TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Does anyone think that starting the iraq war was the right decision?
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade This is what I posted on another forum:

Completely off topic - but was that on IIDB?

It might be worth starting a poll to see how many people think that the coalition should immediately pull out of Iraq. With the current uprising, you have to wonder whether it's worth sticking this out, would pulling out help or hinder Iraq?

Lemme think hard about this...

Good decis... Not!!!

I think I've made myself clear here in the past-

Thumbs down.

quote:

Originally posted by arctic Completely off topic - but was that on IIDB?

Nah, a forum called "BigFooty" rather randomly. I was there for a couple of weeks during the AFL trade and draft weeks and still managed to get caught up in a massive debate on the Iraqi war:

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showt...&threadid=82890

:-/

YES
sans h�itation...
pourquoi se priver d'�liminer une dictature?
Saddam est parti...voila l'important...

Re: Re: Bush was a uniter after all:

quote:

Originally posted by NYCTrancefan Really, I see no reason why the Kurds would even want to touch this mess, they have their own Utopia in Northern Iraq compared to the rest of the country. If true however makes you wonder, what was the point of this war, as if more was needed to question it.

I don't know if they are supporting this at all or not, but I can think of at least one reason why the Kurds would want to "touch this mess".

Following reason: Kurds want a civil war -> A civil war where they aren't fighting but a civil war none the less. Why? Because if a civil war happens, that means Iraq as a solid entity will not exist any longer, and that means a Kurdish nation.

Under such a situation Kurds would be playing both sides by providing them with arms and support to create a fierce civil war and a break up of Iraq. Of course Kurds would want none of the fighting or mess associated with it, but hey if the Sunnis and Shites want to revolt, why not support the bandwagon and get your dream?

Re: Re: Re: Bush was a uniter after all:

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus I don't know if they are supporting this at all or not, but I can think of at least one reason why the Kurds would want to "touch this mess". Following reason: Kurds want a civil war -> A civil war where they aren't fighting but a civil war none the less. Why? Because if a civil war happens, that means Iraq as a solid entity will not exist any longer, and that means a Kurdish nation. Under such a situation Kurds would be playing both sides by providing them with arms and support to create a fierce civil war and a break up of Iraq. Of course Kurds would want none of the fighting or mess associated with it, but hey if the Sunnis and Shites want to revolt, why not support the bandwagon and get your dream?

This is an interesting theory.

I've been saying for some time now that a cohesive democratic Iraq is probably a pipe dream, and they may be better off making 3 little splinter countries out of it.

Imus reported the same thing, so I'm going to assume that it's true (about the Kurds sending aid to the Sunnis).

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSZ I also don't see how the US will win hearts and minds in that region (...)

I've come to the conclusion that this war was meant to be open-ended so that it could more easily pave the way for conquest of the entire Middle East.

A great start to the 21st century for America...

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I've come to the conclusion that this war was meant to be open-ended so that it could more easily pave the way for conquest of the entire Middle East.

War has been a HUGE economic incentive of many American companies for a while now..

We need an economic incentive from peace..

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 I think I've made myself clear here in the past- Thumbs down.

So basically you are against the efforts of our troops to succeed. So let me get this straight 1. you are against the war 2. you want us to withdraw and hope that it would solve all the problems in iraq and

quote:

Originally posted by Bronze YES sans h�itation... pourquoi se priver d'�liminer une dictature? Saddam est parti...voila l'important...

J'ai lol'�

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover So basically you are against the efforts of our troops to succeed. So let me get this straight 1. you are against the war 2. you want us to withdraw and hope that it would solve all the problems in iraq and

Do you like worship at the feet of our soldiers?

Dude, separate the duty of a soldier, from the policy of civilian politicians who send them to do their bidding. The politicians (Bush admin) have sent our troops to carry out a mission which is in and of itself a fraud. So why should our troops continue to be put into a fraudalent war? Why don't you stop being a pussy and sign up for the service if you believe in this piece of shit war..

Here's the link...http://www.goarmy.com/flindex.jsp

Let us know when you're off to boot camp..

And if we were responsible for solving the world's problems, then we should just take over the entire world. Let's invade Burma, because the problems there aren't going to fix themselves?

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton War has been a HUGE economic incentive of many American companies for a while now.. We need an economic incentive from peace..

Peace is a threat to the hierarchal power structure of our world. When people have too much time on their hands they start to figure out what a sick joke our materially consumptive society has become.

They want us to continue chasing after an illusory, clearly contrived, celebrity driven pop-culture while developing an even greater appetite for gadgets, gizmo's and other material baubles.

Basically, they're removing the soul from humanity.

I think that the clothes designers at Obey have a good idea of what it's about.

