Some people who were looking unfavorably at Bush for the "war" in Iraq are now OK with what he is doing because they captured Sadam. As a result of his capture, the war becomes a victory????

Man, I seriously want to beat the shit out of one these pundits, or maybe the next redneck I encounter doing less than the speed limit and with the American flag hanging out of the window of his beat up pick -up. Move your slow ass, you stupid son of a bitch.

Ah, there. This forum lets me fume.. perhaps, i will simply blow his brains off and spare him the pain.

Nah. Just two punches will be Ok.

That's what happens when you live in the most powerful country on earth it seems. A lot of cheering and "wooting" for a man they simply identify with the word evil. Of course America seems to be a paradox, I would think to maintain the most powerful status the general populous would have to be well educated... well sadly the opposite is true. As James said the healthy mind is what I would characterize the normal American...Ignorant. Not necessary bad, but ignorant. Why does this work for the US? Because if ppl knew about the world the government would not have been able to pull of Iraq. Moralistic slave mentality is what moves the US along. There was a man today on CNN in his car*maybe you've seen it*, he said that this was a great day for D.W...D.W? Ignorance allows the power to rule effectively. I know it might piss u off as it does me at times. But I take it as a laughable experiment into the American psyche.

Originally posted by thefountainhed
Some people who were looking unfavorably at Bush for the "war" in Iraq are now OK with what he is doing because they captured Sadam. As a result of his capture, the war becomes a victory????

I noticed the same thing. On CNN, their political analyst was saying the democrats have to run on domestic issues because "you can't argue with success"
If the war was wrong in the first place, why does it matter how well it goes?

If its the biggest, the fastest and other people think you have success... you've just found the american dream.

Unfortunatetly, a lot of americans don't know that SUV's, a life of debauchery and doing what you want despite common reason... doesn't really impress neighboring countries.

Prisme

P.S.
I am fully aware that many americans are honest and concerned citizens of the world and know very well the excesses of certain factions of their government and corporate world.
So please do not feel offended unless you know I'm talking about you.

Some people who were looking unfavorably at Bush for the "war" in Iraq are now OK with what he is doing because they captured Sadam.

Can you back this up?

I had to look for symbolism in Toni Morrison's Beloved for a li'l assignment, and I noticed something intriguing.

Saddam was at large for nine months...

...nine months is the gestation period for a human fetus.

Coincidence? I think not! What could it possibly mean? Probably nothing.

Anyway

Saddam is caught. Hooray. This means that Bush is going to have an easier time getting into office.


Let's weigh the pros and cons of this.

Bush has already been president for three years. Look at what's happened with the world. If Bush's reelection hinged on Saddam getting captured, wouldn't it be better for the man to have not been caught in the first place?

Originally posted by Tyler
Can you back this up?
Turn on CNN.
They're essentially shouting that the war is now a success where yesterday they were talking about the daily casualties.


Originally posted by Pollux V
Bush has already been president for three years. Look at what's happened with the world. If Bush's reelection hinged on Saddam getting captured, wouldn't it be better for the man to have not been caught in the first place?
In the grand scheme of things, although its hard not to be glad that a dictator will actually pay for his crimes, I think the world will be harmed by his capture at this time.

I'm sad to admit that I do think this will make Bush's ratings go up.

I wonder who the hell thinks this capture makes Bush a better president.

No rather I think it will make the President get the political capital he needs to do the dirtier work in Iraq. At home his 2004 campaign will revolve around a pseudo-success in Iraq, a capture, a "growing" economy, and of course the totally unrelated 9/11.

"All donne. Go home now"

- anon. Firdos square grafitti artist.

America will ignore this friendly advice at our peril.

Go home? and leave Iraq without a functioning government and infrastructure? The US has a responsibility to rebuild what it has destroyed. That is more important than the wounded pride of some arab men.

Nah, we'll be fine. We let Germany go on its own after WW1, and they really pulled themselves together! Enough to really take on the world!

Can American citizens really be this stupid? Ive concluded that the American government is no longer for or by the people, but it is for and by the government.

We have the best government in the world, and thats the sick part.

Yes.

We have the best government in the world, and thats the sick part.

You do?:bugeye:

Well, I didn't say the people that operated the government were the best, the way its SUPPOSED to work is. (of course it does not work the way it should)

Well, I didn't say the people that operated the government were the best, the way its SUPPOSED to work is

What would u then define as being "the best"? Democracy?

One that best defends and works apon the will/rights of the people.

