Iraq war's 3rd anniversary

LOL!
Napalm, please dont think i was being patronizing, i was just kidding, i know that the australians are in the thick of the battle just like us americans, and i know you guys suffered a lot whn those bombs went off in indonesia, and how on earth can i be patronizing when i make a joke about vegamite?
think about it, most americans do not even know what vegamite is, but i know what it is, and yet im accused of being ignorant. im a big fan of australia, the road warrior (mad max2) is my favorite film, foster lager is my 2nd favorite beer (after bud light) and i think naomi watts is way hot.australia is big and dexcellent in my book, im sorry you thought i was being patronizing.

through history, alliances with various nations always change and it often leads to situations here one nation appears to be aiding both countries, but that is because there may be weapons left over from a previous alience perios that is used against the other nation when a new conflict arises… But speaking of iran-Iraq war, people always mention this, but i have yet to see any photographs of iraqui or iranian soldiers during the iran-iraq war using american weapons, all the images you see are those soldiers using soviet made ak47s or soviet made tanks, or soviet or french made jets. nobody blames the ussr or france of giving doubale aid to both enemies, but of coure the USA is blamed, as always.
also, this still does not justify in any way the 911 attavcks. if the USA did not arm iraq and iran during that war, do you really think that the war would have been prevented? certainly if people want to fight, they find a way and an arms dealer to do it. and if the 911 terrorists were so conserned about the iraq-iran war, why did they not attack the principals in THAT war? the assistance you speak of still does not justify murdering 3000 people in mid town manhattan. sorry to disagree with you, but it is still not a genuine reason for the macabe and awful event of 911.

your argument with reference to the iran-iraq war has my full compassion, much more than you seem to realize, but it is not a convincing argument for mass murder, or to make an excuse for mass murder, even if the victums are a bunch of bone headed overweight mcdonalds-eating americans who has sucky underpaid jobs in the twin towers.
my own boneheaded skull is not as thick as you think, and i am open to any explainaition that justifies the terrorist actions of 911. dont just give up on me, making your points to a conservative is more interesting than making the same points to others who automatically agree with you. thats why i enjoy posting and apeaking with liberls, it is more interesting and fun than arguing with those who already agre with me

i do apologize for making a cheap remark bout japan nd australia. after i posted that remark, i stted to think more bout it, nd when you think about how hard and bravely the australians fought in ww2, in bioth the pacific and ion euroope, it is clear that the japanese attempt to attack australia would have failed, with or without guadalcanal. and i also think that if the japanese attack went in a western direction, and if they managed to land in california, our australian friends would have been at our sides.

i for one never said that this war would be easy and cheap and harmless. and i think the benefits of this action will become clear in several years time. it is a fight we have to do, and i think President Bush’s long range vision can be hard to grasp by all those with instant gratification on their minds. my argument is not with those who were against the war from day1, but my argument is with those of you who supported the war in its first year, saw thst it was messy, and now want to run. from the first moment a war starts, you have to be clear, it is not something you try out, like a shirt in a store, then return the shirt when it does not fit as well as you thought. even people like cindy sheehan, it takes her son to die before she chooses the antiwar side? if everyone who is aginst the war now, thought it through for 5 minutes before the war instead of being wishywashy and putting magnets on their cars and “thinking” that they supported the war, if they were not sure (as I was) that it was the right thing to do, then they should have said so before we comitted. now it is too late, we are there, and we have to finish the job.

napalm, i already said that i thought gitmo was not worth it, and that the terrorists should be put in us prisions, with fair trials and all that. also, in us prisons, these creeps would have a var more miserable experience, half of them were training to be suicide bombers, so we should deny them the deat5h penelty so they could surffer among the prison population without their fast track to the 63 virgins, or whatever it is they think they will get in heaven.

Ok. I agree.

the evidence is not really very condemming. i am willing to change my mind about anything (for example, since this post exchange, i have been giving some serious thought to switching my favorite beer from bud-light to fosters lager), nbut simply coming us with vague reasons for the 911 attack does not do it. if a group of vietnamese people did that attack, and said it was because their whole families were destroyed by B-52s during the vietnam war, then I might , no, I WOULD understand. if mexicans decided to blow up the alamo, i would understand that. if ome japanese group decided to nuke n american city, and said it was bvecause of hiroshima,then I guess there would be a type of logic to an insne thing like that. but 911 because the usa helped both sides during iran VS iraq? you have to come up with something better.

sorry you dont want to argue with me anymore. I was enjoying your posts.

