Bush said today in his speech that we weren't going to leave Iraq until our job is done, we weren't going to take out anymore troops, but also weren't going to send anymore in. What are you think about this? Just some questions for discussion... What are your views of the Iraq War and how our government is handling it? Have your views changed from when the war started until now? If you were asked to serve, would you? Does anyone notice how the Iraq and Vietnam wars are so closely related? Here's what I have to say about the war. In the begining, I was in 8th grade, not really knowing much. I was a little iffy about it. I didn't really know why we were going in there, but I still supported us nonetheless. In the past two years, much has happened. We had not found any Weapons of Mass Destruction, but we did capture Saddam Hussein. The Iraqis have had the first free election, but the cost has been great. Everyday there are people dying. I remember in 9th grade, we watched the news headlines at the begining of each class, and everytime, there was something about a soldier being killed in Iraq. We kept a tally of people dying from Iraq on our whiteboard, and at that time it was around 200-300. Now, there are over a thousand U.S. soldiers dead. Do I support the war? Yes I do. I support it for our soldiers fighting down there for us. I support it for the Iraqi people who hope that democracy will win. I support it to try and end terrorism. Now lets just say that the U.S. had another draft, would I go? Damn straight I would. I would go because it is my duty. My duty to serve my country when it needs me. But the again, why is it that we cannot stop these terrorists? It seems now, after the election, things are getting worse. Just today, a senior member of the Iraqi parliament was killed, the 2nd this year. What can the U.S. really do against such a devotion of hatred? Does this seem like another Vietnam? There are many similarities, but hopefully the ends are different, and hopefully this time, the U.S. will prevail.
I was anti-war from the beginning... not out of some idealistic pacifist notions or anything like that but because I knew the costs of such an operation were too much and that any post-war solution for Iraq would end up turning Iraq into an Islamic state (90% of Iraqis want their new government to be based in Islam... oh, just wait until Bush finds out that the people end up voting in a bunch of Mullahs to power...) or the country would fall into civil war (which, I still think is a very real possibility.) I did believe that Saddam had WMDs but my idea was that containment was working and that he wouldn't try to do anything stupid again like he had done in the Kuwait invasion. With two no-fly zones, trade sanctions and UN inspections I didn't think Saddam was any type of threat to the United States or our so-called "allies" (i.e. Saudi scum). The only reason that Iraq today is a "hotbed of terrorism" is because we allowed a security vacuum to develop in which foreign fighters have found refuge in a country the size of France that has basically NO security/police/military forces of its own whatsoever. Do I support the war. Nope. Still don't. Do I support our troops? Hellz yes I do. If there were a draft right now would I go? Hellz no. If "don't ask, don't tell" was dropped and there were a draft would I go? Hellz yes. I love my country and I am NOT going to move to Canada like some morons want to do... if you love this country then you stay here and try to change it. However, once Iraq can somewhat secure itself, we should leave the country immediately. I really have very few hopes for a stable, liberal-democratic Iraq (not liberal as in the American political sense, but liberal in the international relations sense, meaning a multi-party state with free and fair elections and a great number of political rights and civil liberties for citizens)... As for the Vietnam comparison, Iraq is not Vietnam. Besides the point that Vietnam could've been the U.S.'s best friend in Southeast Asia if we didn't completely ignore them (Ho Chi Minh quoted the American Declaration of Independence in many of his speeches when he fought against the French for Vietnamese independence. Minh actually originally asked the U.S. for help to get the French out, but the U.S. refused... so Ho Chi Minh was left asking the USSR for help, which happily supplied him arms in exchange for Vietnam's support during the Cold War... leading to the problem we found ourselves in.) But besides there being a great number of young Americans dead in both conflicts, there are relatively few similarities between Vietnam and Iraq... a better comparison (although be it far less known) is the insurgent war the U.S. fought against Filipino rebels after the U.S. took over the country after a brief war with the Spanish. In that, there was a quick U.S. takeover followed by YEARS of guerrilla warfare directed at US troops... that's probably more accurate to today's situation. Whew.... wow... I should turn this in for one of my class papers I have to write on post-Cold War conflict for my major class... HAHAHA Alrighty, g'night people. -CK