Then surely not the US, so who do you think? Finland, Canada, Sweden?

Then let me correct myself, if it actually did work the way it should, then it would be the best (an opinion, not a fact)

I serously suggest you look up the patriot acts.

Man, I seriously want to beat the shit out of one these pundits, or maybe the next redneck I encounter doing less than the speed limit and with the American flag hanging out of the window of his beat up pick -up. Move your slow ass, you stupid son of a bitch.

Ah, there. This forum lets me fume.. perhaps, i will simply blow his brains off and spare him the pain.

Nah. Just two punches will be Ok.

Some serious badasses on this board for sure.

Those of us who remember the Great American Enlightenment, which started when the Russians launched Sputnik and ended with the advent of disco, have gotten used to being surrounded by morons. You'll get used to it too.

(Sputnik was the cause of the intellectual revolution, as our leaders exhorted us to study harder so we could get to the moon first. Disco was merely an artifact of its demise, although we've been known to call it the cause. :))

What was your first clue that we're a nation of morons? That one has finally made it to the White House, immediately following a Rhodes Scholar?

Remember: We are a SPECIES of morons. We are doomed to remain so until the act or doing something stupid is inherently fatal, as it was when we still had to hunt our food with spears. As it is every country is breeding for dumb, shortsighted, perpetually horny, and forgetful people.

Spidergoat: "Go home? and leave Iraq without a functioning government and infrastructure? The US has a responsibility to rebuild what it has destroyed. That is more important than the wounded pride of some arab men."

Clearer than ever, Iraqis can now express that the US has no mandate in shaping Iraq's future. This is very much about pride, which is an extremely important commodity in that part of the world. Now that Saddam is gone, the only thing left for this occupation to preside over is the power struggle, wherein American sponsorship will often be the kiss of death for elements of the Iraqi ethnic, religious, and tribal spectrum we sponsor. We can have all the right intentions, but we can't be what is extremely essential in deciding an accepted destiny for Iraq: We can't be Arab.

This occupation insults Iraqis on multiple levels, in its growing resemblence to Israeli occupation, the importation of shadowy exiles, and general cultural inexperience. The "Coalition" is by its very nature unequipped for the mission of putting this Humpty-Dumpty together again.

Understanding the acceleration of history we are witnessing, the best course at this point is to nuance the rapidly approaching decay of this colonialist model of foreign policy: Iraqification and de-Americanization are primary. There will be unrelenting resistance to the repair of infrastructure from internal and regional organizations, no matter how desperate the need, and no matter how much everyday Iraqis continue to suffer- For the overriding blame will always fall on America.

I sincerely wish that things were so simple that suspicion and resentment toward America could melt away in the light of our magnanimous intentions for bringing liberty to the Iraqi people.

They will not melt away. Many innocent people will die needlessly until we understand this.

Originally posted by Clockwood
Remember: We are a SPECIES of morons. We are doomed to remain so until the act or doing something stupid is inherently fatal, as it was when we still had to hunt our food with spears. As it is every country is breeding for dumb, shortsighted, perpetually horny, and forgetful people.

Well, perhaps the coming dieoff will cheer you up. See: http://www.dieoff.org
BTW how about starting a thread on this topic (the dieoff) ? :confused:

If I were to believe that then my father would be turning on his he
grave.

http://www.dieoff.org


My old man was a Petroleum company owner. There is so much freaking oil in the world we've barely scratched the surface!!.

The petroleum wars are all about politics not the end of fossil fuel, however the cost of finding, drilling, and producing oil manufacturing goes up tremendously within a short time. This why the US rather purchase oil rather than drill it's own. However there is such a thing as the Ocklahoma basin, of which my old man told me weve barely have touched the surface. My old man worked here in the US, and before he died was working in Saudi Arabia, he worked in South America Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil. The wells are not running dry, however the politics of the precious fuel and the amount of money to be made is what drives political pundits.

As for the topic at hand: Why Americans are utter morons.

I don't think that is a good analogy, We're not morons, we just don't give a shiet. And that is the problem, however our attitudes is shaped, and the gullible falls easily: The propaganda matrix in this country would be something Hitler wished he had. When you see pro-war, pro-bush shiet 24/7 on CNN, read about in mayor news papers practically everyday, then hear it on Radio constantly it is easy to be fooled. Clear Channel sponcered war supporting rallies, when thousands were marching against this war, dissenters are made to be anti-semetics, etc...

