 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| ACS
| Commons
| Calendar
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | Color Chart | Photo album | IRC Chat |
|
| | ||
| 0 user currently in World Affairs / Debate. |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - World Affairs / Debate - The war in Iraq, for or against? |
 |  |  |
| Pages: 1 2 3 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
Read the title -_-| Durdurdur | For |
26.7%, 8 votes | Against |
73.3%, 22 votes | Multi-voting is disabled.
| |
| User | Post | ||
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99  Posts: 1863/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by hhallahhOriginally posted by Ziffski Wait, the Greater Good of plunging a stable country into utter hell and deposing a harmless crazy man? Why haven't we gone into Myanmar, or Russia. Same exact concepts that arose after the fact that the WMD idea was completely...I don't know...Wrong. Relatively good article on religion, but makes great points about the absolute pointlessness and brutality of these wars (edited by Ziffski on 12-06-04 10:06 PM) |
|||
Apple Kodondo Level: 38 Posts: 559/594 EXP: 350163 For next: 20284 Since: 03-27-04 From: Washington. Since last post: 264 days Last activity: 152 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Ziffski America prefers to start wars with Islamic nations. Muslims = Evil Terrorists |
|||
windwaker Ball and Chain Trooper WHY ALL THE MAYONNAISE HATE Level: 61  Posts: 548/1797 EXP: 1860597 For next: 15999 Since: 03-15-04 Since last post: 4 days Last activity: 6 days |
| ||
Originally posted by ZiffskiOriginally posted by hhallahhOriginally posted by Ziffski Or yes, perhaps North Korea, we could focus on them... countries that actually HAVE WMDs, and CAN attack us. |
|||
hhallahh Bob-Omb Level: 38  Posts: 458/607 EXP: 365476 For next: 4971 Since: 03-15-04 From: Portland, OR Since last post: 73 days Last activity: 60 days |
| ||
Originally posted by ZiffskiOriginally posted by hhallahhOriginally posted by Ziffski "Harmless crazy man"? Are you fucking serious? |
|||
Arwon Zora Level: 35  Posts: 227/506 EXP: 278115 For next: 1821 Since: 03-15-04 From: Terra Australis Incognita Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 10 min. |
| ||
| This is difficult to answer. I was against the war from the outset, still think it was a dumb idea, but the best thing to do now is try to get the new government stable enough to win the civil war is fighting. Fuck "democracy" here, we should settle for "not harmful" at this stage, because simply having voting doesn't lead to democracy, stability or prosperity. Any idiot who believes that having elections is going to magically solve things doesn't deserve to have an opinion on the matter. THAT SAID about the present situation, lets draw back to the original invasion. The war was a bad idea and I feel right in opposing it, because its goals were dangerous fantasy... the equal of "domino theory" in the 1960s and 1970s. Noble as they may have been, they were never going to happen regardless of what ideological bleeding-heart warmonger fools like Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz said ("freedom is messy?" Jesus Christ!) and greedy self-serving scumsuckers like Cheney might have claimed. And the humanitarian argument alone frankly wasn't enough to counter this - otherwise we'd invade Tibet or the Congo. You have to be able to demonstrate that you're trustworthy, and that you will be able to improve things and not just rearrange the fuckery, or set loose a whole new set of fuckery and hope for the best. Any idiot could point out how disastrous the long term implications of this War Of Choice would probably be - increased terrorism and antagonism, long term resource drain, a percieved puppet government lacking credibility, probably decades of involvement of various kinds. The precedents were nasty and heavy and they were NOT Japan and Germany in WW2, but rather things like Cuba 1898 and Haiti any number of times, as well as things like Iran and the Shah. Not a good track record. Finally, anyone could point out the simple flaws with EVERY SINGLE justification presented, save for the humanitarian one. Christ, remember when the dumb bastards tried to tell us this was a fight against TERRORISM? Remember "45 minutes"? Now we're scratching around in the soil for traces of bacteria and pesticides. And I'm someone who actually BELIEVED Hussein had WMDs, but that this didn't justify an aggressive invasion. On top of the lack of acceptable concrete justifications, the war was terribly argued for on all fronts, by leaders we have no reason to trust, or think capable of pulling it off even if their hearts were in the right place - they ALWAYS sounded hollow like they were trying to trick us or treat us like idiots, threw in plenty of emotional blackmail to fill the numerous gaps in their logical arguments. The