- Joined
- Apr 20, 2005
- Messages
- 30,545
- Reaction score
- 14,776
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
This talking point is as fallacious as it is ubiquitous.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).
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Great. Another new guy that wants the wheel re-created.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.
THe only credible testimony in this issue comes from former Ambassador Joe Wilson.
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.
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.
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.
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
Herophant said:Why do you think USA supports a dictatorship in Sadi Arabia?
Herophant said:Why did america suport autoritarian goverments in afganistan and iraq?
Herophant said:Answer me how this fits with the picture of america fighting for freedom?
Herophant said:The fact is the US have wreced havock in middle eastern political life long before bin laden....
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.
Do you get tired of repeating yourself?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.
Billo_Really said:Do you get tired of repeating yourself?
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.
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.
Iriemon said:From what I understand, there are many versions of Islam, just as Christianity.
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.
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.
GySgt said:I have stated as much. Shall we re-invent this wheel as well?
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.
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.
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.
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.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
Akyron said it in less words. He's still in the lead.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.
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?
Iriemon said:Yes. So what? There are extremists in every culture, including ours. The goal is not to encourage more of them.
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.
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.
Iriemon said:Any country can change. Look at Eastern Europe, Russia, Iran.
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.
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?
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.................
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
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.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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?