war in Iraq

[Pit_Girl]

with war looming overhead like a raincloud on a race weekend.... i was curious to see just how many people acutally support this war of Mr. Bush's(and i dont mean supporting the troops... just agreeing or disagreeing with it in general).... personally, i dont, but that's neither here nor there.

 i dont's want this to turn into yet another big political debate (*cough cough like that big helmet thing a while back *cough cough).... k? just making that clear right away...

-jen

[sdiver68]

http://komo1000news.com/audio/kvi_aircheck_031003.mp3

Listen and learn.

[Nate R]

This guy is being an ASS. Little Girl? She deserves more respect than that. I have no problem with debating, though. She does seem to be lacking for a strong arguement, as well as a few other things.  ::)


This is a real tough question for some. How DO you keep peace and such with Saddam in power? Some think that we should slip in and out  with saddam and other high leaders and be done with it. But, it's never that simple.

 War is looming overhead, and that's real scary.

I do want to say that I am thankful for the troops that sacrifice what they do for us. My brother is in the Mid-East right now, and has been since December.

My generation, and the one that the caller seems to be from has not had to go through a war that affected the American public immensely, and has not had to fight for anything we have. (unlike the civil rights movement, women voting, etc) So, some people have really no gratitude for some of the things we do have, and there's a LOT of ignorance. I just hope that as little killing as possible goes on in this war.

I dont like war in general, and think we should wait until at least the UN backs us, but the fact is that it's coming. So, with that in mind, I do hope we quickly eliminate saddam and his followers.

[lightsmith]

Please refer to the man as PRESIDENT Bush.  Go check out Drudgereport.com to read about political opponents going through an industrial shredder.

[r6_philly]

Need an option: Support the War, not Bush and his ways.

[GAMEDIC]

If i sell you something and you tell me you will pay me later and then you don't....i keep letting it go on and on without doing anything about it..sooner or later you are going to want something else... i am not there but from what i have seen it looks as if everything has been done to make this happen without fighting but when you have got to do something about it for the sake of something worse later then you have to take care of it  just my $.02

[Super Dave]

I'm curious why the resistance against Bush.  If someone else were to propose an end to this in Iraq, would it matter who it was?

Freedom is not free.  I think we've heard that enough.

Peace does not always come peacefully.  The only reason that we've had a good peaceful time is because of what was done it the past.  And there were those that had to die for it.  

For some twelve years, the world community has tried, with the aid and resources of the United States, to try to work out a resolution to the problem.  It hasn't happened.  

France, Germany, and Russia have a huge financial stake in Saddam Hussein.  When he's out, they loose billions.  Isn't that nice that someone that you consider your friend and ally goes behind the international communities back and works with a butcher.

Here's my question...

Can anyone give me a good reason why Saddam and his gang of thugs should be left in power?  Remember, he has tortured, maimed, gassed, raped, and murdered the local people and those of some countries around him.

I did not support the war in 1990/1991.  I felt that it was an Arab matter that the Arab community should have taken care of.  Our involvement was requested by them, in addition to the information that was then let out about the incredible acts that Saddam's army was doing to the Kuwait's.

However, I feel that this time, it is necessary.  The world organization is happy to appease the man.  For the French, Germans, and Russians, if they can make a whole lot of money for their countries businesses, Saddam can go ahead an kill and murder.  No problem.

But somehow, the United States, Great Britan, and Spain are bad because we actually have the fortitude to do something.

Remember, it's hard to do the right thing.  Often times, you can be ridiculed for doing it.  

Pit_Girl...

I know you're a bit younger, so I'll be curious as to your response.  I know, it's neither here nor there, but if you can't talk about it and give your reason for support, you might not have very long legs to walk on.

[Mongrel]

You can't have peace on your terms unless you are willing to fight for it and defend it may seem odd but war and peace are inseparable.  The world we live in is far too troubled and the US can't solve everyone's problems to their satisfaction, and that makes us a target.  They want what we have, and if they can't have it they don't want us to have it.  We also are high profile targets.  You get the most airtime when you hit us.  We are also looked upon by many Muslims as evil and living outside the laws of god, and for that we should be punished. This not to say that Muslims are the target, but to say there is a mind set in these countries, that says we are poor because they are rich, we are without a future as long as they are there, and we know the true path to god and they don't.  They feel justified in all their actions as much as we feel justified in ours.  The people of Iraq are as proud as we are.  Many don't want to fight us but they hold these feelings towards us and it ends up being easy for them to feel sympathy for terrorist and countries that stand against us.

We won't have peace on our terms unless we defend it.  It is hard to see how Iraq can be a threat to me personally, but this is not about one individual, it is about how they affect us on a global scale.  Oil, trade, and travel are important to Americans, their families, and our economy.  Every American will be affected in some manner if these things are not protected.  Some will die, and others will simply be put out of a job.

[TreyBone]

KILL EM' ALL. LET GOD SORT EM' OUT. We should have turned that place into a parking lot a long time ago. I know it sounds awfull. Do I really care for the human life in the middle east .. NO I don't. I care about the human life over here only. Call it shallow or whatever you want, but i say f*#k everyone else.
OK let the ranting begin :-X

[Pit_Girl]

i dont have a whole lot of time to post... so i'll keep this short for now...

