July 6, 200521 yr How many times have you heard someone say that we must learn from our history? Sure we learn that war brings pain and suffering, but what we also see (and it is clear) is that throughout history the strong have always prevailed over the weak. The weaker nations are enslaved and live in poverty, while the strong nations thrive and live comfortably. I am not saying we should conquer the world or anything, I am just saying that as a nation we (America...I know I am not American) must show that we are among the strong, not the weak. Even within countries the same applies: the strong become successful, while the weak remain in the lower parts of society. I believe that if one is strong and has resolve he/she will succeed in whatever it is he/she wants to succeed in, isn't that what the American dream is all about? This country is great because it (theoretically) rewards those who are strong. I will not defend a crack addict (or tobacco addict for that matter) because if they had stronger resolve they could quit and better themselves, instead they chose to quit on life and become bums. There is no sorrier excuse from a cigarette smoker that wants to quit than "I can't do it, I'm addicted." Stop blaming others for your shortcomings, pick yourself up, and believe that you can do whatever it is you set your mind to doing.
July 6, 200521 yr How many times have you heard someone say that we must learn from our history? Sure we learn that war brings pain and suffering, but what we also see (and it is clear) is that throughout history the strong have always prevailed over the weak. The weaker nations are enslaved and live in poverty, while the strong nations thrive and live comfortably. I am not saying we should conquer the world or anything, I am just saying that as a nation we (America...I know I am not American) must show that we are among the strong, not the weak. Even within countries the same applies: the strong become successful, while the weak remain in the lower parts of society. I believe that if one is strong and has resolve he/she will succeed in whatever it is he/she wants to succeed in, isn't that what the American dream is all about? This country is great because it (theoretically) rewards those who are strong. I will not defend a crack addict (or tobacco addict for that matter) because if they had stronger resolve they could quit and better themselves, instead they chose to quit on life and become bums. There is no sorrier excuse from a cigarette smoker that wants to quit than "I can't do it, I'm addicted." Stop blaming others for your shortcomings, pick yourself up, and believe that you can do whatever it is you set your mind to doing. 841944[/snapback] So why not let the Iraqis do it themselves and be strong?
July 6, 200521 yr So why not let the Iraqis do it themselves and be strong? They did not live in a democratic system like ours. However, if you ask me, they should have done it themselves. But we need our economy to produce, and what better way than going to war and producing weapons?
July 6, 200521 yr So why not let the Iraqis do it themselves and be strong? They did not live in a democratic system like ours. However, if you ask me, they should have done it themselves. But we need our economy to produce, and what better way than going to war and producing weapons? 841953[/snapback] Are you for real?
July 6, 200521 yr Wars bring economies out of slumps (sometimes)...how did we get out of the great depression?
July 6, 200521 yr Author How many times have you heard someone say that we must learn from our history? Sure we learn that war brings pain and suffering, but what we also see (and it is clear) is that throughout history the strong have always prevailed over the weak. The weaker nations are enslaved and live in poverty, while the strong nations thrive and live comfortably. I am not saying we should conquer the world or anything, I am just saying that as a nation we (America...I know I am not American) must show that we are among the strong, not the weak. Even within countries the same applies: the strong become successful, while the weak remain in the lower parts of society. I believe that if one is strong and has resolve he/she will succeed in whatever it is he/she wants to succeed in, isn't that what the American dream is all about? This country is great because it (theoretically) rewards those who are strong. I will not defend a crack addict (or tobacco addict for that matter) because if they had stronger resolve they could quit and better themselves, instead they chose to quit on life and become bums. There is no sorrier excuse from a cigarette smoker that wants to quit than "I can't do it, I'm addicted." Stop blaming others for your shortcomings, pick yourself up, and believe that you can do whatever it is you set your mind to doing. 841944[/snapback] So why not let the Iraqis do it themselves and be strong? 841948[/snapback] That is exactly what is happening right now. Recently, all the news coming out of all the major networks has been about American forces training the new Iraqi army, American troops are being sent to Iraq as we speak not to fight, but to train the new Iraqi army. Bush even said himself that it can take up to an entire decade for a country to stabalize itself and eradicate an insurgency, and he also said American's will not be there that long to see it through, once the new Iraqi army is capable of holding it's own, we'll begin pulling out.
