The Official War Room

Originally posted by kanecorp
no sorry, it means that once the threat at been defeated, peace will be there.
Click to expand...

We may have a problem with the identification of the threat.

Are we speaking about a local problem (that can be solved with a bomb) or about a global problem that will let other local problems emerge in the future if we don't solve these on a global basis ?

Somewhere I feel these days that we speak about one symptom, not about the causes.
 
Very nice speech he made. I can't wait until you see the Iraqi's dancing in the streets with American flags and hugging US soldiers. Its gonna be great to laugh at you all, again.
 
kanecorp... i expect you are a big supporter of this war. But even so, you have to look at both sides of it. I'm sure we would all love it if the Iraqi people had hated Saddam forever, but not all of them will. And combined with a military that could have chemical weapons, this might not be a lovefest. American soldiers have known to be reckless also, what if we get a little too excited? There are too many things that could go wrong in any war, this one included, to be able to say with any confidence what you just said. And if it was a laughing matter I too be laughing at you right now and after this war because in all my certainty I can tell that your results will never come to be.
 
I'm not going to check this "Official war room" again. Unfortunatly none of you have anythign valid to say, so i will not waste my time any longer.
 
Originally posted by kanecorp
I'm not going to check this "Official war room" again. Unfortunatly none of you have anythign valid to say, so i will not waste my time any longer.
Click to expand...

Why did you contribute to this thread if you didn't want to listen to other's opinions ?
 
Hey, kanecorp, I am going to take away your superdrive iMac! (analog to USA trying to shoot out Saddam from his leading position). But you love your mac. (analog to Iraqi loving Saddam) Anyway, for some reason I feel very much disturbed and kinda threatened by your iMac. Unfortunatly I cannot convince you or anyone else in this forum. Anyway, I am sure I am right and I gonna take away your iMac and bounce it in pieces.

So? How do you think about this? Just to make it easier for you to understand the situation! ;-)
And now read again some of these posts, esspecially toasts, and I hope you will see what's it all about.

(Consider, I was just talking about the point that USA is making a step without successfully convincing other nations and finally giving themselves the right to proceed. That has nothing to do with democracy...)
 
Originally posted by Jet
I think that by doing this, Bush has jeopardized his ablilty to run for a second term.
Click to expand...

Actually this is probably his one great shot at re-election. The economy is down in the dumps and there is not much HE can do about it (paying the price for the "boom" years that never were, it'll come back, but only when it's good and ready, you can only drop the prime so many times). People have short memories, they'll think "Clinton = Good Economy" and "Bush = Bad Economy/Corp Greed" and open the door the the demos, though not much of what's currently going on is his "fault".

So this is his only shot at making a mark. Everyone knows how Bush Sr's ratings jumped after Iraq v1.0 and I bet he's hoping for the same. And that it will also jump start the economy. At least he's wise enough to do it far enough away from the election to give the economy time to improve. The turnaround didn't happen fast enough to help Sr.
 
Originally posted by Zammy-Sam
Hey, kanecorp, I am going to take away your superdrive iMac! (analog to USA trying to shoot out Saddam from his leading position). But you love your mac. (analog to Iraqi loving Saddam) Anyway, for some reason I feel very much disturbed and kinda threatened by your iMac. Unfortunatly I cannot convince you or anyone else in this forum. Anyway, I am sure I am right and I gonna take away your iMac and bounce it in pieces.

So? How do you think about this? Just to make it easier for you to understand the situation! ;-)
And now read again some of these posts, esspecially toasts, and I hope you will see what's it all about.

(Consider, I was just talking about the point that USA is making a step without successfully convincing other nations and finally giving themselves the right to proceed. That has nothing to do with democracy...)
Click to expand...

Well not really a very good analogy. To state that somehow Sadam is totally an innocent by stander who just happens to have differing world views is a gross oversimplification. If kanecorp also lived in your neighborhood and beat his family, associated and maybe even helped those who killed one of your family members, kept illegal weapons in house and bullied his neighbors, then that would be a much closer representation of the situation at hand. Your other neighbors say "lets sit tight and hope he moves out on his own" or "just call the cops and hope they show up and actually kick him out this time vs a "slap on the wrist"". You are tired of waiting so you decide to "take matters into your own hands".

Gee, I never realized that kanecorp was such a despot ;)
 
binaryDigit, as I said in my post, I was just talking about the case, someone enforces a judgment without being able to convince anyone else. I was not talking about how much I would (to fit to my example in my previous post) dislike kanecorps face. This would be very much analog to your description of Saddam. What Saddam does in his own country has nothing to do with anyone else. His ppl love him and don't fear him. Otherwise it would have been so much easier to get him out there... So, whatever you and other guess to know about Saddam, it has nothing to do with the legitimation to attack him without convincing neutral parties. That's why I made that example and I think it's more analog than I thought before.
The meaning of democracy has been raped from the USA. By a nation thinking they are the seeds of democracy... Funny, huh?

