Saddam Caught?

[Moi]

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
No one doubted that Saddam was bad. What was debated was whether the end justifies the means. That's one thing that I cannot stand people accuse people on the other side of the fence of. No disrespect to yourself of course.

Perhaps it wasn't you, but there have been several posts from people claiming that the Iraqi's did not want, and in fact repelled, help from the US.

I agree with countrygal, it's will be interesting to see if the majority of those expressing anti-american sentiments do so as Saddam's hold on their lives dissipates.

 

[lilcountriegal]

No one doubted that Saddam was bad.

I stated in my post that others seemed to believe Iraqis did not want us in their country for any reason what-so-ever. I never stated in my post that anyone "doubted Saddam was bad". That is something everyone was in general agreement of (even those on the "other side" seemed to think some of the bad things he did were inflated, generally people were in agreement that he needed removed).

Generally there is a difference between how bad Saddam is and if the Iraqis wanted us in their country. I pointed out the negative opinions on the latter.

No disrespect to yourself, of course.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by lilcountriegal
Funny thing is, in two pages of posts on this topic alone I havent seen any of the doubters posting. Must not having anything to say.

I'm hearing that the people of Baghdad and Iraq in general were dancing in the streets upon the news of Saddams capture. So much for the other side's views that the Iraqis didnt want us in their country... hmmm.

Because they are the worst kinds of pond scum in the country. They live here and live off the freedoms that our military has provided them, only to speak out like a bunch of bitches whenever they can. When positive data comes up they are back in the 5th grade playing hide n seek. It makes me sick to see such actions out of US citizens. Oh well, I didn't expect some of them to have a backbone and speak out for both sides. Their agendas are pathetic and they are losers.

I'll exclude DK from this as he was one of the first to make an appearance. Isaac doesn't live in the US, and I think I've read enough of his posts to know he thinks Saddam being captured is a good thing. The rest are just a bunch of worms.

 

[Dan]

Sorry, this is way off-topic, but...

I agree with countrygal,

I have been trying to figure out her name since she started posting here! I feel dumb now, but I kept reading it as Lil Count Riegal, and I couldn't figure out what a Riegal was. Thanks for clearing this one up for me, Moi!

As for the detractors, yeah, I was one of them. Up until probably a month or so ago, I was pretty much convinced that the Iraqis didn't want us there and that we weren't going to accomplish much. I know I'll get blasted for turning coat so quickly, but yeah, I'm pretty much seeing that we did good. I have seen people today saying stuff about how Saddam wasn't responsible for 9/11, and I realize how idiotic they sound, as if that's the only bad thing he's ever done in his life. I still don't know about the whole 'war on terrorism' thing, not that it's not a good idea in theory, but I still think fighting a war on terrorism is just going to produce more terrorists. But, thank God Saddam's caught, and (no sarcasm at all here, I promise) I'm really proud to be an American right now.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Dan
As for the detractors, yeah, I was one of them.

Dan, I hope you don't feel you were a part of my tirade, because you weren't.

 

[Dan]

Oh, I know, I just wanted to clear up that, yeah, I did say some stuff in the past that I'm taking back now.

 

[acludem]

Though I opposed this war, I am glad that Saddam was captured. I hope that the Iraqi people will be allowed to try him. He should be tried either in Iraq by Iraqis or in the international court. The U.S. should not hijack the process.

Also, I think Saddam's capture will have little effect either on the war or on Bush's continual erosion of our relations with Europe. Those people who continue to attack our troops do so because they hate America, many of these people hated Saddam too. Our allies will continue to be angry with us if we continue to alienate them. I can only hope this capture can speed up the process so that we can bring our troops home.

I truly hope Saddam's capture can bring peace of mind to Iraqis who were worried about him coming back into power. This should be regarded primarily as a victory for the Iraqi people, not for the U.S., or anyone else. This victory, this day, belong to the people of Iraq. Those Saddam held in terror for his long reign can rejoice in the knowledge that he will be brought to justice for his crimes. I hope Saddam gets a fair, public trial, and a just punishment, whatever a jury of his peers decides is appropriate.