Please refer to the man as PRESIDENT Bush. .

i would have, but when you make a poll, there  is a limit of 50 characters per option.  i had put in "Mr. Bush" (which is fairly respectful, right?) but it wasnt having that.... so just Bush had to do.

i agree that something must be done about Saddam, but the way our president is going about it reminds me of some cheesy cowboy movie.  bush seems to me just to be a pawn in some grand political sceme conjured up by his father and the other republicans. this isnt the humanitarian war that bush is trying to make this out to be.  it's politics, pure and simple.  as for being a pawn, i think Mr. Bushis perfectly happy to be used.  his name gets added to a list of US presidents who started wars, and he gets to play the cowboy, coming out with his guns blazing..just a few months ago, we were all upset about how Saddam wouldnt comply wth the UN  and their policies.  and yet now, when the UN doesnt agree with us or comply with our wishes, we feel that we can go off and do whatever and say "Screw the UN" i dont know why, but i find i problem with that.  if we feel that we can just run around trying to get others to comply with the UN, and when something they decide to do doesnt agree with us  just turn our backs on it, why not leave it entirely?

KILL EM' ALL. LET GOD SORT EM' OUT. We should have turned that place into a parking lot a long time ago. I know it
           sounds awfull. Do I really care for the human life in the middle east .. NO I don't. I care about the human life over here
           only. Call it shallow or whatever you want, but i say f*#k everyone else.
           OK let the ranting begin  

umm...wow.... yeah, let the flaming begin.... :o

-jen

[sdiver68]

Sooo much to learn, so much to learn.....

How can you agree that "something needs to be done" but not have a solution???

OK, peaceniks argue, how about UN mandates, diplomatic pressure, economic sanctions, and covert activity.

We've done that for 12 years

It's been 12 years since my generation went in and kicked Saddam out of Kuwait.  Do you know how many days he had to disarm under the terms of the surrender agreement he signed?

45 days!

Has there been ANYONE in the rest of the world that has been willing to stand up and say Saddam has disarmed and abided by terms of his own agreement?  No is the answer.

OK, misguided peaceniks say next , what about all the innocent lives that will be lost due to a war?

The 1991 Kuwait-Iraq conflict resulted in an estimated 60-120 thousand dead Iraqis, mostly military.  Let's take the high figure and say 120 thousand more dead Iraqis.  Granted, that is inhumanly brutal  :'(, but lets get past that just for a second.

Accounts collected by Western human rights groups from Iraqi émigrés and defectors have suggested that the number of those who have "disappeared" into the hands of the secret police, never to be heard from again, could easily be 200,000.

Let's see, so by invading and deposing Saddam, we are saving Iraqi lives who would otherwise be disposed of by Saddam's secret police  (200K - 120K) = 80k saved Iraqis

Other benefits:
1)  Ridding the Middle East of a megalomaniac dictator who has WMD and a history of using them
2)  Freeing normal Iraqi's from his dictatorship.
3)  Strangling a source of terrorist resources.

The problem with the current anti-war crowd is they don't have solutions, only protests and the protests do not hold up to a factual analysis.

[Super Dave]

i agree that something must be done about Saddam, but the way our president is going about it reminds me of some cheesy cowboy movie.  bush seems to me just to be a pawn in some grand political sceme conjured up by his father and the other republicans. this isnt the humanitarian war that bush is trying to make this out to be.  it's politics, pure and simple.  as for being a pawn, i think Mr. Bushis perfectly happy to be used.  his name gets added to a list of US presidents who started wars, and he gets to play the cowboy, coming out with his guns blazing..just a few months ago, we were all upset about how Saddam wouldnt comply wth the UN  and their policies.  and yet now, when the UN doesnt agree with us or comply with our wishes, we feel that we can go off and do whatever and say "Screw the UN" i dont know why, but i find i problem with that.  if we feel that we can just run around trying to get others to comply with the UN, and when something they decide to do doesnt agree with us  just turn our backs on it, why not leave it entirely?
umm...wow.... yeah, let the flaming begin.... :o

-jen

The other presidents that started wars were Democrats, weren't they?

So, this is not a political issue, is it?  If it is, you need to make your case.  

Humanitarian?  Five thousand Iraqi's killed in a chemical attack.  That's unpresidented for someone to do that.  I have some military background, and the thing that completely scared me...chemical and biological weapons.  The earliest development of them was in the American Civil war, and they were used briefly in WWI by Germany and France, I believe.  It is an unbelievebly horrible way to inflict death and injury upon someone.  It creates the biggest fear and the most terror.  

I feel that there will be some Iraqi's that will use chemical weapons, and with their poor skill, they will probably kill more Iraqi's than Allied forces.  The result will be awful.

We probably should have acted further than we did in 1991 in the interest of humanitarian interests.  Again, further war would have resulted in long lasting peace.  Now we do have to finish what was not finished the first time.

As for "screw the UN", just take that as a bit of slang.  The UN sure is a lot of talk.  It would be different if they would just yell, but, face it, the dog has no bite.  If you can't back up anything you say, then I don't think you belong in the kitchen.

"Walk softly and carry a big stick..."  I think that was put well.  It's not that you need to use the stick, but at least if you say something you should be able to back up what you say.  The UN is useless.  Show me otherwise.

TreyBone...I understand, but it doesn't work that way.  A SOLDIER would never think that way.  I have that in caps for a reason, because there are differeces among those who serve.  There are some that are motivated by simple ideas, and the others that are SOLDIERS that are motivated by serving God, Country, the People, and the Consitution.