Your Stance On The Iraq war

[Justin]

1.) Do you believe the US invasion of Iraq was justified?
2.) Do you want the US to 'win' the war in Iraq. (To create a stable Iraq without pulling out until after that happens)

[F-ck Casey]

1.) No.
2.) Iraq will never be stable, and the world will never win the "war on terrorism", simply because even our government is a form of terrorism to some. It's an impossible war to "win".

[Chris(tmas)]

Yes. Because of that, Saddam Hoessein was captured.
Yes.

[MegaRon]

1.) Do you believe the US invasion of Iraq was justified?
2.) Do you want the US to 'win' the war in Iraq. (To create a stable Iraq without pulling out until after that happens)

1.) No, we went in there under false intelligence and the president wouldn't let the UN just do their job and look for them first. Sure, Saddam Hussein is a bastard, but we went in there to find weapons of mass destruction and found, what, an expired can of mustard gas?

2.) I don't think we can win. Iraqis don't want the troops there and hundreds are being killed per day because of rebels.

I also hate it when people compare this war to the American revolution, Then again, in the American revolution, there was a militia that fought an oppressive force with guerrilla tactics... no, wait, that sounds just like Iraq. One problem- this time, WE'RE Britain! Know how we know? Our only ally is Britain! ...Oh, wait, I forgot Poland. :roll:

[Linja]

1. No. The 'justification' wasn't all true. Sure, Saddam Hussein was captured, but what about those 'weapons of mass destruction?' Did Bush really expect all those civilians that died (and are still dying) to be hiding weapons of mass destruction under their hijabs?

2. I seriously doubt that Iraq will be declared stable for decades. There are still people dying in every street, riots, invasions, suicide bombers. It's not possible to 'win.'

[Todd]

1.) Do you believe the US invasion of Iraq was justified?
2.) Do you want the US to 'win' the war in Iraq. (To create a stable Iraq without pulling out until after that happens)

1. No
2. Iraq is FUBARed, thanks to Bush. There's no winning or stability for the country in sight.

[Razan]

hiding weapons of mass destruction under their hijabs?
Best.Quote.Ever. :lol: Ninjas are taking over the world.

1. No, originally they went to Iraq for WMD, there weren't any.
2. Not going to happen for decades, so no.

[Mark]

1. No.
2. The US had no business being in there in the first place, and now they've created this mess. If they stay, they'll be there 10 years or more fighting insurgents. Iraq is a lost cause, and shouldn't have even been a cause in the first place. Glad to see some Democratic governors and lawmakers in Congress are voicing their support for a troop withdrawl. If you want the soldiers out, a Democratic president might be your best choice in 2008 (because I doubt they'll be out by then).

[Odaton]

1. Nope
2. No, and I won't rant on because the above posters have explained it pretty clearly!

[Justin]

1. No.
2. The US had no business being in there in the first place, and now they've created this mess. If they stay, they'll be there 10 years or more fighting insurgents. Iraq is a lost cause, and shouldn't have even been a cause in the first place. Glad to see some Democratic governors and lawmakers in Congress are voicing their support for a troop withdrawl. If you want the soldiers out, a Democratic president might be your best choice in 2008 (because I doubt they'll be out by then).

I know, but for Americans, they're your own people. If you read in the news that a soldier from your town or city was killed, you wouldn't be thinking "YES! They killed the bastard!" would you?

I was and still am strongly against the war, and I really hope that Iraq will become a stable country soon so that the US can withdraw. Just because someone is serving their country for a really shitty reason doesn't mean that they deserved to be killed. Sure, there are bound to be bad soldiers serving in Iraq, but the vast majority of them are just trying to survive so they can get back home to their loved ones.

[Mark]

I know, but for Americans, they're your own people. If you read in the news that a soldier from your town or city was killed, you wouldn't be thinking "YES! They killed the bastard!" would you?

What part of my answer has anything to do with that?

[Justin]

I wasn't pointing that question at anyone in particular. I doubt that anyone on this board feels that way.

[saunderitos]

1.) Do you believe the US invasion of Iraq was justified?
2.) Do you want the US to 'win' the war in Iraq. (To create a stable Iraq without pulling out until after that happens)


1) For Christ sake NO
2) NO LEAVE NOW BEFORE MORE PEOPLE DIE

[insanechica007]

1) YES! Saddam had uranium there and god knows what else. He had 10 UN Resolutions to get his weapons out during CLINTON'S Administration, but he never did. And everytime the UN would TRY to search his estates and warehouses, he wouldn't let them in. He killed THOUSANDS of his people by torture and gases..he was like the Hitler of the Middle East. My dad was IN Iraq and he met people who knew people who said something bad about Saddam and were gone the next week, most likely killed. These Iraqis were in NO position to get rid of their dictator, for they were too terrified. What about the Kurds? How many of them where killed? Saddam is an evil bastard and yes, we had the grounds to invade them.

2) YES! We are doing great over there. All the shit they tell you about on the news..suicide bombers against US troops..insurgent attacks..is not that common. The media LIES. I mean, why do you think there are so many against Bush? The Iraqis are GLAD to have us there. If we were to pull out now, there are still enough radicals to throw the country into somewhat of a civil war. Yes, people have died, but MORE people died under Saddam's rule. LOOK what we have done! We made them free. They have a Constitution now. Free elections. In fact, people who voted had to risk getting killed to vote. People, my dad told me, would run out of their homes when his unit went through Bahgdad, waving and shouting praise. He told me he had random Iraqis come up and give them gifts, and young mothers would be out with their babies, waving their arms. THEY knew that their children won't have to live in the world they grew up in, of torture and fear. We shouldn't come out until the Iraqis are stable enough to rebuild and stand on their own two feet.

My dad is Lt. Col. Mark Bannach of the US Marines. His unit was a bulk fuel unit, giving fuel to US veichles.

[Branden]

1.) Yes. They went in after WMDs, and found a slingshot and an unloaded pellet gun. I guess they found what they were after, so I give that guy in the White House a big :thumbsup:

[Justin]

He killed THOUSANDS of his people by torture and gases..he was like the Hitler of the Middle East.
Yeah, the gassing of the Kurds was terrible. Ronald Reagan sold the chemical weapons used to kill the Kurds


Saddam is an evil bastard and yes, we had the grounds to invade them.
If you have the right to invade another country because the President believes that their leader was evil, that gives other nations a right to invade the US if they think Bush is evil, right?