Ok, we are in the same grade, everything started when i was in 8th grade also. I have been politicaly active since 6th grade though, and i'm quite versed in what's going on, so here's my point of view (warning: completely republican argument follows) First of all, we know that Iraq had wmds, we sold them to iraq. That right, we sold them. At the time it was in our favor. but since then saddam has taken power and has used them on his own people. He also has threatened us, as in the gulf war. So, after saddam turned crazy, the UN placed restrictions on Iraq that says that they cannot sell oil for anything other than money for food. Also, the UN signed an order that Iraq must dispose of the weapons and prove that they have disposed of them. So, in the meantime, Saddam gave oil to UN officials in charge of the oil for food program, and therefore, they were all on his side. In our quest to track down known terrorists, Iraq seemed easy. They were disobeying the oil for food program, and they had known weapons that were supposed to be destroyed a while ago. The only problem that i see in the way this campaign was formed was that everyone believed we were just trying to figure out if Iraq had WMDs, which wasnt the point at all. Saddam could have buried them and there is no way those will ever be found. So of course, we go after them and the UN rejects because they are a bunch of corrupt fools. So here we look like the bad guys. Ok, next point: Iraq vs Vietnam. Ok, they both have the same point. The only difference now is that we actually have control of the country. If we had won completely in vietnam, We could have been in this phase of battling terrorist groups for a while too. The only major difference is that Iraq has groups all over, from the inside and outside of Iraq, that want control of the country's land. Sadly, the only way i see to get us out of this mess is to get a very strong Iraqi government in comparison to these groups and the countries surrounding it. Heck, I've heard that other countries in the area are prime targets to initiate a regime change, but i doubt the majority of Americans would approve. For the future of Iraq, i think that our government should give tax breaks to companies investing in building Iraq. Stuff like basic utilities (water, electric, gas), Oil drilling, manufacturing (probably the most important in jump starting the economy over there), and schools. Also, our military should be developing a strong Iraqi military, because without something that other countries would be scared of, Iraq will remain a terrorist hot spot. Also, (last point) 2726 people died in the world trade center bombing. Where did those WMDs go? what if the went to terrorists? would you want another massive bombing becase some weapons that should have been turned over werent? It is terrible that so many people have died in iraq. I have read that 1700 or so people have died. If you had signed up for the military, wouldn't you realize that you were risking your life? That kind of sticks out at me as a major point of joining the military. I believe that there have been almost 500,000 troops in iraq since this whole thing started, and this past march, there were as many as 170,000 troops there. so, with 500,000 troops, and 1700 deaths, thats a death rate of .34%, or .17% per year. Not that much. with so many people over there, and such a large amount of land to cover, its only natural that a few will die every once and a while, while terrible that it's true, they signed up for the military. I have considered joining the military myself, not sure if i will, but its a possiblility. Dont count on the draft. Its a pure possiblility thought up by the Democrats to scare people for the election. It wont happen unless we get drawn into a war, which (if it does happen) probably would happen no matter who won the election. Geeze, ran out of skittles again.
