Vile.
Moderator: Moderators
Al-Qaeda wasn't in Iraq before it was invaded. Hussein was opposed to those guys.AF wrote:They should put stuff like that in the media to shock some of the antiwar people. Iraq was a mistake to invade but all these people complainin that we're occupying another country unfairly dont know what theyre talking about half the time. They just see an army deathcount.
-
Machiosabre
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 25 Dec 2005, 22:56
KDR. I agree, al quaeda wasnt in iraq before US ivnaded. Thats doesnt mean they arent there now and focusing on the invasion itself is stupid. US invaded iraq. It happened years ago. We should be talking about the aftermath not wether it was right to invade to begin with because eitherway we cant go back and uninvade iraq.
So go ahead, go take away several thousand troops form an already destabilized country and watch while al-quaeda, iran and other hostile militant islamic forces take over and disrupt an already volatile region of the world.
Lets say I plunder a country and its resources and turn it into a 3rd world country and then start providing aide because I made a mistake to put it right. Would I be right in saying "we should never have plundered it to begin with and for that reasonw e're pulling out and stopping all the reconstruction money we are pouring in"????
What if I was ran over by a drunk driver and used for compensation btut he judge said "he should never have ran you over to begin with, and for that reason you wont get any compensation".
Or what if a father abandons his wife and child and doesnt pay maintenance because "she should never have ahd the child in the first place"?
So go ahead, go take away several thousand troops form an already destabilized country and watch while al-quaeda, iran and other hostile militant islamic forces take over and disrupt an already volatile region of the world.
Lets say I plunder a country and its resources and turn it into a 3rd world country and then start providing aide because I made a mistake to put it right. Would I be right in saying "we should never have plundered it to begin with and for that reasonw e're pulling out and stopping all the reconstruction money we are pouring in"????
What if I was ran over by a drunk driver and used for compensation btut he judge said "he should never have ran you over to begin with, and for that reason you wont get any compensation".
Or what if a father abandons his wife and child and doesnt pay maintenance because "she should never have ahd the child in the first place"?
-
Felix the Cat
- Posts: 2383
- Joined: 15 Jun 2005, 17:30
And why shouldn't you? I mean, those people are all the way on the other side of the world who can't possibly affect you in any way, shape or form.Felix the Cat wrote:
I have no problem saying that we can and should pull out now.
On the flip coin, Americans are dying.
On the flip flip coin, what about Iraq? Leave now and leave them distablized.
Flip flip flip coin, and you get the fact that imposing our ideals on them is as bad as the Alliance imposing their ideals on the Browncoats.
Flip flip flip flip coin, and we face the fact that some of their "ideals", such as oppressing women, blowing yourself up and so on, are freken nutty.
Flip flip flip flip flip coin...
-
KingRaptor
- Zero-K Developer
- Posts: 838
- Joined: 14 Mar 2007, 03:44
As long as the objective is to create a Jefforsonian democracy in Iraq where Sunnis and Shiites can co-exist in mutual harmony and tolerance, and Western ideals of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc., victory in Iraq is physically impossible.
The only way the civil strife in Iraq can be ended is with two options:
1) One side wins and dominates the other
2) Secular dictatorship, brutalizing everyone else into submission.
Both paths are neither desirable nor likely to happen. The way I see it, this mess isn't going to be fixed, might as well use it to our advantage.
Pull all coalition forces out of Iraq, and let the Shiites (backed by Iran) and Sunnis (backed by the Gulf Arabs) go at it. Anything that happens short of a military invasion by a neighboring country ceases to be our problem.
Brutal? Cruel? Yes. But ultimately preferable.
The only way the civil strife in Iraq can be ended is with two options:
1) One side wins and dominates the other
2) Secular dictatorship, brutalizing everyone else into submission.
Both paths are neither desirable nor likely to happen. The way I see it, this mess isn't going to be fixed, might as well use it to our advantage.
Pull all coalition forces out of Iraq, and let the Shiites (backed by Iran) and Sunnis (backed by the Gulf Arabs) go at it. Anything that happens short of a military invasion by a neighboring country ceases to be our problem.
Brutal? Cruel? Yes. But ultimately preferable.
hmm
a peacfull human policy at home and an aggressive foreign policy.
that is the key.. you kill or get killed the end.
the battle for resources begins..
by 2015 only the middle east will have oil..if i was a usa citizen i would be all for the war.. i wouldnt weant some el qauida or any other dictatoc/terrorist controling the most important resource on the planet.nor would i want europe or asia to control it.oil=so many products that we use daily its unbelievable..for example.. plastic...
that is the key.. you kill or get killed the end.
the battle for resources begins..
by 2015 only the middle east will have oil..if i was a usa citizen i would be all for the war.. i wouldnt weant some el qauida or any other dictatoc/terrorist controling the most important resource on the planet.nor would i want europe or asia to control it.oil=so many products that we use daily its unbelievable..for example.. plastic...
