|
General Iraq War thread - Use this Thread only ! (pg. 19)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Dmatrox |
right.. but i cant read it, it looks like a cool writen script though :D |
|
|
| SuperFarStucker |
| urr i don't watch a channel but I keep tabs on the reuters 'war on iraq' page.. non-sensationalized for the most part.. Reuters is the biggest independent media corporation in the world... (meaning they don't 'belong' to any one group) |
|
|
| jploveparade |
| Iraqi Satelite Channel |
|
|
| DaveSaenz |
| quote: | Originally posted by BTG
i bet iraqi tv is pretty interesting. |
So I've heard. haha. They were having pro saddam poetry readings the other day... |
|
|
| zarathustra |
I agree with SportTrance. I feel that all of the other options have been exhausted. Saddam has to go, pure and simple. If violence is the only thing Saddam understands, then violence is the only way to reach him. It's very unfortunate but it looks to be true.
It is my opinion that most anti-war protester are simple anti-American for whatever reason. An image that they might have in their minds is of a stereotypical American, swilling beer, polishing a rifle and yelling out "Baghdad or bust." Come on...
To conclude this mess of thoughts I would like to argue that for some, protesting the war is easier than finding reasons to justify it (and I think that there are many.) |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0
Him being a liar is not so much in question. But there is a difference whether he has thousands of tons of chemical poisons ready to be sprayed or if he has several old Scuds. A full scale military operation with thousands of civillian deaths is not a fair price for destroying several almost obsolete missiles (which btw can't reach much further than Israel). |
Tito, lets assume that you are correct and Saddam doesn't have any chemical or biological weapons at all. Isn't the fact that the man would sacrifice his country and his people for 4 crummy missiles a little disturbing? That he would continue to defy the UN for over 11 years for a few bits and pieces of banned military hardware is mindboggling. So what happens if nothing were done and he were allowed to remain in power? There's no way you could trust the man to keep his word or keep the peace. If he's THIS irrational now, what will he do if he ever finally develops nuclear weapons or some other significant threat?
As Sportstrance mentioned with his post, Saddam is that type of person who CRAVES power. Obviously he doesn't care about his own people, and obviously he's not content just being the ruler of Iraq. He wants to be the pan-Arab leader of the region and if he can't accomplish it through peace he will through war. How do you negotiate with a man like that??? |
|
|
| jonsimmonds |
| out of the uk chanels bbc is probably the best, i saw a article in a news paper sayin that bbc has set aside £10 million for war coverage, ITN (itv) £5.5 mil and sky have set aside £3 mill (although they are going to buy film etc from other chanels), bbc has the advantage as they dont have adverts |
|
|
| SportTrance |
As far as this war.......
The fact is, everyone of you peace heads still agrees, saddam, regardless of ANY situation, should NOT be in power. Regardless of what you think the war is about, you STILL AGREE that saddamn, and his regime, NEED to be taken out of power. That is the #1 goal the united states is establishing. Saddamn had PLENTY of time, to prove his innocence with weapons of mass destruction, and did not cooperate with the UN. EVERYONE knows this also. Apparently peace heads think removing saddamn can be done in a peaceful manner (we all know thats hilarious). Some even believe we should just leave him in power. (even smarter). Some also believe we should have allowed the UN more time to do such investigations. (lost cause)
Let me tell you this. The government knows things, you will, never, ever, know. I find it so terribly interesting, that you can stand up, and pretty much say (from your credible resources of tv news), what this war is really about.
Removing saddamn from his power, is goal #1. You can argue, complain, say its "no its only about oil, its about this" according to your highly credible tv sources, then so be it. We all know a percentage IS about oil. Ofcourse some of it is about oil, war is never really just over government, but also economy. No brainer in that one. Once again, you're not pointing out anything we don't realize.
Saddam has lied, over, and over. Its has been proven, over, and over. All you're justifications to why this war shouldn't occur, are just repeats. One thing I do know is, and I've stated before, you ONLY know 1/4 of what the government knows. Your source of information, goes as far as your television screen, and a piece of paper printed out daily.
You nor I, have any real ground to say why this war should, or shouldn't happen. But I do know one thing, Saddam has run a terrible dictator ship for many, many years. The world knows this, its a given. Regardless of weapons of mass destruction, regardless if you think its about oil, THAT ALONE is justifiable cause, to take him down. He did NOT comply completely with the UN, and had never really complied in the past.
What it takes for people to understand something, I do not know. The US has enough credible information (that you will never know), for reason to take this guy out. You can think what you want, say what you want, just realize, once again, your amplification of your non-ground standing beliefs, have been proven useless again.
One thing I heard on tv, which I found interesting, was that most protestors don't even concieve the fact, that if they did what they're doing on our streets, in Baghdad, they would be dead by now.
Remember, you have the right to protest, but please, if youre going to protest, please have some ground to stand on. If you're only source of information stops at a tv screen and a newspaper, believe me, its really hard to take you serious, especially if you're idea of protesting is vomitting.