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2003/12/14/post_911_limits_on_dissent_claimed/

Oil:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1213-03.htm

Godless.

"There is so much freaking oil in the world we've barely scratched the surface!!...The petroleum wars are all about politics not the end of fossil fuel, however the cost of finding, drilling, and producing oil manufacturing goes up tremendously within a short time."

We are witnessing the turbulent end of the petroleum era. There are still mountains of coal left, more than we have ever used, but financial and environmental costs ended the predominance of coal, exactly as the same factors are ending the days when Oil was King.

This is a perfect example of Americans being morons, because we are allowing both Israeli and petroleum lobbies to drag us down, when we could more easily be innovating our way back out of dead-ends that lie ahead regarding both mideast conflict and unsustainable energy sources. Americans are avoiding and failing to understand realities that will be pivotal to her future.

There is plenty of damned oil left! The oil companies wouldn't want you to think that though, it helps them keep the prices jacked up your ass. (and everyones for that matter)

I'm glad the title of this topic seems to imply all americans.

It's reasonable to remark on the collective direction of a country. A reasonable term in such a discussion is "Americans". It is unreasonable to imply this discussion applies to every American individual.

Presently, the collective political vector of the USA is quite arguably moronic: Stunted; stupid; in conflict with reality; unreasonably doing harm to ourselves and others.

Originally posted by spidergoat
Go home? and leave Iraq without a functioning government and infrastructure? The US has a responsibility to rebuild what it has destroyed. That is more important than the wounded pride of some arab men.

Yes, call it a victory and go home. The US's only responsibility has been to satisfy its own interest. Why would we expect it change?

It won’t be long now until most of us are so stupidified by propaganda and politicians that many will die from staring up into the rain with there months open and forgetting to swallow.

as for oil oh there is plenty of oil just not enough mineable oil to match demand! there’s oil 4 miles down everywhere!, but the pumps would have to burn more oil pumping it up then they would get from it, this is call negative energy. This is why many source of oil though vast are un-useable because of how much energy is needed to mine them would result in very little if not negative amounts of oil production! Even with efficient oil sand mining world demand for oil will out match production by 2030, production of oil on drained wells cost more and more as it gets more difficult and energy costly to mine it.

So what does Bush want? A cookie for telling others to risk their lives to do his bidding?

Sadly this showcase trial that is being prepared is designed by those at home who need a boost at home.

In the beginning the conservatives claimed Iraq had nukes and could launch in 45 minutes and Iraq could kill Americans (as a matter of fact that republican-in-disguise Lieberman said it Sunday on Meet the Press). This wish of the neo-cons does not play out, so what's next? Humanitarian war.

Well my fellow neo-con Americans Iraq has been under sanctions imposed by us through the UN that have killed thousands. Time after time we have shot down attempts by other nations to eliminate the sanctions. Further, the direct result of our invasion (http://iraqbodycount.com), nearly 10,000 Iraqi have lost their lives. What kind of freedom is that? And Freedom? If having barbed wires in your neighborhood and living like a prisoner is American freedom, then count me out.

This capture should be celebrated but I fear Bush is celebrating not the fact that a bad person has been captured but that his reelection just got a boost.

Indeed, this changes Nothing.

About Oil:

as for oil oh there is plenty of oil just not enough mineable oil to match demand! there’s oil 4 miles down everywhere!, but the pumps would have to burn more oil pumping it up then they would get from it, this is call negative energy.

Scream ignorance on me if I am incorrect...but in Alberta where oil is deep, they use water. This of course is having absolutely horrid effects on the ecosystem. But it is cheaper to do it as such. Here is my thread on the oil world we live in and the problems the US faces.

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=485326#post485326

As for the US:

If you notice the US is transgressing into a stagnate and even backward social agenda. For instance meanwhile Canada and W.Europe are becoming more and more progressive. The US is becoming more and more conservative. I think the reason why is because of lower educational standards, and due to America strong connection to religion. To those of us who live outside of the US and aren't fundie Christians, we look at the former head of progressive policy with disdain. Surely many Americans themselves must feel constricted by this neo-conservativism. Hyper-militarization, patriotism, repression, etc. are now part of the modern American lexicon. This is only but a phase, but it won't be a nice one.

Nico:

If you notice the US is transgressing into a stagnate and even backward social agenda. For instance meanwhile Canada and W.Europe are becoming more and more progressive. The US is becoming more and more conservative.

Nope. If you watch TV here you'll see quite a lot of liberal activity. What about the anti-war protests here in America that France praised?