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
That's just about the most idiotic thing ever.KingRaptor wrote:As long as the objective is to create a Jefforsonian democracy in Iraq where Sunnis and Shiites can co-exist in mutual harmony and tolerance, and Western ideals of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc., victory in Iraq is physically impossible.
The only way the civil strife in Iraq can be ended is with two options:
1) One side wins and dominates the other
2) Secular dictatorship, brutalizing everyone else into submission.
Both paths are neither desirable nor likely to happen. The way I see it, this mess isn't going to be fixed, might as well use it to our advantage.
Pull all coalition forces out of Iraq, and let the Shiites (backed by Iran) and Sunnis (backed by the Gulf Arabs) go at it. Anything that happens short of a military invasion by a neighboring country ceases to be our problem.
Brutal? Cruel? Yes. But ultimately preferable.
I fucking hate the American liberal left side. There shouldn't be one fucking person in the entire country right now in favor of abandoning Iraq, because it's so fucking evil to do that it's not even funny. Bush may be an idiot, he may have bungled up going in in the first place, he may suck at his job, but at least he's the one person in your god forsaken country who is acctually willing to pay for his fucking mistakes.
"It's impossible" is just a fucking horrible copout made by people who mean "I don't want to pay the price involved". To me, when it comes to human lives and futures, you pay that price, no matter who you are or what it is.
"he may suck at his job, but at least he's the one person in your god forsaken country who is acctually willing to pay for his fucking mistakes."
Yeah right, do you see George chomping at the bit to get on the frontlines and liberate Iraq to make up for his mistakes?
He doesn't pay for his mistakes, It's the British and American soldiers who pay for it, some of them with their lives.
All so that twat can get his hands on someone elses oil.
"It's impossible" is just a fucking horrible copout made by people who mean "I don't want to pay the price involved". To me, when it comes to human lives and futures, you pay that price, no matter who you are or what it is."
That's very noble, hey, If you feel so strongly about it why don't you sign up as a volunteer and head over to Iraq Swift? you can take the place of my mate who been there for the last 8 months with the marines. I'll even pay for your ticket.
Im sure you'll change your tune once youve been shot at. tosser.
Yeah right, do you see George chomping at the bit to get on the frontlines and liberate Iraq to make up for his mistakes?
He doesn't pay for his mistakes, It's the British and American soldiers who pay for it, some of them with their lives.
All so that twat can get his hands on someone elses oil.
"It's impossible" is just a fucking horrible copout made by people who mean "I don't want to pay the price involved". To me, when it comes to human lives and futures, you pay that price, no matter who you are or what it is."
That's very noble, hey, If you feel so strongly about it why don't you sign up as a volunteer and head over to Iraq Swift? you can take the place of my mate who been there for the last 8 months with the marines. I'll even pay for your ticket.
Im sure you'll change your tune once youve been shot at. tosser.
-
SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
Fair enough, it's incredibly hard on the soldiers in action there. And yup, Bush is pretty much the guy to blame for that. The thing is though, people signed up for a job in the military, it's not as if they believed it was impossible that they would be put into active combat (well, they might have, but that's another issue entirely). I'm not advocating putting these people through unnecessary suffering, but I really don't see how you can call their suffering unnecessary.
Unfortunately the Canadian military is already somewhat overstretched fighting the Taliban and Al Quieda in Afghanistan to contribute to Iraq, where they will continue until the region is stabilized.
Unfortunately the Canadian military is already somewhat overstretched fighting the Taliban and Al Quieda in Afghanistan to contribute to Iraq, where they will continue until the region is stabilized.
-
Machiosabre
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: 25 Dec 2005, 22:56
I had that thought a few times, you figure soldiers sign up for a job and they should do it and losing your life is a risk, but losing your life for something pointless isn't really the idea behind the military.
And sure at first glance retreating seemed the worst choice to me also, but keeping iraq in limbo forever isn't an option and out of the options available right now saving some soldiers isn't the worst one.
Obviously help from other countries nearby and diplomacy would be the best solution, which is funny since Bush has to be the worst negotiator in the history of the world.
And sure at first glance retreating seemed the worst choice to me also, but keeping iraq in limbo forever isn't an option and out of the options available right now saving some soldiers isn't the worst one.
Obviously help from other countries nearby and diplomacy would be the best solution, which is funny since Bush has to be the worst negotiator in the history of the world.