humanitarian argument was an AFTERTHOUGHT, after nothing else stuck (stopping terrorism, they have large amounts of WMDs, they'll welcome us with open arms, etc)... and of course this "we can make things better" when it did come argument was made without any reference to history that shows they understand and acknowledge their own role in how things got that way. No "we're correcting our mistakes of twelve years ago, our war and sanctions made things worse and made Hussein stronger" style arguments because that would have required humility and sophistication far beyond what the leaders responsible for the war were capable of. So: It was a dodgy war, fought out of pure choice for ostensibly noble (but ultimately fantastical and naive, even dangerous) goals, presented in a variety of false ways that destroyed any hope of credibility. The one legitimate "we'll make things better and get rid of a bad man" argument was thrown in almost as an afterthought and terribly argued as well. But what's done is done, no matter how bloodyminded and foolish, and the best thing to do now is try to equip the new government to win its civil war... trying to keep it harmless if not "democratic". Oh, Legion, Radiohead told me all this so I guess you can just ignore it. |
|||
Imajin Buster Beetle Level: 34  Posts: 393/452 EXP: 234863 For next: 18788 Since: 03-15-04 From: Kingdom of Zeal Since last post: 39 days Last activity: 53 days |
| ||
| Arwon basically said my views on the humanitarian aspect... I'm going to agree that Saddam was not a threat to the North American mainland, mostly because that's obvious (Oh, and he wasn't a threat to Hawaii either).. And that, if he had wanted to, he could have attacked American bases in the Middle East. Tell me, can you give any reason WHY Saddam should have done such a thing? Such an attack would basically force the US to invade Iraq, and as the war showed us, his regime wasn't exactly an impenatrable rock- it fell surprisingly fast (For me, anyway)... Now, one could argue Iraq was a threat to Israel (our Ally), but he was as much a threat to Israel as any other Arab leader... King Abdullah II of Jordan, King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, or what's-his-name of Syria all lead countries whose foreign policy is anti-Israel. When does the invasion of Jordan start? (And Jordan even borders Iraq!) Again, an invasion of Israel would be instant death for Saddam's Iraq, and perhaps the United States wouldn't even need to get involved.. The Israeli Army is supposed to be pretty good. However, we can't leave Iraq right now. If we did, we'd basically be responsible for another Afghanistan: The United States forces are often the only thing stopping the terrorists from seizing parts of Iraq and forming neo-Taliban regimes. However, we also have to start helping Iraq's religious minority: Iraqi Christians, and other religions, have been persecuted in droves since the war began, and now the new Iraqi Interim Constitution says that Islam is basically the state religion, and can be used as a basis for laws... Ah well, there's always Syria (Which is pretty tolerant of Christians, especially by Middle Eastern standards).. Er, or is there? |
|||
|
Kefka Indefinitely Unbanned Level: 81 Posts: 2374/3392 EXP: 4826208 For next: 166641 Since: 03-15-04 From: Pomona, CALIFORNIA BABY! Since last post: 4 hours Last activity: 4 hours |
| ||
Originally posted by hhallahhOriginally posted by ZiffskiOriginally posted by hhallahhOriginally posted by Ziffski In regards to America, he was pretty harmless.... Much less harmless than a number of other dictators. |
|||
Dracoon Zelda The temp ban/forum ban bypasser! Level: 84  Posts: 1859/3727 EXP: 5514391 For next: 147561 Since: 03-25-04 From: At home Since last post: 5 hours Last activity: 5 hours |
| ||
| My idea is to just finish up there and get out. We didn't need to go, but it is to late to cry about it. We are almost finished, hopefully, and I really hope we can all just leave the place. Bush isn't the best president, by far, but we have to put up with him, and we will eventually be fine again. Really though, we need to focus on the 6 table treaty thing. (North Korea, South Korea, China, Russia, Japan, and America) So we don't have to worry about a nuclear attack on us. | |||
|
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99 Posts: 1884/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| No, you're there for decades more until the country has a strong enough military to supress the new tide of Islamic Fundamentalism and pro-Hussein sentiment. When you leave it'll only get worse. Ha ha, 6 table talks with 4 countries that hate you. |
|||
Grey the Stampede Don't mess with powers you don't understand. And yes. That means donuts. Level: 82  Posts: 1395/3770 EXP: 5192909 For next: 16318 Since: 06-17-04 From: Kingston, RI, USA, Earth Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