Buddy

thank you, Mr.thisguyiknow for the link to bin ladens statement, which i read several times over, and pondered and thought about at work.

he still does not bring up any good reason or excuse for the 911 attack. he is also not a very good poet, even though that may not be his fault, but the fault of the translator, because poetic things are not easy to translate.

Binladen does say some compelling things, and it is easy to be moved by his descriptions of people killed in the american shelling of lebanon, but his method of retaliation, with regards to the twin towers is still not justified.

if he ONLY attacked the pentagon, then there might be some weight to his argument, because the pentagon is a obvious military target. actually, he seems to leave out that the americans paid dearly for the lebanon incident because of that suicide attack on the us marine barracks which lkilled something like 260 us marines (and 60 french soldiers, the same day), and he also attacked the US cole, so if it is revenge against the US military, he was already getting his revenge, so why make an attack on a building full of new yorkers sitting at their desks and having coffee?

OBL also makes some compelling points about how the us is spending its resourses to chase him down, and how he is attempting to bleed the US economy, but this still does not provide the justification for the 911 attacks.

what is amazing is how this guy chooses to fight his battles, he comes from an unbelievebly wealthy saudi family, you would think that he can use his familys resources to make the “changes” he wants in a more creative way than acting like some kind of psychopathic islamo-fasctist cowboy hiding in caves. its too late for him now, after what he did, but i can not find any7 respect for a person who has made the life choices that he has made. he has helped nobody. even if his complaints against the USA are justified, who has he helped? who has he fed? who has he educated? he is just a killer who uses a lot of fancy and romantic psudo-political jargan. dont buy into it. even if you hate bush, dont buy into this guys game, he is a real snake, and he has no authority on anything, except for various ways to kill people.

nice try, and i’m glad you provided the URL, it was interesting reading. I think the man (bin laden) is completely insane, by the way.

Buddy

Is it true that a majority of Americans want to Impeach Bush?

Which one? :smiley:

Huh?

Which Bush?

If I was in Congress, I would want to

Am I the only one who thinks that these people’s arguments would be a whole lot easier to comprehend if they actually typed out real words isntead of typing liek thsi?

no, thats not true, that is just a bored media with nothing beter to do than to pick on the president.
if a real person to person poll were taken, a poll that asked every american about bush, i think we’d find that he still enjoys enormous support, and the vast majority of americans still support him.
he is a very typical american, bush is, like it or not. he has captured that “special something” that is deep in the american personality, for better or for worse.
i support him, im a proud republican, and even if the polls are giving him the thumbs down, history will vindicate hi,. just go ask harry truman,.
so no, he wont be impeached. it is not in the cards.

OK, if he gets caught doing something private with condi, maybe that will outrage enough people, but that wont happen

This has been fun reading. I’ll just weigh in on a piece of it. Mr. Bud Lightbulb, never heard of you before. Wonder if you’re really an American, and are you out of high school? And if you normally post under another nam/avatar, why hide here?

What if the U.S. only supplied money? Guess what kind of rifles they’d buy? Money and training? But maybe those don’t count because they don’t show up in an AP photo. Or maybe the AP doesn’t prefer to use photos showing American weaponry, as that wouldn’t look as good. Photos are isolated facts, if accurate, but not general indications of conditions.

Please stop re-asking your stupid loaded question. Nothing justifies a surprise attack on civilians. Okay? But what were these guys pissed off about? Maybe this will help you comprehend their point of view. And remember that whoever we’re talking about does not work for the former Iraqi government. How did we get into Iraq after 9/11 again? If we had focused our energies and political will on Bin Laden, surely we would have had him three years ago. Saddam was and is a separate issue.

Our choice to “invite” the world’s terrorists to come to iraq and fight it out with us is one of the things we Americans are famous for. Making sure the fight happens in a place we don’t really care about. Anywhere, as long as it’s not on our own soil. And if there’s an oil supply to protect, there’s billions of private industry dollars to be made. Why should private industry profit so much while the rest of us taxpayers go into debt to the amount of about $30,000 apiece; every last man, woman and baby of us?

