| Author | Message | ||
| Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member Username: Airbarton Post Number: 487 Registered: 11-2002 |
Art it is pointless for us to continue to debate the possible outcomes of WWII since we are both just speculating. One thing is for sure if we had stopped Hitler from rearming by holding him to post WWI treaties, the war in Europe would likely not have occured. As far as Sadams affiliations with radical Islam is concerned, I don't think many people other than you would argue that he had some tie, proof or not. Maybe I should put this in terms an Attorney would understand. This is like the difference between a criminal case and a civil case. I would choose to view this like a civil case and make my judgement based on a preponderance of the evidence. You on the other hand would see it as a criminal case and require proof positive. The fact is ART, we are a common enemy of Sadam and radical Islam. It would be just a matter of time before the two got together. I think we are waisting our time with this argument as it has become apparent that I will never get you to see this the same way I do. We should just agree to disagree and move on to some other subject! | ||
| j scott leonard (Jscott)
Member Username: Jscott Post Number: 419 Registered: 1-2002 |
Interesting that I simply ask a question related to the topic of killing innocent. MikeB. labels my followup as a "flame response". He than labels me a "buffoon". Perhaps I am guilty, but I find it very interesting that MikeB resorts to name calling instead of engaging in an intellectual discussion. If "baffoon" I am, than at least I'm a happy, satisfied, non-name calling, Ferrari loving, baffoon! Don't get so worked up fella. Life is too short, especially if you are an unborn clild in a world of Mikes. I see direct connection regarding compassion for the innocent. My twin sons were born pre-mature at 6 1/2 months. According to MikeB, they were not as valuable as an innocent in Iraq. Today they are 23. Perhaps a discussion without emotion or name calling would be much more effective. Somehow neither side of the debate ever seem to understand that. I hope we can raise the level. All life has value, in Iraq or unborn. I weep for the loss of all innocent life. This is just my opinion. Enough said. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1530 Registered: 6-2001 |
MikeB: You've read far too much right wing propaganda. Roe v. Wade, doesn't say that. What Roe said was that there were 3 distinct portions of pregnancy, and they would be dealt with differently. The first tri-semester, where the fetus isn't viable, is pretty much the woman's choice. The second trimester, is more restrictive, towards the end of that time period, the rights of the fetus are becoming more important. In the last trimester, the rights of the fetus are more important, and usually it takes a medical issue to justify an abortion. The dispute between late term abortion between the conservatives and us is that we would allow legisation over that issue, provided that a provision be made regarding the health of the mother. The conservatives chose to insist that no such clause be present, and we have this impass. Art | ||
| Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member Username: Srt_mike Post Number: 180 Registered: 12-2002 |
Art, This is one area where the supreme court disagrees with you. They allow abortions for reasons even such as "I just don't want the kid". Personally I'm very much in favor of abortion, but whether one is or not, using a discussion of deaths in Iraq to talk about abortion is wacky and disingenious. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1528 Registered: 6-2001 |
If the unborn kid is 8 months, 25 days, maybe they would be close to equal. Bottom line, neither deserves to be killed, without damn good cause, and on an unborn, for the life of me, I can't think of any cause. Art | ||
| Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member Username: Srt_mike Post Number: 179 Registered: 12-2002 |
j scott, a little disingenious to pose a question under the guise of "just curious" and then flame the response when you don't appear to like it. I think only a buffoon would equate a person living and breathing in Iraq with an unborn child. | ||
| j scott leonard (Jscott)
Member Username: Jscott Post Number: 418 Registered: 1-2002 |
Interesting and convenient distinction. A bit confused over the rational. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 384 Registered: 1-2003 |
No, the value isn't the same. | ||
| j scott leonard (Jscott)
Member Username: Jscott Post Number: 416 Registered: 1-2002 |
Just out of curiosity, what is the value of an unborn child? Would it be the same as an innocent in Iraq? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1518 Registered: 6-2001 |
Charles: Apples and oranages. Iraq wasn't and still isn't a radical Muslin state. We've been discussing for quite a while: no evidence, none, connecting Iraq with any of the radical Islamic issues. Dead horse, done deal. What Iraq was, was someone that our government alleged had weapons of mass destruction, and most of us bought it hook, line and sinker. If true, then war was probably justified. If not, a whole bunch of dead people. As to the second world war, maybe we get a different result, maybe not. I think the die was cast when Russia entered into a treaty with Germany, which gave Hitler the go ahead to do whatever was necessary with Eastern Europe. By that time, all the necessary pieces were in place for Hitler to make do in Eastern Europe. Had we attacked Germany before he went after Russia (1941 as I recall), he probably wouldn't have gone into Russia, and the war might very well have ended up differently: remember he had a 4 engined jet plane, with enough range to reach New York, and return from there. If you check your history, the primary reason the war was won so early, was the fierce Russian resistance, and Stalin's removal of all of his war time production to east of the Urals (Hitler didn't have any long range bombers early in the war). Bottom line: had we started on Hitler earlier, we might have lengthened the war, and he was about 6 months, one year from nukes. The point is that there are no quick and easy answers. Time will tell whether this was a smart thing or not. Again what I'm seeing is the willingness to do these sorts of things from people who haven't seen what I've seen. I just got off the phone with another attorney, my age, whose son in law is in one of the helicopter units in Kuwait. He saw a lot of the same things I saw when young, and he made the comment: he has to be careful about what he says in front of his daughter and son in law. I guess the difference is the value we place on human life. I hold it in the highest regard, and believe that before you kill someone, you better have a compelling reason. I don't consider liberation of that person's fellow citizens who are not under immediate threat of extinction a compelling reason. Despite the comments, there may have been good reasons for our allies, and their citizens to have disagreed with our actions. Art | ||
| Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member Username: Airbarton Post Number: 485 Registered: 11-2002 |
Art, what do you mean by threatened? Our borders were not directly threatened before WWI yet we got envolved because we realized that it was just a matter of time before our borders would be threatened. If we had gotten envolved in WWII sooner Pearl Harbor may not have been hit and if we had gone over and kicked some butt while your man Clinton was in office the twin towers might still be there. The fact is Art our nation has payed the price of isolationism many times in the past don't you think it's time we learned from it? We can no longer afford to sit around with our heads in the sand and hope the worlds problems will just some how go away. The only way we will ever have real security is to go out and do away with regimes like Sadam's. As much as we don't like it we have no choice. I suppose you think Sadam and his thugs were just a bunch of nice guys that were badly misunderstood and that they had no ill will towards the US. I am affraid you are in for a reality check here Art. Radical Islam is out to get us. The last thing we need is a regime with the resourses and capabilities that Sadam's had, helping them. I think you should consider who we are dealing with here Art. Diplomacy will not work with these people. Strength is the only thing they will respond to. This war has put them on notice. I think they need to see that we mean bussiness and maybe they will clean up there act. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1428 Registered: 1-2002 |
Niiiiice. These French pr!cks seem to be going out of their way to sabotage the US any way they can. Wonder what has them so scared? Perhaps the senior Iraqi regime leaders have the goods on Chirac & friends? Methinks the answer is a resounding YES. I guess it's no coincidence that Jacques & Chirac & Iraq all rhyme...   | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1219 Registered: 10-2002 |
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030506-32981825.htm | ||
| j scott leonard (Jscott)
Member Username: Jscott Post Number: 415 Registered: 1-2002 |
Given time, we shall know if the war was just or not. If it was, as I truly believe, alright the price is high but the cost of doing nothing even higher. If it was not, even I, AS A DEDICATED AND LOYAL GEORGE BUSH SUPPORTER, will see him out. We will know much more before the election, that is for sure. However, never glamorize or glorify war! It is terrible. However, some war is justified and righteous. We shall see. We are not a nation of conquest and God forbid that we ever become one. But, we are a powerful nation that has every right and obligation to protect our way of life. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1515 Registered: 6-2001 |
Charles: I'm not against war. However, having seen one up close and personal, I think that we should not engage in a war unless threatened. Period. They told us we were threatened, and apparently they may have lied. Saddam was not a good person. Neither was the Shaw of Iran, but look at what replaced him, something worse. Don't say this is a good thing, until it has played out. It may not end up the way you envision it. One thing is certain: thousands died, thousands were injuried. That won't change, and those lives have been destroyed, apparently based upon a lie. If I would to do something like that in my life, I'd see free government housing if I were lucky. I'm just insisting upon a common standard. That's not idealistic, its based upon experience. There are other people on this thread who feel the same, because of their experiences, but they don't want to get involved in the discussion. They feel, as I do, that younger members (yes, I know you're in your 40s) who haven't gone through a war, etc, really don't understand what they are talking about. Art | ||
| Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member Username: Airbarton Post Number: 484 Registered: 11-2002 |
Art, many people died to end the Nazi occupation as well but it had to be done. I am not for war for the sake of war Art. I was for this one because I knew, like most people but yourself, that it would be the only way Iraq would be rid of Sadam. Freedom is not cheap, that is just how it is. You have this rediculous idealistic view that somehow we were going to free these people from Sadam's regime by being nice to him. All I am trying to say here is that I don't care what the governments reason was for this war, it needed to be done. Don't blame us for the lives that were lost blame Sadam. If regimes like his did not exist in the first place we would not need to have any bloodshed. Why can't you place the blame were it belongs which is on tyrant's like him that want to destroy our world. Art I certainly understand why you feel the way you do but I don't think even you would say that war is never an option. I also think you do see the value of Iraq's liberation. I just think you are so liberal that you just can't see past your parties own propaganda. I am lucky enough not to be aligned with either party as I am an independent. If you knew me you would know that I am very much a humanitarian as well. Believe me I do feel for these people but I am sure they have suffered far worse at the hands of Sadam than they have from this war. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1512 Registered: 6-2001 |
Dave: The 30 days or so came about become one of the other guys on this thread said we should have found it by then. Additionally, the UN had far less people in Iraq, was not able to interrogate high individuals, and because we now control Iraq, any claim that people aren't talking because of Saddam wouldn't be valid. Lastly we allegedly had concrete evidence (Powell, UN speech, Feburary 2003), we should be a little more efficient than the UN. As to Charles Barton's comments about why some people are still upset if there are no weapons, and our government lied: thousands of living breathing human beings died as a direct result of that lie (if it was a lie). I don't see this as a left right issue, but one of a humanitarian issue: a bunch of people with asperiations similar to all of ours died, a bunch of people were mained, injuried, lost whatever they had accumulated. If Mr. Barton has difficulty in seeing that aspect of this, he has my sincere and heart felt thoughts for his condition. Art | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1413 Registered: 1-2002 |
