|
United States in Iraq Poll: Leave or stay (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| BadBadNeil |
| quote: | Originally posted by Massive84
So mister guru..explain me who is they? It seems to me you are saying that ALL iraqies had it bad under saddam..did you live in Iraq at that time or do you still live there? Have you ever been there? DOn't sit behind your computer and assuming things for an entire nation. Some people had it bad and some had it good. And let me tell you this, same thing in Holland..some people have it bad and some good. Just because CCN says iraqies have it bad, doesn't mean it's right :rolleyes:
Geez, i wonder who started this chaos. And i also wonder why people are acting like "wow, we never knew it will end up like this"
Sure..and America has no debts at all? And yes America is full of freedom :rolleyes: . Ya man iraqies are so happy now..they can build their economy!!!! woo \o/ .. but first they have to rebuild their houses and lifes that america bombed.
A pointless one i must say. |
Please read my above post to answer all your questions. I don't have the patience to type it all out again for you. |
|
|
| Massive84 |
| quote: | Originally posted by BadBadNeil
Please read my above post to answer all your questions. I don't have the patience to type it all out again for you. |
Who said i want answers from you? It certainly will be ..
"well i don't live in Iraq..i never did..i watch CCN..and woot i come to TA and can say and people will just aknowledge it because i just lack patience. Iraq was not so good under saddam's hand"
Nah thanks anyway.
Do me a favour..if you have anything to assume about an enitre nation..at least put 2 words infront everything you say.."I think"
BECAUSE, i think that Iraq is now MUCH worse with your stupid Bush than Saddam. |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
| quote: | Originally posted by BadBadNeil
I guess you think he was a swell fellow. Do I have to personally shake his hand to know that he is bad? Did you have to shake Jeffrey Dahmer's hand to know that he ate people after dismembering them or did you just take the media's word for it? You don't have to be in the middle of the action to necessarily get a grasp of the problem. |
That's a bit off topic don't ya think?
Was Saddam a threat to his people. Sure but I don't care. Reason being is that I am sure Iraqis never cared for us no more than someone in the Papua New Guinea cares if we live or die.
Was he a threat to the US, not at all. You were lied to plain and simple. You would be a glutton for punishment to believe we have to stay now based on what these same people told you about the supposed existence of WMD's when there are none officially.
| quote: | | Nothing that happens in other parts of the world put food on your table or money in your pocket, but does that mean you lock yourself in your room and ignore the rest of the world? |
Please for a minute act like you've learned something once in a while.
| quote: | | Well the US dollar was making ground against the Euro due to the latest developments in the EU. The stock market is rebounding nicely even in a slowly rebuilding economy, people are buying real estate at all time highs and we are maintaining growth even through raising interest rates and $60/barrel oil. Seems healthy to me. |
It's a fiat system here and in the EU. Don't rely on it gaining ground on it's own. The markets are manipulated more than you think.
| quote: | | GM is laying people off because they put out inferior products, have poor management, weak designs, and have to cover union costs, that isn't a problem with the US government, it is a problem with GM. |
I was pointing out the layoffs not the finished products. A bottom line was the goal. GM doesn't care if they make the fastest or finest cars as long as they make the most profit.
| quote: | | Our deficit has been billions of dollars since I was born, what else is new? |
You made it seem like the Iraqi nation had it worse than us. Don't you think that our deficit should take precedent over someones elses'?
| quote: | | Of course recruitment numbers are down, it is the middle of a war, people are dying and there is no set date for an exit. When the war is over and troops start coming back I am sure numbers will eventually increase again. |
No one that argues to stay is enlisting. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by Massive84
i think that Iraq is now MUCH worse with your stupid Bush than Saddam. |
I agree,at least back in saddam days people had a descent living conditions,and there was no bombs blowing up everyday killing them,but hey it is all about in democracy I guess and thats what you get.:rolleyes: |
|
|
| TheNobleEu |
Cheers to Lebezniatnikov and OCC.
Leaving now would be a truly terrible thing -- it would be to write-off the lives already lost and the resources committed. It would also add credence to the accusation that the US likes to start things and not finish them, create trouble with never any initial mind to how to manage them in the long term (a mud-slinging with some validity -- recall the fallacy of Vietnam).
If the US was to leave now, all face it ever had in the international community would be lost.
It cannot afford that, now.
BTW: there isn't many or enough valid options in the poll.
Cheers,
-Noble |
|
|
| TheNobleEu |
Cheers,
-Noble |
|
|
| BadBadNeil |
| quote: | Originally posted by Massive84
Who said i want answers from you? It certainly will be ..
"well i don't live in Iraq..i never did..i watch CCN..and woot i come to TA and can say and people will just aknowledge it because i just lack patience. Iraq was not so good under saddam's hand"
Nah thanks anyway.