 

[jon_forward]

Hey Dan, does that mean G.W gets another vote? not to change subject but I hear on the news that democratic hopefuls are glad we got the bastard , as americans, but stated we went about it the wrong way. I wish I could see into the future and make my decisions now based on how things played out. mr.wizard, mr.wizard bring me home....

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Dan
Sorry, this is way off-topic, but...



I have been trying to figure out her name since she started posting here! I feel dumb now, but I kept reading it as Lil Count Riegal, and I couldn't figure out what a Riegal was. Thanks for clearing this one up for me, Moi! Don't feel too bad, I just figured out that GOP Jeff is Grand Ole Party Jeff, Dah!

Originally posted by Dan

As for the detractors, yeah, I was one of them. Up until probably a month or so ago, I was pretty much convinced that the Iraqis didn't want us there and that we weren't going to accomplish much. I know I'll get blasted for turning coat so quickly, but yeah, I'm pretty much seeing that we did good. I have seen people today saying stuff about how Saddam wasn't responsible for 9/11, and I realize how idiotic they sound, as if that's the only bad thing he's ever done in his life. I still don't know about the whole 'war on terrorism' thing, not that it's not a good idea in theory, but I still think fighting a war on terrorism is just going to produce more terrorists. But, thank God Saddam's caught, and (no sarcasm at all here, I promise) I'm really proud to be an American right now.

No shame in learning. I have to say that my opinions change over time (although I am fiercely conservative and hawkish throughout) but that's why a board like this is cool. If someone can present facts in such a way as to not attack personally, we can learn from each other.

 

[Dan]

Hey Dan, does that mean G.W gets another vote?

Well, in my opinion, my vote's not gonna matter too much, I think this sealed the deal for Bush, the next election's his, unless he really screws up bad in the next year.

That said, I don't follow politics all that closely, so I don't know whether I'm going to vote or not.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Dan
Well, in my opinion, my vote's not gonna matter too much, I think this sealed the deal for Bush, the next election's his, unless he really screws up bad in the next year.

That said, I don't follow politics all that closely, so I don't know whether I'm going to vote or not.

Now for my soapbox: people have fought and died for the priviledge of voting and you aren't going to vote?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

 

[jila]

I am please that this monster was caught. Now I wish to see the people of Iraq exacute him in public . I hope his head is severed from his body and the body burned so he can never be buried facing Mecca and then he will never get to his precious Alla.

 

[jon_forward]

you gotta vote, one of the God given rights of being an American..thats why we have our people out kicking the asses of bad guys, hell most folks dont even understand to concept of voting for their leaders let alone do it! take some buds, cut class, vote and then party your ass off the rest of the day as a reward to yourself for voting, it only once every 4 years....just DO it!!!

 

[Isaac Brock]

Originally posted by Moi
Now for my soapbox: people have fought and died for the priviledge of voting and you aren't going to vote?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

She has an excellent point. If you have freedom, i think it is criminal and irresponsible not to exercise it. It is that freedom in which allows debates like this to happen. It doesn't matter what side of the political spectrum you are at, voting is your number one democratic right and duty.

 

[Isaac Brock]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Because they are the worst kinds of pond scum in the country. They live here and live off the freedoms that our military has provided them, only to speak out like a bunch of bitches whenever they can. When positive data comes up they are back in the 5th grade playing hide n seek. It makes me sick to see such actions out of US citizens. Oh well, I didn't expect some of them to have a backbone and speak out for both sides. Their agendas are pathetic and they are losers.

I'll exclude DK from this as he was one of the first to make an appearance. Isaac doesn't live in the US, and I think I've read enough of his posts to know he thinks Saddam being captured is a good thing. The rest are just a bunch of worms.

First off thanks Jim for omitting me of your hit list. It's always good to know that I won't get whacked while I sleep

Secondly, I too hate when liberals (or any person for that matter) cower as soon as something that is such obvious good news (ie. the capture of Saddam). Anyone with half a brain should be happy when a truly dispicable person is found and is about to be brought to justice. It was no different than Pol Pot, Milosevic and yes, even Hitler (though his fate was more left to providence than justice) However, that can also go both ways (examples which I could go into, but that would be better left for another thread, another times).

However, my main thesis in defense of intellectual liberalism on the war in iraq, is whether the end justifies the means? Frankly I think that is a fair question.