I think the reason why is because of lower educational standards, and due to America strong connection to religion.

If I didn't know any better, I'd think that you were talking about Afghanistan.

To those of us who live outside of the US and aren't fundie Christians, we look at the former head of progressive policy with disdain. Surely many Americans themselves must feel constricted by this neo-conservativism. Hyper-militarization, patriotism, repression, etc. are now part of the modern American lexicon. This is only but a phase, but it won't be a nice one.

Religion always has everything to do with it, doesn't it?

Nope. If you watch TV here you'll see quite a lot of liberal activity. What about the anti-war protests here in America that France praised?


TV is not an indicator of liberalism, or conservativism. Sure the news maybe but not TV shows. What is, is the gun laws, the "healthcare" that 40 million DON'T have, the amendment that wants to make homosexual marriage illegal, pot laws not staying up with reality, anti-abortionists and a vocally anti-abortionist president (albeit he can say what he wants), Patriot acts, etc. If you talking about those gay guys on TV, they are really just conservative stereotypes of homosexuals. That is what I am talking about conservativism, protests...that's a basic right. Irregardless of PoV.

If I didn't know any better, I'd think that you were talking about Afghanistan.

No, no, America still has ok educational standards, but they are slipping, that's the point.

Religion always has everything to do with it, doesn't it?

Watch and enjoy:

These ppl are in power! (http://www.jhm.org/home-new.asp)

PLEASE watch one of these videos. I think it proves American ignorance. (http://www.thegospel.org/Pages/JVIM.asp)

Again water has to be pumped down and pressurized the wells to pump oil up, it basic physics you must spend energy to move un-pressurized oil up just as you have to spend energy lifting a treadmill up a flights of stairs! To move oil by force 4 miles cost a huge among of energy, this is also not taking into account the amount of energy need to drill and maintain a deep well. Sand oil is the same way it must be filtered out of the sand by force this is why at present it cost more per production the well oil despite, soon though oil sand may cost less as oil prices raise. The thing is we will not run out of oil but by 2030 having to pay $4 or more for a gallon of gasoline might suck, by this time alternative fuels may be cheaper.

I find it amazing that Americans think Iraqi are "happy" their country is being looted by the west. Also the tired old line of "we are bringing them democracy" is finally becoming a false hope in the hearts of Iraqi citizens.

"It's great that he's caught, but it wasn't him who screwed up the petrol and the electricity and everything else so badly, so now a canister of gas that was 250 dinars costs 4,000, if you can get one," said Ghazi, a 52-year-old dentist.

"The Americans promised freedom and prosperity; what's this? Go up to their headquarters, at one of those checkpoints where they point their guns at you, and tell them that you hate them as much as Saddam, and see what they do to you," said Mohammad Saleh, 39, a building contractor.

"The only difference is that Saddam would kill you in private, where the Americans will kill you in public," he said.

"A lot of things -- safety, freedom, prosperity -- that we were supposed to have are gone. They promised many things, and now that they have caught Saddam maybe they kept one."
source (http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=0Z5YWGMG4G1VACRBAEKSF EY?type=topNews&storyID=3991873)

Most americans are sleeping sheep;

1) Sleep. They have no clue, What their neighbors are doing let alone what their offices of governent are doing.

2) Sheep. Even when awake they are herded in the directional whim of the likes of Bush.

It's a complete an utter travesty. Millions of people have given their lives fighting for freedom. And horrific a tragedy the World Trade Center was. But due to the 3381 lives so claimed by this tragedy; You have sheepishly allowed laws within the Patriot Act to make me wonder what we are fighting for? You better hope that Bush and his crew don't deem you to be an enemy combatant. Your rights as an American have changed. They are nearly memories of a past.

Bin Laden attacks trade Center.

We bomb Iraq.

If Bin Laden Blows anything else up we must surely bomb North Korea.
I'm ashamed at the amount of ignorance that surrounds me in my soon to be forgot United States Of America. When republican americans would vote an Imbecile into office rather than cross party lines. God Bless America for he is the only one that can help us now!

If this war is a success and the gullible voters think this has made them very safe ...then I have a suggestion for the future presidents ....Bomb the hell out of a country already ravaged by UN sanctions ....once you catch the leader of the country then you can always turn him in ...you will always find some people who would be ready to burn him on the stakes....


Well done Mr. Bush you are really a hero .....now lets line up all the countries to create a pipeline from Middle East to Halliburton's parking lot ....so we would know which country to bomb next...