MFZ, I am not the President, so I cannot answer your 1st question. In addition, inspectors were only shown what Hussein wanted them to see. Don't you get the ineffective irony here? 6 months? 6 years? 12 years? What difference does it make when you are dealing with this sort of situation? So as for your 2nd question: I would say you are correct, but not through UN maliciousness, but rather due to Iraqi 3-card Monte. | ||
| Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member Username: Airbarton Post Number: 481 Registered: 11-2002 |
I thought we already agreed the government lied about it's motivations for the war? The lefties just can not get over this. So what if they lied! Anyone with any brains should have seen that before the war anyway. Are we all that naive to think that the government always tells us the truth? I think the left is just pissed that the gloom and doom they predicted did not happen. The world is a better place with one less dictatorship! why is that so hard to see! | ||
| MFZ (Kiyoharu)
Junior Member Username: Kiyoharu Post Number: 230 Registered: 2-2003 |
So how come you didn't give them their 6 months? Because their results are not up to your standards? | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1408 Registered: 1-2002 |
30 days? Come on, Art! All the appeasement monkeys DEMANDED we give the UN at least 6 more months to find them. And you want them in 30 days??? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1506 Registered: 6-2001 |
I'm keeping this alive, and out of archive, for another 30 days. No WMD, then I'll put a post in. Art | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1348 Registered: 1-2002 |
Always to the defense of the other side, at the expense of your employer. Sigh...   | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 381 Registered: 1-2003 |
"Randall, why do you hypocritically take pay every 2 weeks from the institution you so apparently loathe? And where's your documentation on the millions killed and/or tortured and/or experimented upon by Mr. Hussein?" Did I say I loathe the Navy? I don't recall ever saying that, but if you could point me to the link maybe it could refresh my mind. I did a search for documents or articles, and this on came up: http://www.rense.com/general37/terror.htm It seems the millions number comes from speeches. If you count Halabja it is definitely in the millions, but the CIA say that Saddam may or may not be responsible for that incident. Why don't you provide documents to the millions killed and/or tortured and/or experimented upon by Mr. Hussein? | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1344 Registered: 1-2002 |
Art, yes--Nepenthe! I know the place! Outstanding idea!!!!!!!   | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1457 Registered: 6-2001 |
Dave: I'll see you in 2004 for the National meet. If you drink, I'll buy you one at Nepinthi"s (sp) in Big Sur (about 5 miles from Carmel). Craig: No one is demanding an immediate showing of WMD. However, given the prior statements of our leaders, i.e., that they had positive proof of same, that they were following, via satellite WMD in mobile units, etc., I can easily see why some would demand an immediate proof. It's been almost a month since we've essentially defeated Saddam. It is probably enough time to have discovered these weapons, given the prior statements by the government. Having said that, perhaps another 30 days would be sufficient, and if nothing has been found by then, perhaps we've been lied to? Cruisin: As to entering a war, if we compare Viet Nam vs. WWII, you can see that someone who has a direct personal interest will be far more willing to fight than someone who is conned into fighting. In WWII, we understood that we'd been attacked, that Germany had declared war on us, and that we were in a fight for our life. In Viet Nam, we were lied to about being attacked, and when that become public knowledge (68 or 69) those who had been against the war were joined by a whole bunch more people. We will defend ourselves, but I just don't know how many people truly want us to become an empire that attacks others based upon what we think they will do, rather than defend ourselves based upon what people have done to us. That gentlemen is the entire point: do we defend ourselves, or do we, when we, and only we, perceive that we are threatened? I submit that latter can easily be perceived as the act of a bully, and that may very well lead to consequences we certainly do not wish to see. Art | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1341 Registered: 1-2002 |
LOL, Craig! How very true!!! Randall, why do you hypocritically take pay every 2 weeks from the institution you so apparently loathe? And where's your documentation on the millions killed and/or tortured and/or experimented upon by Mr. Hussein? A$$clown. | ||
| Craig (Beachbum)
Junior Member Username: Beachbum Post Number: 111 Registered: 9-2002 |
if it wasnt so sad it would be commical, the same people that are demanding the immediate proof of WMD were the same people that were demanding the UN weapons inspectors be given more time, if in a couple months there is still no proof that will be the time to start criticizing the administation | ||
| Crusing (Crusing)
Junior Member Username: Crusing Post Number: 64 Registered: 10-2002 |
Who likes war??? I don't know of anyone. But whether right or wrong when a country goes to war, they should go in to win at any cost, including civilians. War is sad and ugly but it is and will always be necessary to preserve our freedom. The problem arises when we don't fight all out. It pisses me off that our county has become so frikin weak that we are more concerned about the citizens of other countries than our own people. I don't want to see anyone die innocently, that is terrible! But it is war for CRYING OUT LOUD. It is not pretty. I am just glad that during WWII we did not have such wimps in this country. Could you imagine what the talking heads would have said after some of the early losses in the South Pacific. They would have been waiving the white flag. I just hope we never get tested in the future. I'm afraid that our poor citizens just won't have the stomach for it. That may be a good reason for preemptive wars. | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 380 Registered: 1-2003 |
