North Korea, Darfur and Zimbabwe were all A-OK though.
Printable View
North Korea, Darfur and Zimbabwe were all A-OK though.
Did they have terrorist governments that were our enemies?Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
Iraq didn't have an aggressive terrorist government with the means to attack the US, either. Didn't you hear?
Their terrorists couldn't attack us?Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
You can't destroy an idea like terrorism/anti-capitalism by mounting a war on an entire country just because the leaders sympathize
All the US has done is piss them off further
IMHO
The wars were never against entire countries. They were against the governments and are now against the insurgent terrorists who are trying to prevent the success of democracy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Placebo
If anybody here really hates infringements on women's rights and "supports children" and so forth, the Hussein regime and the Taliban should give you plenty to talk about, and so should the insurgent terrorists. Start a thread on them.
This is sickening. I actually feel sick reading this. Hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians die, and you say the war wasn't against them. And then people try to kick the Americans out of their homes and now they're terrorists? Are you that small? Are you so hopelessly indoctrinated that you can't see this from their point of view? Most of these people did nothing wrong, ever. Then an American cruise missile kills their entire family in the name of "democracy" one day, and what, they're supposed to just "take it"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
Would you just "take it" if a Chinese missile killed your family in the name of "communism"? You wouldn't take up arms if Chinese troops started marching through the streets, knocking down doors looking for "capitalists"? IN YOUR HOME?
That's all I have to say to you, you fucking waste of skin.
Hey irrational hysterical psycho loonie, tell me something... Was U.S. involvement in Western Europe in World War II "against" Western Europe? Were we "against" France and other European countries we saved? Answer me. Don't dodge. Innocent people were killed by our troops, mostly by accident. Answer the question, Mr. Emotionally Driven Can't Think.Quote:
Originally Posted by drewmandan
You see, war is sometimes necessary, even when the people being protected are killed in some cases. So... the fact that innocent people are killed in a war DOES NOT prove that the war effort is automotically against their masses. Get it? Can you concentrate hard enough to be rational enough for a few seconds to understand that?
By the way, I don't believe for two seconds that you are a good person. Don't even attempt to fool me on that. I see straight through you. You keep giving yourself away. ;)
So the fact that Saddam Hussein issued an order to kill Bush's father had nothing to do with it? You think what the Iraqis were doing is worse than what's happening in Darfur? You think Saddam Hussein was as unstable as Kim Jong Il?
Now I know that Iraq had WMDs, human rights violations, and Al Qaeda training camps... oops, no wait, I'm thinking of Iran. That's right, now I remember, Iraq had taken it's WMDs apart under the watch of the UN and had no links to Al Qaeda before we invaded them, it was Iran that had all that stuff.
Hypocrisy, thy name is Bush.
How do you think we are combating terrorism? There are a lot of people in the middle east who were never big fans of the USA, but not extremists. Do you think that by invading a sovereign nation that did not provoke us that those people might be persuaded into terrorism? Why do you think that Al Qaeda is stronger now than it was in 2001? Why do you think that bombing them will make them like us just because we brought democracy?
Fear mongering is brining people to the causes of Al Qaeda, just like fear mongering got you to believe what Dick Cheney wanted you to believe. You claim to care about the plight of people in Iraq, but put them at much higher priority than the people of Zimbabwe, Darfur, Congo, Korea, or even Americans in New Orleans who are much worse off.
No, no, no, and Kim Jong Il had not violated a ceasefire with us or used WMD's in a terrorist attack or run a country in the heart of the Middle East.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Make sure you read that.
But not the rest of the list.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Make them like us? You made that up that variable. For one thing, the fight is not happening here because Al Qaeda is so preoccupied somewhere else. For another thing, we are killing or capturing those who have it in them to become Islamofascist extremists. For another thing, we have killed or captured the majority of Al Qaeda's leadership and a zillion of their grunts.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Do you read my posts? I keep explaining the same things to you over and over and over and over and over. The war is about a BIG PICTURE, not any ONE THING. OKAY??????????????????? I am so tired of telling you that. And I DO think we should liberate Zimbabwe, Darfu, Congo, etc. I think the entire free world should come together and liberate every oppressed nation in the world. Stop making stuff up about me. BUT... THOSE PLACES DO NOT MEET ALL OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE BIG PICTURE OF CIRCUMSTANCE THAT HAVE US IN IRAQ. Got it? Really? Did you read it that time? I am not going to explain it to you again. If you don't read my posts, stop talking to me. If you do read my posts, BE INTELLECTUALLY HONEST.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
What you keep calling the big picture is a lot of issues. All of which were wrong, 10 wrongs don't make a right.
You're saying that the reason that we are in Iraq is a combination of multiple things, all of which are either lies or blown way out of proportion. One of the biggest reasons was terrorism, when in fact, there were no Al Qaeda there before we went in, but Iran has training camps. You keep saying that the war in Iraq keeps the fight from here. Who said the fight was supposed to be here? It started in Afganistan, and that's where most of them are. You are using Americans as bait. Americans are people, not bait.
The next was to democratize the area to end oppression. Well, as bad as it was there, it's much worse in Iran and the other places that I've mentioned. The last of the biggest reasons was WMDs. Lots and lots and lots of people said over and over again that Iraq had taken them all apart (and they were right) even though Iran has an active WMD program. The other was revenge for the assassination attempt on George HW Bush. That's not an issue for the military.
10 wrongs don't make a right, get it?