How ripe is this one.

Why do we have to do this fight? Please justify the necessitiy of this fight, not based on current events, but on the Iraq that existed before we attacked. Yes we know how bad Saddam was. Please explain what makes him worse than many other current dictators who are in power. And for extra credit, please try not to use oil as a part of your answer. In other words, a correct answer will have to compare the “badness” of Saddam to the other equally bad or worse leaders out there, who mostly live in countries without oil.

Next, since our president continues to withold the information, please explain his long range vision to us. We got the part about removing Saddam, and I think a fair majority of the populace was in agreement with that. What now? A free Iraq? How free? Can it be free their own way, or does it have to comply with some U.S. requirements?

I advocate not leaving as long as we’re trying to help Iraq build up its own forces to take over the job. But are we dragging our feet? Is the strong emphasis really on turning over ther responsibility to them? Or are we taking our time so American private industry can make as much money as possible while we’re there, and why aren’t all of us more pissed off about this?

What about those of us who don’t like the way it has been handled? I don’t want us to run. I want us to proceed with honor and honesty. When are high-level heads going to roll as a result of the Abu-Graibe thing? Never I guess. No honor. If we can’t fight the good fight WHILE living up to our own Constitution, perhaps it is a fight not worthy of us. Or more accurately, perhaps we are not worthy of the fight.

Maybe you need to go in with a clear plan for what’s supposed to happen after Saddam is ousted. If we had one it was never publicly announced. There has been a lot of bumbling since then. Not by our boys and girls in the field, they died with honor while doing their best. Just like the boys in Vietnam. This is no Vietnam, but there are many similarities. The word quagmire comes to mind. We eventually got out of there when it became apparent we could never win as long as we continued to play the game as we had been. That was a different war, but it works as a good example of the fact that THINGS CHANGE IN THE COURSE OF EVENTS. Even if someone was in favor of invading Iraq, they might not be in favor of the current course of action in the current situation.

Somebody please explain to Bud Lightbulb what torture is. Apparently he doesn’t get it. The guys in Gitmo aren’t being punished by the other prisoners, idiot. They’re being tortured/annoyed/mistreated/stripped of their rights by the employees of your favorite president.

Which half? Where’s the evidence? What about the other half?

I wouldn’t. Those people in the WTC probalby didn’t have much to do with bombing raids in the 60s and 70s. Nothing justifies it. But the “other side” still has valid arguments for being pissed off at the USA. If you don’t know what any of them are, you haven’t been seriously trying to understand your enemy. You must understand your enemy to defeat him.


Three years. To me, the saddest thing about this anniversary is the fact that Bush is still in charge. Some 50.00000??? percent of you really messed up this time! :slight_smile:

Ok, im out of here.
ill just stay with the unicycle section and stay out of the politics section if i’m going to be called stupid. i did not insult any one. and i dont think i deserve to be called stupid.
maybe just conversation should be called “just Liberals”
bye.
of course you dont know me. part of the fun of logging on to the internet and to sites like this is to meet new personalities on line without all of the hassles of meeting them in person. i guess i will have to meet all of you first before i can log on next time. unicycling is one of my favoite things, and it never occured to me to do a web serch on unicycles, but i did and i found this place. but thats not good enough.
ill come back to this forum after i graduate from high school

Buddy

A few changes in that paragraph to make ye ponder.

In that instance, ‘stupid’ modifies ‘question’, not you.

Except Bush isnt’ from Texas, The Bushes are a well-to-do Conneticut family. Bush Jr. and Sr. just loved the whoel cowboy thing so much they moved there. Although the error doesn’t make your point any less valid.

I feel the very much the same way when I hear Bush speak.

When I looked at your user info I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed you were at least in college, but thanks for confirming that it’s only high school. It’s hard to take seriously in any sort of discussion a high school student who talks frequently about his drinking habits. And the fact that your favorite beer is bud lite is very telling.

The truth is our political discussions on this board are not for liberals only, they are for articulate, educated, culturally aware individuals only. There are many on this board who share your views and when they choose to express them we give them respect listen to them, but unfortunately you aren’t able to have a political discussion at that level and you come off as a fool, which of course furthers our negative opinion of Bush.