Here's a reason to think your country could be a bit untrustworthy. http://www.healthnewsnet.com/humanexperiments.html Almost every incident on that list you can do a search for and find out more. You can find government confessions about it, but always many years after the fact. The arguement that can be given is since we don't have a dictatorship, the bad people that allow experimenting on people are usually only in office for a few years. So it's not really a concern. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1339 Registered: 1-2002 |
Art, I would really like to meet you someday. I mean that. I agree with nearly 98% of what you said, even though you & I approach many issues from diametrically (sp.??) opposite directions. That said, I guess on this Iraq situation, the Hussein regime & its apologists & facilitators/enablers (France, Russia, Germany) has a much bigger history of lying about so many things related to the purported causes (yes, I said causes, since Bush attributed the war to WMD as well as Al Queda & other terrorist connections) than the US and/or Britain do. So, in context, I believe my country until it proves untrustworthy. However, Iraq et al have proved untrustworthy since at least 1991... | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1456 Registered: 6-2001 |
MikeB said it all: "Art, I think maybe part of the basis for your feelings is that the USA needs to be a little more up-front with it's citizens. I agree with you on that. I feel that if they are going to "sell" the war based on WMD, well, I want to know where the WMD are! They are retreating from their stance quicker than a Frenchman at the Maginot line. I think (and hope) the media will hold them to their claims" The difference I think, is that without the immediate threat, we wouldn't have gone to war, because it wouldn't have been supported. That is the issue, it has always been the issue. Another thought: we hear about how bad our enemies are. When you find someone false in one aspect of their conversation (testimony) you must look at the balance of their testimony with some distrust. My point is: how do we know that our enemies are so bad? If we've been lied to before, why don't we just disbelieve everything we are told? I guess I've seen so much BS on the part of my government (both repubs and demos) that unless I can see it, touch it, or otherwise verify it, I just don't believe it. That is where I'm coming from, an absolute lack of trust, based upon years of being BS'd. It's especially bad when people die over those misrepresentations. Having said that, we probably have one of the best systems around, but not because we're so good, its just that the other places are so shitty. We should all work to make our government more honest and more representative. Art | ||
| Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member Username: Srt_mike Post Number: 159 Registered: 12-2002 |
There are always many many reasons why we (or anyone) goes to war. For this campaign, there are a lot of factors, I think. First, there is an effect of destabilizing Iran and Syria. Both Syria and Iran have pro-US countries on either side of them. Their world just got a whole lot smaller. Second, there is the "show of force" to the Arab world that may just knock Syria, Iran, and NKorea back into line. Third, there is Saddam's non-compliance with the UN resolutions requiring him to prove he disarmed. World support had eroded a lot over the last 12 years, and it was sort of a "now or never" time to go into Iraq. Fourth, there is the unknown quantity of Saddam. It's better to have someone containable who is nuts (like Kim Jong-Il) than someone uncontainable. Saddam was a thorn in our side and it was better for us if he wasn't there. Fifth, there was the support Iraq gave directly or indirectly to terrorist organizations. Maybe not Al-Qaeda directly, who knows. But certainly Iraq was anti-US and in some way or manner, our enemies were their friends. Sixth, there was the fact that Saddam had used and abused his people for a long time. He murdered a whole bunch of people and created some pretty atrocious conditions for his people to live in while living the life of a king himself. Seventh, there was the fact that there didn't appear to be an end in sight. Uday or Qusai were going to take over, and it would be another 30 years of the same old BS. Our attempts to covertly effect regime change had not worked and the outlook wasn't looking too good. Eighth, Saddam had in the past worked on WMD and may (or may not) still have them. Even if he does not, he will have the means and motivation to create them in the future. He also has the motivation to sell or use them. Whether he would or not is debatable - but he does have the means and the motive. Now, we can all latch on to ONE of these reasons for war and refute it and then claim the war is not just... but that is missing the big picture. There is more to this equation also. The world does not see the things I listed above in the same way that we see them. There are legal complications, relationship complications, and economic complications in going to war. The REASON, in my opinion, that this war was sold heavily on the basis of WMD and an imminent threat from them, is because that is one of the reasons the UN "allows" countries to go to war - imminent threats. So, by claiming Iraq as an imminent threat, the war is "legal" by world standards. I have my own opinions on the eight reasons listed and how instrumental each of them were. I suspect others have their own opinions also. But I think we are being closed-minded if we latch on to one reason and dispute it and claim the war was not justified. Art, I think maybe part of the basis for your feelings is that the USA needs to be a little more up-front with it's citizens. I agree with you on that. I feel that if they are going to "sell" the war based on WMD, well, I want to know where the WMD are! They are retreating from their stance quicker than a Frenchman at the Maginot line. I think (and hope) the media will hold them to their claims. However, we can't forget the other reasons listed above. I don't think anyone can gain war support by using many of those reasons, because the average billy-bob in the street knows nothing of world politics and destabilization. So they sell war based on other more easily understood concepts. Regarding the horror of war.... I am not immune to it. Even those Iraqi soldiers who are 100% in support of Saddam have families. It's easy to villify them, but I bet if there was no war and we met in a bar, we would likely get along. But that's part of war. You just cannot allow yourself to get too emotional about the individual - you need to think of the whole. And thats why I don't really get too wound up over pics like Randall posted, because that's war. I believe in abortion too - but when someone posts a pic of a mangled fetus, it's just an attempt to horrify people into seeing things their way. I've seen my fair share of mangled bodies and unrecognizable corpses with massive head trauma. It's not a pretty sight. But, it's war. People die on both sides. We just have to keep in mind ALL the reasons before we judge too quickly. | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Member Username: Whart Post Number: 986 Registered: 12-2001 |