| I agree with Dracoon, it'd be much more prudent for America to strengthen its ties with other nations. It's just logic: If we think of America as one single person, and Russia, Japan, South Korea, etc. as single people, then America can see how good of a person they are through the opinions of the other people. It doesn't matter how good Americans think America is because the view of the average American is skewed in America's favor (or, oftentimes, very far and unfairly against it). If our actions lead to friendship with other countries, then we know that what we're doing is right, as opposed to what we think is right. Right? |
|||
|
Imajin Buster Beetle Level: 34 Posts: 394/452 EXP: 234863 For next: 18788 Since: 03-15-04 From: Kingdom of Zeal Since last post: 39 days Last activity: 53 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Ziffski Wait, four? I understand China and North Korea, and Maybe Russia, but whcih of South Korea or Japan hates us? Or are you impling we hate ourseleves? |
|||
|
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99 Posts: 1885/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Russia China North Korea South Korea Their governments are quite anti-American. |
|||
|
hhallahh Bob-Omb Level: 38 Posts: 459/607 EXP: 365476 For next: 4971 Since: 03-15-04 From: Portland, OR Since last post: 73 days Last activity: 60 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Ziffski Pft. You must be using an incredibly weak standard to catagorize other countries as "hating us". I suppose you'd include pretty much any country except some Eastern European states, if it were possible. And India. France hates us, Canada hates us, Germany hates us, Venezuala hates us, Mexico hates us... what does it mean? (edited by hhallahh on 12-08-04 07:44 PM) |
|||
|
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99 Posts: 1889/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| Do you know what the term botched international relations means? (edited by Ziffski on 12-08-04 07:48 PM) |
|||
|
hhallahh Bob-Omb Level: 38 Posts: 460/607 EXP: 365476 For next: 4971 Since: 03-15-04 From: Portland, OR Since last post: 73 days Last activity: 60 days |
| ||
Originally posted by Ziffski That's what you call it when you end up being invaded by the United States, right? |
|||
|
alte Hexe Star Mario I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night Alive as you and me "But Joe you're ten years dead!" "I never died" said he "I never died!" said he Level: 99 Posts: 1898/5458 EXP: 9854489 For next: 145511 Since: 03-15-04 From: ... Since last post: 2 hours Last activity: 2 hours |
| ||
| You mean when your nation can't sustain any sort of relationship without the threat of sancations and/or military action? | |||
|
Colleen Administrator Level: 136 Posts: 5457/11302 EXP: 29369328 For next: 727587 Since: 03-15-04 From: LaSalle, Quebec, Canada Since last post: 3 hours Last activity: 1 hour |
| ||
Some of those governments might have anti-American sentiments, but at the same time none of them want North Korea to go nuke-crazy... so it's better to go with the devil you know than the devil you don't, to put it one way.  |
|||
MathOnNapkins Math n' Hacks Level: 67  Posts: 1145/2189 EXP: 2495887 For next: 96985 Since: 03-18-04 From: Base Tourian Since last post: 1 hour Last activity: 32 min. |
| ||
| I was just watching CNN for a minute or two, and there was the story about how a journalist used a military proxy to ask a question about adequate armor in the armed forces to Donald Rumsfeld. And then they put on something that made me just want to punch the screen. It was their poll of the day: "Do you think our Troops in Iraq have adequate resources?" Now it sounds innocent enough, but it's a totally pointless question. Here Legion's point about being in the military would actually mean you know more. How the fuck would I know if my troops have enough stuff in Iraq? I'm not over there, and I'm not in the military. Jeez louise. |
|||
|
windwaker Ball and Chain Trooper WHY ALL THE MAYONNAISE HATE Level: 61 Posts: 555/1797 EXP: 1860597 For next: 15999 Since: 03-15-04 Since last post: 4 days Last activity: 6 days |
| ||
| Well, it's probably just to see the opinions of Americans. It's like the poll on CNN.com "Is there a connection between Al-Qaeda and Saddam?" 65% said yes. |
|||
|
MathOnNapkins Math n' Hacks Level: 67 Posts: 1152/2189 EXP: 2495887 For next: 96985 Since: 03-18-04 From: Base Tourian Since last post: 1 hour Last activity: 32 min. |
| ||
| Well, my point is that any opinion gleaned from such a poll is likely to be massively uninformed - in fact it might be mostly colored by party lines / sentiment about the war. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 | Add to favorites | "RSS" Feed | Next newer thread | Next older thread |
| Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - World Affairs / Debate - The war in Iraq, for or against? |
| | |