[F-ck Casey]

If you have the right to invade another country because the President believes that their leader was evil, that gives other nations a right to invade the US if they think Bush is evil, right?

Yeah. But we'd kick their ass. AMERICA FUCK YEAH!

[Mark]

1) YES! Saddam had uranium there and god knows what else. He had 10 UN Resolutions to get his weapons out during CLINTON'S Administration, but he never did. And everytime the UN would TRY to search his estates and warehouses, he wouldn't let them in. He killed THOUSANDS of his people by torture and gases..he was like the Hitler of the Middle East. My dad was IN Iraq and he met people who knew people who said something bad about Saddam and were gone the next week, most likely killed. These Iraqis were in NO position to get rid of their dictator, for they were too terrified. What about the Kurds? How many of them where killed? Saddam is an evil bastard and yes, we had the grounds to invade them.

2) YES! We are doing great over there. All the shit they tell you about on the news..suicide bombers against US troops..insurgent attacks..is not that common. The media LIES. I mean, why do you think there are so many against Bush? The Iraqis are GLAD to have us there. If we were to pull out now, there are still enough radicals to throw the country into somewhat of a civil war. Yes, people have died, but MORE people died under Saddam's rule. LOOK what we have done! We made them free. They have a Constitution now. Free elections. In fact, people who voted had to risk getting killed to vote. People, my dad told me, would run out of their homes when his unit went through Bahgdad, waving and shouting praise. He told me he had random Iraqis come up and give them gifts, and young mothers would be out with their babies, waving their arms. THEY knew that their children won't have to live in the world they grew up in, of torture and fear. We shouldn't come out until the Iraqis are stable enough to rebuild and stand on their own two feet.

My dad is Lt. Col. Mark Bannach of the US Marines. His unit was a bulk fuel unit, giving fuel to US veichles.

You had grounds to invade them? Where are the WMDs? The uranium? All I read is hearsay, where's the proof or evidence?

Saddam wouldn't let people into his palaces? That's a UN problem, not the US' priority. The UN could've solved this themselves. This is all about gaining a foothold in an oil-rich part of the world in a time where oil is becoming less and less available in the face of rising demand.

I have great respect for your father going over there and being a part of the army, but he was sent over there for malicious reasons against his or anyone else in the army's knowledge. I understand the obligation you may feel to support him in his cause, and I completely respect that, but there were no WMDs, and that means there was no reason for the US to invade Iraq.

[Will]

The invasion of Iraq was not justified. There was no proof that there were any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and President Bush wouldn't let the United Nations look for themselves. He breached UN security by invading Iraq in the first place. He should've been banned from the UN just for that, which I'm surprised never happened.

Now that the United States is over there, sure, I want them to win the war. They're not going to, though. That's like the Boston Red Sox winning two World Series in a row.

[Razan]

Iraqis are GLAD to have us there.
That made me laugh.
How many Iraqis do you know personally that are happy you're bombing their country, since you're so SURE they are? Who's dying? Saddam is alive. Hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis who have nothing to do with the war are dead.
I have alot of respect for your dad going there, he must be courageous and love his country but I don't think you would like the war so much if he didn't come back...

[insanechica007]

Yes, I still would've supported Bush. Didn't you not read what I said about the Iraqis running out of their homes just to wave at my father's troop? Did you skip over the part where I said of the hospitality they all offered to them because they were so happy just to see them? I can give you pictures of people that my father's troop helped. Pictures of Iraqis greeting them. You want to talk to my dad? You want more proof??

Yes, there was proof. The media lies. They FOUND uranium. God knows what else could be hidden there. That's 10 UN Resolutions. Ten!! Eventually, someone was going to have to go in. WE'RE part of the UN. How do we know he wouldn't have used them against us, something much bigger that would kill more than 9/11. How are we bombing them? As I said, more people died under Saddam's rule than from us being in there. Now, who's court is trying Saddam? The Iraqis. Without us, they wouldn't have had the courts to do that because there was no such thing as a fair trial. Their 'leader' WAS evil. IS. It's not a matter of opinion. Bush isn't evil. He's not killing his own people. Yeah, it's a war, people die, but he's not raping people and killing them because he ramdomly feels like it. If Bush was in the least like Saddam, most of you would be dead. They couldn't have free speech. Where's the proof of Bush just wanting to get their oil?

Yes, it was completely justified. The point is not "gaining a foothold in an oil-rich part of the world". It's to free them. And to get them a fair government. Yeah, it's a war. It's not pretty. But from the start of it, the media has been completely left-sided. Democrats and regular people just lashing out at Bush. But, it's never analytical enough to make sense.

That's all I have to say about that.

[girl15]

1. no :peace:
2. no, i don't think so...
short answers...

[saunderitos]

1) YES! Saddam had uranium there and god knows what else. He had 10 UN Resolutions to get his weapons out during CLINTON'S Administration, but he never did. And everytime the UN would TRY to search his estates and warehouses, he wouldn't let them in. He killed THOUSANDS of his people by torture and gases..he was like the Hitler of the Middle East. My dad was IN Iraq and he met people who knew people who said something bad about Saddam and were gone the next week, most likely killed. These Iraqis were in NO position to get rid of their dictator, for they were too terrified. What about the Kurds? How many of them where killed? Saddam is an evil bastard and yes, we had the grounds to invade them.

2) YES! We are doing great over there. All the shit they tell you about on the news..suicide bombers against US troops..insurgent attacks..is not that common. The media LIES. I mean, why do you think there are so many against Bush? The Iraqis are GLAD to have us there. If we were to pull out now, there are still enough radicals to throw the country into somewhat of a civil war. Yes, people have died, but MORE people died under Saddam's rule. LOOK what we have done! We made them free. They have a Constitution now. Free elections. In fact, people who voted had to risk getting killed to vote. People, my dad told me, would run out of their homes when his unit went through Bahgdad, waving and shouting praise. He told me he had random Iraqis come up and give them gifts, and young mothers would be out with their babies, waving their arms. THEY knew that their children won't have to live in the world they grew up in, of torture and fear. We shouldn't come out until the Iraqis are stable enough to rebuild and stand on their own two feet.

