The Nobel Peace Prize... Among the 2004 Nominees

[Lohman446]

Originally posted by Ov3rmind

It's not peace, but it's not a war. It's conflict, but a few few squabbles and skirmishes is hardly a war.

The world is a worse place because: We've made terrorists even more pissed and Iraq is going to fall apart no matter what we do (religious disputes the Western world does not understand and can not effectively deal with).

Let me first preface any remakrs by saying this is a well thought theory, but one I will personally disagree with.

In an era where anyone can be anywhere in the world given a short amount of travel, and face it fairly open borders any rogue nation, any rogue individual is a threat. The more finances, safe havens, they have, the worse that threat is. Saddam may not have had a hand in 9/11 (may have to, but I'm not trying to discuss that issue) but he would have done the same thing given the opportunity. I don't care if he had WMD (which I question either way, though as Shartley commented, he thought he did). He did present a danger to the United States and its citizens. Invading Iraq again was going to happen, it was a looming danger - Clinton nearly invaded Iraq again and if I recall it was the Republicans throwing a fit about the wag the dog theory. I think we have stabilized the rest of the middle east by drawing terrorists into Iraq - I mean look at Syria when Israel attacked terrorists in their border, did they respond? In essence I beleive that Iraq under Saddam did present a "clear and present danger" to the United States. However, I will immediatly note that we barely crossed that line and can easily see how others would disagree about how real that danger was.

[phantomhitman]

first off-i am not arguing is the war is right or wrong. thank you

so everyone arguing against bush is saying that they would have been fine if saddam would still be in power today? that if bush did not "invade" them saddam would have been controled his country fairly? that if bush didnt "warmonger" saddam would have one day realized that he is a madman?

people get real, saddam is no longer in power, be happy. either that or jump back into your time machine and kill saddam when he was yonger.

[AutomagBoy]

Yeah about those nominee's......

[Koosh]

My reasons for not liking the second gulf war:

1. After we forced the weapons inspectors out of Iraq (back in 2000 I believe), then let them back in last year they didn't have enough time to do a through search. Hell, we've occupied the country for longer then we gave the inspectors time to search, and we still haven't found any.

2. Saddam is a bad guy. Of course he is. But there are TONS of bad people out there. Yes he was a brutal and oppressive dictator, and giving the Iraqi people freedom is a great thing we should be proud of. But why there? Why Iraq? Are we now the worlds watchdogs? Whenever a new, brutal dictator springs up in say... Africa, are we going to send in the Army to dislodge him too? Why not? Do the middle eastern people deserve freedom more then African?

But hey, we can sit here and yell about if we should or shouldn't have went to war until we are all blue in the face. The fact is WE ARE THERE NOW! Lets deal with the bastards who are killing Americans in Iraq, then lets get the hell out of there!. We gave them Freedom from a Dictator. Lets set up elections and fix what we bombed, but we don't need to be there for 5 or 10 years. At least, I hope not.

[bornl33t]

Originally posted by p8ntball1016
Could someone please explain to me how Bush got on that list?

well Irak isn't invading Iran or killing any more kurds....not to mension all the Irakies that are now living their lives peacefully till they die a natural death?

Bush is a good president. Especially if you look at the alternatives. Also, don't forget he IS the president and as such he deserves the support of the American people.