Al Qaeda is not the only terrorist group, but in Iraq we have set up one Hell of an Al Qaeda roach motel. The Hussein regime was an enemy terrorist government, and they trained smaller terrorist groups. The WMD's were not "all" accounted for, and we had strong intelligence that the regime had stockpiles. Acting on that intelligence was understandable. The stabilization of the Middle East is a very long term plan and not something anybody is saying could happen immediately.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
You may disagree with the reasons for the war, and that is fine. Just stop acting like I am claiming that any one of the reasons for the war could stand alone as justification. Nobody is claiming that. I sure as Hell am not.
If the evidence was so strong then why was it completely wrong?
Universal Mind must be dis-information. If he was simply retarded he wouldn't be so intelligent at debating his backward blatantly false conceptions. One can only conclude he is actively trying to make people ignorant on purpose. There is no other way to explain why he demonstrates knowledge of truth yet debates against it directly. You have to know some things in order to debate against them. So he reveals easily that he knows but he debates it in the hope others can be convinced of his false arguments, which he knows are false. The purpose is to make people ignorant. That's trolling.
No, no, no. Don't assume malice when stupidity will do. Humans have this thing called "double think", where they can hold two inconsistent notions in their mind simultaneously. This occurs when there's a serious lack in critical thinking skills. You have the same problem. Incidentally, this is one of the main differences between a brain and a computer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix
I have a feeling that most of the people here don't know what they are talking about, not just Universal Mind. I caught Universal Mind once bullshitting about the Patriot Act, I'll catch the rest of you eventually.
The evidence was not strong, it was non-existent. UM, please read the 911 Commission Report. It's long, but don't try to debate with someone who's read it on Iraq.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
And as I said before. There is no mention of 9/11 on the FBI wanted poster for Bin Laden. And now 2 wars have been fought, with like a million people dead, without any actual reason behind them. If we count out the obvious oil and war is business reasons.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
How do you know it was? Wrong or not, it came from many sources. That is a fact, and the empty insults I am about to address are worthless at proving that fact wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minervas Phoenix
In those two posts combined, the number of counterarguments to what I said = 0. You two are pathetic pieces of shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by drewmandan
You are a liar, hypocrite.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Show me where in that it says the evidence was "nonexistent". Why were Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry talking about the evidence before George W. Bush even had national fame? It is so absurd when people act like Bush made the whole thing up. Why is the far left so dishonest?Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Huh? You kept saying that the Patriot Act didn't apply to American citizens. You pulled that out of your ass, I showed you Title 2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
Chapter 2.Quote:
Show me where in that it says the evidence was "nonexistent". Why were Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry talking about the evidence before George W. Bush even had national fame? It is so absurd when people act like Bush made the whole thing up. Why is the far left so dishonest?
During the Clinton Administration there were WMDs. They hadn't finished taking them apart until the very late 1990s.
The 911 Commission Report was a bipartisan effort, you do you think it was compiled by the far left?
It does not apply to American citizens that are not "enemy combatants". The government cannot just come round you up and keep you for as long as they want without a trial because they feel like it. They have to have a good case that you can reasonably be considered an enemy combatant in a war. Things have always been that way. We, and everybody else, have always been able to keep prisoners of war without a trial. How many of these prisoners of war have been American citizens?Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
By the way, I am not a fan of the Patriot Act.
Quote it for me. No evidence of WMD's, not a thing for Bush to go on except his own fantasy? Let's see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
No, the Hussein regime never did account for all of their WMD's.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
Completely unreliable and unsubstatiated sources, then.Quote:
How do you know it was? Wrong or not, it came from many sources. That is a fact, and the empty insults I am about to address are worthless at proving that fact wrong.
In Britain the people who wrote the dossier actually knew it was wrong.
If they were, how were we supposed to know that? How can we know it now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Xei
Americans are americans weather or not they are enemy combatants or not. Innocent until proven guilty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Universal Mind
A good case would be able to get a warrant with no trouble and convict them in a federal court. Innocent until proven guilty, if the case is so strong then there should be no problem proving them guilty.Quote:
They have to have a good case that you can reasonably be considered an enemy combatant in a war.
Ugh, I gotta go find it. I have it on a bookshelf somewhere but I don't know where.Quote:
Quote it for me. No evidence of WMD's, not a thing for Bush to go on except his own fantasy? Let's see it.
The International Atomic Energy Agency said that they did. Condoleezza Rice lied to you. http://thinkprogress.org/2007/04/29/...ns-inspectors/Quote:
No, the Hussein regime never did account for all of their WMD's.
We know it now because they were wrong! :|Quote:
If they were, how were we supposed to know that? How can we know it now?
The intelligence was clearly not good enough because it was completely wrong.
What do you mean, 'how could we have known they weren't lying'? We can't go acting on every unsubstantiated claim that people make.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
I hear you. It is a very serious issue. The Patriot Act poses a lot of problems. Just understand that what we are dealing with is not easy. We don't have time to send every prisoner of war through the court system, but we do have a Bill of Rights to uphold.
There is a difference between accounting for every single weapon and assessing that apparently no WMD's exist. A lot of officials disagreed with that assessment any way. But what is certain is that not every WMD was accounted for.Quote:
Originally Posted by ninja9578
One way or the other, a terrorist government with a propensity for having WMD's has to go. We all know that they were trying to get their hands on more of them. That was a huge problem. Dealing with it was not easy.