Another Iraq thread

[xylo]

It's about time I threw in my 2 cents on the war in Iraq. First off it seems that everyone here is heavily into this "support the troops" mentality. Let me just say here that I hope that all of the troops are able to return home safely to their families as soon as possible.

However, I am also amazed that nobody is showing the same amount of concern for the Iraqi civilians. Unlike the soldiers who are all in the army by choice, did any of the Iraqi civilians choose to get involved in the war? Did anyone ask them if they'd mind having their loved ones killed to "liberate" Iraq?

I'm not asking anyone to stop supporting the American troops (I support them by wishing for their safe return). But when you're all out there waving you're American flags I'd like everyone to spare a thought for the Iraqi mother who has had to bury her children. Or the young child in Iraq, too young to understand what is happening, who will have to grow up without parents.

To all who think that this has been a fairly bloodless war, I urge you to look at this site.

http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

To all who say that Saddam is an evil and despotic leader, I agree with you, he is. But let's remember that his regime was installed by the American government. The weapons of mass destruction were given to him by America so he could kill Iranians (America also gave weapons to Iran) And now that America wants them back they attack him (who pays the price? the civilians of course - but don't worry I'm sure America is so much more secure now, its not like we've just pissed off anymore terrorists or anything). And if Saddam is to be removed from power it should be an international decision, not a political manouvre by the republican government.

Also did anyone notice that as soon as Bush couldn't find the weapons of mass destruction the war became about "liberating" Iraq instead? Why doesn't George Bush liberate any of the African countries who are under the rule of atrocity committing despots? Well there are two reasons, one they don't have the same amount of mineral reserves, and two people aren't as scared of them as they are of middle-eastern nations. Bush is taking advantage of an anti-arab xenophobia/hysteria and using it to authorise a war which simultaneously allows him to increase military spending (hey, it sure beats spending money on education and welfare right?) and at the same time give the American people the illusion that he is protecting them (from a third world country on the other side of the planet). Wow, that's pretty smart for a guy who had to buy his way into college.

That's all from me for now. I'll try and make my next thread something less contoversial (maybe I'll tell another joke, but this time one not about George Bush).

xylo

 

[buggs]

Ummm…I don’t know if you have been following the news at all, but the British just found documents that show there was an Iraqi/Al Al Qaeda Link, as you an see here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85256,00.html

And also the fact that they are finding chemicals which Iraq lied and said they didn’t have:
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/ns/news...70758526.htm&sc=rontz&photoid=20030409LON800D

Fox News and CNN also reported yesterday that a detained Iraqi scientist confirmed that they lied to, and misled the Un Inspectors. He said they were creating weapons of mass destruction.

Hey I am not a fan of war. Yes there are casualties. But I am sorry, sometimes WAR is necessary to take out the evil that is in the world. Evil does not stop from people holding hands, tralahlahing with flowers “wishing there was piece”. It just isn’t the way this universe works, no matter how much we wish it would be.

 

[BigJim]

Hey I am not a fan of war. Yes there are casualties. But I am sorry, sometimes WAR is necessary to take out the evil that is in the world. Evil does not stop from people holding hands, tralahlahing with flowers “wishing there was piece”. It just isn’t the way this universe works, no matter how much we wish it would be.

Buggs, I agree with you 100% per cent. However I would feel a lot happier if our "leaders" would stop lying through their teeth to us about what is going on in the world.
Osama and Hussein are both arseholes and neither one would get if a tear from me if they were shot tomorrow. But demonising them has been the West's main excuse for Project TWAT and there is a colossal amount of mis-information being filtered out to us.

As for the newspaper reports, they were found intact in the rubble of a bombed building? Well if they're so resilient, why did'nt they just build the building out this paper? I'm not dismissing them yet, but let's not look for the smoking gun till they're confirmed independantly. (Which means by someone not in any way affiliated to either of our governments or our lying bastard media agencies.)

 

[buggs]

Oh and how about this in regards to regime change in Iraq:

Oh, and by the way, Clinton also wanted regime change of Iraq in 1998, and spoke to the Pentagon about it in Feb of 1998. But Kofi Annan stepped in and talked Clinton into trying the failed food for oil program. Don’t take my word for it, read it here:

“The president's warnings are firm. "If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." The stakes, he says, could not be higher. "Some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal."