Art: We've already discussed the issue of justifying our intervention in Iraq and already agreed to disagree. I'm not trying to be glib here, but i am willing to accept that there was no proof prior to our invasion of Iraq of a nexus between that country's regime and Al Queda; after the fact proof of same would not really justify our attack if in fact that was the basis for it, since it is a shoot first, ask questions later approach. (None of us, to my knowledge, are privy to what our defense and intelligence people know, and i would assume that we would have made the case had there been one, before we launched). Having said that, i still don't think we needed to justify our acts there on the basis of an Al Queda link; the guy was a thorn, a problem, deserved killing, and was probably the easiest pathway for our direct intervention in the Mid-East. In '91, the decision was apparently made not to go all the way, at the risk of destabilizing the Mid-East. I believe the current thinking is exactly the opposite; namely, to disrupt the radical Muslim stronghold in the Mid-East. Admittedly, under Saddam's rule, radical Islamists had little latitude; his administration was more secular than religious. But, and here's where we'll disagree, i think of all the countries over there, Iraq was the easiest target to justify, and will serve as a staging ground for further campaigns, overt and covert, to dislodge extremist sanctuaries. Witness Syria. And, Iran, which hopefully, will revolt with little doing from us. (Interestingly, self-determination there led to an ultra conservative religious rule which a great number of the young, and educated, are fed up with, even without our provocation). Even if i am wrong, or wrong-headed, i think what i have just outlined reflects the thinking of the hardliners in the Bush administration. Once we are out of Saudi Arabia, it will be interesting to see how the masses there react. That place, to me, is the real problem, since the Saud family has, for two hundred years, had a compact with the Wahhabi sect, which teaches that all of us are heretics, infidel and that we must die so their true religion can survive and prosper. Finally, i want to take you to task on the following: If we had established an Al Queda connection with Iraq, would that have justified the horrific death of the child in the photo? I don't think you are advocating that any more than i am. The death of innocents is always a tragedy. That was my original point in this thread.Respectfully,.... | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1329 Registered: 1-2002 |
Art, we are more in agreement than you may realize. And please forgive me: I did NOT mean to imply that I have no sympathy for the innocents whose lives have been lost in Iraq---either due to the war OR due to 30 years of Saddam's murder. I will bet you real money that the latter dwarfs the former by several orders of magnitude. I despise war, despite its occasional necessity, because it's the little guy--the innocent bystander--who gets it the worst. This has always been the case. I cry for the Iraqis who got the shaft this time, but I harden up when I realize that the vast majority of them were hurt/killed due to the cowardice & dishonorable behavior (I am keeping it clean here) of Hussein's cabal of thugs. Also, Art, I mourn for your family's loss to the Nazis. James, indeed. Kinda like some things portrayed in Schindler's List, eh? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1451 Registered: 6-2001 |
Dr. Tommy: Oil may have been the real reason, but the stated reason was the weapons of mass destruction, with a commentary that they had conclusive proof. Art | ||
| James Glickenhaus (Napolis)
Intermediate Member Username: Napolis Post Number: 1134 Registered: 10-2002 |
Dave The thing about Dachau I remember most was a letter from the wife of the commandant thanking Mengle for moving the medical experments where they imursed prisoners into ice water to see how long they could live into a more sound proof building. It seems the screams were keeping her kids up at night. In the same letter she also thanked him for the chochlate he sent her kids for Christmas. Best Jim | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Intermediate Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 1118 Registered: 5-2001 |
Art - I thought you were of the opinion earlier that the entire bases for this war was oil/money. | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Intermediate Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 1117 Registered: 5-2001 |
I watched a program on the History Channel last night on how the Japs treated our POW's during WWII. They were amazingly inhumane. It was worse then you can even imagine. Evidentally, the atomic bomb saved thousands of our soldier's lives because the Japs had decided to execute all the POWs in the event of a land invasion by the US. They interviewed surviving POWs that still do not forgive that country. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1450 Registered: 6-2001 |
Dave: I don't need to be reminded about Holocaust day: I lost an entire side of my family to those lunatics. What I am upset about is the apparent joy that some have over this. People, innocent people died, were mained, etc. This isn't a time to celebrate, and anyone who does is in my opinion, something without feelings. Read JScott's post here. He does understand the issues, but it appears that some on this board don't. As to whether this was needed or not: time will tell. The issue, was and is, weapons of mass destruction. They haven't been found, and may not be found. The entire basis for our war was that Iraq had them, and we were fearful that they would use them against American citizens. My President, his staff, and other officers of my government, from November 2002 through about April of this year, kept saying that they had conclusive proof of this, and indeed the letter provided to the UN Security Council by our delegate, Mr. Negroponte (sp?) on March 9, 2003, provided that there were such weapons, and in that letter it was the sole basis for our going to war. If that proves untrue, then an awful lot of people died, for what appears to be either a mistake or a fraud. Art | ||