July 6, 200521 yr Author There have been little to no stats on how many Iraqis have died from the media. So its just not fair to blame the media because the American people are making their own conclusions. 841895[/snapback] Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq: Min 22787 Max 25814 http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ American Military Deaths 841896[/snapback] In what dreamland do you live in? This is war in a urban enviroment, collateral damage is inevitable no matter how much you try to avoid it and to expect anything otherwise is simply unrealistic. Show me one accidental civilian death caused by American's, and i'll show you a number ten times that purposely caused by Saddam. BAGHDAD, Iraq ? As many as 300,000 Iraqis killed during Saddam Hussein's 23-year dictatorship are believed to be buried in more than 250 mass graves found so far around the country, the top human rights official in the U.S.-led civilian administration said Saturday.
July 6, 200521 yr Wars bring economies out of slumps (sometimes)...how did we get out of the great depression? 841968[/snapback] Certainly a difference between going to war for the economy and the economic benefit being a side effect. Pearl Harbor and not the great depression lead us to WW2. And accord, my point was more to what sandroimbuto said regarding people having to stand up and do things themselves. The Iraq war is a clear example of the weak getting help. Certainly if the US didnt show up, these same people wouldnt have stood strong.
July 6, 200521 yr There have been little to no stats on how many Iraqis have died from the media. So its just not fair to blame the media because the American people are making their own conclusions. 841895[/snapback] Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq: Min 22787 Max 25814 http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ American Military Deaths 841896[/snapback] In what dreamland do you live in? This is war in a urban enviroment, collateral damage is inevitable no matter how much you try to avoid it and to expect anything otherwise is simply unrealistic. Show me one accidental civilian death caused by American's, and i'll show you a number ten times that purposely caused by Saddam. BAGHDAD, Iraq ? As many as 300,000 Iraqis killed during Saddam Hussein's 23-year dictatorship are believed to be buried in more than 250 mass graves found so far around the country, the top human rights official in the U.S.-led civilian administration said Saturday. 841982[/snapback] Dude, he was just pointing that out because the media doesnt actually report this to the American people. Yet they are accused of being against the war. Doesnt make sense.
July 6, 200521 yr Author So why not let the Iraqis do it themselves and be strong? They did not live in a democratic system like ours. However, if you ask me, they should have done it themselves. But we need our economy to produce, and what better way than going to war and producing weapons? 841953[/snapback] Are you for real? 841958[/snapback] Go read over your first few posts, and ask yourself that same question. The things you have said in this thread are so incredibly absurd, it doesn't matter how frustrated or against the war you are, your comments in this thread are inconceivable and utterly ridiculous in every aspect and there is no excuse for it.
July 6, 200521 yr Author There have been little to no stats on how many Iraqis have died from the media. So its just not fair to blame the media because the American people are making their own conclusions. 841895[/snapback] Civilians reported killed by military intervention in Iraq: Min 22787 Max 25814 http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ American Military Deaths 841896[/snapback] In what dreamland do you live in? This is war in a urban enviroment, collateral damage is inevitable no matter how much you try to avoid it and to expect anything otherwise is simply unrealistic. Show me one accidental civilian death caused by American's, and i'll show you a number ten times that purposely caused by Saddam. BAGHDAD, Iraq ? As many as 300,000 Iraqis killed during Saddam Hussein's 23-year dictatorship are believed to be buried in more than 250 mass graves found so far around the country, the top human rights official in the U.S.-led civilian administration said Saturday. 841982[/snapback] Dude, he was just pointing that out because the media doesnt actually report this to the American people. Yet they are accused of being against the war. Doesnt make sense. 841987[/snapback] The media doesn't report it for a number of reasons, one of them being that there are no official statistics and thus it's really impossible to know an exact figure, another and probably the biggest reason of them all being that it would be dangerous to report it, even if the number was very minute. It is quite obvious a select number of news organizations are against the war, this is no secret, but *most* at least use some common sense in their reporting and realize that to even make an attempt at reporting such a thing would be extremely dangerous and would accomplish nothing but lighting a fire under the insurgents.