Our Media has become Bush's PR team whore ....damn it every channel is promoting it as a victory ....well we never wanted Saddam in the first place ....what about 911 ...what about our friends and family lost in New York....why is that not important ...why 11000 soldiers in Afghanistan and 130000 soldiers in Iraq....

Looking at the media I sincerely agree with this thread ..that Americans are really ignorant ...give them any thing with lights and poll backup and they take it hook line and sinker....

God Bless America !!

in its growing resemblence to Israeli occupation
Exactly as I see it. Haven't you noticed the growing number of suicide bomber incidents in Iraq in very recent times ??!!

REMeber those SAT analogies??

Israel occupies Palestine: Palestininan suicide bombers::America occupies Iraq: Iraqi suicide bombers !! amazing

Maybe right now you don't see the resemblance because the occupation has just begun, but give it a few more months (and you know the US troops aren't leaving Iraq any time soon) and a few more bombers and you'll get it. So exactly what is America's purpose in staying in Iraq any longer? They've humiliated the evil leader already. If the US went for Iraqi oil the entire world would attack. And why does America always think its her God-given duty to rebuild other nations in her image? What if, just maybe, Iraq wanted to remain as Iraq?? :bugeye:

America's purpose in staying in Iraq any longer? They've humiliated the evil leader already.

The purpose of invading Iraq wasn't to humiliate anyone, or remake Iraq in our image. Their leader was supporting terrorism, at the very least, by his payment to the families of palestinian suiciders. It is a small step from that to the kind of terrorism practiced by Osama. How moronic do you have to be not to see the connection. Only the extreme action of invading Iraq could have any effect whatsoever. Of course, there is no guarantee of safety anywhere, anytime, but in this case, there was an extremely obvious threat which had to be dealt with. There are many intelligent people who supported this action.

I find it amazing that Americans think Iraqi are "happy" their country is being looted by the west.

Um, it was the Iraqis that looted themselves.

Yes, call it a victory and go home. The US's only responsibility has been to satisfy its own interest. Why would we expect it change?

The US interest would not be served by leaving now. Widespread guerilla war would break out between all the factions that want power. It will not be a victory until Iraq has a government elected by the people of Iraq, something that western countries take for granted, and the Iraqi people have not had for 30 years.

Their leader was supporting terrorism, at the very least, by his payment to the families of palestinian suiciders.
Yes I KNOW THAT. Now that the US has him, the troops can leave Iraq before it turns into another occupation crisis like in Israel.

Originally posted by miss khan
Yes I KNOW THAT. Now that the US has him, the troops can leave Iraq before it turns into another occupation crisis like in Israel.

I am so sick of the "occupation" idiocy. Working to build Iraqi infrastructure, services, get the oil flowing again, debt forgiveness, etc. all to occupy. Pull your head out. This is getting old.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by spidergoat
The purpose of invading Iraq wasn't to humiliate anyone, or remake Iraq in our image. Their leader was supporting terrorism, at the very least, by his payment to the families of palestinian suiciders. It is a small step from that to the kind of terrorism practiced by Osama. How moronic do you have to be not to see the connection. Only the extreme action of invading Iraq could have any effect whatsoever. Of course, there is no guarantee of safety anywhere, anytime, but in this case, there was an extremely obvious threat which had to be dealt with. There are many intelligent people who supported this action.


hahahahahahahahahaha. If we indian wold have occupied iraq it would have benn much safer and better than ur rule and atleast we woldn't kill civilian for enjoyment and joy like YOU do.:D

I am so sick of the "occupation" idiocy. Working to build Iraqi infrastructure, services, get the oil flowing again, debt forgiveness, etc. all to occupy. Pull your head out. This is getting old.

So invading a nation for a PNAC doctrine, who are living under foreign military rule, with no self-governance, and terrorism is not occupation? You are a idiot, occupation has nothing to do with what your doing in the country. Your foreign, not welcomed, and raping the nation of it's oil. ;)

hahahahahahahahahaha. If we indian wold have occupied iraq it would have benn much safer and better than ur rule and atleast we woldn't kill civilian for enjoyment and joy like YOU do.

Sure, if India invaded Iraq, Pakistan would vaporize India, then India would vaporize Pakistan.

Your foreign, not welcomed, and raping the nation of it's oil.

So, its better when Saddam raped his own nation of oil profits so he could build more palaces?