Still your opinions don't really matter until you're A) SEXUALLY active :lol: B) Registered to vote C) Working D) Able to be drafted I'll make a note of it. Did Saddam have WMDs that we gave him? Yep. Was Saddam our friend in the Iran-Iraq War? Yep. Did Saddam use WMDs on his own people, namely the Kurds? Yep. Did Saddam threaten us in the Gulf War? Eh. Not really. He invaded Kuwait, which many Iraqis consider to be part of Iraq, and the US, under UN mandate, formed a coalition of a nations to remove Saddam's forces from Kuwait. Nothing else. Saddam has never threatened the US directly... that's more of something the Iranians and the North Koreans do. The UN Oil for Food program was corrupt. No doubt about it. In fact, I want Kofi Annan's head on a platter with all those who ran the program. However, the wonderful thing about the UN is that the Oil for Food program was completely separate from the inspections regime headed by Hans Blix, which was so far completely trustworthy and all of their reports were dead on. During the 1990s, the UN inspections teams personally oversaw the destruction of thousands of tons of chemical and biological weapons as well as ICBMs and other missile technologies, as per the UN mandate. After that task was complete, the UN teams were unable to find any more WMDs, as we now know they were either used, destroyed or never existed in the first place (I suspect there is a high probability that Saddam's own officials lied to him about Iraq's capabilities as to make sure they themselves weren't executed). And what terrorists were operated inside Iraq during Saddam's regime? You can't name any because there WEREN'T any. Yes, Saddam himself was a terrorist in the classic sense of the word, but there were no al-Qaeda training camps or leaders anywhere in Iraq. The most heinous thing Iraq did was give money to suicide bombers in Israel, but really, the Saudis and the Iranians gave infiinitely more money to help Hamas and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade than Saddam ever did. In fact, Saddam was head of the Iraqi Baathist Party, which essentially is the Arab Communist Party. Saddam himself kept a VERY secular state and dislike the religious extremists almost as much as we do... he saw them as a threat to his own power. There's a reason that many Muslim states didn't actively oppose Saddam's removal... the Mullahs in Iran and the Clerics in Saudi Arabia saw him as an obstacle to Islamist government in Iraq. Wow. If we attacked Iraq because of the oil for food program was corrupt... then we need to attack ourselves first. Many of the officials in the IOFP were American and many of the companies that tried to do business with Saddam were (you guessed it) American contractors... if we're going to go around invading countries that have violated UN Security Council resolutions, then really we should have US troops based in Jerusalem right now as Israel (and to be fair, North Korea, Zimbabwe and Iran are also in violation as well) is currently in violation of a number of Security Council resolutions but we haven't done anything to try and enforce them thusfar... We don't look like the bad guys. We look like morons. Saddam could have buried them... good for him! As long as he never dug them up, who cares??? Saddam was contained and he was no direct threat to the US or our allies. Exactly why I suggested the Phillipines as a better comparison. First, I think most (if not all) of the terrorists in Iraq are foreign fighters, even the Bush administration has played up this point in recent months. Iraq does need a strong government... a VERY strong government... something that will be able to control the security problems and protect itself against its neighbors... I think the best kind of government to do that is... what's it called??? Oh yes. A dictatorship. DAMN IT! And yes, many of Iraq's neighbors are prime candidate for regime change... Saudi Arabia first of all... (I think we'll see regime change from within Iran in the next 20-30 years, if not sooner). So, if we're REALLY serious about human rights and democracy we should stop sucking on Saudi Arabia's oil tits and let the regime collapse... the only problem with that is that the regime that replaces a Saudi government would be probably even worse than the asswipes in power right now... sucks, don't it? TAX BREAKS??? We're ALREADY paying them to reconstruct an ENTIRE country AND its military... good thing our education system isn't falling behind and that every American that needs healthcare can get it... I can think of a single reason why in a family where two parents work full-time jobs (many times multiple full-time jobs) and who don't have employer health insurance are simple "out of luck" if a family member breaks a bone, or contracts pneumonia... or is prayer the only "compassion" these conservatives ever care to give??? And oddly enough, all the places that were hit on 9/11 (New York, DC, PA) all voted Democrat in the last election... as did the states most likely to suffer an attack Illinois (Chicago) and California (probably Los Angeles or San Francisco)... that's gotta tell you something, don't it? I think I've dealt with that point already. Yeah, well, MOST of the people in the US Army and Marines that signed up for the military did so before 9/11 and those that joined AFTER 9/11 did so thinking that we were going to go after the assholes that attacked us (which Iraq did not... no matter how much Bush uses the words "Iraq" and "9/11" in a sentence together) it still doesn't change the fact that EVERY SINGLE post-war report says that there was NO Saddam-alQaeda link before or after 9/11... and remember people, remember, the rationale for war was WMDs... NOT regime change and NOT going after the people responsibile for 9/11... those last two were made up after the neocons realized that they royally fucked up. FURTHER, MOST of the people in Iraq right now are Army National Guard or Reserve troops who never expected to be torn away from their jobs (these people are NOT career military... they're plumbers, school teachers, mechanics, office workers, accountants, businessmen) OR their families and be forced into 3 or 4 EXTENDED tours of duty after their original obligations to the Army, National Guard or Reserves had been completed. I'm just gonna pretend that as a member of a party that espouses a complete "culture of life" attitude that EVERY life is important you did not just turn people's lives into numbers... I really doubt there is going to be a draft... That idiot Rangell from NY originally proposed the draft bill that was swiftly killed by Congress... Anyway, good debate. And despite what my tone may be, I just like to have lively arguments... ooooh law school here I come... later! -CK
I feel like if i were to start talking again I'd be treading on your same points. but, just to throw in a few counter points: On the Phillipines, we are in a very different situation now then we were in then. For some reason, the idiots that got us into the Phillipines wanted to take the Philipines as a US territory, and of course they did not like that idea. And of course new york, DC, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and California are going to vote Democratic, they consist of large cities, which are normaly democratic. As for the rest of the stuff, I think I'd be arguing a point of view, and I dont like trying to change a point of view. Its more fun to argue facts and that sort. Like you mentioned, You have your right to vote, i dont yet, and everyone deserves to vote for what they believe in when they have the ability to. Thanks for the debate, it was fun!