July 6, 200521 yr 842211[/snapback] Neither slavery, fascism, nazism or communism has been ended... So yea, you're absolutely right - War has never solved anything. 842230[/snapback] Slavery has ended in america, there is no soviet union, and Hitler is no more.
July 6, 200521 yr 842211[/snapback] Neither slavery, fascism, nazism or communism has been ended... So yea, you're absolutely right - War has never solved anything. 842230[/snapback] Slavery has ended in america, there is no soviet union, and Hitler is no more. 842232[/snapback] Slavery has ended in America? What about the exploitation of illegal aliens here in the States - not to mention the way 80% of the products we use are made by slaves overseas. Some of them children. Just because we outsource our slaves doesn't mean slavery has ended. No Soviet Union, true true... Too bad China's still around and spreading its influence, and Cuba has survived right under the nose of the U.S. imagine that? Hitler might be gone, so might the 3rd Reich, of all of the things you mentioned this one might be the one that has died the most, but its definitely making a comeback. There's a ton of Neo-nazis here in the U.S. especially in the Pacific NW, and there is a resurgence in Europe as well. Fringe group - yea, but still around. Fascism? HA HA HA.
July 6, 200521 yr 842211[/snapback] Neither slavery, fascism, nazism or communism has been ended... So yea, you're absolutely right - War has never solved anything. 842230[/snapback] Slavery has ended in america, there is no soviet union, and Hitler is no more. 842232[/snapback] Slavery has ended in America? What about the exploitation of illegal aliens here in the States - not to mention the way 80% of the products we use are made by slaves overseas. Some of them children. Just because we outsource our slaves doesn't mean slavery has ended. No Soviet Union, true true... Too bad China's still around and spreading its influence, and Cuba has survived right under the nose of the U.S. imagine that? Hitler might be gone, so might the 3rd Reich, of all of the things you mentioned this one might be the one that has died the most, but its definitely making a comeback. There's a ton of Neo-nazis here in the U.S. especially in the Pacific NW, and there is a resurgence in Europe as well. Fringe group - yea, but still around. Fascism? HA HA HA. 842243[/snapback] You are a moron. I swear. I'm going to leave you with this: Peace is impossible with dealing with unreasonable people. But, your a f***in hippy communist jackass.
July 6, 200521 yr Truly excellent post. 842250[/snapback] I know. It's also nice to know, if I died protecting my fellow americans, I will be looked at as an a**hole by f***tards like you and Micheal Crook.
July 6, 200521 yr Author Truly excellent post. 842250[/snapback] I know. It's also nice to know, if I died protecting my fellow americans, I will be looked at as an a**hole by f***tards like you and Micheal Crook. 842255[/snapback] He is scum, there really is no other way to describe him. Even Michael Moore and many of the extreme left wing pacifist whackos at least have respect the troops, but this Felo idiot is just beyond ignorant.
July 6, 200521 yr :sleeping Keep drinking the neo-con Kool Aid, and saluting the flag :patriot while the crooks in the Oval Office make themselves richer off the blood of the Iraqi and American people.
July 7, 200521 yr 842211[/snapback] See, this is what I was talking about earlier. You take a defense of a man and his bravery and make it into a defense of war itself. By doing that, youve done much more damage to what soliders sacrifice. If you claim you support soliders by advocating war, then the converse becomes true and people hate on war by attacking the soliders, like in Vietnam. Thats why people get pissed off. The actions of soldiers are distinct from the war.