These are the words not of President George W. Bush in September 2002 but of President Bill Clinton on February 18, 1998. Clinton was speaking at the Pentagon, after the Joint Chiefs and other top national security advisers had briefed him on U.S. military readiness. The televised speech followed a month-long build-up of U.S. troops and equipment in the Persian Gulf. And it won applause from leading Democrats on Capitol Hill.”

Taken from the website:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Conte...01/607rkunu.asp

How do you like that flaming cake going down?

 

[BigJim]

Don't feel the need to bolster CLinton on my account Buggs. I dislike him every bit as much as I like the coke snorter currently in the White House and the coke dealer/runner who went before Clinton. I'm not Democrat. I think being pigeon-holed into any narrow definaition sets too many limits.

 

[august spies]

thats because the us has a forieng policy based soley on promoting war, the arms trade, and global corporate hegemony.


ps fox news is just extension of the pentagon, in fact its even more right wing than the pentagon. they lie enough that stalin would cringe, and didnt one of them get caught stealing stuff from iraq?

pps cnn is just as bad

 

[theallknowing1]

Actually there is a political theory relating to this

The theory is(quite properly)named the "Blowback" theory. It states that many incidents, such as 9-11 are actually CAUSED by previous actions taken by the military(some) and the CIA(mainly).
This have been shown to be true in quite a few cases. Take this one for example.

Terrorist pilot Mohammad Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis
captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the
Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called "political
prisoners."

However, the Israelis would not release any with blood on their hands, The
American President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State,
Warren Christopher, "insisted" that all prisoners be released.

Thus Mohammad Atta was freed and eventually thanked the US by flying an
airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center. This was reported by many
of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first
identified. It was censored in the US from all later reports.


There are many other examples as well. To name a VERY FEW, Osama Bin Laden being funded by CIA during cold war to fight against Soviets invading Afganistan, Sadam Hussein being provided with arms, Fidel Castro being provided help to overthrow the previous dictatior, The Israeli's, etc, etc. The list goes on and on and on.

I think its time that Americans pay attention to THESE atrocities, and take action against THEIR perpetrators the same way they take action against others.

 

[avethibaltus]

Regarding Buggs' post...

Hmmm CNN and Fox, both very reliable sources for detailed and factual information about all subjects, foreign and domestic. No politics there.

I'll have to check out those websites you mentioned and probably change my opinion about Bush, Iraq, and everything else. As many chemicals and weapons of mass destruction as Iraq has/had, our guys have no doubt found tons and tons which they just don't want to admit to as all the results aren't in yet (didn't Jane's rank them as no. 1 for nuclear, chemical, and biological weapon stocks - oh darn, my mistake, I think that was actually the US).

BTW, you do know that the Fox News Network has very close (blood) ties to the Bush family? And that CNN made their name with GW1 and gains financially the longer any type of "war" lasts where they have cameramen on the ground.

If you put 1+1+1+1+1+1+1 together and come up with 7 is it plain dumb to admit it when the idiot box say it's actually 6 and you just don't have all the details that the President does?

 

[BigJim]

Regarding Buggs' post...

Hmmm CNN and Fox, both very reliable sources for detailed and factual information about all subjects, foreign and domestic. No politics there.BTW,

*hands Ave a crowbar*

Here you go mate, that's to get all that tongue out of your cheek.

you do know that the Fox News Network has very close (blood) ties to the Bush family?

Oh hell yes!

 

[Deleted member 2452]

you anti-war folks just can't see the truth

i have the feeling you just hate america so fucking much nothing would ever convince you that america was right to topple saddam/iraq.

iraqi civilians were killed? no shit, there was a war there remember?!?! instead, why not think how many civilians weren't killed due to the u.s.'s caution in target selection.

frankly i don't care about iraqi civilians, i'm concerned that now terrorists won't get weapons from saddam/iraq!
steve

 

[ShiningIce]

*Wonders if Steve will one day be caught holding up a 7Eleven in his boxers because he suspects they're anti-American terrorists.*

 

[avethibaltus]

Ahh the good old days, listening to all the excuses criminals can come up with for the crap they do. Sorry Steve but I would put your comments right up there with those from the rapist who, after raping a Nun on her way to church one Sunday morning, said to me:
"I didn't want to hurt her, can you ask her to forgive me"

Then again maybe it is more like the child molester who upon being apprehended couldn't understand why everyone was so wound up about the whole incident:
"I would never hurt a child"

If someone walked into a bank with a sawed off shotgun and held up the place, killing only two of the innocent 20 people in the bank, would it be okay if he really needed the money? What if he didn't really need the money? Would it be considered mitigating circumstances that he didn't kill everyone in the bank? How would you feel if you were one of the 20 and your child one of the two? Banking, at least, would be a whole new adventure from that day on. Wouldn't it have been easier to do it the legal way and apply for a loan, maybe even pawn the shotgun?