We've all known peace protestors to be useless and non-helpful in the past, but c'mon, this is extreme....... |
|
|
| Tranex02 |
ok.....here's the way i see it
about those (current)anti-war protestors....you have some of those ppl who are rallying against war just because they believe war is not a solution, or war is never right, or that peace is always a solution....
and you have those that are not supportive of this war....
I believe what sporttrance wrote applies to the first category of ppl, and i totaly agree with him.....(keeping in mind that this thread isn't about being pro-war or pro(the current)war...)
Just to support a few of his comments:
| quote: | | By assuming peace is possible, with ALL people in this world, is EXTREMELY ignorant. |
true.....people think differently and they will not change...
| quote: | | War only exhists, when there is NO other solution. |
also true....
Ok, now i'm going OFF-TOPIC, by relating to this current war, and comparing the 2nd type of 'protestors'.....
This isn't in reply to the origional post, but rather to the pro(current)war ppl who have replied....
SOME of those protesters do not support this current war because they don't believe that there is enough of a reason for the US to lead this war.... If it's because the regime kills it's own ppl and bcz it's a threat to other nearby nations like kuwait..... why should the US go in there and defend them...... They believe that the all the money,effort, and concentration should be spent on local issues, and going to education and health care...
and if it's because he poses a BIG threat to the US.... Where is the evidence, bush hasn't proven that to the ppl.
.....and the fact that Bush links what happened in 911 with the regime...... isn't right. he can't win support (although he has) by saying that the regime poses another 911 threat by simply saying such a thing...ppl want proof...
To these ppl, it hasn't come to this: | quote: | | He has conquered several countries and killed millions already, and plans to conquer your country, in a week. |
These ppl don't need/have a solution because they don't see the problem in the first place....
Again, This ^^^ is NOT MY opinion..... I'm just showing you that there are different ppl with different views....and this thread doesn't apply to every protester.
Don't think that i'm trying to clarify the differences because i myself am against the war.... because that isn't the case!
For me, I'm niether anti-war nor pro-war...... in other words, i havn't chosen a side yet.... it's very easy for ppl to choose a side esp. when they are mis-lead by one-sided views/reasons.
Some ppl think they know all the sides...but they really don't...
I do see both sides.... and i can't seem to come to a conclusion. I can't support simply one side, and have it represent me and all of my opinions....
Anyway...... hope i kinda made sense ..... considering i've spent too much time and brain power on this post!;)
:) |
|
|
| JohnSmith |
I'm just curious about a few things SportTrance.
first up, where should we be getting our information from? I use the internet, some sources i consider reliable, others not.
second, where are you getting yours that makes your opinion more justified.
third, i want to answer your question. You asked, repeatedly PROVIDE__THE__SOLUTION, and that is what i will do.
The solution to your hypothetical problem, is undoubtably war. A crazed madman is coming at you with thousands of troops, and you have no choice but to defend yourself. In fact this right is enshrined in the UN charter, chapter 7. If you are under attack, i believe you are legally, and morally justified in attacking your agressor.
Now, leaving the hypothetical behind, this is not the situation we have in Iraq. America is not under attack from Iraq, and never has been. The only one doing any attacking is the US and UK with their continous bombing of the "No Fly Zones" which are not recognized by the UN, nor by any country besides the US and UK. Iraq is the country who has a crazed madman with thousands of troops attacking, and is forced to defend itself. This is why I am against the war.
As for the situation in Iraq, I do agree that Saddamn is a terrible leader. However, i do NOT believe it is the responsibility of the US to be judge, jury and executioner on this issue. This is something for the international community to consider carefully, and take action on if neccesary. Even with the USA's obvious influence on the UN, they were STILL not able to get the needed votes to pass the resolution, NOR convince france, germany or russia to abstain from using their veto. This proves that the international community at large did not support this action, and that the US is actually a "rogue state" now. In fact it is now the responsibility of the UN to demand that the US cease this action or face military action itself. Of course, we all know that this will never happen. |
|
|
| montie |
| quote: | Originally posted by SportTrance
As far as this war.......
The fact is, everyone of you peace heads still agrees, saddam, regardless of ANY situation, should NOT be in power. Regardless of what you think the war is about, you STILL AGREE that saddamn, and his regime, NEED to be taken out of power. That is the #1 goal the united states is establishing. Saddamn had PLENTY of time, to prove his innocence with weapons of mass destruction, and did not cooperate with the UN. EVERYONE knows this also. Apparently peace heads think removing saddamn can be done in a peaceful manner (we all know thats hilarious). Some even believe we should just leave him in power. (even smarter). Some also believe we should have allowed the UN more time to do such investigations. (lost cause)
Let me tell you this. The government knows things, you will, never, ever, know. I find it so terribly interesting, that you can stand up, and pretty much say (from your credible resources of tv news), what this war is really about.