This occupation insults Iraqis on multiple levels, in its growing resemblence to Israeli occupation, the importation of shadowy exiles, and general cultural inexperience. The "Coalition" is by its very nature unequipped for the mission of putting this Humpty-Dumpty together again.

I'm willing to admit that. In fact, the ability of this adminisration to build a government in Iraq is my main objection to the war, otherwise, it was entirely justified.

So, its better when Saddam raped his own nation of oil profits so he could build more palaces?

Prior to the sanctions,prior to the Gulf War. Iraq even under Saddam was one of the best places to live in all of the Middle East. The invasion of a state for NO justifiable reason is beyond comprehension, and it's real rich coming from a American who had three before used Saddam. :rolleyes: So let me ask, is it better that the US and friends propped this man up during the worst years of his regime in the 80's? :confused:

Originally posted by spidergoat
The purpose of invading Iraq wasn't to humiliate anyone, or remake Iraq in our image. Their leader was supporting terrorism, at the very least, by his payment to the families of palestinian suiciders.

Let's follow the yellow brick road to Palestine - Why is there support for Palestine?
Do you realize how pathetic it sounds when you shift your reasoning for going into Iraq?
[list=1]
Weapons of Mass Deception in Iraq
Humanitarian "aid" to the Iraqi
Now you bring in the Palestine-Iraq connection
[/list=1]
On the latter issue, I would agree with Saddam. The United States is funding Israel to occupy and bulldoze palestinian homes, so why not have someone bear the burden of the Palestinian people.

It is a small step from that to the kind of terrorism practiced by Osama.

That's why we are making sure he is put to justice. Oh wait.

Only the extreme action of invading Iraq could have any effect whatsoever.

Please tell us what your reasoning is for this. How is this in any way safeguarding me and my faimly here in the Mid-West. Further, who's filling in the vaccume of power in Iraq? That's right neo-conny: terrorists. Self-defeating effort this invasion has been.

Of course, there is no guarantee of safety anywhere, anytime, but in this case, there was an extremely obvious threat which had to be dealt with.

What was that?

There are many intelligent people who supported this action.

I guess if these so called smart people jumped off a cliff tomorrow we all should do the same.

Originally posted by spidergoat
So, its better when Saddam raped his own nation of oil profits so he could build more palaces?


Suggestion: rather than decide what the Iraqi want, let's listen

"I reject it," says Qays Ibrahim, waiting in a three-mile gas-station queue. "Saddam never did me any harm and we didn't have to wait like this for gas."

Another man, who gave his name as Abu Ahmed, says that the insurgency will continue as long as American troops are in Iraq. "Even if a new Iraqi government is formed, the Americans will still be here," he says. "All Iraqis, whatever their sect, reject occupation. The troubles will continue."
source (http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1215/p01s03-woiq.html)

Prior to the sanctions,prior to the Gulf War. Iraq even under Saddam was one of the best places to live in all of the Middle East.

Unless you happened to be one of the people Saddam sent through a plastic shredding machine, or on the Iraqi National Olympic Team, or stuck in the dungeon of an Iraqi police station, or wanted to exercise free-speech.

"I reject it," says Qays Ibrahim, waiting in a three-mile gas-station queue. "Saddam never did me any harm and we didn't have to wait like this for gas."

..and Hitler made the trains run on time, big deal.

Only the extreme action of invading Iraq could have any effect whatsoever. Please tell us what your reasoning is for this. How is this in any way safeguarding me and my faimly here in the Mid-West. Further, who's filling in the vaccume of power in Iraq? That's right neo-conny: terrorists. Self-defeating effort this invasion has been.


I'm not a neo-conservative, I'm a liberal democrat who happens to agree with the war. I'm not pro-Bush, but he was bull-headed enough to do the right thing here, and you have to admire that. 9/11 should have proven to you that terror can happen anywhere, with chemical weapons it would be worse, 30,000, instead of 3000; Minnesota instead of New York. Ignoring the problem would not make it go away. Terrorists have no power, thats why they use such tactics. Iraq is a mess, but sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. A bunch of dis-organized terrorists are better than state sponsored terror.

there was an extremely obvious threat which had to be dealt with.

Saddam's WMD's, coupled with his imperial ambitions, and ruthless tactics constituted a significant threat. I don't believe that they were destroyed, and neither should you. Would you believe a man like Saddam?

so why not have someone bear the burden of the Palestinian people.