| Dr Tommy Cosgrove (Vwalfa4re)
Intermediate Member Username: Vwalfa4re Post Number: 1116 Registered: 5-2001 |
Randall - How do you decide which internet info you read and quote is accurate and which is inaccurate? Seriously. Is it the site, the source, or because it supports your opinion? | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1327 Registered: 1-2002 |
Jon, you are 100% correct. That is why I posted the link WITHOUT comment. It proves little...but when CNN starts posting stuff like this (as opposed to FOX, etc.), it tells me that even they believe it may well be the tip of the ol' iceberg. But time will tell. Again, I posted it to stand on its own, without editorial. Also, I agree with you 100% regarding Saudi Arabia, as I have posted here before. It's ironic to have read Randall's (and to a lesser degree, Art's) comments yesterday, of all days. Yesterday was Holocaust Remembrance Day. My father was a commando in WWII. He was highly decorated for, among other things, commanding the very first group of Allied troops who liberated 2 concentration camps (Dachau & a "lesser" one). He spoke yesterday on the steps of the Texas State Capitol about his experiences, in order to refute those who deny the Holocaust happened, and to keep alive the dwindling first-hand experiences of dealing with pure undiluted EVIL. I was there to be with him, and to show that some of my younger (41) generation feels the same way, regardless of the fact that I am a gentile. He is 78, and every year there are fewer & fewer of him left...just as there are fewer & fewer Holocaust survivors, one of who shared the dias with him & the Governor, etc etc. Now, I am not saying Hussein was Hitler...but evil is evil. And like it or not, in this world, you either lead, follow, or get the f_ck out of the way. For 220 years, the US has chosen the first; sometimes slowly, sometimes reluctantly, sometimes with the wrong "allies" or on the wrong side. But, to be a civilized nation, you HAVE to be willing to confront evil where it lives. Why do so few people today realize that? FREEDOM ISN'T FREE, FOLKS!!!!!!!  | ||
| Sunny Garofalo (Jaguarxj6)
Member Username: Jaguarxj6 Post Number: 380 Registered: 2-2003 |
Real live, innocent people really died? They weren't computer generated images? Holy...! I'm going to start up a charity, quit my job to join the Red Cross, and volunteer over there. Spare us the bleeding heart routine. I'm sure that when we invaded Iraq, we just made up the launching of rockets (or whatever they were) towards Kuwait and a city filled with civilians as a cover for our OWN atrocities. I guess that Iraq was really attacking the US troops and air bases in Israeli when they launched their SCUDS during Desert Storm/Shield. And Iraq pulled out right away despite UN warning after warning. Don't worry, I just made that up. We really didn't find a memorial celebrating the terrorist attack on 9/11 in an Iraqi government building, our skilled troops painted that for the journalists prior. And all those human rights violations by Milosovic.. we really were responsible for those and pinned the blame on him. Until the US was attacked in Pearl Harbor, we weren't going to risk our troops, resources, or way of life to fight Europe's war, were we? Good thing we did, eh? Art, you actually sound disgusted that someone might not have or share the same ethics and sensibilities as you. And that I truly find hilarious. If Randall wished to stand up for his convictions and see them validated (or destroyed), he would give us the information himself. Sunny | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 613 Registered: 8-2001 |
Dave, The CNN article doesn't prove a whole lot about tying Saddam and bin Laden together. If a suspected bin Laden aide received treatment in an Iraqi hospital and met with Iraqi military officials and we can justify that war on that basis alone then how come the Saudi's get off the hook. 95% of the highjackers came from Saudi Arabia and we have proof that some folks low down in the Saudi Royal family gave money to bin Laden and his group. We have all beaten this issue to death about what the reason's for war were and I still think we should have bombed the hell out or Saudi Arabia long before Iraq came up on the list. Pakistan as well. You can make the arguement that Saddam was a dangerous lunatic, that the poor people of Iraq needed to be liberated, that we needed their oil, that daddy Bush still couldn't get over Saddam trying to kill him, and all the other reasons for war that I disagree with BUT the 9/11 arguement at this stage is weak. If we find more evidence than the war was the right thing to do but this is not the case at present. One person in Iraq looks rather lame when we have 1000 Al Queda folks and bin Laden himself in Pakistan and all the folks who hit those towers and the Pentagon came from Saudi Arabia. I think the US is right to pull out of Saudi Arabia. In fact I think we should drop every missle we have on them as our planes leave Saudi Arabia. Jon | ||
| j scott leonard (Jscott)
Member Username: Jscott Post Number: 399 Registered: 1-2002 |
I am the Christian right. I hate war and have the experience and credentials to say that. Many make comment but have little or no experience. As a Christian conservative, I prayed daily for the safety of our soldiers, our leaders and especially the innocent in Iraq! It breaks my heart that innocent children were hurt. They don't deserve any of what they experienced. It is our moral responsibility to help them in any way possible. I pay more in taxes than I want to think about, however, this year knowing that several thousand of my dollars will go to help those innocent in Iraq makes it somehow tolerable. I detest that dictators oppress people, I am thankful that many may now have the opportunity to live under greater freedom. I pray that is the outcome. God forbid that we fight any more wars. But I know that sin and evil exists in this world. Someday it will end. This is not so much a right v left discussion,it is a good v evil. The question is in the mind of the individual as to what is good and what is evil. Likely neither side will convince the other. All that I know is that mass labeling of people groups as all one way is foolish and untrue. This is not the "Holy Grail" and to catagorically make that assertion is patently wrong. All Christians in my circle of friends hated the war but also hated that the people were under oppression. I supported the war and am thankful that it is over. It would have been wonderful if another way could have been found. Tough choices were made and many will disagree and many will agree. Thank God that we can have the debate and God bless the U.S.A.!!! Go for it fellows! Where is that spell check when you need it? | ||