Steve, I believe you may be confusing the issue a little. We're not talking about taking out a ruthless dictator who was brutally oppressing his people and stirring up crap in the middle east with US support, we're talking about why he had to be taken out now and what the real objectives are.

Maybe one day we should get together and compare notes about who has done what for which country. And please don't make the mistake of accusing someone of something about which you have no idea. And you really have no idea.

 

[theallknowing1]

Re: you anti-war folks just can't see the truth

i have the feeling you just hate america so fucking much nothing would ever convince you that america was right to topple saddam/iraq.

iraqi civilians were killed? no shit, there was a war there remember?!?! instead, why not think how many civilians weren't killed due to the u.s.'s caution in target selection.

frankly i don't care about iraqi civilians, i'm concerned that now terrorists won't get weapons from saddam/iraq!
steve

I don't mean to throw gasoline on a fire, but I MUST point out that THIS is PRECISELY what i was talking about in the patriotism thread.
http://www.ticklingforum.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28725&perpage=15&pagenumber=1

I said it then and I'll say it again.

IF AT ANY time ANY belief supercedes rational/logical thought that BELIEF has become BAD/WRONG/PROBLEMATIC/ETC and needs to be put to an END.
I believe that patriotism has certainly taken on this aspect in American Culture since 9-11. And this is a PRIME EXAMPLE OF IT.

 

[Hitman]

Whatever. All you people who think this whole war is one big conspirasy just give me a headache.

 

[Deleted member 2452]

i wasn't making excuses, nor appologising.

i wouldn't care if one million iraqi's had died in the war!
where did you get the idea i was an appologist for america's actions?!?! hell, i was, and am, for this war. against terrorists everywhere, and against saddam/iraq.

and comparing me to a rapists, and a child molester makes you a total ass wipe in my book. those kind of comments are designed to only engender a flame war. you are trying to hurt me, and be offensive. typical of the liberal left wing; when you can't fight the position, attack the speaker. you sir only made me feel contempt.
steve

 

[His Divine Shadow]

I have to agree with areenactor. Remember, what Myriads said: attacking the person, and not the person's idea, is a big no-no. Keep it civil folks.😎

 

[asutickler]

Re: Re: you anti-war folks just can't see the truth

IF AT ANY time ANY belief supercedes rational/logical thought that BELIEF has become BAD/WRONG/PROBLEMATIC/ETC and needs to be put to an END.

Sweeping absolutism, anyone? 🙄


In order to be a functioning member of society, one must allow their beliefs to dictate their behavior in certain instances and to a certain extent. Unilateral reliance on logic leaves no room for concepts such as the difference between right and wrong. Furthermore, the entire concept of logical reasoning by human beings is subjective, to a degree, due to the normal emotional capacities of the human psyche.

The only humans who can be said to truly function without regard to "beliefs" are persons posessing sociopathic tendencies related to a lack of emotional and moral comprehension. Such persons operate solely on cold logic, and will kill, steal, cheat, and etc. based solely upon logical assesments of wether the benefits of such actions outweigh their risk of being caught.

In short, people's beliefs supercede logic on a rather regular basis, and the result is not always a bad one.

 

[asutickler]

If someone walked into a bank with a sawed off shotgun and held up the place, killing only two of the innocent 20 people in the bank, would it be okay if he really needed the money?

If a police officer encountered a madman in a shopping mall, and said madman was using two people as human shields while arming a device which could possibly kill thousands more, would the officer be justified in possibly killing the two innocents in order to insure the safety of a far greater number of people?

 

[Haltickling]

In order to be a functioning member of society, one must allow their beliefs to dictate their behavior in certain instances and to a certain extent. Unilateral reliance on logic leaves no room for concepts such as the difference between right and wrong. Furthermore, the entire concept of logical reasoning by human beings is subjective, to a degree, due to the normal emotional capacities of the human psyche.