My dad is Lt. Col. Mark Bannach of the US Marines. His unit was a bulk fuel unit, giving fuel to US veichles.




aww dude shut the fuck up, i would bet my life the reason that they were cheering is that it wasn't a group of american triggy happy bastards who decide to attack their allies.

The media DOES lie, but I think your dad lies aswell.

and apart from that, woow,fucking fuel unit, no one cares what rank your dad is.

oh and i believe that more people died in bushs attempt to free them. bullshit about the freedom though,he wanted oil.

bush fucking sucks,and so does the american army.

[Will]

If you actually believe that there were weapons in Iraq then I feel sorry for you. Everyone knows there weren't and Bush even admitted that there weren't. And if he didn't someone else in his cabinet did. That much I remember.

Uranium. Ooh. Scary.

[Mark]

Yes, I still would've supported Bush. Didn't you not read what I said about the Iraqis running out of their homes just to wave at my father's troop? Did you skip over the part where I said of the hospitality they all offered to them because they were so happy just to see them? I can give you pictures of people that my father's troop helped. Pictures of Iraqis greeting them. You want to talk to my dad? You want more proof??

Yes, there was proof. The media lies. They FOUND uranium. God knows what else could be hidden there. That's 10 UN Resolutions. Ten!! Eventually, someone was going to have to go in. WE'RE part of the UN. How do we know he wouldn't have used them against us, something much bigger that would kill more than 9/11. How are we bombing them? As I said, more people died under Saddam's rule than from us being in there. Now, who's court is trying Saddam? The Iraqis. Without us, they wouldn't have had the courts to do that because there was no such thing as a fair trial. Their 'leader' WAS evil. IS. It's not a matter of opinion. Bush isn't evil. He's not killing his own people. Yeah, it's a war, people die, but he's not raping people and killing them because he ramdomly feels like it. If Bush was in the least like Saddam, most of you would be dead. They couldn't have free speech. Where's the proof of Bush just wanting to get their oil?

Yes, it was completely justified. The point is not "gaining a foothold in an oil-rich part of the world". It's to free them. And to get them a fair government. Yeah, it's a war. It's not pretty. But from the start of it, the media has been completely left-sided. Democrats and regular people just lashing out at Bush. But, it's never analytical enough to make sense.

That's all I have to say about that.

You say they found uranium, but where's the proof? Back up your statements.

It's true, the US is part of the UN. But it's not the States' job to do a job the UN could have done much more effectively and without you further jeopardizing your countries safety by pissing off almost the entire world. The US could've went in there with UN help if the UN saw fit that Iraq had WMDs. But there were no WMDs, and that's why the UN didn't go in. Surely you'd think if the US had proof there were weapons of mass destruction, they'd show their proof to the UN before saying "we'll do this ourselves". Why piss off the entire UN? There's a hidden reason for this war. Please explain to me why the US couldn't have done it that way. How is this logical?

Saddam was no threat to America. There was no link between Hussein/Irai gov't and Al Qaeda. Absolutely none. A complete fabrication by the Bush administration. (Proof (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html)). Saddam had no motive or capacity to attack America. It's all unfounded paranoia. Started by your government to keep the masses paralyzed with fear and forced into submission that "he knows best" for your country. It's an absolute travesty.

If it was the US' job to take out every "evil dictator" in the world, the army would be spread so thin that you'd have to start making clones of people to have sufficient numbers. Why was Iraq such a specific target? Why not Darfur? Columbia? Congo? Rwanda? All these places have citizens in which they're being terrorized by civil war or corrupt governments. If the US feels it's their job to invade a country with no credible evidence by masking it as a "liberation" of their people to install "freedom" and "democracy", why not go into a country where there's sufficient evidence to show that genocides and atrocities are occuring? That's right, there's no considerable amount of untouched oil in any of those countries. Surely you're not that naive.

If you gave the media and Democrats a chance to prove their points before dismissing it as slander in a self-protective attempt to shield yourself from doubting what you believe is the truth, you might notice that this war is an absolute mess that shouldn't of happened in the first place

Saunderitos: You're warned. Never tell anyone to "shut the fuck up" here. There's a difference between disagreeing with someone's opinion and just completely insulting them for having one. Calm down.

[Will]

Also, FOX News Channel, the most right-wing news source on cable television, has even admitted that Bush fucked up.

[savetomorrow]

Yeah. But we'd kick their ass. AMERICA FUCK YEAH!

I dunno about that, most of our troops are in Iraq.

and of course we should have gone! The man bought yellow cake from Africa

[Mark]

I dunno about that, most of our troops are in Iraq.

and of course we should have gone! The man bought yellow cake from Africa

Source?

Actually, both you and Insanechica are wrong about uranium. The white house itself admitted they were wrong about Saddam buying Uranium from Africa. (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/09/iraq/main562312.shtml) The man LIED in his state of the nation address! It was based on forged documents!

And who said it was to use against Americans? Saddam couldn't have threatened you with it because he didn't have it, and even if he did he most likely didn't have the capacity to use it against the US.

That's why you fact check instead of believing everything you hear from your president. Can't exactly disagree with the man you idolize, can you?

[Will]

What's "yellow cake"?

Angel food cake?

[savetomorrow]

What's "yellow cake"?

Angel food cake?

Sorry I thought more people saw the Black Bush skit by Dave Chapelle.

This war is a pointless mess that is costing us not just money, but the lives of many soldiers. Sure, "we are winning" is a common response from Bush supporters but how can you win against a general enemy: evil-doers? A war against no common enemy is a war that will last years upon years. Now we have to stay the course because we have a new Iraqi government we'll have to watch over for years to come even though we were suppost to "hand over the power" to the Iraqi government July 30th of 2004.

[Mark]

Sorry I thought more people saw the Black Bush skit by Dave Chapelle.

