To Avoidroids: What kind of reply is that? I state a legitamite difference of opinion and you come back with some played-out 60’s chant. Why are we at war with Iraq? Do you really believe he is a legitamite threat to the U.S.? If so, why? Let’s engage in a debate instead of resorting to personal attacks.
scall144 , I basically agree with everything you’ve written on here. Like I said I don’t necessarily disagree with going to war, just the nature and the circumstances under which we are doing it. It is also frustrating to me that people truly believe this administration is doing what it is doing for altruistic reasons.
I agree that we are doing this to be a safer nation. But there is a misconception that those that want to hurt us hate us for no reason. This is not true. They hate us for specific reasons. Already many of the people on this forum hate the French for simply disagreeing with us. Imagine if they bombed portions of the U.S., and their troops occupied portions of our country. We would fight them right? Terrorist attacks against civilians on our land are in NO WAY justified, and the people that carried the out should be found and punished, but are we really too proud to acknowledge that we did things to make people hate us?
I feel that the agressiveness and arrogance on the world stage is just a step in the wrong direction. This is what angers people to the point that they want to kill Americans. They want to hurt us because they believe we are evil, so to stop that we keep doing the things that make them hate us? What would really make me feel safer is if we played a central, active role in the creation of a fair palestenian state and we removed our troops from place they are not wanted, such as Saudi Arabia. My list also includes the elimination of the Al Qaeda organization, and the disarmament of the North Korean regime. The disarmament of Iraq is also on the list, but further down.
DocT, I’m sorry if I came off with a “holier than thou attidtude.” I see how I did come off that way and I seriously apologize for that. In presenting the fact that we provided the UN with forged documents I just want to make sure that people know about this. This is not a conspiracy theory, we have admitted this fact. You used a quote to point out the Colin Powell claims we didnt know the documents were forged. This essentially means that either we knowingly gave false documents, or we didnt know and thus didnt bother verifying evidence we presented to the UN. In either case, there should be some acknowledgement of what happened. It’s disturbing to me that our administration might be using evidence but not bothering to verify it. I have the same issue with the Aluminum tubing we used as evidence. I provided you with quotes in which both our Vice President and National Security Advisor saying that the tubes were not useful for any other purpose except for enriching uranium, but then the weapons inspectors found evidence that proves otherwise. This is disconcerting to me.
If we have solid evidence, then why use a piece that we didnt even bother verifying? Because it would give up “sources”? Are these the same “sources” we pay for information that gave us the forged documents? Or gave us the lead on the Aluminum tubes? I just find it impossible to believe we couldn’t produce one solid piece of evidence to give the world. I agree that it is not our responsiblity to prove the existence of WMD to the world, it is Saddam’s. But if we have solid evidence that will keep the world from hating us than fucking show it! If we don’t have solid smoking gun evidence than admit it.
Yes it is possible that major media outlets (CNN, ABCNews, FoxNews)in the U.S. are fabricating quotes from senior officials, but I personally don’t believe that.
It is disconcerting to me that there are people that really believe that the Iraqis have been happy in “every town we’ve gone in.” That is simply not true. I provided you with an account from a reporter in Safwan that experienced firsthand the people’s frustration with our troops’ presense. This reporter was not from antiwar.com, or liberal-rag.com, this was the same reporter that was present the day before when our media was covering them dancing in the street. Are you saying that you believe his account of the people dancing in the street because it fits what you want to believe, but then believe that overnight he bacme a biased source not worth listening to? I want people to acknowledge that not everyone is dancing in the street over there, many of them are unhappy we are there. This does not mean we shouldn’t be there (arguably), and it does not mean that they will not be better off in the future. It just means let’s be honest, lots of innocent Iraqi people are not happy we are there.
To scall144: I see CNN on a daily basis. I watch FoX News. I have had subscriptions to NR, American Spectator, and the Weekly Standard. I visit World Net Daily as well as Znet. So my perspective is not a narrow as you might think. In fact I would say it is far more broad than 95% of the people who post on the off-topic forum. I’ve been mentioning anti-war.com because they have consistently come out with the best columns. They have plenty of links to other mainstream and alternative news sources. From reading your posts you seem like a patient person who doesn’t fall back on personal attacks. So with being said why don’t you just check out anti-war.com just for the hell of it. There you can see the source of the other perspective.
