Im an American, and I dont take over countries

Discussion in 'World Events' started by Carnuth, May 1, 2003.

  1. Carnuth i dont Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    547
    I am an American, I supported the war in iraq, i dont support having Americans run an interrim government. It makes me so angry that Bush has the audacity to make himself "lord-governor" of a so called "liberated" country. Obviously the UN needs to step in, and the United States step out. That is my opinion, and I hope it is others as well. When the next presidential election comes, I wont vote for Bush and neither should you. True, he did liberate a country from a dictator which is well and good, the war was a good thing, but that wasnt his battle cry to begin with. His rants of mass destructions have shriveled into the background, overtaken by his praise for himself. His original campaign promises of NOT going out and using the US military for nation building have been dismissed, along with his original ideals for a peaceful resolution. The war is over, Bush did a good job, apart from the looting, but now he is over-reaching himself, and I as an American acknowledge it, and I hope the rest of the world will stop judging me and my country for the eccentricities of Baby Bush.




    *disclaimer: does not apply to everyone

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Clockwood You Forgot Poland Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,467
    Dude, its not forever. Just long enough to get them on their feet and get things organized. Heck, bush wont even be in office much longer unless hes reelected.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Carnuth i dont Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    547
    regardless, as soon as the regime was kicked out, the US needed to get their troops out, and bring in international peace keepers from UN members emphasizing pro-iraq arab(ex: not Iran) peacekeeper presences. The sole US occupation is ruining it for us.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Clockwood You Forgot Poland Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,467
    True enough. We should have use a mixed peacekeeping force. THere are worse things than us though.
     
  8. Carnuth i dont Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    547
    yet to the world, they are hidden behind the "threat" that is America
     
  9. Coldrake Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    808
    I'm not aware that the UN has called for sending in a peacekeeping force, only inspectors. However, if France, Germany, Russia, and Belgium want to send peacekeepers, that would be fine. If not, the Americans and Brits are going to have to stay at least long enough to get an interrim government in place and a functioning police force.
     
  10. Revolution Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    164
    Hey I would still vote for this guy!

    http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=21667


    He'd probably take care of business and kick the shit outta some of the BS we got in this thing we call life. Cmon Conan For President!

    Thats one thing I do know and dont like because of a fine line.

    You hate USA, but maybe not American Citizens
    You hate US Citizens, but not America
    You hate Our Government, but not the citizens
    (Yea I am aware I cannot spell)

    etc etc............


    We are all screwed........... Lets give Arnold a shot.
     
  11. Allahs_Mathematics Mar'Ifah Ahl As-Suffah Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,111
    On our feat and organzied , as in a democratical vote for an Islamic Government ?

    Leads start orducing the arms , harbor mujahiddeen , and ally with Iran , my Shiaa brothers !!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Whoohoo cant wait Shiaa unification of Iran and Iraq , THANK YOU AMERICA

    Would an democratically chosen Ayatollah and some legally approved death squads do ?

    But again THANK YOU AMERICA , this will unite Shiaa Arabs and Shiaa Persians .

    Oh wait , what do I hear , its gonna be democratic but not quite like that ? Oh I c we will get a democrat and republikan party we can choose between as well wont we ? Oh great do we get our own Monica Lewinsky *Star of David* too ? And how about our own little Wolfowitz *Star of David* , or our own Rumsfeld *Star of David* ?
    Come on man if u can have Jewish nuts we surely can have some Muslim ones cant we ? We want Yassin Ahmed & Usama Bin Laden , and we want that funny Taliban Mullah as well , and we demand Al Sahaf as our minister of information .
     
  12. jps Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,872
    We want democracy in Iraq the same way we wanted democracy in Vietnam.
    An oft overlooked fact is that prior to the Vietnam war the US had called for free democratic elections there, it soon became clear that such an election would be won easily by Ho Chi Minh, so the US changed its mind about democracy.