Do me a favour..if you have anything to assume about an enitre nation..at least put 2 words infront everything you say.."I think"
BECAUSE, i think that Iraq is now MUCH worse with your stupid Bush than Saddam. |
You asked for answers when you said "So mister guru..explain me who is they? It seems to me you are saying that ALL iraqies had it bad under saddam..did you live in Iraq at that time or do you still live there? Have you ever been there?" which if you read the post right above your's I gave my answers in response to that exact question.
I never said that times aren't bad now but I said that when they improve, they will be better than they ever were under Saddam. The people will eventually have even more of a chance at personal wealth than under saddam, yes even the small minority who was favored under Saddam because with a free enterprise system the sky is the limit to your success. You aren't limited by a single person determining how high politically and economically you can reach.
I suppose you think earth was built in a day too eh? |
|
|
| BadBadNeil |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
That's a bit off topic don't ya think?
Was Saddam a threat to his people. Sure but I don't care. Reason being is that I am sure Iraqis never cared for us no more than someone in the Papua New Guinea cares if we live or die.
Was he a threat to the US, not at all. You were lied to plain and simple. You would be a glutton for punishment to believe we have to stay now based on what these same people told you about the supposed existence of WMD's when there are none officially.
|
Off topic but a direct comparison on what you need to believe something is true. You don't necessarily have to be there when an event occurred, see the act take place, to know it happened.
You may be right that a small percentage even care what happens to us, I haven't seen any info on this. Honestly I don't care what happens to them, I have enough to worry about here at home and I would suspect that to them it is the same. You worry about your family, friends, having a job, feeding yourself before you worry about someone halfway across the globe.
It may have been a mistake to go in, or it may not have been. That we will find out in the next decade when "hopefully" things improve. If the Iraqi economy is a success spreading wealth and democracy in the region I suspect it will be deemed a success. How does that affect us here in the US after spending $250Billion, not sure yet, I don't feel safer than I did 3 years ago.
| quote: |
Please for a minute act like you've learned something once in a while.
|
? Sorry, my vast intellect is not up to par with your own?
| quote: |
It's a fiat system here and in the EU. Don't rely on it gaining ground on it's own. The markets are manipulated more than you think.
I was pointing out the layoffs not the finished products. A bottom line was the goal. GM doesn't care if they make the fastest or finest cars as long as they make the most profit.
You made it seem like the Iraqi nation had it worse than us. Don't you think that our deficit should take precedent over someones elses'?
|
I still feel our economy is overall fine, but that is my opinion. I will continue to invest in the stock market and real estate and continue to have a larger percentage invested in domestic rather than foreign investments.
The finished products though affect the layoffs. If GM was putting out good products and didn't have exorbant labor costs they would be selling more and making more profit per vehicle, therefore having more demand for cars, and in turn not having to lay people off. You don't need the fastest cars but well built, reliable, stylish, and exciting vehicles are all things they are missing generally. We went further into this in the thread on this topic before so I'll just end it there.
Yes I want our absurd amount of tax money spent on us first as we have an ever aging infrastructure. As much as I would like that I have little choice in where my money goes. I send in my $4000 checks to the government as they ask and then have to trust that they do the right thing with the money which often isn't the case. I wish there was a study of how much tax money is blown each year on foreign and domestic projects that don't pan out. |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
| quote: | Originally posted by BadBadNeil
You don't necessarily have to be there when an event occurred, see the act take place, to know it happened. |
That's why it's called history or his story.
History is written by the victors
Winston Churchill
| quote: | | It may have been a mistake to go in, or it may not have been. That we will find out in the next decade when "hopefully" things improve. If the Iraqi economy is a success spreading wealth and democracy in the region I suspect it will be deemed a success. How does that affect us here in the US after spending $250Billion, not sure yet, I don't feel safer than I did 3 years ago. |
Somehow people are conditioned to stay in a war we shouldn't have been in. In a war we have to pay for in blood and finance.
| quote: | | ? Sorry, my vast intellect is not up to par with your own? |
Why waste it here on this pittance of a forum?
| quote: | | I still feel our economy is overall fine... |
That's what the same way we thought about our way of life prior to 9/11 and the subsequent loss of liberties. Wait until it collapses and then will the reminiscing begin about stock markets past.
| quote: | | If GM was putting out good products and didn't have exorbant labor costs they would be selling more and making more profit per vehicle |
So by this you mean workers are getting paid too much? How about you take a pay cut because you make too much money. Everybody is for something until it affects them then will they change direction.
| quote: | | I wish there was a study of how much tax money is blown each year on foreign and domestic projects that don't pan out. |
That would most likely be a job for the GAO. |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
Back in 2002, following the trauma of 9-11, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld predicted there would be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large. How could he be so sure of that? Perhaps because these attacks would be instigated on the order of the Honorable Mr. Rumsfeld. According to Los Angeles Times military analyst William Arkin, writing Oct. 27, 2002, Rumsfeld set out to create a secret army, "a super-Intelligence Support Activity" network that would "bring together CIA and military covert action, information warfare, intelligence, and cover and deception," to stir the pot of spiraling global violence.
