Tell me again why anyone supported it? I dunno, it seems to be pointless, even more so than the Vietnam war. The war in Afghanistan I understood, even if they did drop the food packages in the same spot as the cluster bombs, they still did scatter the terrorists.
But Iraq? Saddam is no terrorist. An evil dictator maybe, but he was elected to power, making the war to overthrow him the very opposite of democracy. Doesn't matter whether or not he cheated, though few people would say that even.
Why all the whinings about the good old Americans dying to liberate a country? They killed plenty of innocent civilians. The innocent civilians died defending their country from western invaders. I'm not saying anyone deserved to die, I'm saying that nobody out there deserved it, the Iraqis or the Americans. The civilians just shot to defend themselves. The soldiers just fought because it was part of their job.
The worst thing of all is that once everything is done, they're replacing Saddam with a president that's just as cruel, but doesn't even have a sense of humor. WTF? All that death, murder, international debt and all they've accomplished is switching the iron glove to different fist.
What happens even if they win this war in Iraq? There won't be less terrorists. Hell, there'll be TWICE as many terrorists as so many people get pissed off at the killing and torture of the innocents, whether in the west or middle east. Then more people would be going all "Why did the terrorists do this to us? We didn't do anything!"
Even all that oil wouldn't be enough to pay off all the dead family members AND pay off all the national debt + interest they took to occupy the country. I dunno... this war is just... sad.
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.
Pete Nattress Cheesy Bits img src/uploads/sccheesegif
Registered 23/09/2002
Points 4811
9th November, 2005 at 05:53:04 -
"An evil dictator maybe, but he was elected to power, making the war to overthrow him the very opposite of democracy"
Stop there, Muz. Hitler was elected to power too, are you saying that World War 2 was the opposite of democracy? Saddam gassed his own people, sanctioned torture and murder, and endorsed the actions of other terrorists. He WAS a terrorist.
Haha, I used to be so firmly pro-war simply because everyone else wasn't. You're wrong about the ousting of Saddam being anti-democratic though, as pete said. About my stance on the war, something had to be done but I don't think they went the right way about it.
Ohh...my...goodness...I see a thirty page flame war in the future.
-"Why all the whinings about the good old Americans dying to liberate a country?"
Stop whinning yourself son.
-Pete hit is right on..."Saddam is no terrorist" I would need some evidence that he didn't kill thousands of his own people.
-"He was elected to power" I would be elected too if I said "vote for me or I'll kill you"
-According to the Compact Oxford English Dictionary democracy is defined as :a form of government in which the people have a voice in the exercise of power, typically through elected representatives.
-As you said Saddam was a dictator.
-According to that definition dictators are the opposite of democracy.
-"They killed plenty of innocent civilians" Please don't make assertions unless you are willing to back it up with evidence. Show me the money and I'll believe you. I could say "the Americans were cutting kids arms off!" but that doesn't mean you should believe me.
-"They're replacing Saddam with a president that's just as cruel" Uhhh...Does the new presiden't rape girls?
-"but doesn't even have a sense of humor. WTF?"
Hahaha...Now this is a valid point.
It sounds like to me your just whinning about the war yourself.
I think something had to be done about Saddam, but I don't think there motives we're entirely right. If they're that seious about stopping terror, why don't they attack other murderous human-rights violating nations, like Israel?
They only attacked them because they have oil, and it's the reason why they're still there.
Bush and Blair took us to war simply because there hadn't been a proper war for a bit. America needed to show their dominance - and Britain is always going to stand by and support. Afghanistan wasn't big and scary enough, so they invented a reason to invade Iraq. Saddam has always been a dictator, so why choose now to dispose of him? To scare the living daylights out of Iran, North Korea and all those other "Axis of Evil" nations, that's why. Only it's backfired because it's created terrorists where there were none before.
The end result is that we live in a place with a lot more terrorists and a lot less allies.
At first I was supportive of the war. Saddam's a dictator, so it's only right we got rid of him. But the reasons for the timing of this, plus the unending occupation are all wrong. Now I'm not supportive of the war.
The war doesn't even have a name, how pathetic is that?
Politics Stink! Why are we Americans stuck with an idiot president anyway? Bush seems to just be trying again after his daddy lost a war to Iraq. Stupid Texans.
The problem with Bush is that he's incompetent...he's not an evil man, he just has no idea how to run things.
I think that taking out Saddam was a good thing to do overall; now they don't have an evil dictator...but now America can't pull out because they need to finish what they started. This will cost more time, money, and most importantly lives. And, through it all, another whacko will be elected in Iraq.
Fine Garbage since 2003.
CURRENT PROJECT:
-Paying off a massive amount of debt in college loans.
-Working in television.
That aint necessarily true. America can back out whenever they want. Theyre just too afraid to be looked down on to do such a thing. Also on the added fact Bush is too stupid to realise that he is stupid and doesnt have it in him to make his first intelligent decision. Ah well, I personally don't know anyone who supported the attack, so its all good. Its hard to believe anyone would.
Classic George W. Bush Quote - "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
[i]-Pete hit is right on..."Saddam is no terrorist" I would need some evidence that he didn't kill thousands of his own people.[/i]You should've looked up 'terrorist' while you had the OED out.
I don't tend to hear much on this 'war' in recent times. Although it appears there's still more and more casulties, with or without Sadam. And from what i've heard relief from other nations troops doesn't seem to be doing a great deal.
I honestly think that all troops should be withdrawn at this point. If they're doing more harm than good, then especially. And if that's the case, then they could at least withdraw troops for an amount of time just to see how the country handles itself. At least the nations in question can breath a bit easier knowing that their troops won't become casulties of this almost pointless 'war'.
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is what grinds my gears.
WE COULD!
Peblo Custom ratings must be 50 characters or less
Registered 05/07/2002
Points 185
10th November, 2005 at 02:02:32 -
Cause you're a robot?
"Isn't it always amazing how we characterize a person's intelligence by how closely their thinking matches ours?"
~Belgarath
Advertisement
Post Reply