Fine, support the Palestinian people, but don't support the militants that intentionally murder busloads of innocent people, including other palestinians and moslems. Saddam was rewarding these deeds specifically, not helping the Palestinians in general. I recognize, this was not a reason the U.S. stated we went to war, but it is just another example of the urgency involved. If we let the U.N. proceed in their own way, perhaps we would still be in the same place, only at a later time.

I guess if these so called smart people jumped off a cliff tomorrow we all should do the same.

Of course not, but it proves the issue is not so clear, calling them morons is just a way for you to avoid thinking about it too much.

As Jacob Sullum so eloquently put it before the war... (http://www.reason.com/sullum/021403.shtml)

The question is whether Saddam is rational. That is, can he be deterred from using chemical and biological weapons against the United States? I'm inclined to think he can, that the threat of massive retaliation would give pause to a man who, if nothing else, has shown that he is determined to stay alive and stay in power.

Most Americans probably agree that Saddam can be deterred from launching a direct attack, which is why the Bush administration has emphasized the possibility that Iraq would supply terrorists with "weapons of mass destruction." Hence Powell's insistence that, despite the religious and ideological gulf between them, Saddam and bin Laden are pals.

If invading Iraq were justified as self-defense, it would not matter how the U.N. Security Council voted or whether other members of NATO were willing to go along. Our government has an obligation to defend American lives, regardless of what world opinion says.

The search for legalistic justifications—involving debates about whether Iraq is in "material breach" of this or that U.N. resolution, or whether another resolution must be passed so that military action comports with international law—would be utterly beside the point if it were clear that Iraq posed an intolerable threat to the United States.

In this connection, the Bush administration wants to have it both ways. Last summer Vice President Cheney declared that "a return of inspectors would provide no assurance whatsoever of [Saddam's] compliance with U.N. resolutions." So what is the point of the charade in which the U.S. has been engaged for the last several months?

Even while signaling his disdain for business as usual at the U.N., Cheney made it sound as if U.S. policy is based on the enforcement of U.N. resolutions. But surely our country does not need the U.N.'s permission to defend itself. Evidently that is not what the U.S. is poised to do.

In gulf war 1, he had chemical weapons. He did not use them against American forces, because he knew the retaliation would be massive.

Iraq was a devastated country with infrastructure in a shambles, and a military that barely gave our forces pause.

I have yet to be convinced that Saddam Hussein's Iraq posed a significant threat to the U.S.

Spidergoat said Only the extreme action of invading Iraq could have any effect whatsoever.

False Dilemma (http://www.cuyamaca.net/bruce.thompson/Fallacies/dilemma.asp)

The argument misrepresents the choices that are available when making a decision.


Example:
"If we cut off funds for El Salvador, then we are caving in to the threat of international communism. If we increase military support for El Salvador we are supporting a brutal dictatorship. Either we increase military support or we cut off funds altogether. Therefore we must choose between caving in to communism and supporting a brutal tyranny."

God knows I love this country but!
No one can top us for brutality. Ask thee American Indian. If ya can find one. We have been the biggest damn bully on the block for a long time. And we wonder why the other children in the school yard dont want to play with us? Oh sure there nice to our faces.. sometimes, who wouldnt be ! Just remember bully's dont always win. What saddam didnt realize is he would have probably won had he not fired a shot.

The U.S is not pulling out of IRAQ until the oil they went there for is secured and shipping west. If you think Bush went to Iraq to rescue Iraq citizens or prevent "WMD" your living in a non reality.

Using American pride like a violin player he redirected our Bin Laden angers and sent us into to a war for his own preverted agenda. Which most americans know nothing about. Special interest groups have more power than the senate and house combined. Wake up citizens don't be sheep for ever.

spidergoat

Would you believe a man like Saddam?

yep , more than you and of course more than george W :cool:
if you take the monster out of saddams head - he would be a nice , intelligent , proud person !
if i would have to deceide which of both persons should be my dad -> i would chose the smaller liar and pick saddam :D
at least he could teach me what honor means , something bush could never be abe to do

i´m glad that saddam is alive ( though your president wants to see him dead ) , because he has now the perfect postion to fuck some people like rummy in the ass ( i hope you all are going to buy his book )

The thread was named: Why Americans are utter morons;

I tend to prove why here:

In case you need further proof that the America is doomed because of stupidity, here are some actual label instructions on consumer goods.