This war is a pointless mess that is costing us not just money, but the lives of many soldiers. Sure, "we are winning" is a common response from Bush supporters but how can you win against a general enemy: evil-doers? A war against no common enemie is a war that will last years upon years. Now we have to stay the course because we have a new Iraqi government we'll have to watch over for years to come even though we were supposted to "hand over the power" to the Iraqi government July 30th of 2004.

You were being sarcastic? Try and make it more obvious next time, nothing with your post indicated sarcasm. ;)

[Odaton]

Where's the proof of Bush just wanting to get their oil?

One: Look at the spikes in oil prices due to the hurricanes this summer! This is due to a supply that is barely meeting the demand now and which cannot meet it if cheaper imports cannot come in. American oil companies make quarterly profits of $3-10 Billion (Exxon Mobil has profits of $10 billion the quarter of high oil prices), and companies that large have a HUGE, HUGE incentive on the government. If they want to keep their industry alive, cheaper oil imports from the Middle East is essential...and that means securing the supply. And yes, I know my economics I'm getting 93 in the senior course.

Two: Why would President Bush invade Iraq without any proof of nuclear or chemical weapons? Why would they go to such lengths to fabricate this evidence? Why would the Bush Administration use the media to spread lies about the alledged link between Saddam and Al-Queda? All of this because they needed a reason to invade Iraq to gain a foothold in this region, and they had no valid reasons.

Three: So, Saddam is a dictator and a murderer you say? Fair enough. Why, then, have countless dictators across the world gone unchecked, slaughtering millions? What about the murderous military dictatorships installed in Latin America during the days of Ronald Reagan? What about the supplying of weapons of mass destruction to Saddam by George Bush Sr., as well as supplying the Taliban (and Osama bin Laden) in Afghanistan? This is because Americans had something to gain by supporting these oppressive regimes, but you don't hear this on the news, do you? The only reason they went after Saddam is because their once-ally became uncooperative and they decided to invade to gain more control over the second largest oil producer in the world. Ironic? Definately not.




Yes, it was completely justified. The point is not "gaining a foothold in an oil-rich part of the world". It's to free them. And to get them a fair government. Yeah, it's a war. It's not pretty. But from the start of it, the media has been completely left-sided. Democrats and regular people just lashing out at Bush. But, it's never analytical enough to make sense.

That's all I have to say about that.

This is the largest Conservative myth I know...the liberal media! This is simply a huge propaganda tool used by neo-conservatives to justify scaling back the accepted limit of public beliefs and values. How would liberals have any control over the media? Almost all the outlets of media (newspaper, radio, TV, internet, film) are basically controlled by five international corporations, Time-Warner, General Electric, News Corporation, Disney, and Viacom. These corporations would all support conservative, economy-based policies of the Republicans, who will give them subsidies and tax cuts. The conservative voice is the voice of the media, since they are the ones who own it. See Noam Chomsky's and Edward Herman's Manufacturing Consent for twenty years of research and analysis on this subject. Of course there are some liberal ideas, but that is because dissent has to happen...but really the media rarely really analyzes the situation or makes conclusions other than the ones you would already know.

I hope your last sentence means that you were finished with your post, not debating with us :)

[insanechica007]

Saddam was no threat to America. There was no link between Hussein/Irai gov't and Al Qaeda. Absolutely none. A complete fabrication by the Bush administration. (Proof (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html)).

Washington Post. CBS. Mainstream, left-sided media. It's insane what they'll to to bash Bush..I don't even read my own newspaper but.. What the UN was doing wasn't helping at all. Something had to happen. I could post articles and interviews but I don't have the time at the moment.

Wow, I didn't know this would upset so many people. My father is no liar, hon. And he's not in the army. He's in the Marines. Saunderitos, that was really disrespectful. I respect everyone else's opinions because they're actually doing so in a sophisticated manner. They have their opinions and they back them up. You, you just told me my "woow,fucking fuel unit, no one cares what rank your dad is." How is that supporting anything? How is that helping? It's not right for you to say something like that because it sounds like you don't know what you're saying. If you give me a reason, I'll honor it, but telling me I "fucking suck" doesn't have anything to do with why you dislike the war. I could be alot more angry right now but I'm not.

Thank you all for not bashing out at me..I've left other forums because too many people started sending me hate mail and such..so thanks.

[Odaton]

@Insanechica007: for my reply to your last post...look at my previous essay...I don't want to write another one :lol:

And I know the bashers you run into...however that kind of stuff is modded quite well as you can see and I like to debate rather than yell at people!

[Will]

The only thing that I can safely say that I find amusing is that Bush supporters never "have time" to back up their responses, nor do they ever provide legitimate sources.

[Mark]

Washington Post. CBS. Mainstream, left-sided media. It's insane what they'll to to bash Bush..I don't even read my own newspaper but.. What the UN was doing wasn't helping at all. Something had to happen. I could post articles and interviews but I don't have the time at the moment.

Wow, I didn't know this would upset so many people. My father is no liar, hon. And he's not in the army. He's in the Marines. Saunderitos, that was really disrespectful. I respect everyone else's opinions because they're actually doing so in a sophisticated manner. They have their opinions and they back them up. You, you just told me my "woow,fucking fuel unit, no one cares what rank your dad is." How is that supporting anything? How is that helping? It's not right for you to say something like that because it sounds like you don't know what you're saying. If you give me a reason, I'll honor it, but telling me I "fucking suck" doesn't have anything to do with why you dislike the war. I could be alot more angry right now but I'm not.

Thank you all for not bashing out at me..I've left other forums because too many people started sending me hate mail and such..so thanks.

You can call whatever media source you want biased, but CBS is hardly a left-sided media. You live in a country where over half of your people don't trust your "President" and think he misled you into war. The majority of Americans disagree with your "President"s motives, but does that make them all left-wing liberal nutcases? No. That makes them logical.

Besides, call CBS as left-winged as you want, but CBS was just reporting what the 9/11 Commission stated. You know, that commission your "President" was first against (probably because it'd expose his mishandling of briefings and warnings) and then allowed to investigate the 9/11 attacks. You cannot possibly disagree with that government-approved commission's report. It's completely baseless and contradictory.