Removing saddamn from his power, is goal #1. You can argue, complain, say its "no its only about oil, its about this" according to your highly credible tv sources, then so be it. We all know a percentage IS about oil. Ofcourse some of it is about oil, war is never really just over government, but also economy. No brainer in that one. Once again, you're not pointing out anything we don't realize.
Saddam has lied, over, and over. Its has been proven, over, and over. All you're justifications to why this war shouldn't occur, are just repeats. One thing I do know is, and I've stated before, you ONLY know 1/4 of what the government knows. Your source of information, goes as far as your television screen, and a piece of paper printed out daily.
You nor I, have any real ground to say why this war should, or shouldn't happen. But I do know one thing, Saddam has run a terrible dictator ship for many, many years. The world knows this, its a given. Regardless of weapons of mass destruction, regardless if you think its about oil, THAT ALONE is justifiable cause, to take him down. He did NOT comply completely with the UN, and had never really complied in the past.
What it takes for people to understand something, I do not know. The US has enough credible information (that you will never know), for reason to take this guy out. You can think what you want, say what you want, just realize, once again, your amplification of your non-ground standing beliefs, have been proven useless again.
One thing I heard on tv, which I found interesting, was that most protestors don't even concieve the fact, that if they did what they're doing on our streets, in Baghdad, they would be dead by now.
Remember, you have the right to protest, but please, if youre going to protest, please have some ground to stand on. If you're only source of information stops at a tv screen and a newspaper, believe me, its really hard to take you serious, especially if you're idea of protesting is vomitting.
We've all known peace protestors to be useless and non-helpful in the past, but c'mon, this is extreme....... |
The dictator of N. Korea (Kim Jong)has commited just as many if not more atrocities to his people as Saddam, and his country is much more of a threat to world peace than Iraq. (Iraq's army is peanuts compared to N. Korea).
Since this guy's country is a big threat to world peace (he's already threatened to nuke people), and this leader is a horrible oppressor of his people, than according to your arguement, our next target, or actually what we should be focusing on right now, is his country.
In fact following that arguement theres alot of countries we should be attacking to liberate (at least in our perspective) the people.
I think you are looking at this situation too simply and putting WAY TOO MUCH faith in the US government.
I do agree there are horrible situations when war is necesary.
But there are numerous factors to consider and many costs vs. consequences and benifits to weigh to make a decision like that.
The costs and consequences far outweigh the benefits of the war in iraq. Not only for us, but if america continues its track record in countries it attacks in the middle east, but for the Iraqi people. |
|
|
| SportTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by JohnSmith
I'm just curious about a few things SportTrance.
first up, where should we be getting our information from? I use the internet, some sources i consider reliable, others not.
second, where are you getting yours that makes your opinion more justified.
third, i want to answer your question. You asked, repeatedly PROVIDE__THE__SOLUTION, and that is what i will do.
The solution to your hypothetical problem, is undoubtably war. A crazed madman is coming at you with thousands of troops, and you have no choice but to defend yourself. In fact this right is enshrined in the UN charter, chapter 7. If you are under attack, i believe you are legally, and morally justified in attacking your agressor.
Now, leaving the hypothetical behind, this is not the situation we have in Iraq. America is not under attack from Iraq, and never has been. The only one doing any attacking is the US and UK with their continous bombing of the "No Fly Zones" which are not recognized by the UN, nor by any country besides the US and UK. Iraq is the country who has a crazed madman with thousands of troops attacking, and is forced to defend itself. This is why I am against the war.
As for the situation in Iraq, I do agree that Saddamn is a terrible leader. However, i do NOT believe it is the responsibility of the US to be judge, jury and executioner on this issue. This is something for the international community to consider carefully, and take action on if neccesary. Even with the USA's obvious influence on the UN, they were STILL not able to get the needed votes to pass the resolution, NOR convince france, germany or russia to abstain from using their veto. This proves that the international community at large did not support this action, and that the US is actually a "rogue state" now. In fact it is now the responsibility of the UN to demand that the US cease this action or face military action itself. Of course, we all know that this will never happen. |
well, fair enough, and clear. Keep in mind, I did state that my post doesnt have any relation to the current war, and I stated that for a reason. I am neither pro-war nor anti-war, atleast with this specific war. I personally believe we are doing something beneficial, HOWEVER, I do understand your point completely, that that we are not ones to decided on the fate of Iraq, and that the entire international community should decide. Unfortunately, I do believe, after time and time, nothing would change if we left it in the hands of the UN. IMO we were going round and round, with a pretty much "evil" dictator, and would continue to go round and round, as long as it continued.
As far as news resources, i'm getting no better/worse sources than you are. My opinion isn't anymore justified than yours, but you will notice, unlike A LOT of anti-war believers on this board, I am not jumping to conclusions as to what exactly this war is about. I always have, and always will believe, that the government will ALWAYS know more than we do. But, I support what we're doing quite simply because we all know what saddam has done and is doing, its a world known fact. We all do know, the #1 goal, is to take out saddam. |
|
|
|
|