July 7, 200521 yr and btw, what war stopped communism? If anything war totally botched that. We didnt stick around in Vietnam, communism took over, yet the rest of SE Asia joined capitilism.
July 7, 200521 yr That doesnt negate the fact that war has had positive results. I see no one responded to my post about General Dallaire in Rwanda. Its very easy to regurgitate what you hear on the news about Iraq, but its too hard to read up on the actual events that occured in Rwanda. watching the movie isnt enough. So someone please answer this question, in rwanda, violence by daalire would have saved lives. Would it have been justified, or should we always manage a peaceful solution even at the expense of lives? I will not argue any longer if you feel that those 800,000 lives were worth the sacrifice b/c the western world did not resort to violence. Whats better 500 dead Hutu extremists and 100 Europeans or 800,000 innocent rwandans? Thats an easy choice for me to make, war would have been the best solution.
July 7, 200521 yr That doesnt negate the fact that war has had positive results. I see no one responded to my post about General Dallaire in Rwanda. Its very easy to regurgitate what you hear on the news about Iraq, but its too hard to read up on the actual events that occured in Rwanda. watching the movie isnt enough. So someone please answer this question, in rwanda, violence by daalire would have saved lives. Would it have been justified, or should we always manage a peaceful solution even at the expense of lives? I will not argue any longer if you feel that those 800,000 lives were worth the sacrifice b/c the western world did not resort to violence. Whats better 500 dead Hutu extremists and 100 Europeans or 800,000 innocent rwandans? Thats an easy choice for me to make, war would have been the best solution. 842687[/snapback] Absolutley unquestionaly undeniably Dallaire should have been allowed to act. Its a stain on the UN and Clinton for letting that happen.
July 7, 200521 yr This man was a hero- He saved the lives of many men under his command, and possibly some that weren't. The men that he killed, members of Saddam's Republican Guard, were the worst of the worst when it came to ruthless killers and murderers. Those men were basically the Gestapo of Iraq in their day. The majority of them likely deserved to die. On the other hand, I agree that if I were that man's son, I would want him alive, rather than receive a medal in his place. However, when in combat, lives can be lost in the blink of an eye. In conclusion....the war was wrong, yes, but this man was a hero for what he did, being just one man in a large army.
July 7, 200521 yr That doesnt negate the fact that war has had positive results. I see no one responded to my post about General Dallaire in Rwanda. Its very easy to regurgitate what you hear on the news about Iraq, but its too hard to read up on the actual events that occured in Rwanda. watching the movie isnt enough. So someone please answer this question, in rwanda, violence by daalire would have saved lives. Would it have been justified, or should we always manage a peaceful solution even at the expense of lives? I will not argue any longer if you feel that those 800,000 lives were worth the sacrifice b/c the western world did not resort to violence. Whats better 500 dead Hutu extremists and 100 Europeans or 800,000 innocent rwandans? Thats an easy choice for me to make, war would have been the best solution. 842687[/snapback] It's a dilemma, hindsight is 20/20, and like I responded earlier the problem is not as one-dimensional as you describe it. Let's hypothetically say that they do attack the weapons cache - who's to say that ends the rebellion? The rebels would more than likely just have gone out and gotten more weapons and probably hidden them better. If the U.N. was to take action right then and there, they would have not only had to face the rebels at their base, but face retaliation in a larger scale from the rest of the Hutu forces. Something they thought they were not prepared to do at the time. Had they captured the cache it would have probably delayed the genocide, but who's to say it would have stopped it? In order to have stopped the genocide it would have involved a long term engagement in Rwanda - something the U.N. and the U.S. were not willing to do at the time. However they were willing to do it in Kosovo, a couple years later. Interesting... As to your question whether war would have saved lives in this case, I suppose it would have. For a little while at least... The truth is, the problem should have never reached that point. It was negligency that let it escalate and reach that point. I'll probably get called a communist hippie again, but instead of giving all our foreign aid money away to Israel so they can create more war, we should invest that money and try to get Africa out of the Middle Ages. But that's just me.
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.