The tactic you're using here is "smearing". It was the Republicans' main modus operandi during both the 2000 and 2004 elections. It's a tactic used when they know their backs are up against the wall and they're cornered, so they lash out at everything and try to de-credit the sources through slander. You're doing it, and it makes no sense. Instead, please try providing sources to de-credit my proof, instead of just saying it's not true. Good luck, though, since that proof is concrete.

[Odaton]

Especially when the government who commissioned it was trying to cover it up! :lol:

[Will]

Going along with what Mark said, I've also stated that the FOX News Channel, which is, easily, the most conservative news channel on cable television, has admitted that President Bush was in the wrong, and they're the ones who spent the most time supporting him. FOX News Channel is a huge, huge news source, so the fact that even they're admitting that President Bush fabricated everything should be a testament to how much he's misled the nation. Just watch any news program on there now. Before the 9/11 Commission's reports, FOX supported Bush like they were his third leg.

[Razan]

insanechica007: Everyone already said what I wanted to say but yes, there were some Iraqis that wanted the US to go there. Keywords: "were some". They just wanted Saddam to leave because everyone fucking hated him.
As I said before, Saddam is acctually alive and well, while Iraqis/American soldiers are dying. I'm not saying your dad is going up to any random Iraqi and blowing his head off, I'm just saying that I don't think the 27,295 to 30,789 Iraqis that died were all evil monsters plotting against America. Btw, that isn't the number of total deaths, that's only the number of people killed by soldiers. Now there are stupid extremists going around blowing themselves up so add another few thousand dead so far.
Not to mention the 2,113 US soldiers that died.
Now tell me all those deaths are justified.

inventionofitstime1004: LMAO. Mars, bitches!

[saunderitos]

Wow, I didn't know this would upset so many people. My father is no liar, hon. And he's not in the army. He's in the Marines. Saunderitos, that was really disrespectful. I respect everyone else's opinions because they're actually doing so in a sophisticated manner. They have their opinions and they back them up. You, you just told me my "woow,fucking fuel unit, no one cares what rank your dad is." How is that supporting anything? How is that helping? It's not right for you to say something like that because it sounds like you don't know what you're saying. If you give me a reason, I'll honor it, but telling me I "fucking suck" doesn't have anything to do with why you dislike the war. I could be alot more angry right now but I'm not.


So you support a crazed president who invades a country for economical benefit but will not accept that I think your Dad lies?
You said yourself that the media lies, why not your parents?
Your Dad isn't perfect 'hon',and neither is mine. Everybody lies.
Opinions need no backing, because they are opinionated. I can think whatever I like, and say whatever I like.
I dislike the war because I dislike pointless slaughter of innocents.
I dislike the war because the american system is hypocritical.
I dislike the war because the american system only does what is for benefit of themselves. Whether it be to 'look good' to the world, or to have economical benfits.
I dislike the war because america should have pulled out long ago, even though they shouldn't have entered.
I dislike the war because my countries system followed like a puppet for no reason.
I dislike the war because it is KILLING PEOPLE for some phoney reason.
I dislike the war because I am sick of america trying to be the world police.


There are my views, are you happy?
The REASONS why I dislike the war.
I couldn't careless whether you respect me or not.
Now I have shown my views in a sophisticated way, you have no reason try and say that my opinion is wrong. Which by the way I didn't say for you.



Saunderitos: You're warned. Never tell anyone to "shut the fuck up" here. There's a difference between disagreeing with someone's opinion and just completely insulting them for having one. Calm down.
:( I'm sorry Mark.
LoL I'll be more composed from now on.

[Razan]

Opinions need no backing, because they are opinionated. I can think whatever I like, and say whatever I like.
No offense but what's the point of even "debating" on anything if you're just going to saying whatever the fuck you want without back up/proof? I'm not saying I disagree with anything you said but that quote was just...I don't know the right word for it but if anyone said that to you, you would probably not take what they're saying seriously. I prefer debating on facts.

[insanechica007]

They are. It's a war. There is a difference between innocent deaths and deaths caused by war. In a war, people get killed. What about the Civil War? How many civilians and soldiers died in that? And the Korean War?? Death is always there. And, also, when people inlist, they know they are at risk of getting killed. Same goes for the Iraqis. They aren't innocent. They're soldiers. And the civilians? Yes, not most of it is their fault, but it's their own people killing them. What about suicide bombers? You can't tell me that they're American. And who are they blowing up? Yes, the US troops, but how many of their own people do they kill along with them? Alot of them don't even see their fellow Iraqis as their own people.

Okay, saunderitos, you put forth your opinion. That's all I asked. You couldn't care less if I respected you or not? I shouldn't. After all, you've called my father a liar. Why would he lie? But, I'm choosing to look apon this as

There was proof that he had WMDs. 10 UN resolutions. What about the fact that he wouldn't let the UN search him and his estates? Bush didn't lie. And the fact that Katrina happened wasn't his fault. Besides, oil priced didn't even go as high as predicted. Americans use alot of gas..the prices are going to have been going up. And the dictartors in Latin America? They had no reason to harm us. The Cuban government isn't nearly as deadly as the Iraqi government once was. The US never supplied Iraq with the means to make WMDs. But, what I don't understand is why is it never Clinton who did anything. Have you noticed that all the former presidents that are put down are never liberals? Clinton was one of the worst things to happen to this country. He fucked this all up before Bush had even gotten here. I just wanted to point that out.

No, I'm not, as long as Bush is alive. :D

[Odaton]

All of this has evidence of no proof and much of it shows that you have no idea what you're talking about.


There was proof that he had WMDs. 10 UN resolutions. What about the fact that he wouldn't let the UN search him and his estates? Bush didn't lie.

One, before the war the UN was in the midst of an inspection that Saddam had AGREED to. This is a widely known fact, and if you want a source I'll provide it.


And the fact that Katrina happened wasn't his fault. Besides, oil priced didn't even go as high as predicted. Americans use alot of gas..the prices are going to have been going up.

Two, of course Katrina wasn't his fault...but the same thing happened, didn't it? Nobodies to blame, but to stop these things from happening again oil securities are very important to economic stability.


And the dictartors in Latin America? They had no reason to harm us. The Cuban government isn't nearly as deadly as the Iraqi government once was.