When do we have the right the decide what government is best for Iraq? Has the war truly ended (perhaps it would be better to say reduced) the WMD threat in the middle east? Do the loss of lives both innocent and guilty justify freedom? Has this war dented terrorism or fanned the flames of fundamentalism? Has the war shown the US and its coalition to be agents of freedom or deliquents of international law? Has the US grown friendships or polarized its former allies.

I think the best question of all, is what right do we as global citizens (not just Americans, but all of us) have to imply our moral values on them.

I wish I had the time to address one of these individual points, but the idea is, is that there are many valid questions and I think most people can guess the answers "liberals" as you call them, would say to many of these questions. However, some might just surprise you.


P.S. On a side note, I've never understood the inherent rabid animosity between "conservatives" and "liberals". I find the divisions feed their way almost into to social fabric of your nation. Isn't it just okay to agree to disagree? Just an observation, not a judgement by any means.

 

[jimnyc]

Good points and questions, Isaac, I'll try to answer one by one.

First off thanks Jim for omitting me of your hit list. It's always good to know that I won't get whacked while I sleep

I give credit where it is due, and criticism as well. You've done nothing, nor ignored anything, that would result in criticism.

Secondly, I too hate when liberals (or any person for that matter) cower as soon as something that is such obvious good news (ie. the capture of Saddam). Anyone with half a brain should be happy when a truly dispicable person is found and is about to be brought to justice. It was no different than Pol Pot, Milosevic and yes, even Hitler (though his fate was more left to providence than justice) However, that can also go both ways (examples which I could go into, but that would be better left for another thread, another times).

I just find it odd when some are so eager to jump on the bash Bush bandwagon, and bash USA bandwagon - that they don't seem nearly as eager to speak out agains those considered our enemies. It's then that I realize their true purpose for being here.

However, my main thesis in defense of intellectual liberalism on the war in iraq, is whether the end justifies the means? Frankly I think that is a fair question.

As do I. You'll get varying opinions here from both ends of the spectrum. I think human lives are being saved, therefore that alone justifies the entire war. Nothing short of invasion and removing Saddam was going to accomplish that.

When do we have the right the decide what government is best for Iraq? Has the war truly ended (perhaps it would be better to say reduced) the WMD threat in the middle east? Do the loss of lives both innocent and guilty justify freedom? Has this war dented terrorism or fanned the flames of fundamentalism? Has the war shown the US and its coalition to be agents of freedom or deliquents of international law? Has the US grown friendships or polarized its former allies.

I only think we have the right to help with an interim government, after that the rest should be wholly decided by Iraq through the voting process. I hope their on their way, but only time will tell.

The primary 'war' in Iraq is over. Their will unfortunately be deaths to ensue due to insurgents, but that's to be expected. I don't think the 'war' with terrorism in the Middle East is over, nor the threat of WMD. We won't see that for quite some time, but it's been a good start over the last year.

The lives lost is sad. This, I believe, is sometimes a necessary evil. Lives have been lost on the battlefield many times over the years in the name of freedom, and I'm sure this won't be the last time. It's for some the ultimate sacrifice to give, one that we all benefit from.

I think terrorism has been dented AND flames have been fanned. I would say it's sort of like the eye of the storm. I think we would all agree that terrorism needs to go. The removal process has to start somewhere, why not start in a country that is being slaughtered by it's own President.

I think many see the coalition as delinquents, but I also think that will change over time. More people despise war than like it, so the negative backlash is nearly always expected. Results will win people over. It's yet to be seen whether or not the war on terror can be a full success but I think this has all been a damn good start.

I think the US has alienated allies to an extent AND some bonds have been made stronger. It will take time to mend the wounds with France, Russia, Germany & Canada - but it will heal.

I think the best question of all, is what right do we as global citizens (not just Americans, but all of us) have to imply our moral values on them.

I agree. I think we should help them get started with their own government, ensure the safety of their people, then get out of dodge.

I wish I had the time to address one of these individual points, but the idea is, is that there are many valid questions and I think most people can guess the answers "liberals" as you call them, would say to many of these questions. However, some might just surprise you.