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton War has been a HUGE economic incentive of many American companies for a while now.. We need an economic incentive from peace..

because american arms manufacturers dont sell anything during "peace" time

quote:

Originally posted by trancer-x I've come to the conclusion that this war was meant to be open-ended so that it could more easily pave the way for conquest of the entire Middle East.

um, yeah. the US is going to invade the entire region seriously, id love some of whatever it is youre smoking!

quote:

Originally posted by trancer-x They want us to continue chasing after an illusory, clearly contrived, celebrity driven pop-culture while developing an even greater appetite for gadgets, gizmo's and other material baubles.

says the guy that uses the internet for 100% of his research, as well as his debating medium, and frequents a music-related forum.

youre too old to be obsessed with socialist conspiracies!

quote:

When people have too much time on their hands they start to figure out what a sick joke our materially consumptive society has become.

what a load of utter nonsense! yeah, government's go to war so that people are distracted and the powers that be that profit from consumerism are able to maintain their selling margins

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN because american arms manufacturers dont sell anything during "peace" time um, yeah. the US is going to invade the entire region seriously, id love some of whatever it is youre smoking! says the guy that uses the internet for 100% of his research, as well as his debating medium, and frequents a music-related forum. youre too old to be obsessed with socialist conspiracies! what a load of utter nonsense! yeah, government's go to war so that people are distracted and the powers that be that profit from consumerism are able to maintain their selling margins

I'm sure it's intentional, but you really are a waste of my time (as you're probably just a low waged psy-op) so now you're finally on ignore.

It's been fun but I'm tired of debating with someone who only seems to know how to argue out of what seems to be sheer ignorance while consistently issuing personal attacks, baseless innuendo, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by LatinLover So basically you are against the efforts of our troops to succeed.

Because I don't support the policies set forth by civilian leaders who put them there?

You do understand the difference, right? Perhaps a bit of wishful thinking on my part to be hopeful of that.

quote:

So let me get this straight 1. you are against the war

I have been ever since there was no WMDs to be found, and no al-Qaeda connections to be made, yes. Prior to that I was for the war because I was led to believe by this Administration that we were in imminent danger from Saddam pointing nukes and WMDs at our heads. It was so much a threat that we needed to take our eye off the true enemy, bin Laden in Tora Bora, and focus our attention on another country that was supposedly ready to attack us.

Or so I originally tried to believe it was true.

quote:

2. you want us to withdraw and hope that it would solve all the problems in iraq and

I seem to recall asking you two very simple questions, which strangely I never received responses from you back when you first got banned. Let's take a walk down memory lane and see if you're willing to finally answer them:

quote:

Given the fact that hardly any predictions made by this Administration and its supporters have come to fruition about this war in Iraq, why the fuck do you think you have an ounce of credibility to make any predictions about the situation in the future? Given your support to the group that's been wrong on almost all accounts with this war, what on earth should compel anyone to start believing your predictions now? And lastly, again I wonder, do you think it's okay for Bush to call for a timetable of withdrawal against Clinton back in 1999? http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=416194

I advocate a phased withdrawal over time with a select group of special forces remaining to continue the efforts in going after al Qaeda as well as a force to remain to train the Iraqi military/police.

And considering that we will soon be back to pre-SURGE! levels to which the same insurgent problems we had before will continue to remain, and considering that all predictions and efforts up to this point have not gone as Bush has planned or hoped in his wildest of imaginations (and believe me, he's got quite an imagination), I would like to consider evidence to the contrary that seems to demonstrate that our military presence being withdrawn may actually be a better step towards stabilization. Case in point, the British handing over Basra city out of their control:

quote:

�Residents of Iraq�s southern city of Basra have begun strolling riverfront streets again after four years of fear, their city much quieter since British troops withdrew from the grand Saddam Hussein-era Basra Palace.� http://uk.reuters.com/article/email...T72246420071001

And, of course, we're all shocked at our Administration attacking the British for pulling out of Iraq as a consequence:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...3/nbrown603.xml

So given what we've had so far,

given what's been tried by the British,

given that we might have to eventually conclude that our presence itself may in fact be part of the problem and not the solution,

given the fact that the Iraqi government needs to start sometime to govern themselves rather than continually rely on our military's efforts,

given the fact that Bush himself and a slew of GOP hypocritical asses advocated a timeline of withdrawal from Bosnian War when a Democrat was in office,

I contend there's a strong need to try something different than what we've done up to this point.

And finally, I'd also contend that my position of wanting our troops out is very much for the troops, i.e. keeping them alive to fight another day. This war mandated at least a couple hundred thousand of our troops at minimum to successfully maintain the borders and quell the violence, yet even with our SURGE! numbers combined we didn't even get close to that. On top of that our Administration and Pentagon failed to provide proper body and vehicle armor to viably protect our troops for years.

So if anyone is being an anti-military advocate, it's little Bush enablers like you along with this Administration and it's associated chickenhawks who love creating wars but will always want others to fight those wars for them. By failing to enlist and truly demonstrate support for this cause as you claim, especially when the SURGE! numbers are coming back down and we need more troops to help out, you are one of the biggest anti-military men I've ever known.

When will you drop that horrible pride of yours, learn to deal with authority and enlist to truly support your president and war he created?

Initially I thought no. But now I think I'm coming around. As passionate and dedicated as I may have been in criticizing Bush on any number of conservative principles that I hold dear, the war has done wonders to convince republicans (27%ers excluded) that Bush is not only incompetant, but the farthest thing from "conservative" as you can get. And it only took ~4000 american lives, and half a trillion+ dollars to do it!

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.