Three, about the dictators...what does it matter that they didn't want to harm us? The U.S. was installing murderous regimes in Latin America letting them kill off the opposition in their country while supplying these regimes with arms and recon! Cuba? This is no dictatorship really, look at Guatamala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua...millions of people died between them. I was saying that all of this freedom fighting seriously contradicts a lot of previous and current US policies.

Four, you are saying the Iraqi gov't was deadly to us? Any proof? The Bush Administration ADMITTED there was no WMDs found in the country but yet used other excuses like Saddam's gassing of the Kurds. This has been said many times in this thread!


The US never supplied Iraq with the means to make WMDs.

Five, I never said this! But they did supply Iraq with chemical and nuclear weapons.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

But, what I don't understand is why is it never Clinton who did anything. Have you noticed that all the former presidents that are put down are never liberals? Clinton was one of the worst things to happen to this country. He fucked this all up before Bush had even gotten here. I just wanted to point that out.

Six, how come Clinton isn't blamed? First of all, Clinton didn't start any wars and other than in Serbia did little in the way of interventionalist policies, rather than the neo-conservatives Bush Sr., Bush Jr., and Reagan. Clintons was impeached over a sexual affair...how insignificant compared to G.W. Bush and tens of thousands of Iraqis and over 2000 Americans dead by his hands. Thats why Clinton wasn't blamed...how did he fuck up the country, anyways?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry I am coming off mad, but I am frustrated that while you are discussing, you fail to read others points and think critically on them. And when you do, you say your opinions but show know proof, and to a person who has studied these topics you come off as someone who hasn't really read into recent World History very much. Thats fine, but please don't keep spouting statements with no basis or merit.

[Mark]

Six, how come Clinton isn't blamed? First of all, Clinton didn't start any wars and other than in Serbia did little in the way of interventionalist policies, rather than the neo-conservatives Bush Sr., Bush Jr., and Reagan. Clintons was impeached over a sexual affair...how insignificant compared to G.W. Bush and tens of thousands of Iraqis and over 2000 Americans dead by his hands. Thats why Clinton wasn't blamed...how did he fuck up the country, anyways?

Unless you consider the largest budget surplus in United States history "fucking up" your country. :lol:

In 1992, when Clinton first got into office, the Federal budget deficit was $290 billion. That was ran up by Bush Sr. The Congressional Budget Office predicted it would rise to a deficit of $445 billion by 2000. (Source (http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/economy.html)) In 2000, Clinton reported a record budget surplus of $230 billlion, beating the previous year's then-record of $122.7 billion. (Source (http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/09/27/clinton.surplus/)) In 2004, Bush declared that the federal budget deficit would be $500 bilion, the highest deficit in US history. (Source (http://money.cnn.com/2004/02/25/news/economy/greenspan/))

Insane: Hearsay does not count as credible proof. You need to back up your statements instead of introducing flawed, baseless arguments.

[Odaton]

Holy shit! $230 billion SURPLUS? I think the current Canadian surplus, $9 billion, is one of the highest ever! IT kinda dwarfs in comparison!

Opinion:
I'd have to say much of the pro-Bush arguement from the citizens is the product of much of the fear and lack of balanced information that is presented by the media. Also, with Bush lowering taxes and the US social safety net, he lowers the skill/intelligence level of the general population. People who have less education in some way (be it trades, university, or whatever) are less informed and less able to make critical decisions based on the facts presented. I think that Bush's preaching of protection, religious, and faith caters to the comfort zones of American minds, pacifying their actual concerns because of overwhelming paranoia that has been created by the media and corporations.

[saunderitos]

What about the fact that he wouldn't let the UN search him and his estates?


America don't allow UN inspectors to enter america.

America is just hypocritical, they have the most Nuclear weaponary/ chemical weaponary in the world, so why do they kill people who have them aswell?


After all, you've called my father a liar. Why would he lie?

Why don't you ask him that, I think that your father lied because I think it is ridiculous about what he said,happening. Why would you greet men who are killing you,destroying your hospitals with 'precision weaponary', blowing up apsrin factories because you THINK you are making weapons there? Oh, thats right, he is just supplying fuel to the tanks that destroy their towns and cities.

Why are there people prepared to destroy themselves to kill a few of you?

[Will]

America don't allow UN inspectors to enter america.
Uh, dude, the UN headquarters is IN America.

[saunderitos]

Uh, dude, the UN headquarters is IN America.


hmmm,maybe EU, I muddle them up alot ^^

[insanechica007]

You all might find this intresting..this backing up what I said about being in Iraq had nothing to do with its oil. Look here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/iraq/iraq_strategy_nov2005.html

In this, an official statement from the White House, it states reasons as to why being in Iraq is of US intrest: "Iraq is the central front in the global war on terror. Failure in Iraq will embolden terrorists and expand their reach; success in Iraq will deal them a decisive and crippling blow. The fate of the greater Middle East -- which will have a profound and lasting impact on American security -- hangs in the balance."

It also states, further on: "We will help the Iraqi people build a new Iraq with a constitutional, representative government that respects civil rights and has security forces sufficient to maintain domestic order and keep Iraq from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. To achieve this end, we are pursuing an integrated strategy along three broad tracks, which together incorporate the efforts of the Iraqi government, the Coalition, cooperative countries in the region, the international community, and the United Nations."

And furter more: "Our Strategy Is Working. Much has been accomplished in Iraq, including the removal of Saddam's tyranny, negotiation of an interim constitution, restoration of full sovereignty, holding of free national elections, formation of an elected government, drafting of a permanent constitution, ratification of that constitution, introduction of a sound currency, gradual restoration of Iraq's neglected infrastructure, and the ongoing training and equipping of Iraq's security forces."

It gives cold, clear reasons as to why we are there, why we are staying, and what's happening in Iraq. The page also has links to statements from the president on issues such as Hurricane Katrinia relief, and Homeland Security.

There you go.