I'm usually referring to the foaming at the mouth liberals that fail to see any good whatsoever coming out of war with Iraq. Their are negatives and positives alike. We work to make the negatives better from this point on, but we don't ignore the good.

P.S. On a side note, I've never understood the inherent rabid animosity between "conservatives" and "liberals". I find the divisions feed their way almost into to social fabric of your nation. Isn't it just okay to agree to disagree? Just an observation, not a judgement by any means.

Generally speaking, it usually does end up with agreements to disagree. Then you have some that are too conservative for some and then the foaming liberals I already mentioned. Politics has always been a sour subject and 9 out of 10 times leads to arguments and mudslinging. Entertaining at times, but not in the best interest of the country.

 

[Palestinian Jew]

jimnyc, you'd better not put me in that pond scum category. I think today was a great day for the world, and I hope bush and blair can take a moment of relaxation before politics enters the picture again.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Palestinian Jew
jimnyc, you'd better not put me in that pond scum category. I think today was a great day for the world, and I hope bush and blair can take a moment of relaxation before politics enters the picture again.

I think you yourself just removed yourself from any possibility of that label with those words alone.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by Isaac Brock

However, my main thesis in defense of intellectual liberalism on the war in iraq, is whether the end justifies the means? Frankly I think that is a fair question.

We will not know the answer to that question until it is the "end". But, in fairness, must we only act when the outcome is guaranteed? Is it not enough to say that we acted in a way that we believed right and just?

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
Do the loss of lives both innocent and guilty justify freedom?

Freedom is expensive as it costs lives. They are the only thing on earth we can't fix. But yes, freedom is worth it. I will quote Patrick Henry "give me liberty or give me death".

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
Has this war dented terrorism or fanned the flames of fundamentalism?

As far as I'm concerned, history will show that we did what we thought was right. I'll refer you to my first response- is it only the victorious whose actions are borne out? Even if terrorism is merely dampened as some have suggested or worse, fanned, I still say it's better to have acted. At least we won't be complicit in the terror.

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
Has the US grown friendships or polarized its former allies.

For all the countries that we've aided and all the allies who owe us a debt, if not the least in gratitude, if they turn their backs on us now than they have more than proven not worthy of our friendship. I am also just as sure that they are more pragmatic...they need us today, they will need us tomorrow and thus, will at least not be of harm to us.

Originally posted by Isaac Brock
I think the best question of all, is what right do we as global citizens (not just Americans, but all of us) have to imply our moral values on them.

I don't want to imply my moral values on anyone; however, I can't believe that there is anyone naive enough on this earth to suggest that we have to sit on our hands while Saddam and the rest of the terror mongers destroy and kill and threaten us. The fact that Saddam continued to finance terrorist activities despite the "global" response of the 90's and 00's makes me certain that he had to be stopped. For us, for Iraq and also for the world.

After that, I think we can peacefully co-exist with people who have a different form of goverment. I mean, hey, I don't believe in monarchies I think they are immoral and ridiculous. But if that's what the UK, Norway, Spain and Japan want- more power to them.

Originally posted by Isaac Brock

P.S. On a side note, I've never understood the inherent rabid animosity between "conservatives" and "liberals". I find the divisions feed their way almost into to social fabric of your nation. Isn't it just okay to agree to disagree? Just an observation, not a judgement by any means.

I agree that the animosity is superfluous. I can understand someone else's point of view and even the validity of their beliefs even as I don't believe them. However, I also understand that when you feel passionately about an issue it IS sometimes difficult to disassociate the message from the messenger. That's not an excuse for name calling, mind you, but rebutting people's fundamental beliefs is a tricky business and not many people do it well.

I also find it humorous (yet sad too) that people choose to point out other's less than deft debating skills such as spelling errors, grammatical errors or what have you rather than seizing the opportunity to educate or at least communicate with their counterpart.

 

[Dan]

I realize it's a freedom and a right to vote, but the thing is, isn't it sort of a mockery of that freedom for me to take advantage of it, even though I don't know a thing about any of the candidates other than Bush? I'm not really all that interested in politics and don't know a thing about anyone's stances, and don't really plan on reading up on them, sorry. Maybe I'll change in the next 11 months.