And let's not talk about the fact, that the war won't hurt Saddam but the innocent ppl there. But as I said, I wasn't talking about these things in my previous post
 
Originally posted by Zammy-Sam
binaryDigit, as I said in my post, I was just talking about the case, someone enforces a judgment without being able to convince anyone else. I was not talking about how much I would (to fit to my example in my previous post) dislike kanecorps face. This would be very much analog to your description of Saddam. What Saddam does in his own country has nothing to do with anyone else. His ppl love him and don't fear him. Otherwise it would have been so much easier to get him out there... So, whatever you and other guess to know about Saddam, it has nothing to do with the legitimation to attack him without convincing neutral parties. That's why I made that example and I think it's more analog than I thought before.
The meaning of democracy has been raped from the USA. By a nation thinking they are the seeds of democracy... Funny, huh?

And let's not talk about the fact, that the war won't hurt Saddam but the innocent ppl there. But as I said, I wasn't talking about these things in my previous post
Click to expand...

His people love him and don't fear him? Hardly. While there may be a percentage of the population that fall into this category, there are still large numbers that despise and fear him. Given his own humanitarian (or lack thereof) track record with his own peoples, how can you say that a perponderance of his own people like having him as their leader? I wouldn't exactly call Sadams regime "democratic", so it's not like the US is crushing some popular president elected to office.

If you'll remember, there were attempts on Saddams life internally. Just because people _couldn't_ oust him, doesn't mean that the reason is because people don't want him ousted.

War and the declaration thereof has never been a democratic process. The US doesn't have elections to vote for going to war, never have. It's funny that you use the word "seed", because in some ways that's exactly what the end result is hoped to be, the planting of a "seed" of democracy to a govt that is currently ruled by a dictator.

Can't argue anyones point about the US and UN though. Interesting stuff.
 
Oh believe me, ppl in his country are much more behind their dictator Saddam than americans behind their soldiers. I am originally from Iran and I know from my relatives what they think about all the situation. And even the Iranian, who were in war with Iraq long time ago and still didn't come to a friendly relation love Saddams courage. You know why? He turned to be the man who is not going to follow the big guys instructions and hit back. Why do ppl want USA to get hit back? Because many nations in that area criticise USA's blind intervention.
I don't support this, since the history showed a lot of great interventions from the USA. But that's the way ppl in that area think and why I am sure, ppl are behind their violant dictator. But as long the nation is happy with their leader, noone has the right to intervent.
But if USA says, Iraq is a threat for US-people, than they should prove it before the action. And this is where they failed...

About my "seeds of democracy"...
as I said, binaryDigit: it's so paradox! USA is so sure they are the seeds of democracy, but the way they act rigth now they look more like Hittler than Saddam does. That's why the whole thing stinks
 
....A little humour won't hurt anyone..:D

massdestruction.jpg
 
Originally posted by Zammy-Sam
...
About my "seeds of democracy"...
as I said, binaryDigit: it's so paradox! USA is so sure they are the seeds of democracy, but the way they act rigth now they look more like Hittler than Saddam does. That's why the whole thing stinks
Click to expand...

Whoa, be careful about how you use your analogies there. Comparing this US action against Iraq/Saddam to anything Hitler did is a stretch to say the least and quite insulting. You can accuse the US of being overly zealous and self centered in it's handling of this situation, but to in any way compare it to what Hitler did is just wrong.

Interesting point about the "peoples" opinion though. However, there is a difference between his people hating him and them hating the US even more. Just because they hate the US more doesn't mean that they wouldn't love to see him gone.
 
Originally posted by toast
Have you asked the Iraqi people if they want to get bombed for freedom ?
Click to expand...
I remember I was criticized earlier for this quote:

None of the Iraqis who agreed to be interviewed for this article had any sympathy for Saddam Hussein. Armand, a filmmaker from Chicago, says he hopes if there is a war, Saddam will be ousted.

"It makes me sick when people campaign against war," says Armand, who says he fled Iraq after taking part in the unsuccessful rebellion against Saddam that followed the Gulf War. "I don't want to live in this constant fear all the time. If there is a war and my family survives the war, I will at least be able to go and see them."
Click to expand...

Source: here.

Granted, Armand is not in danger of being bombed by the U.S. Air Force, but his opinion is valid, yes?
 
I think we should discuss a line that came up in this thread. Its meaning went something like this: "Iraq has illegal weapons".
Illegal weapons? Weapons of massdestruction?

USA got them, and they have even attacked another country with them. Shouldnt it be illegal for USA also to have them?
 
Originally posted by Decado
I think we should discuss a line that came up in this thread. Its meaning went something like this: "Iraq has illegal weapons".
Illegal weapons? Weapons of massdestruction?

USA got them, and they have even attacked another country with them. Shouldnt it be illegal for USA also to have them?
Click to expand...

Well it's not any different from police having and using weapons vs criminals having and using them. If you are a felon, you can not legally get a handgun. i.e. If by your actions you have proven that you are not responsible, then you lose certain rights. This is the gist behind the UN's stance on Saddam having WMD. It's obviously not JUST about any other country having WMD.
 
yep, but there you have a mentality that only works in the USA, since in most (all?) european countries we dont have your insane weapon laws :)
And who made USA the police???
 
BD, too many Americans are concerned about their rights and not about their responsibilities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top