IRAQ THREAD originaly "Seems at least one Brit agrees with me....er us."

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by shartley

I don't even think you get what I am saying.

We are talking about how dropping a bomb creates more hatred and more terrorist. Do you think the civilians on the ground could care less that we wed attacked first. All they know is that they are now being attacked, and now their innocents are being killed. I am not blaming the innocent lives lost on us, I know that happens in war, but the civilians are. And if we are going to combat future terrorism, that is all that matters.

[shartley]

[Collegeboy]

No Shartley if you once again read you will see that I agree with the taking out of high ranking officials, with the seizure of money, and the stopping of supplies to the terrorist. But I also believe the most important thing to help slow down terrorism (for you will never stop it) is to stop its recruitment base. Bring aide to the civilians; help to give them a better life. Try and bring down that huge wage difference between leaders and workers. Give them a reason not to hate America.

But by all means do not add to their hatred by giving them a reason to hate America.

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by Jojo1
Screw SaddaM, Bin Laden, and all other people who do not support the US...We do not need anyone they need us...just think about this all you people with different opinions...some countries can not even have a discussion like this...America is a free country and we should be very thankful, but you forget people have to stand up and fight for this $hit.....

What does the right to freedom of speech have to do with an invasion of Iraq? We are not talking about an invading hostile power. Saddam had tons of chemical weapons in the first Gulf War and they were basically useless to him because Bush Sr. told him if he used them there would be armageddon in Baghdad. The guy is so powerless against our army that he cannot even kick us out of the no fly zone. According to one of cphillips previous posts his troops want to surrender before the war even begins. We do not have an immediate threat. It would be great to see the administration heal the breech with our allies and get a united front. According to oldsoldiers last post this may be possible.

If anything I see everyone saying, "I support the president because he is the president" much more terrifying than Iraq. What would be next? Are we all going to goose step and sing songs about our beloved Fatherland? If people support the president because they are convinced of the REASONS I don't really have a problem with that. I may disagree with those reasons but at least it isn't the "Because Stone Cold SAYS SO!" reason.

All i am saying is this do not be scared of a war in Iraq...be scared if the United States would not invade...Also i say fight fire with fire...you bomb our country then we will bomb yours...you kill our families then we will kill yours...Already iam going to get some grief for saying this, but this is the only way to fight terrorism...when people are brought up to hate Americans then there is nothing we can do about it...i say take there oil and whatever else we want...maybe a taste of there own medicine will sober them up!!

They are not raised to hate us! Many people emmigrate here because they want to experience opportunity in the US and enjoy our way of life. When you see people dancing in the street that is only a small percentage of the total population. We have marches in the US as well yet people who partake in them are a very small percentage of the whole. A Serbian once told me that the reason that peace is so difficult is because one side loses his father and the child is raised being constantly reminded by the mother, "remember what they did to your father!" He grows up and takes his revenge and a mother now on the other side is reminding her child, "remember what they did to your father!" That is NOT the path of our nation. Everything that Bush Sr. said in the quote above is what makes the US GREAT not what makes us weak. We do not want to become a country of eye for eye, tooth for tooth, bigots!

[shartley]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
No Shartley if you once again read you will see that I agree with the taking out of high ranking officials, with the seizure of money, and the stopping of supplies to the terrorist. But I also believe the most important thing to help slow down terrorism (for you will never stop it) is to stop its recruitment base. Bring aide to the civilians; help to give them a better life. Try and bring down that huge wage difference between leaders and workers. Give them a reason not to hate America.

But by all means do not add to their hatred by giving them a reason to hate America.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
So fight terrorism by causing more hatred. You my friend are a genius.

then by more of your superior "logic" you better be hoping we lose this war big time right?

[1stdeadeye]

Back into the fray!

Originally posted by Collegeboy


I don't even think you get what I am saying.

We are talking about how dropping a bomb creates more hatred and more terrorist. Do you think the civilians on the ground could care less that we wed attacked first. All they know is that they are now being attacked, and now their innocents are being killed. I am not blaming the innocent lives lost on us, I know that happens in war, but the civilians are. And if we are going to combat future terrorism, that is all that matters.

The circle of violence begins with the violence caused by the terrorists. They generate hate on the retaliating side.

As for the Iraqi situation. There should be no civilians at military targets. The use of human shields by Iraq is illegal. If you are referring to the Palestinian situation, the terrorists should not be hiding amoungst the civilian population. They are drawing the retaliation onto the civilians. Though the civilians will not see it that way, the price of doing nothing is too severe!

[1stdeadeye]

We do this now!

Originally posted by Collegeboy
No Shartley if you once again read you will see that I agree with the taking out of high ranking officials, with the seizure of money, and the stopping of supplies to the terrorist. But I also believe the most important thing to help slow down terrorism (for you will never stop it) is to stop its recruitment base. Bring aide to the civilians; help to give them a better life. Try and bring down that huge wage difference between leaders and workers. Give them a reason not to hate America.

But by all means do not add to their hatred by giving them a reason to hate America.

We do this now! How much aid do we give to the Palestinians? What we need to do is bring in NGOs to administer the aid so that the corrupt Palistinian Authority doesn't pillage it and then take credit for it. We won't do it, because no NGO will step forward to administer it. Why? Think hostages and Beruit!

[Jack_Dubious]

A very good interview with Gen. Anthony Zinni, Bush's Middle East envoy.

Here

An excerpt:

"I'm not convinced we need to do this now. I am convinced that we need to deal with Saddam down the road, but I think that the time is difficult because of the conditions in the region and all the other events that are going on. I believe that he can be deterred and is containable at this moment. As a matter of fact, I think the containment can be ratcheted up in a way that is acceptable to everybody.