Yes, your right I didn’t mention the attrocities commited by the VC. Primarily because I’m concerned with our governmnets actions and the atrocites that our being committed in our name. That comes first, what can we do to prevent the wrongs that are being perpetrated by this nations leadership.
You talk about the soldiers who returned to extreme hatred but failed to mention all the soldiers who came back to join the protestors. There are still Vietnam vets and Gulf War vets who are protesting the present war. (By the way, I thought that the congress only had the power to declare war?) As a side note, a lot of the soldiers were already hooked on drugs before they came back.
I will say this war is not JUST about oil but, for power, money, oil and making the world safe for Isreal. What legitamite threat does Iraq pose to the U.S.? Just because we live within the borders of the only superpower doesn’t mean that the people who run this country aren’t punchdrunk in their own hubris to desire more. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
The measures taken after 9/11 were ostensibly put into place to supposedly protect us but they will only serve those in power to get even more control over the masses. All that “we must give up freedom in order to protect freedom” is non-sensical and very dangerous. Again doesn’t it seem ironic that we are supposedly “liberating” the people of Iraq but are losing more and more freedoms at home? Very strange indeed. Something is rotten in the U.S.
DocT: “‘they’re reported by every single news source that’s ever existed’ yet you cannot provide one credible link to what you claim.”
Humor me with specifics. I provided you with links to articles by FOXnews, CNN, ABCNews, Washington Times, MSNBC, etc… None of these sources are credible?
All I claimed is that the US submitted forged documents. If my sources were not credible, that implies you still do not believe we submitted false documetns. But you seem to now agree that that is a fact, whether knowingly or unknowingly. So the link I provided was credible, was it not? Did you know we had submitted forged documents before I posted this? It’s clear that you take Colin Powell at face value when he says he didnt know it was forged, I do too to an extent, but I think that us not verifying this evidence is not excusable. I think people should know this happened.
I provided you to links about aluminum tubing that contains quotes from our officials and contradicting quotes from IAEA officials. Are you suggesting by saying they are not credible that all of these sources are fabricating quotations? I don’t believe that. Are you saying you believe Dick Cheney over the IAEA officials? That’s fine, I just wanted to bring it to your attention that the contradiction of information existed.
I provided you with sources in Safwan that reported Iraqi reaction to our troops that contradicts what many people believe. Do you believe those reporters from ABCNews and CNN were lying about their experiences? Then you must also believe they were lying the day before when they said the iraqi people greeted the troops, correct? I don’t believe they are lying. That brings to our attention a question, why were they happy when the troops were present, but then openly unhappy once the armed troops had left?
To Mark,
You are correct that congress is the only branch of the government that can declare war, (I don’t remember me posting anything disputing this)and we have not actually delcared war since ww2(I am fairly certain about that). I do not understand the relevance of this discussion however.
Now to more recent developments, as you probably have already heard a “huge” chemical weapons facility has just been seized by coalition forces 100 miles SE of Baghdad shrouded in camoflauge. This is fairly substantial evidence that Iraq poses a serious terrorist threat, and yes it is a terrorist threat since they would be targeting civilians with an attack which is the definition of terrorism.
If Iraq did not intend to use these weapons on Americans why would they produce them?? Possibly to attack the Kurds (this is called Genocide), or in warfare( a direct violation of the Geneva convention). In either case this would warrant the removal of this dictatorship, unless an individual does not value human life.
As far as my diversifacation of news sources I have been to antiwar.com, I read the NYTIMEs, and occasionally even watch network news.
Corruption exists in all facets in every government. The only differnece is in Democracy you can elect the lesser of two evils, the Iraqi people do not have this option. It is no shock that they cheer the American troops in most instances.
“The U.S. military has secured a facility in southern Iraq which Pentagon officials say may have been used to produce chemical weapons. The officials cautioned that it wasn’t clear what suspicious materials were at the facility, located in Najaf, about 90 miles south of Baghdad.”
In which source did you find that it was a “huge” plant that definitely produced chemicals? I pray that they can determine without a doubt chemicals were produced there. Smoking gun evidence is probably the best chance of getting back the good will extended to us from the world post 9/11.