    I doubt we'll be that blatant this time...eventually a "democratic" vote will be allowed, but only once we're sure of the outcome. Its gonna be tricky to figure out how to make the Iraqis who right now seem likely to support a theocratic state vote for a US puppet, but I'm sure good ol' american ingenuity will find a way.
     
  13. alanH Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    523
    We don't want democracy so much as we want stability, relative freedom, the rule of law and policies favorable to us. Democracy is more of a means than an ideal end in itself. After all, which would you rather live under...a king who protected all your rights, or a democracy of complete and unfettered majority rule?
     
  14. Allahs_Mathematics Mar'Ifah Ahl As-Suffah Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,111
    Good thing u admit where u stand , thats the way to go , be honest , just say it . Indeed democracy to u is a means not a goal , because what is your goal is a USA friendly Iraq , well thats not gonna happen democratically , and thats going to call for a revoltion , and u know it . Prepare yourself , for as u put puppy's , they will have the same faith as the Shah of Iran .

    U killing me man .

    Hey slave , come on now , u wouldnt really wanna be on your own would u , dont u just stay rather here and have a place to sleep , and food , and work a bit , instead of starving on your own .

    I wish every oppressor would come out and admit he is an oppressor like you are , it would be great . We could start seriously declaring military targets
     
  15. alanH Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    523
    I don't believe one needs to be an "oppressor" to desire that other countries be friendly to us and pose us no threat.

    That said, there is a valid question of what will happen in Iraq, and whether left to their own devices they will opt for freedom, or another Shi'ite style theocracy. Or whether the country should even stay bound together as it is, given that there are so many competing demographics involved.
     
  16. Allahs_Mathematics Mar'Ifah Ahl As-Suffah Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,111
    Theoretically it isnt . Allas , we have history , interests etc .
    In conclusion : Oppressing is necesarry , they're not voting Chalabi

    They are free to choose theocracy and there is nothing you will be able to do without force about it .

    competing demographics ?
    U make those demographics up man
    Disneyland-demographics
     
  17. EI_Sparks Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,716
    Correct. And desiring another person carnally doesn't make you a rapist. What earns you those titles is when you use force to achieve your desire.
     
  18. SuperFudd Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    296
    Back on subject:
    Ideally the UN should take over now but it is so corrupt and ineffective that it is not an option. Still certain functions of the UN can and should be used with the "coalition" in charge.
     
  19. alanH Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    523
    Math: actually, we're not voting Chalabi either...
    And it's an interesting concept to say that a people are "free" to choose theocracy, since it puts the force of religious dogma even upon those who don't choose it. And by "demographics" I mean the differences between the Shi'a, the Kurds, the Sunnis, etc. What part of that do you believe I'm making up?

    Sparks: so noted that there's a difference between thought an action. That said, I think there's a difference between raping someone and neutralizing a threat posed to you.
     
  20. EI_Sparks Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,716
    Superfudd,
    If you're going to toss around corruption charges at the UN and then hold up Bush's administration as an alternative I have only three word for you : Enron, Insider Trading.

    AlanH,
    What threat, exactly?
     
  21. alanH Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    523
    Sparks: in this case the threat that WMD that Saddam has, or rather had, could be passed off to a third party and used against us. Other threats as well, mostly variations on that theme, but that primarily.
     
  22. heflores Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,103
    You are so so confused. Repeat after me....

    We want their oil...We want their oil....We are theives....theives in style......We don't give a shit about the Iraqis.

    Believe me it's good for you, it's not goot to start creating contradictions in your brain, believe me, I learned the hard way....your crap will surface one day too.
     
  23. alanH Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    523
    heflores: how do you square, then, the contradiction of wanting their oil with the fact that we could have had it easily by cutting a deal with Saddam long ago? Or that why Iraq when they're the number 5 oil producer, hardly our first choice? Or that flooding the market with Iraqi oil would reduce prices? Or that it's going to be plain and visible where the oil money goes from here on in, given our actions?


    What we want is stability in the oil markets, there's no doubt of that. But the nonsense about this being an "oil grab" is terribly old and discredited...come up with something new.
     

Share This Page