Okay, here is the political and activist bitch figure talking. I am strongly anti-war shokingly. Although I belive these people needed our help in liberating them, we as a different walk of life shouldnt come over there and try to change these peoples belifes. NOTE: Each time we go to war with a foriegn contry, we always try to change their political veiws, and their religion. We do it with missionaries, and we do it with soldiers. Also, look at these cases of abuse to civilians in Iraq. They go on and on. Now I'm not saying that america is the only guilty one in this, but we are doing it to the innocent people. And, just who do you think sold these WMD to Iraq and Iran? We did, Ronald Reagan to be exact. He was good friends with Saddam, and Bin Laden. You wanna know a way to support our troops? Bring them back home! And then impeach George Bush, get his ass out of office, and get the right guy/girl in there. I cant wait for 2008. GO HILLARY!
Eww... I'll vote for Bill Frist before I vote for Hillary... she's already been President for 8 years, she can't run again! Besides, Senators almost NEVER get to the Presidency (Kennedy was the last)... I'm hoping Governor Warner from Virginia runs... he's a Democrat who is very popular in a conservative state and he's not too old and generally likable. Perfect. Either him or perhaps Governor Easley from North Carolina for mostly the same reasons. (I'm just more familiar with Warner since he's from a neighboring state). Oh and Gov. Vilsack from Iowa! He'd be good too... okay, that's all. I'm not gonna list all the Democratic governors... haha.
Ok, i'm breaking my oath on no more non-gay related stuff, but i just came out of a stupid argument with my brother and i can not stand anymore. lol, cought the shockingly joke! where have we tried to change the people of iraq's religion? Unfounded. The only thing that we are trying to change is their governments restrictions on religion. And when have we tried to change their political views? ok, i'm sorry, we believe in a democratic state, and there's no way we will allow another dictator have power. abuse to civillians is the product of an untrusting military in a state where there are many small groups of hiding terrorists. please dont make me laugh, i said earlier that we sold the weapons to iraq, at a time when we were friends, at a time when Hussein wasnt a dictator. and about bin laden, i had actually never heard that before, but once again, this was back when bin laden did not hate the US, and we were looking for allies against the soviets. So i guess its safe to say that regan was an idiot and we should have given the soviets an upper hand against us. I'm sure there would be some happy troops, but then again, you are saying that there isnt a significantly better world ahead than the price that has been paid so far. Its terrible to give up after people have put their life into danger for this cause. lol, impeach, as far as i'm concerned, George Bush hasnt done anything against the law! And Hillary! please. I read this interesting book called Loosing Bin Laden by richard miller. It talks about how Clinton knew of the active threat of Bin Laden, and why he didnt pursue it. Bin Laden attacked in 1992 and in 1993 (the second one was even at the world trade center). Why didnt Clinton take him out then? and it's not like we didnt try to keep tabs on him then, there were a few genuine oppertunities to take him out. Even though, i think it's going to be a war in 08, its amazing that people are getting militant already about it. BTW, i guess i have to look into who can be running for office in 08, Thats something that i wasnt into ever before.