[insanechica007]

You all might find this intresting..this backing up what I said about being in Iraq had nothing to do with its oil. Look here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/ir...y_nov2005.html

In this, an official statement from the White House, it states reasons as to why being in Iraq is of US intrest: "Iraq is the central front in the global war on terror. Failure in Iraq will embolden terrorists and expand their reach; success in Iraq will deal them a decisive and crippling blow. The fate of the greater Middle East -- which will have a profound and lasting impact on American security -- hangs in the balance."

It also states, further on: "We will help the Iraqi people build a new Iraq with a constitutional, representative government that respects civil rights and has security forces sufficient to maintain domestic order and keep Iraq from becoming a safe haven for terrorists. To achieve this end, we are pursuing an integrated strategy along three broad tracks, which together incorporate the efforts of the Iraqi government, the Coalition, cooperative countries in the region, the international community, and the United Nations."

And furter more: "Our Strategy Is Working. Much has been accomplished in Iraq, including the removal of Saddam's tyranny, negotiation of an interim constitution, restoration of full sovereignty, holding of free national elections, formation of an elected government, drafting of a permanent constitution, ratification of that constitution, introduction of a sound currency, gradual restoration of Iraq's neglected infrastructure, and the ongoing training and equipping of Iraq's security forces."

It gives cold, clear reasons as to why we are there, why we are staying, and what's happening in Iraq. The page also has links to statements from the president on issues such as Hurricane Katrinia relief, and Homeland Security.

There you go.

[Will]

LMFAO.

Of course a White House report is going to say that!!! It's run by Bush's administration!

Why don't you go read the 9/11 Commission? It might open your eyes. But before you claim it's "anti-Bush," remember that it was organized by Bush himself and even BLOCKED by Bush before it became public.

[Mark]

Hahaha! I can't believe you accused us of using biased sources and then come to us with White House reports! That's rich.

[saunderitos]

Hahaha! I can't believe you accused us of using biased sources and then come to us with White House reports! That's rich.


^^

[Odaton]

To take it to the extreme, thats like someone in World War 2 supporting Nazi propaganda by giving people some of their fliers! We would all be fools to believe that.

I'm not saying that there is no proof to your point, but first of all you need to give evidence that disproves our evidence that we back with proof. But a government website will not be a good source of information for this issue, speaking of bias! Of course they are going to say positive things about Iraq since that is a policy they are trying to gain support for!

[foofightersgroopie]

I know I am only 17 and the rest of you guys have a close up on life because you are livin on you own. But what I have to say about the war does not need to be over looked.
I think that the war idea has a plus side. I mean, look at it this way. I'm an American. Damn proud of it. And to sit around while Iraquies bomb my country, Bush made a good choice. Now I know that part of the people here say that we should not be about fighting, it should be about developing peace on earth and all that crap. Well for get it, it aint gunna happen, as long as there are thugs, gangs, and rapists out there there will never be peace. So why make a country look wimpy when we have the equiptment to fight back and protect our selfs.
Now I know that yall could care less about what a 17 year old has to say, but come on, use your brain for once. Not all the Bush has done is bad.

[Todd]

And to sit around while Iraquies bomb my country


When did Iraq ever bomb the US? Oh, um, how about NEVER

[insanechica007]

So now you are all saying that this lied.
Okay, I can work with that.
How do you know that all of your sources aren't lying? How do you know that Bush is lying? How does anyone know anything?
I doubt they would lie in an official statement from the government. This isn't some CBS report or TIME article here. This is the real plan. It's not an opinion. It's not a matter if the media will accept it or not. It's the real thing. I'm not saying that my source are better than yours, I'm just saying that this is from the White House.
Once the White House says Bush fucked up about this, then I'll believe it.

[Will]

This just in:

The White House already said that the Bush administration fucked up.

IT'S CALLED THE "9/11 COMMISSION REPORT."

Are you even reading anything we're saying?

Also, the government lies all the damn time. Reagan's administration lied, Nixon's adminstration lied, Clinton's adminstration lied, they've all lied.

[Justin]

When did Iraq ever bomb the US? Oh, um, how about NEVER

Yeah they did! Saddam Husin bombd us with with the nucler weapons remember? THats why we went, and cuz liberating the Iraquies is noble and kind. Y r the Iraquies kiling ppls when they should be kissing the Donald Rumfields feet?

[Mark]

I know I am only 17 and the rest of you guys have a close up on life because you are livin on you own. But what I have to say about the war does not need to be over looked.
I think that the war idea has a plus side. I mean, look at it this way. I'm an American. Damn proud of it. And to sit around while Iraquies bomb my country, Bush made a good choice. Now I know that part of the people here say that we should not be about fighting, it should be about developing peace on earth and all that crap. Well for get it, it aint gunna happen, as long as there are thugs, gangs, and rapists out there there will never be peace. So why make a country look wimpy when we have the equiptment to fight back and protect our selfs.
Now I know that yall could care less about what a 17 year old has to say, but come on, use your brain for once. Not all the Bush has done is bad.

So because there is violence in the world, the US should contribute to the problem with more violence? That's the most skewed logic I've ever heard. Two wrongs do not make a right.

I turned 18 just over two weeks ago, so any 17 year old has a valid opinion people should listen to...if they have sufficient knowledge to form an opinion on a subject instead of making uneducated assumptions based on ignorance.

Iraq had no WMDs. They didn't have the capacity to attack your country. Both of these things have been proven by numerous government reports (i.e: 9/11 commission report) and media sources. So while you stand idly by, succumbing to the Republican fear machine and thinking exactly what they want you to think: that Iraq is a threat, you're only letting yourself be controlled by unfounded paranoia and propaghanda. If you took the time to research and backcheck what this government tells you, you'd realize that you've been making alot of uneducated guesses based on blindly following their words, like sheep. Think for yourself.

[Justin]

If there are thugs, gangs, and rapists, aren't there some in your country too? Why did the US invade Iraq when there are still so many problems with thugs, gangs, and rapists in the US? Shouldn't Bush concentrate on the thugs, rapists, and gangs in America before 'liberating Iraquies'?

There are tons of problems going on in the US. Remember the poor people who suffered from Hurricane Katrina? How can you possibly say that Bush was right by playing tough guy because you have the right 'equiptment' to 'fight back', when the federal government takes 6 DAYS to get the National Guard into New Orleans? It's really sad that your 'equiptment' isn't good enough, and US soldiers are getting killed all day.

