• 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.

So I'm a bit frustrated

1

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
We're in Iraq, and there is no sign that it had any real link to terrorism against the US (mindful, its great to have saddam gone, but I don't believe thats the true motive here, I actually have no idea why we are in Iraq) so I sit here and stratch my head saying


If we were true to the war, wouldn't we invade Saudi Arabia or Pakistan?

These are the two biggest factors in the spread, funding, and all general growth of terrorists. So why aren't we doing more with these two countrys?
 
^Pakistan is cooperating and so is Saudi Arabia...technically. They give us terrorists every once and a while (I know, generalization) and that makes us forget about them.
 
As much as I've read, heard, and had a chance to see on video documentarys.

Saudi Arabia is the biggest money provider to terrorism, and Pakistan is the biggest aid in training and arming these guys. Many a nuclear Paki scientist has been arrested for ties to Al quadea. Just recently there was one in the news.

Lets not forget many terrorists are of Saudi decent, and there terrorist influence goes all the way up to chechnya and down to the phillipines.
 
^I know where you are coming from, but I am stating what people in the administration has said, and let's face it, they are the ones who ultimately matter in making decisions on who to attack, not us or documentaries. In their eyes, they are supporting our war on terror, so thus, we don't have to be enemies, etc.
 
the elected officals only reflect what people understand, and this says it best

"The greatest arguement against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter"-Winston Churchill

the idea of any democracy based country is that the people can ultimately hold you accountable for what you do. We don't seem to stress that enough.
 

This is a country that gave refuge to terrorist. They also gave them the ability to train and helped in there funding. Saddam himself offered a reward to families of terrorist who perform suicide bombings. No this is not the only terrorist footing. But we can't fight a war on 5-6 different fronts. This PC war is stilll in progress, and will be so for a little while longer is my bet.
 
Invading Iraq was, in my opinion, a stupid move... instead we should have invaded some place when needed more help, Sudan for example.

Reason why we don't invade Saudi Arabia? Because they have their hands in our pockets. We couldn't "live" to be without them, they give us oil, we give them safe haven.
There was this guy on The Daily Show recently, who wrote a book dealing with why Saudi Arabia is our biggest threat and why we should be a stop to them. Though the Daily Show is really funny and is mixed with comedy, it still has news and GREAT interviews... Go here http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_daily_show/videos/celebrity_interviews/index.jhtml?start=17 Watch the interview of Gerald Posner, the author of the book "The Secret of the Kingdom". After that, make sure you go back to the first page and watch some more. One they've got an interview with a really smart man named Kenneth Timmerman, author of "Countdown to Nuclear Crisis" (with Iran).
Great interviews, loads of information, great comedy.. can't beat that!
 
I already have a similar book, actually. Thats why I'm so amazed we're not pressuring Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Infact, i think invading pakistan would have been pretty swift.
 
There is an interesting book about the threat of Iran that is just great...it was on the Daily Show, sounded interesting, and it was.
 

Keep in mind he also said:
"Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others that have been tried"


It's not that we the people are stupid, or sheeple or what-have-you, it's just that we're busy and have lives to lead. We don't have sixteen hours a day to devote to learing what the hell is going in Pakistan's parliment or a Saudi mosque.
The term for this very real Achilles heel of democracies everywhere is called Rational Ignorance.
 
ok let me spell it out for u people the us is playing the world like a game its all ways some one eles fault or some ones problem. the war on tarrors good but is the us's heart realy into it? i mean come on Binladen got away. the us has too much power and no one to keep them in line. in the 1950s-the early 90s the ussr was the coner balance of power but now no ones stoping bush from his sick goals of trying to find personal enemys and useing the us army to do it!
 


Spell Check works wonders.


No one to keep us in line? I believe you're mistaken my friend, there's a reason why we don't just invade China, or Iran. They might not have the "economic headlock" at their disposal, but they've got something we cannot spread... fear. China has the biggest army in the world, this year China has doubled its military spending.
I don't think comparing the USSR to modern day America is such a wise choice. But they do have one thing in common, they'll both crumble.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…