According to a classified document prepared for Rumsfeld by his Defense Science Board, the new organization--the "Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group (P2OG)"--would actually carry out secret missions designed to provoke terrorist groups into committing violent acts. The P2OG, a 100-member, so-called "counter-terrorist" organization with a $100-million-a-year budget, would ostensibly target "terrorist leaders," but according to P2OG documents procured by Arkin, would in fact carry out missions designed to "stimulate reactions" among "terrorist groups"--which, according to the Defense Secretary's logic, would subsequently expose them to "counter-attack" by the good guys. In other words, the plan is to execute secret military operations (assassinations, sabotage, "deception") which would intentionally result in terrorist attacks on innocent people, including Americans--essentially, to "combat terrorism" by causing it!
This notion is currently being applied to the problem of the Iraqi "insurgency," it seems. According to a May 1, 2005 report by Peter Maass in the New York Times Magazine, two of the top US advisers to Iraqi paramilitary commandos fighting the insurgents are veterans of US counterinsurgency operations in Latin America. Loaning credence to recent media speculation about the "Salvadorization" of Iraq, the report notes that one adviser currently in Iraq is James Steele, who led a team of 55 US Army Special Forces advisers in El Salvador in the 1980s. Maass writes that these advisors "trained front-line battalions that were accused of significant human rights abuses."
The current senior US adviser at the Iraqi Interior Ministry, which Maass writes "has operational control over the commandos," is former top US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) official Steve Casteel, who worked "alongside local forces" in the US-sponsored "Drug War" in Bolivia, Peru and Colombia, "where he was involved in the hunt for Pablo Escobar, the head of the Medellin cocaine cartel."
The US "drug war" in Latin America also serves as a cover for ongoing counterinsurgency, employing terrorist methods to achieve two aims: one, actually combating genuine insurgency; two, the ratcheting up of a "strategy of tension," heightened social violence designed to induce fear among the citizenry and the subsequent call for greater "security."
The Provocateur State: Is the CIA Behind the Iraqi "Insurgents"--and Global Terrorism? |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
"Funding is tough to come by these days," he says. "The biggest downside to a war in Iraq is what you could do with that money. What does a war in Iraq cost a week? A billion? Maybe a billion a day? The budget for the National Cancer Institute is four billion. That has to change. It needs to become a priority again.
"Polls say people are much more afraid of cancer than of a plane flying into their house or a bomb or any other form of terrorism. It is a priority for the American public."
Fighting cancer is new mission for Armstrong
People will ignore this when someone else has to play boogeyman.
CASUALTY OF WAR: THE U.S. ECONOMY
James Sterngold, Chronicle Staff Writer
Sunday, July 17, 2005
The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have already cost taxpayers $314 billion, and the Congressional Budget Office projects additional expenses of perhaps $450 billion over the next 10 years.
That could make the combined campaigns, especially the war in Iraq, the most expensive military effort in the last 60 years, causing even some conservative experts to criticize the open-ended commitment to an elusive goal. The concern is that the soaring costs, given little weight before now, could play a growing role in U.S. strategic decisions because of the fiscal impact.
"Osama (bin Laden) doesn't have to win; he will just bleed us to death," said Michael Scheuer, a former counterterrorism official at the CIA who led the pursuit of bin Laden and recently retired after writing two books critical of the Clinton and Bush administrations. "He's well on his way to doing it."
The Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a nonpartisan Washington think tank, has estimated that the Korean War cost about $430 billion and the Vietnam War cost about $600 billion, in current dollars. According to the latest estimates, the cost of the war in Iraq could exceed $700 billion.
Put simply, critics say, the war is not making the United States safer and is harming U.S. taxpayers by saddling them with an enormous debt burden, since the war is being financed with deficit spending.
One of the most vocal Republican critics has been Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, who said the costs of the war -- many multiples greater than what the White House had estimated in 2003 -- are throwing U.S. fiscal priorities out of balance.
"It's dangerously irresponsible," Hagel said in February of the war spending.
He later told U.S. News & World Report, "The White House is completely disconnected from reality." He added that the apparent lack of solid plans for defeating the insurgency and providing stability in Iraq made it seem "like they're just making it up as they go along."
The Democrats have also raised concerns about the apparent lack of an exit strategy and the fast-rising costs, particularly since President Bush has chosen to pay for the war with special supplemental appropriations outside the normal budget process. Some Democrats have insisted that, to cover war costs, the president should propose comparable reductions in other government programs, in part to be fiscally responsible and in part to make the price of the war more tangible.
CASUALTY OF WAR: THE U.S. ECONOMY
Don't forget we're still paying for the Civil War. |
|
|
|
|