I do think eventually Saddam has to be dealt with. That could happen in many ways. It could happen that he just withers on the vine, he passes on to the afterlife, something happens within Iraq that changes things, he becomes less powerful, or the inspectors that go in actually accomplish something and eliminate potential weapons of mass destruction -- but I doubt this -- that might be there. "


I think its a fair article with an honest view of the situation. I hope you read it.


JDub

[1stdeadeye]

What?

Originally posted by Jack_Dubious
A very good interview with Gen. Anthony Zinni, Bush's Middle East envoy.

Here

An excerpt:

"I'm not convinced we need to do this now. I am convinced that we need to deal with Saddam down the road, but I think that the time is difficult because of the conditions in the region and all the other events that are going on. I believe that he can be deterred and is containable at this moment. As a matter of fact, I think the containment can be ratcheted up in a way that is acceptable to everybody.

I do think eventually Saddam has to be dealt with. That could happen in many ways. It could happen that he just withers on the vine, he passes on to the afterlife, something happens within Iraq that changes things, he becomes less powerful, or the inspectors that go in actually accomplish something and eliminate potential weapons of mass destruction -- but I doubt this -- that might be there. "


I think its a fair article with an honest view of the situation. I hope you read it.


JDub

How Dare You Bring That Article To Our Debate!!!

Nice article. Maybe all of this pressure is part of Bush's plan to give Saddam a heart attack!

[shartley]

Originally posted by Jack_Dubious
A very good interview with Gen. Anthony Zinni, Bush's Middle East envoy.

Here

An excerpt:

"I'm not convinced we need to do this now. I am convinced that we need to deal with Saddam down the road, but I think that the time is difficult because of the conditions in the region and all the other events that are going on. I believe that he can be deterred and is containable at this moment. As a matter of fact, I think the containment can be ratcheted up in a way that is acceptable to everybody.

I do think eventually Saddam has to be dealt with. That could happen in many ways. It could happen that he just withers on the vine, he passes on to the afterlife, something happens within Iraq that changes things, he becomes less powerful, or the inspectors that go in actually accomplish something and eliminate potential weapons of mass destruction -- but I doubt this -- that might be there. "


I think its a fair article with an honest view of the situation. I hope you read it.


JDub

[Collegeboy]

I don't know about you all but I rather stop future terrorist attacks the helping to cause more. I rather stop the terrorist in the future then to worry about retaliatory for something that has already happened. For it is this retaliatory attitude that will get us in trouble and has gotten us in trouble.

The plain FACT is terrorism thrives on torment, on strife, on trouble. By causing more of that you are only leading to an increase of terrorism. It doesn't matter who did what first, this isn't the 1st grade, it matters on whom did what last.

We step up the populace disproval of these terrorist groups, when get these peoples on our side. We get these people to deal with their own terrorist. We get these people to handle their problems. WE DON NOT DO ANYTHING TO CAUSE MORE TERRORISM.

And no this isn't some thing in my world, it can work and will work. If people would give it a chance.

[aaron_mag]

Re: What?

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye

How Dare You Bring That Article To Our Debate!!!

Nice article. Maybe all of this pressure is part of Bush's plan to give Saddam a heart attack!

As even the French have pointed out Bush's stance has forced Iraq to be more compliant with the weapons inspectors. You may have a point here. We rarely see Saddam in front of the camera but when we do it is obvious that the last ten years have not been kind to him. He's looking kind of gray and toothless. There was another article like this from the US commander in the UN that was printed in our local paper. He didn't come out and say he was against the war but he kept implying that Saddam was contained and not much of a threat.

There will always be people within an administration that do not agree on every point. But it is the job of the head of that administration to take all the information (of which NONE of us have) and make the best decision he can.

What you say is true. We don't have all the information. We can, however, only debate what we know about and what we can guess. If we were in a position to know other facts we certainly would not be posting our thoughts on the internet (I hope not anyway!) As I have mentioned previously, however, seeing people advocate total faith in the government scares me. It may be that in 50 years (when I am in my eighties) and all the facts have been released I may call myself an idiot. I'm sure Shartley will counter with "I'll save you the 50 years and call you an idiot NOW!"

[1stdeadeye]

How do you aid them?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
I don't know about you all but I rather stop future terrorist attacks the helping to cause more. I rather stop the terrorist in the future then to worry about retaliatory for something that has already happened. For it is this retaliatory attitude that will get us in trouble and has gotten us in trouble.

The plain FACT is terrorism thrives on torment, on strife, on trouble. By causing more of that you are only leading to an increase of terrorism. It doesn't matter who did what first, this isn't the 1st grade, it matters on whom did what last.

We step up the populace disproval of these terrorist groups, when get these peoples on our side. We get these people to deal with their own terrorist. We get these people to handle their problems. WE DON NOT DO ANYTHING TO CAUSE MORE TERRORISM.

And no this isn't some thing in my world, it can work and will work. If people would give it a chance. [/QUOTE

How can we aid them? When they are being led by and have elected a leadership that tacitly supports terrorism? How are you going to get this aid and help directly to the people? You have to root out that leadership to reach the people. How much of the humanitarian aid that we sent to Somolia got to the people? Not much as it was raided and stolen by the warlords we left in place. How much of the billions in international aid sent to the Palistinian Authority reaches the Palistinians? Not much. It is pilfered or diverted to buy ships full of weapons (that Israel will catch and sieze anyway)! We can't give them a chance if their own leaders won't. In Iraq though, we can give them a choice after we take Saddam down!

[1stdeadeye]

Re: Re: What?

Originally posted by aaron_mag


It may be that in 50 years (when I am in my eighties) and all the facts have been released I may call myself an idiot. I'm sure Shartley will counter with "I'll save you the 50 years and call you an idiot NOW!"

Ooh, ooh I'll do it!