All you’ve done by posting on these topics is further convince us (assume it’s more than just me) that we are right, and Bush is egomanical war monger who doesn’t know what he’s doing.

Agreed about the sadness. To play devil’s advocate, how many of this 50% do you think were “suckered” into voting for Bush… that is, how many were just plain too stupid to think for themselves, bought all of the media’s craptastic “shock and awe” reporting and became too frightened to vote for anyone else but Dubya? There’s likely a large segment of this population who are “on the fence” politically and were swung to The Right by the fearmongers in media and politics.

What can you expect from a country full of sheep? What does it take to wake these people from their slumber? :thinking:

Actually, more guys like Bud Lightbulb would probably help. Bring it on! :slight_smile:
(And yes, Bud, only the question was stupid. Who hasn’t asked stupid questions before?)

Beyond that, my opinion of the solution is more scary. People would have to be more interested in the outside world and reality, than they are in who’s going to be voted off American Idol or Survivor this week. They would have to read and think more. Ouch.

So I guess I’ll keep my sig line as-is for now…

i dont think i fully understand what you mean by that, but the fact that you put a smily face at the end of the sentence i think it means something friendly.

sorry i over-reacted. and i read and re-read everything you said in your message wher eyou responded to my stuff, and i will think about what you wrote.
i also realized that i was asking for it, because i did write really long arguments against the things that napalm and thisguyiknow said, and to me it sounded like a debate, but because it was long and extra long, i think it came across as a lekture, and maybe i came across as a blo-hard, so i was asking for trouble because if someone is new to a website and if that siomeone (me, in this case) writesd very long thingz like that, it is easy to forget that it might come across as rude.
in the future i will be short and sweet in my comments, or i will hang low and get to know you guys in a slow and unobtrusive way, not like a know-it-alkl who appears and lectures everyone.,
i have nothing to say about all the stuff you wrote because i think i already made my point, and because i already spoke, it is my turn to listen, and i dont have to agree, but i can still look into my computer screen and read and listen because that is what these forums are alll about, people spreading their ideas, and exchanging viewpoints.

Very good words, Mr. Litebulb. Just Conversation is a great place for us to learn to understand each other. If we take our time and try to get into each others’ heads, we will learn the most from the people we don’t agree with.

Another of those subjects where battle lines are drawn, and ritualistic arguments are exchanged without anyone changing his opinion a jot?:slight_smile:

Democracy is a fairly new idea. In Ancient Athens, only the elite were allowed to vote. In Britain, women died less than 100 years ago as they fought for the right to vote. In the USA, the blacks got the vote during my lifetime, after a hard and at times violent struggle.

And in the Arabic countries, there is virtually no heritage of democracy at all.

Democracy produced leaders of the calibre and popularity of Adolf Hitler, Margaret Thatcher, George W. Bush, and Berlusconi.

In all systems, the scum rises to the surface. The current dispute in this country over multi-million pound loans shows that votes are an expensive commodity for the politicians to buy. So rich people with rich backers become leaders, and on the whole they use their power and influence for the rich.

Saddam Hussein was a tyrant. One advantage of being a tyrant is that he was able to keep the various warring tribes apart. Now he’s gone, the warring tribes are free to kill each other, and centuries of hatred are boiling over. (The Sunni/Shi’ite argument goes back to the time of the death of the Prophet, in 632 AD!)

And how will democracy help, when people will vote almost entirely on tribal lines?

The whole thing is a complete and utter dog’s breakfast.

And now they want to do it in Iran too?

If you want someone to stop terrorising you, stop making them hate you. What if the cost of all those planes, tanks, shells, missiles and bombs had been shared out equally between the Afghans or Iraqis? There’d be schools, water plants, hospitals… and recruitment of terrorists would be harder.

And as for the numbers game: the number of Americans killed in 9/11 was not that dissimilar to the number of Americans killed by other Americans every year. The number of UK citizens killed in 9/11 was approximately equal to a week’s UK road casualties.

9/11 was terrible, disgusting, awful, and evil, and I’m not belittling the tragedy of it at all, but I am saying that the response to it was disproportionate, poorly directed, and appallingly badly conceived.