Hate to say I told ya so...

Originally posted by wecanhaveoursay
How about the liberation of a country from a insane dictator that killed thousands of its people

My only problem with that is i dont think Saddam was insane. Just evil. I know ive used similiar language in the past but i realized that thats a liberal mindset. a belief that there is no evil therefore anyone who does something like that must be insane. But there is evil. We need to remember.
 
Originally posted by Avatar4321
My only problem with that is i dont think Saddam was insane. Just evil. I know ive used similiar language in the past but i realized that thats a liberal mindset. a belief that there is no evil therefore anyone who does something like that must be insane. But there is evil. We need to remember.

Its not our place, never has been, despite the fact that people think might makes right, to determine who gets to rule a country except our own.
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Its not our place, never has been, despite the fact that people think might makes right, to determine who gets to rule a country except our own.

So you think we were arong to take Hitler out of power in Germany?
 
Originally posted by wecanhaveoursay
no good reason
How about the liberation of a country from a insane dictator that killed thousands of its people

also

you liberals call this a war
what like 3000 people have died
WW2 had casualties over 10 million

there is no way that iraq is not better off now than it was before we came to there aid

Actually 3000 civilian casualties are estimated in Afghnistan, which was a just and uncompleted military action. Iraq posed no imminent danger to the US, or anyone else. With the time and forces wasted there, Afghanistan could've been scraped out like a gourd with all of the Taliban and Al Qaeda forces captured and tried, or killed in fighting.

But no...Dubbyuh had a chubby for Saddam. As a result, we have an estimated 9000 to 12000 civilian causualties in Iraq, directly related to American military action. There are no reliable estimates as to Iraqi military casualties. This in war of aggression built upon a foundation of lies.

As for whether or not Iraqis are better off now...Well, that remains to be seen.
 
Originally posted by Avatar4321
So you think we were arong to take Hitler out of power in Germany?

Hitler started wars of aggression and conquest throughout Europe. Saddam tried and was slapped down by Bush the Elder and the rest of the world. He was a threat to no one but his own people.
 
Originally posted by Avatar4321
So you think we were arong to take Hitler out of power in Germany?

Hitler was in the middle of sweeping europe under his thumb. hussein was not.

apples and oranges ring a bell?
 
Originally posted by freeandfun1
The point is that Iraq is not a "separate" war. It is a "battle" in the War on Terrorism. Technically, it is a war. Just as during WWII you had the "war" in the Pacific and the "war" in Europe. But combined, they were just part of all the "wars" (the wars in the Pacific, in Indo China, Europe, North Africa, Russia, China, etc.)that made up WWII.

<blockquote>Main Entry: 1war

Pronunciation: 'wor
Function: noun

Usage: often attributive

Etymology: Middle English werre, from Old North French, of Germanic origin; akin to Old High German werra strife; akin to Old High German werran to confuse

1 a (1) : a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations (2) : a period of such armed conflict </blockquote> Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.

Given that definition, we are not engaged in any sort of "war" on terrorism. Police actions resulting in the rooting out and rolling up terrorist operations...Yes. War...No. There is, therefore, no justification for the USA PATRIOT Act, nor for the Administration's clamoring for more power to infringe upon the rights of American citizens, or anyone else for that matter. To state that there is a "war" on terrorism with the aim of defeating terrorism condemns us to an indefinite and interminable state of war, as terrorism will be with us so long as the root causes of terrrorism are not addressed in a rational manner.
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Its not our place, never has been, despite the fact that people think might makes right, to determine who gets to rule a country except our own.

Yet unchecked tyranny in OTHER COUNTRIES, breeds harm for us. This is a new age, with new weaponry. That old isolationism is no good anymore. Tyrants will always come after freedom, because the sight and knowledge of freedom ALWAYS makes their people harder to control. The people begin to want the types of freedoms they see elsewhere. It's a basic good and evil scenario.
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
Hitler was in the middle of sweeping europe under his thumb. hussein was not.

apples and oranges ring a bell?

DOes kuwait ring a bell?
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
maybe more like orange juice and apple juice then. its different but still juice.

It's nearly the same and has nothing to do with fruit!:)
 
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
thats not an admission theres a link, thats a rebuttal to the statement from avatar that we've severed those links when in fact, we've only increased terrorism in the country.

But in saying we HAVEN'T severed those links, you're admitting they exist.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top