On a Sears hairdryer: Do not use while sleeping. (darn, and that's the only time I have to work on my hair).
On a bag of Fritos: You could be a winner! No purchase necessary. Details inside. (the shoplifter special)?
On a bar of Dial soap: "Directions: Use like regular soap." (and that would be how???....)
On some Swanson frozen dinners: "Serving suggestion: Defrost." (but, it's "just" a suggestion).
On Tesco's Tiramisu dessert (printed on bottom): "Do not turn upside down." (well...duh, a bit late, huh)!
On Marks & Spencer Bread Pudding: "Product will be hot after heating." (...and you thought????...)
On packaging for a Rowenta iron: "Do not iron clothes on body." (but wouldn't this save me more time)?
On Boot's Children Cough Medicine:"Do not drive a car or operate machinery after taking this medication." (We could do a lot to reduce the rate of construction accidents if we could just get those 5-year-olds with head-colds off those forklifts.)
On Nytol Sleep Aid: "Warning: May cause drowsiness." (and...I'm taking this because???....)
On most brands of Christmas lights: "For indoor or outdoor use only." (as opposed to...what)?
On a Japanese food processor: "Not to be used for the other use." (now, somebody out there, help me on this. I'm a bit curious.)
On Sunsbury's peanuts: "Warning: contains nuts." (talk about a news flash!)
On an American Airlines packet of nuts: "Instructions: Open packet, eat nuts." (Step 3: maybe, uh...fly Delta?)
I don't blame the company. I blame the parents for this one: On a child's superman costume: "Wearing of this garment does not enable you to fly."
In a chainsaw: "Do not attempt to stop chain with your hands or genitals."
(....was there a lot of this happening somewhere)?

Corporate lawyers are making us morons!!!

Godless.

Although I can't quote it directly, the "Do not point at another person" warning on the barrel of a Smith & Wesson is ... worrisome in its own right.

Prior to the sanctions,prior to the Gulf War. Iraq even under Saddam was one of the best places to live in all of the Middle East.

Sure, if you were fortunate enough not to be born a Kurd or a Shiite, but instead born a Sunni, a minority in the nation, and made sure you never said anything remotely critical of the government or happened to be in close proximity to Saddam or his sons when they were having a bad hair day.

If you happened to be a female that he found attractive, regardless of being married, engaged, of age, underage, no matter to Uday. More than one well documented case of Uday crashing a wedding ceremony, taking the new bride to be away at gunpoint and having his way with her on her wedding night. In at least one case the groom committed suicide rather than face the humiliation.

Yep, Iraq was a real paradise under Saddam and his boys.

:confused:

At Uday eulogy:
“what can we say about Uday that was good, eeer… aaaaaah… uuuuum... Well he would rarly rape the mentally retarded.

spyke , the kurds always wanted their own state - and under saddam , they were really close to that goal !
btw , kurds hate turks more than saddam .... doesn´t that say something ?

spyke , the kurds always wanted their own state

Of course they did.

and under saddam , they were really close to that goal !

Er, yeah, right. And 100,000 Kurds died trying for statehood before 1990, and the US, Britain and France implemented the Northern Fly-Zone to protect the Kurds from Saddam's reprisals because Saddam was so close to giving them their own state, something the Turks would never have gone along with even if Saddam had actually been willing to do so.

btw , kurds hate turks more than saddam .... doesn´t that say something

Yes, it says that the Kurds hatred of the Turks is much more ancient than their relative new hatred of Saddam. The Turks were brutalizing the Kurds for hundreds of years, whereas Saddam had only had roughly a quarter of a century to do so.

Sure, if you were fortunate enough not to be born a Kurd or a Shiite, but instead born a Sunni, a minority in the nation, and made sure you never said anything remotely critical of the government or happened to be in close proximity to Saddam or his sons when they were having a bad hair day.

I hope you aren't tying to say the repression of the Kurds, and Shi'a only happened under Saddam...;)

Er, yeah, right. And 100,000 Kurds died trying for statehood before 1990, and the US, Britain and France implemented the Northern Fly-Zone to protect the Kurds from Saddam's reprisals because Saddam was so close to giving them their own state, something the Turks would never have gone along with even if Saddam had actually been willing to do so.


:rolleyes:
whoops , have i forgotten something ???
honestly , sally , i´m fully aware of saddams "escapades" , but that doesn´t change the fact that from 1991 on, kurds could live peaceful in nothern iraq , and could rule themselves !


Yes, it says that the Kurds hatred of the Turks is much more ancient

no mister , no points for you :D
ancient hate ? no , it´s about racist behavior against kurds in turkey .... saddam "only" punished the kurds for helping the enemy