you do. The truth is that he doesn't care and you think he does. Sitting in front of a television and forming an opinion is wreckless and ignorant. Study the region. You will start to understand. She may not approve of how we got ourselves into Iraq, but even "multimedia" understands the grander issues involved, because she has studied.

It doesn't matter what we do or what you see (like that matters). It doesn't matter if Iraq didn't happen. It doesn't matter if we instead invaded Saudi or Iran or Syria. Get it through your head...they are determined to hate you and kill you. Doing nothing for fear of "antagonizing" them is stupid. The President of Indonesia learned that from the Bali bombings. What we don't do today, we will inevitably do in the future. North Korea is not determined to kill you. China is not determined to kill you. The U.S.S.R. was not determined to kill you. Germany was not determined to kill you. The civilization in the Middle East is a threat to you whether you want to see it or not. You represent everything their God condemns and the failures in the Middle East are using you as salvation. They have nothing left. They are desperate and they are lashing out.


Iriemon said:
They are the worst. The Wahhabism their government supports is the most radical and dangerous. Their citizens attacked us on 9/11. And you want to give them a bye? That seems totally inconsistent for the justification you are arguing for Iraq. Why shouldn't we be invading Saudi Arabia and setting up a democracy there?

The true lords of terror is the "House of Saud." They are the ones that created all of this mess so many years ago and they are the ones that dictate this perverted form of Islam throughout this civilization. They are also the one's that are running around in their own country arresting up their own extremists now. I call it poetic justice. They've done this out of greed and for control.

Don't you have intelligence? Can't you figure this all out for yourself? Despite sometimes obvious evidence direct responsibility for the numerous terrorist attacks on Muslim governments is not always a sure thing. What they are responsible for is the oppression and continued use of the West for their own selfish agendas which create the "martyr." What we are sure is that Islamic extremism on a grand scale comes form a single civilization in the most darkest region on Earth. (Even Africa exports.) Iraq was secular to a dictator and the people that were abused would have no problem with the overthrow. Further, the People of the Middle East had no interest in Saddam's Iraq or what happened to it. Saudi Arabia is the birth place of Islam. Attacking Saudi Arabia would be seen as a direct assault against Islam and it would bring the world down on top of us. The insurgency into Iraq would be nothing in comparison (and you would just be bitching about that instead of Iraq). Aside from the religious ramifications....the world has a lot of economy invested in the stability of oil flow from the established elite. This is why we are sworn to "protect" these bastards.

So..it is not about "me" giving them a bye. It's about dealing with them on a different level. The option of "war" is not feasable. The same with Iran. I got to say..you would completely drown in a tactical think tank community.
 

Busta

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 18, 2005
Messages
1,135
Reaction score
0
Location
From somewhere, deep below the Earth...
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Billo_Really said:
If you expect to talk your way out of this one, conservative spin doctors, then you better BRING IT!

Exploiting Tragedy by Craig B. Hulet
September 2001 - February 2002

September 11, 2001.................

Well of-coarse Bush lied, that's what politicians do.

Just refrain from believing that Kerry, Hillery or anyone ells would have don anything remotely different. To assume such would be to follow along with the ongoing divide-and-conquer social manipulation.

Middle and Far East wars were, and are, going to happen no matter who you vote for. Just wate for the up comming nuclear exchange.

NON of this is news.

ALL politicians are corrupt. ALL politicians lie.

Republicrats and Demacins......the only difference is how the news is reported.... and nothing ells.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,352
Reaction score
2,436
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
teacher said:
Akyron said it in less words. He's still in the lead.



Hey, I say generations, you say maybe our grandchildren will see it. Don't be stealing my thunder. You seen how I treat Billo. You want some of that?


By my calculations as well this will take 50-90 years to play out. It will be key to establish math/science/literature as the education of choice instead of the current Terrorists Manufacturing Plants

madp2.jpg
 

Billo_Really

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally Posted by Busta:
Just refrain from believing that Kerry, Hillery or anyone ells would have don anything remotely different. To assume such would be to follow along with the ongoing divide-and-conquer social manipulation.
Quite the contrary, I think you make a very good point. I am on record for saying that if Kerry would have won, we would be in exactly the same place we are now. No difference. Clinton carried through every policy of Reagen and Carter before him. The faces might change, but the policies are all the same.
 
Top Bottom