| Craig (Beachbum)
Junior Member Username: Beachbum Post Number: 110 Registered: 9-2002 |
Art, i see, so when our troops are fired upon its a disgrace for them to protect them selves, unfortunetly firering from behind inocent women and children is a favorite tactic of these torrorist, like one of the other guys said, when do you see our solders dancing in the streets at the death of anybody, you betray the over inflated ego of an attorny that is caught up in his own self importance | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1447 Registered: 6-2001 |
Craig: You betray your stupidity with your posts. I'd think before you write. No matter what anyone says, this is a disgrace, even if it had to be done. The conservatives have apparently taken this as a holy grail. Well, it isn't. Real live, innocent people died. To be proud of this points out, that even though its called the "Christian right" the first word is a fib. Whether the picture Randall showed was our doing or someone elses, there is absolutely no doubt that we've done something similar to people there. We've all seen the pictures of young children, with horrible injuries. To not feel any emotion towards them is a disgrace. Whart: show me the proof that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. Seems that no one else has been able to do that, i.e., connect those two events. It's one thing to be angry about the deaths, I'm angery also. Its another thing to lash out at any one in range because you've been hurt. That an act of a savage. I always thought we weren't. Art | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1326 Registered: 1-2002 |
Oh, this is PRICELESS: "I read about it on MSN. It sounds like the troops jumped the gun a little bit." Randall, time to start taking your own advice. Remember? That advice was just a few sentences earlier: "The articles you post are full of assumptions. You seem too stupid to understand that. It's always "MSN says" or......". How's it feel to be hung on your own petard, JAMF? Thanks for so quickly taking my advice below, Randall:  | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 379 Registered: 1-2003 |
Here's one for you. Ever think people in my shop read this stuff? By the way..... Navy=Pearl Harbor. Don't you remember that? | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 378 Registered: 1-2003 |
The articles you post are full of assumptions. You seem too stupid to understand that. It's always "sources say" or "we think". I'm glad you skipped the article about the drum of chemical weapons found the other day. That was another false claim. How about the article about a JOURNALIST that found "TOP SECRET" papers and proceeded to scratch away the ink scribbles and white out to find Bin Ladens name? You should be ashamed of yourself for even belieing that crap. You post this •••• over and over, trying to convince someone that everything the government said was true. Why don't you just wait? I'm sure if our government finds any really solid proof they will show it to the world. Maybe every day I should post an article against US actions, or maybe we should just let this topic die until something valid comes up. By the way, I didn't retract my statement. They did slaughter those people. I read about it on MSN. It sounds like the troops jumped the gun a little bit. | ||
| Jim Schad (Jim_schad)
Intermediate Member Username: Jim_schad Post Number: 1165 Registered: 7-2002 |
I say hire a PI and find out who Randall is or trace his IP. He is in the Navy in Hawaii. Is that on Hickam Field or are there other Navy establishments? Then copy all his posts and mail them to his CO and a few fellow seamen and just for fun you can include all our responses. Then lets see how he is rewarded. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1325 Registered: 1-2002 |
Riiiiight, Randall. Nice attempt at a rapid backpedal. Too bad it is a bit, um, transparent. People who are proud of their employer do not slander or libel them so sickeningly, even in jest. People who hypocritically take their employer's money every 2 weeks, while simultaneously stabbing said employer in the back nearly every day, do. And, what silly post from me? All I did was post a link from cnn, WITHOUT ANY EDITORIALIZING on my part. Not sure how that qualifies as silly. It's amazing, though, as the dribs & drabs come out (as many people predicted they would) that back up many (but NOT yet all) of the administration's claims about Iraq before the war, the folks who were the most vehement in their pre-war contempt for our government just keep getting more outrageous with their claims. It's just that the smart ones have learned when to shut up... This is for you & your monkey, Randall:  | ||
| wm hart (Whart)
Member Username: Whart Post Number: 984 Registered: 12-2001 |
Just remember, there were 3,000 Americans in much worse shape, some who were literally vaporized, or turned into a shrapnel/slurry mix in a steaming pile of rubble. Any innocent's death is a tragedy; however, there are alot of people out there who aren't innocent and clearly deserve killing. If American service people did this (and i'm not sure they did), i am sure they are not dancing in the streets laughing about it; can you say the same about our enemies? Regards from another member of the wacko right wing conspiracy... | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 375 Registered: 1-2003 |
LOL.... I just wanted to spin you all up. Looks like it worked too. I notice everytime there a pro-war article Dave jumps on it to post it, even if it an article about assumptions, so I just figured I would do the same. Craig- you can send me money via Paypal, I'll gladly take it and put it towards airfare. Dave- Sorry for the grammar error, I too was in a rush. I was just leaving for work when I saw another silly post by you, so I took the bait and responded. | ||
| Craig (Beachbum)
Junior Member Username: Beachbum Post Number: 109 Registered: 9-2002 |
