|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,418 Year: 3,675/9,624 Month: 546/974 Week: 159/276 Day: 33/23 Hour: 0/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Keeping the Peace | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Finding Nirvana Inactive Member |
I need somewhere to share my feelings on the war. I think we need to pull out now. It's just a war on religion. It is a chance for Bush to finish what his daddy started. Bush said that Suddam had weapons, it turned out that he didn't. So, why are we still there? We have Suddam, thousands of people are and counting, and what is it all for? Bush wants them to be Christian. The wall between Church and State is beeing demolished. I just need to say, thanks Geaorge. You are unique and heartless man.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
Welcome to evcforum.
Quite a few people here are opposed to the war, while a few favor it. The really hard question is about pulling out. Now that we have broken things in Iraq, do we have a moral responsibility to repair it. I'm inclined to think we do, yet it isn't obvious how. Impeach Bush
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3949 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
well. see. bush jr and bush sr are politically very different. bush sr had sound realist-theory-based foreign policy. when it was better to leave a 'stable' government that was at odds with our more feared enemies in the area, he did so. that's why bush sr didn't take saddam out. because saddam's secular government would not ally with the muslim governments of iran and syria and so forth. by preventing a unified middle east, we ensured some hope for the situation. now, thanks to bushy jr, there could be a unified islamic run middle east.
it has nothing to do with 'what daddy started'. it's fine to disagree with the war. it's not okay to be uninformed in that idea. This message has been edited by brennakimi, 02-05-2006 10:09 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sidelined Member (Idle past 5929 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: |
nwr
The really hard question is about pulling out. Well real men don't like to pull out eh?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1365 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
it has nothing to do with 'what daddy started'. it's fine to disagree with the war. it's not okay to be uninformed in that idea. ever thought that maybe bush is the one who's misinformed about his daddy's policies?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3949 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
entirely likely. but still not the point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6409 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
ever thought that maybe bush is the one who's misinformed about his daddy's policies?
Bush Sr. probably didn't understand Bush Sr.'s policies either. It was handled by his advisors. Bush Jr. wasn't listening to Bush Sr.'s advisors.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1365 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
eh, semantics. but probably right.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
tsig Member (Idle past 2930 days) Posts: 738 From: USA Joined: |
I need somewhere to share my feelings on the war. I think we need to pull out now. It's just a war on religion. It is a chance for Bush to finish what his daddy started. Bush said that Suddam had weapons, it turned out that he didn't. So, why are we still there? We have Suddam, thousands of people are and counting, and what is it all for? Bush wants them to be Christian. The wall between Church and State is beeing demolished. I just need to say, thanks Geaorge. You are unique and heartless man. When you want to get out of a hole the first thing you do is quit digging. How many patrols must the solders do? And what do they find? Except more casualties. What are the terms of disengement?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
angel valkyrie Inactive Member |
I realize that many people opposed the invasion before and during the war, but isn't it time we have to deal with the fact that we did go into Iraq and what's done is done?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminJar Inactive Member |
We're glad you decided to join us.
At the end of this message you will find links to some threads that might help make your stay here more enjoyable. Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
New Members: to get an understanding of what makes great posts, check out:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Finding Nirvana Inactive Member |
I agree with you. What's done is done, but can't we correct this? If we stop digging deeper into his hole, there will be less casualties. By now many families are probably at home crying about the loss of there loved ones. I have to admit I don't disagree with all wars but this is one I can't stand. It would be considered necessary if we were there to actually prevent something. Suddam is captured which stopped the . We found absolutely no weapons of destruction. We should be done. Thst's my whole point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: I doubt that. The fact that the majority of Iraqis are Muslim and that the leaders of the US profess to be Christians is largely a coincidence. Bush and company would have gone to war in Iraq even if they were Muslim or if Iraq were a Christian nation. "Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 1962 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Whilst I disagree with many decisions world leaders of all shades make, one thing that I cannot assent to, is that they are predominantly stupid or rash or unthinking. Our own Taoiseach (prime minister) comes across as a bumbling fool who can barely string a sentence in English together. He was described by a former Taoiseach, who is universally acknowledged as cunning and intelligent "as the most cunning of them all" He has managed to steer himself through any number of political landmines and is referred to as the "Teflon Taoiseach" - nothing ever sticks to him. The public persona belies that which is going on underneath and I smile when people put up quotes from George as if they represented the limits of the man. This is a general view btw- it has nothing to do with his supposed beliefs
This current war was, imo, entered into for specific short, medium and long term strategic reasons. Whilst not every event has been predictable, the very brightest of minds have been think-tanking their way through any number of potential scenarios and nothing that I see thus far bears characteristics which will have taken the Administration by total surprise. If they actually knew there was no wmd then they also knew that that information would come to light. And had a strategy for dealing with it. Bear in mind that world powers will only remain that way if they grow (or at least maintain) a sphere of influence. Nobody knew the reasons why Russia got themselves immersed in a war which could have been maintained at the level of skirmish in Afganisthan. When they left, all that remained was a countryside littered with downed helicopters, burnt out tanks, dead people and a lot of pissed off natives. And a highway leading from Russia borders through Afganisthan all the way to the the oil honey pot called the middle east. If a jump by anyone on this area was to be made then Russia was in pole position. Russia 1 - America 0 In Kosova, declared a United Nations protectorate, the Americans went in and built themselves a runway capable, not of handling just relief cargo planes but of carrying B-52 bombers. The runway points straight at the middle east and is an ideal lauch pad for any full scale air bombardment that might need to be launched on the middle east. Russia 1, America 1 Someone at sometime was going to have to make a jump on middle east oil. Given the strategic importance of it, the idea that it would be left totally in the control of relatively unstable government is unthinkable. I wouldn't say that the Americans went in only for oil but to think that gaining some kind of leverage in an area so critical to the world economy did not inform their thinking would be to ignore reality. One of your governments prime responsibilities is to protect the interests of your nation. If they had information that made them conclude the countries (and by extension in their thinking definitely - the worlds) best interests would be served then serve them they would be compelled to do. They were voted in to govern - not get permission from, their people. If that meant creating a smoke screen to disguise movement as smoke screens are meant to, then deploying it against those they feel they are serving is, I think, permissable. The American public and organs of the state who weren't in a position to be aware of the elements making up the situation could in their ignorance hinder the best interests of themselves. Medicine isn't always pleasant tasting. Sometimes it needs to be forced down. Pulling out will be done either when the plan hatched is fulfilled to the extent that it can be or if the domestic/world situation throws up scenarios which cannot be accomodated by the plan or one modified to adapt to the situation. I do not believe for one minute that the lives of the servicemen and women nor the lives of the Iraqis which are being lost are considered callously by your government. I think that they will plan, and not only for public relations reasons, a best as they can so as to minimise loss. But if life must be lost in order to achieve goals which are considered paramount then that may well be the way it is. Life itself has never been paramount in such situations. It never will be
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I think that they will plan, and not only for public relations reasons, a best as they can so as to minimise loss. Really? My best friend from childhood died in Iraq last year because the Pentagon didn't think it was important to secure 200 tons of high explosives. The insurgency - another detail that just slipped under the radar in the pre-war planning - seized those exposives long after two seperate army divisions had decamped in the area, fashioned them into IEDs, and used them to blow up hundreds of our guys. Including my buddy. All because seizing oil fields was a higher priority than seizing weapons. I'm sorry but I see abolutely no indication that the Administration had any wish to prosecute this war with an eye towards effective minimization of casualties. Instead they've pursued this war with nothing but an eye towards political expediency and advantage.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024