The only humans who can be said to truly function without regard to "beliefs" are persons posessing sociopathic tendencies related to a lack of emotional and moral comprehension. Such persons operate solely on cold logic, and will kill, steal, cheat, and etc. based solely upon logical assesments of wether the benefits of such actions outweigh their risk of being caught.

In short, people's beliefs supercede logic on a rather regular basis, and the result is not always a bad one.

Sorry asu, I think you're mixing up emotions with belief. It is true that you can't believe without emotions, but you can very well have emotions without belief (i.e. disbelief, frustration, anger, love, affection etc).

"Cold logics" also includes the knowledge that much more than 90% of our actions are dictated by emotions instead of rational thinking. That's nothing bad indeed, as long as you are aware of this fact...

 

[asutickler]

Sorry asu, I think you're mixing up emotions with belief. It is true that you can't believe without emotions, but you can very well have emotions without belief (i.e. disbelief, frustration, anger, love, affection etc).

How can you have disbelief without belief? 😉


Actually, I'm not. Differences between right and wrong, value judgements, morals (or the lack thereof), and other such notions are not based upon emotion, but are subjective qualities based on personal beliefs.

For example, if offered a choice between (to use a highly exaggerated example) vast wealth and true love, you might opt for true love, while I would likely grab the cash and run. Who made the better choice? That depends upon your personal beliefs. 🙂 A person's beliefs and values actually DICTATE the code of logic that they operate under.

 

[avethibaltus]

I see a sort of logic here, I think.

In comparing COMMENTS from one person to those of another person the objective is not to insult or breed contempt, rather to encourage a logical, understandable, and well founded counter-argument which obliterates the assumption upon which the comparison was based. An attempt to personalize the argument is a good indication that the responding poster is frustrated and has no logical response.

I have therefore failed.

On second thought, let's revise the questions a little.

What is a terrorist? (When answering don't forget that those brave American colonists who dumped that British tea into Boston Harbor would have been considered terrorists at that time and place.)

How many bystanders/innocent civilians/non-involved persons/children/mothers/relatives/brothers/sisters are allowed to be killed too when one is on an official KTA (kill terrorist arabs) mission? Is there a specified ratio?

If, as previously mentioned, the number is irrelevant then why we don't just use our WMDs in TWAT to blast their MFC back to kingdom come? We may be on to something here.

 

[asutickler]

How many bystanders/innocent civilians/non-involved persons/children/mothers/relatives/brothers/sisters are allowed to be killed too when one is on an official KTA (kill terrorist arabs) mission? Is there a specified ratio?

It's an awful thing to have to consider, but I would say that the risk of damage to innocents should be weighed against the potential for harm to yet greater numbers of OTHER innocents, should said terrorists be allowed to escape. Not an easy thing to judge, and not at all an enviable task... 🙁

If, as previously mentioned, the number is irrelevant then why we don't just use our WMDs in TWAT to blast their MFC back to kingdom come? We may be on to something here.

If the number of civilian casualties was truly irrelevant, Baghdad would be a uniform pile of rubble six feet high right about now. Your comment in regards to the irrelevence of casualties amongst Arab civilians is the opinion of exactly one previous poster.

Assuming that "MFC" translates roughly to "female parent copulating nation," I would point out that the NATION of Iraq was neither our enemy or our target. Saddam Hussein was our enemy, and his regime and any WMD that they may or may not have posessed were our targets.

 

[avethibaltus]

Thank God for ASU, I was beginning to worry that all the logical thinking, ethical types had already gone to bed.

 

[His Divine Shadow]

The one big problem with killing innocents, besides the killing, is that their deaths often inspire other (family members, bystanders, random people) to take up the terrorist cause, thereby increasing the amount of terrorism.

 

[theallknowing1]

Re: i wasn't making excuses, nor appologising.

i wouldn't care if one million iraqi's had died in the war!
where did you get the idea i was an appologist for america's actions?!?! hell, i was, and am, for this war. against terrorists everywhere, and against saddam/iraq.

Once again, a PERFECT EXAMPLE of the point I adressed above. Also interestingly I have seen NO REAL DEFENSE for these actions. If any "PATRIOTS" out there have one, I'd LOVE to hear it.