Des, my opology for my poor spelling and bad grammar, i never graduated from high school, i was working full time when i was 13 for financial reasons, the only reason i know how to read is because i taught myself, in spite of this short coming i own multiple homes in southern cal and have never lied or cheated anybody to get where i am, i must admit though i do enjoy raising the rents on liberals who think they know everything because theyve got a college degree i must opologize to everyone else for my foul language (except for randall) i realize randall is just a loser who blames his country for his own shortcomings | ||
| Mike B (Srt_mike)
Junior Member Username: Srt_mike Post Number: 157 Registered: 12-2002 |
Randall, You really struck a chord with me this time. What were you thinking to post that? First of all, there is *ZERO* evidence that the USA was responsible for that. How can you claim we are imperfect (we are) yet fail to understand that a) Iraq is probably a lot MORE imperfect b) They were desperate c) They were launching anything they could - guided or not Who is more likely to have caused more civilian casualties in this war? The USA or Iraq? How can you so quickly jump on this picture and claim the USA did it? What a buffoon. Regarding the "slaughter" - do you REALLY and I mean *REALLY* think a bunch of marines were sitting around watching a parade and one of them said "Hey let's shoot us some of those eye-rackees"??? I mean do you really think it happened like that? Here's what I think happened. Loyalists to Saddam, or Fedayeen, or maybe even Iranians were in the crowd and had people on rooftops. They took some shots at the US soldiers to get them to fire back, for the sole purpose of creating a very visible humanitarian problem for the USA. Randall - be honest - would you feel better if the #'s were reversed and a bunch of Iraqi soldiers killed a bunch of US soldiers who were parading their victory? I bet then you would say that either "we shouldn't be there anyway" or "why would they rub it in their faces? They got what was coming". You're completely unAmerican Randall. I really hope you leave our country and stop whoring yourself for an organization you completely do not believe in. It's one thing to not support military action in Iraq. What you do and say is another thing entirely. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 3752 Registered: 8-2002 |
Dave - and 'no'/'know'...  | ||
| Craig (Beachbum)
Junior Member Username: Beachbum Post Number: 108 Registered: 9-2002 |
Randall, you know, your a real piece of s--t, your so f----g stupid your realy not worth replying to but i couldnt resist, if you think this is such an evil country why dont you go live somewhere else, by living in this country and paying taxes your supporting this evil gov, your as guilty as the people you say slaughtered the so called inocent civilians, your the worst kind of hypocrite, at least most of us believe were doing the right thing, you believe were doing the wrong thing and you still support the evil empire i for one would be glad to contribute to a fund to buy you a ticket out of the country under the condition you never come back i have know dout this is the only place you run your big mouth, because if you did it out in public somebody would knock you on your butt | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1321 Registered: 1-2002 |
No, DES, I made a spelling error due to typing way too fast with way too few fingers, as I often do & admit to just as often . Big difference between that (haste & carelessness) and the inability to distinguish between "hear" and "here", just as many people confuse "there" and "their", "your" and "you're", etc., while simultaneously pontificating about his disgusting (and already disproved) allegation of US soldiers "slaughtering" Iraqi "civilians" as if it were a signed/sealed/delivered fact, while willingly taking a paycheck from the same folks he is accusing nearly daily of atrocities, etc etc. | ||
| Jack Habits (Ferraristuff)
Member Username: Ferraristuff Post Number: 299 Registered: 4-2003 |
Repost: OK, all who have TOTAL faith and belief in politicians and media raise their hand.... Please? Pretty please? Anyone? Jack | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 3745 Registered: 8-2002 |
You made a grammatical error, as well, Dave. | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1320 Registered: 1-2002 |
Randall, first of all, brainiac: it's "hear", and not "here". Perhaps you should learn basic grammar before posting sensationalistic nonsense. <segway> Second, slaughtered? SLAUGHTERED??? Get your facts straight, buddy. I appears that our troops were fired upon by dozens of guys wielding AK-47's & AK-74's, and they fired back. What part of "self-defense" do you not understand? And why, oh WHY, would you believe the word of some ex-fedayeen Iraqi liar over that of dozens of US soldiers???? You take your paycheck from the Navy yet post this crap? You should be ashamed of yourself, Randall. Oh, and one more thing: I presume the photo you posted is of one of the millions of victims of Saddam's 30 years of murder. An I correct? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1441 Registered: 6-2001 |
Commentary aside: No matter what side you're on, this is a tragedy. Too many dead and badly injuried people. Even the kids in their military had parents, etc. The kids in our military who died, or were hurt had parents, etc. Whatever side you're on, this wasn't something to be proud of. It may or may not have had to be done, but nothing to gloat about under any circumstances. Far too many hurt for that. That includes those in the government. Art | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Advanced Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 3739 Registered: 8-2002 |
"Sources said...", "...said to have...", "...believed to be..." Where's the actual, factual information...? | ||
| Randall (Randall)
Member Username: Randall Post Number: 374 Registered: 1-2003 |
Did you here about the troops that slaughtered some civilians today? Kind of like the national guard did in the 70's at Kent State University. But, hey guess this is just the price of freedom.  | ||
| Jack Habits (Ferraristuff)
Member Username: Ferraristuff Post Number: 290 Registered: 4-2003 |
OK, all who have TOTAL faith and belief in politicians and media raise their hand.... Please? Pretty please? Anyone? Jack | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Intermediate Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 1439 Registered: 6-2001 |
Arab perspective: http://www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=25700 | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Intermediate Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 1319 Registered: 1-2002 |
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/29/sprj.irq.terrorist.capture/index.html |