Do you get pissed off at the terrorists who set off IEDs that kill US soldiers?
Think about what the Iraqi people must have thought when you bombed THEM. Even the very bestest equiptments in the world can't bring back all the innocent civilians killed in Iraq.


And to sit around while Iraquies bomb my country, Bush made a good choice
Iraq has NEVER bombed the US, that's completely ridiculous; that makes me think you have no idea about what in the blue fuck you're talking about.
Never in the news have I heard that Iraqi Air Force planes flew to the US and dropped bombs on US cities.

[Odaton]

I would say that the Bush Administration has performed one of the greatest propaganda media campaigns since the start of the Cold War or maybe even since World War II. It has been able to capitalize on the fear and paranoia created after 9/11 to great effect, by linking terrorists and Iraq not too directly but just enough for people to "draw between the lines" and make that conclusions themselves. Americans love fighting for "freedom", and at the start sparked a patriotic pride that the Republicans were able to use to their advantage. And their control of the media has been SUPERB. After all of these reports that Bush has been in the wrong, and after they even admitted that Saddam had no WMDs, as well as the Vietnam-esque situation in Iraq, its quite amazing that the media has been able "report" these things but no analysis has been made so that the public can really disseminate the information properly. And with the focus on Iraqi elections and their constitution as well as "terrorist" uprisings, they have tried inadvertantly to reduce the effect of these reports. foofightersgroopie here is a perfect victim of the media control and propaganda.

[insanechica007]

So you're telling me that you can't trust an official statement from the WHITE HOUSE that what I gave you is all true, but you can trust the god damn 9/11 commission and some liberal news media source?
Ha, I think not.
The "thugs, rapists, and gangs" aren't something Bush can solve. What do you people think?..the president has magical powers and can just solve every single problem here? It's not like he can go around to every gang leader and tell them to stop. What is this??
Don't even start with Katrina. Did you know the federal government can't just invade somewhere because that's considered declaring war on the state? The mayor has to ask for help. How do we know that he did? Then, the governor has to ask from the president. How do ANY of you know that it was Bush's fault?
And you know, the funny thing is, I'm only 14. You're all listening to me as if "my opinion really counted". I'm also the only of the only few supporting Bush. Hopefully, the other people my age will stop saying "Oh, Bush sucks." "Why?" "Cause he's Bush." And hopefully, furthermore, the media will stop dishing out this bullshit.

[Shade]

So you're telling me that you can't trust an official statement from the WHITE HOUSE that what I gave you is all true, but you can trust the god damn 9/11 commission and some liberal news media source?
Ha, I think not.

Are you kidding me? The 9/11 Commission was created BY Congress. Are you telling me that Congress is all full of flaming liberals? It was carried out by an independent and bi-partisan group (http://www.9-11commission.gov/). News flash, last time I checked, as in 6 seconds ago, Congress has a Republican Majority, so sorry, the 9/11 Commission was not carried out by Liberals. Nor was it even a product of the Media to begin with. Do you make this stuff up as you go?


The "thugs, rapists, and gangs" aren't something Bush can solve. What do you people think?..the president has magical powers and can just solve every single problem here? It's not like he can go around to every gang leader and tell them to stop. What is this??

I agree partly with you here. But what's hillarious to me is that you think that Bush can't solve drug dealing and petty thieves and yet it is within his power to go and build an entire country from scratch, put a democratic government in place, protect it from invaders and warlords from seizing power again, building up its army, and do all of this within his stated 2 year deadline, oops that's already passed. That's such a phenomonally large job its not even funny. You're not making any sense.


Hopefully, the other people my age will stop saying "Oh, Bush sucks." "Why?" "Cause he's Bush." And hopefully, furthermore, the media will stop dishing out this bullshit.

Who here has said that Bush sucks because he's Bush in this topic? Point them out to me. So far I've seen a plethora of very valid, and well documented posts from a vast number of members. The board has a number of very good debaters, one of the reasons I love coming here. Each topic is sure to have a variety of views, supported as best as possible by linked sources. So far the only one I've seen spewing propoganda is you by claiming everything you don't agree with is the product of flaming liberals.

[Odaton]

Well said, Shade :)

[rosanna]

1. no
2. no

the us is harming more than helping the iraqis. i'm not saying leave them there to drown, but someone else (without that political agenda i am talking about) should help them.

[Mark]

Are you kidding me? The 9/11 Commission was created BY Congress. Are you telling me that Congress is all full of flaming liberals? It was carried out by an independent and bi-partisan group (http://www.9-11commission.gov/). News flash, last time I checked, as in 6 seconds ago, Congress has a Republican Majority, so sorry, the 9/11 Commission was not carried out by Liberals. Nor was it even a product of the Media to begin with. Do you make this stuff up as you go?

Exactly. The White House reports obviously are curbed to reflect the agenda of the White House, and therefore will not shell out negatives that are the cause of their agendas. What we're being confronted with here on insanechica's part is blind faith. That's a dangerous way to put trust behind someone. That makes it very easy for them to manipulate you. And they've succeeded.

[savetomorrow]

So now you are all saying that this lied.
Okay, I can work with that.
How do you know that all of your sources aren't lying? How do you know that Bush is lying? How does anyone know anything?
I doubt they would lie in an official statement from the government. This isn't some CBS report or TIME article here. This is the real plan. It's not an opinion. It's not a matter if the media will accept it or not. It's the real thing. I'm not saying that my source are better than yours, I'm just saying that this is from the White House.
Once the White House says Bush fucked up about this, then I'll believe it.

From the White House.... Bush is kinda in the White House...and filters everything that comes out of it...

[Will]

What do you people think?..the president has magical powers and can just solve every single problem here?
He's trying.

[rosanna]

ehh...only three more years of hell and making us americans look like asses in front of the world, and he'll be out...

[Justin]

ehh...only three more years of hell and making us americans look like asses in front of the world, and he'll be out...

It's unfair on Americans that their reputation worldwide is skewed because of their government. People often forget that the US spent a ton on foreign aid; they basically spearheaded the recovery efforts after the Tsunami.