To Mark:
We are at war with Iraq because they have violated numerous sanctions in a war that they lost 10 years ago. Because of that treaty they are not supposed to be producing wmd’s. They were also supposed to destroy their chemical and anthrax stockpiles, but they didn’t. They couldn’t come up with any proof or documentation of this. To me, that is enough of a reason to be over there. Are we supposed to just let Saddam keep on violating this treaty?
To Realest,
The “huge” quote came from a senior official in the pentagon, and the Iraqis are claiming it was a pesticide factory. Most pesticide factories are not in the middle of the desert camoflagued and fenced in with barbed wire.
Realest and Mark:
I have debated this subject often and forcefully. My reasons for supporting the administration’s course are as broad as they are heart-felt. Now that we are at war, I think that you both should think seriously about supporting the troops and the President. The last thing these brave people need to see is dissent. They are supporting your right to do everything. I for one, will honor their sacrifice and courage.
Mark and Realest, let’s cut to the chase. Does saddam possess weapons of mass destruction? Does he use them? Does he verify the current existence or the destruction of weapons WE KNOW (AND HE ADMITTED TO HAVING) prior to the UN’s departure in 1998? Does he invade neighbors in his quest for regional conquest? Does he offer suicide bomber’s families $36,000 if a family member attacks Israel? Has he fired on or invaded four of his neighbors? Has he tried to assassinate our former President? Does he murder, rape, and torture his own people? Does he divert humanitarian aid and use it to build elaborate palaces and bunkers?
If you answer yes to any of these questions, then your arguments become specious. If you answer yes, and then still disagree with our course of action, then you are beyond persuasion.
By the way, the iraqi UN ambassador has said publically that most of the United States citizenry is against the war in iraq. This is as tragic as it is untrue. You must not give comfort to the regime or provide false hope to the iraqi soldiers. By providing a united front, we encourage their soldiers to give up the struggle. No one can hope to defeat a united America. Therefore, please join me in presenting a united front to our enemies.
Mark, I don’t know what you are ranting about but I have never addressed a reply to you. Realest is at least entertaining so I read his posts. I had to go way back on this thread to find yours and still have not bothered to read it all. Should you ever attain the level with which I hold Realist, I may respond to you. Until then, Mark who?
TheRealest is right about everything he says. The UK government plagiarised a PhD thesis written by an Iraqi grad student at Cambridge in 1991 on the state of Iraq BACK THEN. & I don’t think most people are saying that removing Hussein is wrong, it’s whether or not the USA has the unilateral right to remove him without the blessing of the international community (ie the UN).
& the USA lost the Vietnam War because the Vietnamese used guerila warfare, which the USA wasn’t used to. “They attack, we retreat, they rest, we attack” is the 4-step process. The USA was fighting like it was a war for territory & the Vietnamese was fighting to kill the Americans. I’d say so many Vietnamese died because the USA dumped 20,000,000 gallons of Agent Orange all over the country, which could have easily been a chemical weapon even if wasn’t intended to be one.
To Say,
The realest is a very intelligent person with correct facts, and you seem to be as well.
To address the issues you raised: The preamble of the constitution gives us the unilateral right to remove Saddam Huessein from power. Furthermore we are not the sole country involved in this war, the coalition is comprised of over 35 nations. If you could find me any precedent pre dating our constitution that requires our foreign policy to follow the guidelines and opinions of France, Germany, and Russia I would be interested in hearing it.
The intentional or unintentional use of forged documents is of a major concern to this nation and could call to question the crediablity of our leadership. It is unexcussable. This does not mean however that the war is not justified.
Here it is in plain English: “Although the preamble is not a source of power for any department of the Federal Government…” etc. & Why aren’t there more people in the USA with dirty bombs? Aren’t they protected by the 2nd amendment?
TO SAY,
People like you anger me, why because they take a quote out of context and use it to further their argument. Before you point out that you did include an elipsis I will mention the little effort it took me to include the entire quote(cut and paste) and therby alow people to make their own judgement on an issue.
"Although the preamble is not a source of power for any department of the Federal Government, 1 the Supreme Court has often referred to it as evidence of the origin, scope, and purpose of the Constitution. 2 ‘‘Its true office,’’ wrote Joseph Story in his COMMENTARIES, ‘‘is to expound the nature and extent and application of the powers actually conferred by the Constitution, and not substantively to create them. For example, the preamble declares one object to be, ‘to provide for the common defense.’ No one can doubt that this does not enlarge the powers of Congress to pass any measures which they deem useful for the common defence. But suppose the terms of a given power admit of two constructions, the one more restrictive, the other more liberal, and each of them is consistent with the words, but is, and ought to be, governed by the intent of the power; if one could promote and the other defeat the common defence, ought not the former, upon the soundest principles of interpretation, to be adopted?’’
If you would like me to comb through the entire Constitution and and reference the numerous instances where it is stated we as a nation have the duty to protect our selves I will, but I will probably not be finished until the year 2020.
NOw onto your brillant argument regarding our second amendment. I will give you an exerp from it (notice how do not claim to post the entire portion of it and really only the post that aides my POV) “being necessary to the security of a free state…” I think we may all agree civilian possession of “dirty bombs” are not “neccessary to the security of a free state.”
Just a few thoughts…
I want to say that i am not anti-American. Furthermore i am former military. so here goes.
Who is the Only Country to actually “USE” Weapons of Mass Destruction?
What country massacred at least 2 indigeonous peoples in their greed for expansion?
Who routinely attempts to moralize their interference in other country’s politics?
I appreciate the freedoms this country grants to it’s citizens-more than some,having actually been involved in helping defend them. I am not anti-war. I only wish that We would not drag morality into a purely political arena.
Those who do not learn history’s LESSONS are doomed to repeat them ad nauseum.
For all the people opposed to the war saying that they are well-read in a broad base of media sources. If you’re so learned I suggest you go to rushlimbaugh.com and help broaden your knowledge base.
Also, just a little quote that I heard “America to UN: ‘I brought you into this world, and I can take you out of it.’”
To Pitt,(and others who do not check their facts)
To say we are the only nation to use weapons of mass destruction is moronic, you apparently do not know what WMD are (chemical, nuclear, biological). The truth is chemical weapons were used in trench warfare during WW1 by both the US and Germany, Iraq has commited mass genocide with chemical weapons against the Kurds, and the USSR has used chemical weapons in WW2 and most likely used them against the Chechynians(although this is not confirmed) just to name a few. Please check you facts, I make an effort to put logical arguments up on this board and the last thing we need is fallacy entering into the mix.
To Avoidroids: Check back on 3/22. You wrote a message with a quote taken right out of my post.
To scall144: The point I’m trying to make has to do with the continuing circumvention of our Constitution by our supposed “leaders”. They know what they are doing is wrong ,but they don’t care and that should mean something to all patriots. It also has a lot to do with the ignorance of the public. It is a sad state of affairs. So why put so much trust into people who are continually taking away our freedoms?
Many other countries have WMD so why focus on Iraq? Should we invade every country that posses these weapons?
Iraq did not use these weapons during the first Gulf War. Why?
What about our own government who murdered The Branch Davidians? I don’t hear you mentioning that?
There are 3rd party choices out there. The corruption in the 2 major parties is endemic and too far gone. They love your “lesser of two evil” arguements because it keeps you voting for these crooks.
If Iraq is such a threat then why aren’t their neighbors so frightened of them, but the U.S. - which is 1/2 a world away - somehow percieves them as a grave threat. This is balderdash!
To United States=good people: I will only support someone if I beleive they are doing something right, not because he is the President.
What freedoms are the troops protecting by invading Iraq? If your really worried about our freedoms then take a good look at this administration because they are doing their best to get rid of them. Just to name a few Patriot ActI, II, etc…
Iraq may have weapons of mass destruction but so do we and a lot of other countries. Are we supposed to invade them as well? Is the CIA not involved in the assasination of political leaders? Well, I know there is a law saying we aren’t supposed to but we routinely break it. Has the U.S. not been involved in the murder of it’s own citizens(Waco)? The econcomic sanctions put on Iraq by the U.S. has done nothing for the people and only helped to keep Saddam in power. Does he invade other countries? Yes. But what about the U.S.? Do we? Yes we do. Look at Korea, Vietnam, grenada…
All the things you say about Iraq are terrible and most likely true. However, you fail to see that your own government has done much the same. It’s this blind hypocracy that really bothers me.
The U.S. is good and middlle east people are baaaaddd. It’s this caveman mentallity that has to go if we are to look at this situation as objectionable as possible.
So if I do not think this war is morally just, then how can I join you in good conscience?