-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Controversal Cartoon
- Thread starter jagges84
- Start date
- Status
jdnew
Registered User
Bush is a pimp who knows what he's doing. Want proof, check this out.
http://www.rock103.com/crew/pics/?pow=012004
http://www.rock103.com/crew/pics/?pow=012004
cricechex
Active Member
Guys, guys, guys...I already tried to talk some since into this kid, but it didn't work then and won't work now either. To tell you the truth I kinda feel bad for him after what Patmack said about his 'salty' quote. Anyways, Pat, he's from Cali, that is why he thinks the way he does.
...but then again, I am only a noob...
...but then again, I am only a noob...
WMDs are the only justification for going to war? What legalistic BS. Tell that to the people with familily members in mass graves. Thinking like that is what is wrong with the UN. Those who are enamored with international law need to remember that all law serves the people, not the other way around.
Taxman2A
War were declared.
akamifeldman said:
Incorrect. One of Saddam's strongest weapons during OIF was the propaganda that the US was being imperialist and really wanted to fight the war for oil. If he would have used any WMD the **** would have immediately hit the fan; the US would have been internationally justified, and France, Germany, and all other countries that disagreed with us would have been forced to change their tune. I'm not sure if WMD really did exist in Iraq or not, but the simple fact that he didn't use them doesn't prove anything.
petescheu
Registered User
besides, can you imagine the retaliation if he had used them? military and politically it would have been suicide for saddam. he might be a real jerk, but he is also a very very smart person... he was smarter for burying them in the sand or sending them to syria or whatever it was that he did with them.
You're right, Taxman, one of the biggest hangups in Iraq is a misperception of our intentions. Saddam wasn't the only one who spread the view that we are there for oil. The left-wing peacenik movement did it here, too, as did OBL. The fact that we buy our oil at prices largely influenced by OPEC is, of course, conveniently ignored. And as for the idea of "imperialism," empires don't talk exit strategy, sovereign governments, or June 30th handover deadlines. They just move troops in to stay.
Saddam is not a psychopath. Shoo24 is right by saying that though he may be deluded, he is a very cagey character. That's how he was able to stay in power so long. He knew that if he used unconventional weapons he would throw away what little chance he had against us. Personally, I think the WMD question won't be solved by weapons inspectors, but by historians.
Saddam is not a psychopath. Shoo24 is right by saying that though he may be deluded, he is a very cagey character. That's how he was able to stay in power so long. He knew that if he used unconventional weapons he would throw away what little chance he had against us. Personally, I think the WMD question won't be solved by weapons inspectors, but by historians.
livefast
Registered User
For all of you (not many here) arguing against the war all I have to say is this: The WMD question was a legitimate concern, especially after it was discovered about a month and a half ago that Russia was working with the Iraqi government to develop war heads that would violate UN treaties because of their killing range AND because the Iraqi gov't paid N. Korea a few million dollars advance for nuclear materials (N. Korea ended up screwing Iraq by keeping the money and not giving them anything). And I'm not even going to cite the several instances when Hussein's government has gassed or machine-gunned civilians, or the worse. The bottom line is we have killed or captured over 70 percent of al-Qaeda's and the Taliban's members and leaders in Afghanistan and Iraq and both groups are, as a network, inoperable now. You think we would have had such success without the war in Iraq? The world is a better place without Hussein's goverment, is it not? The war on terror is absolutely justified. You may disagree with me. You'd be wrong.
snizo
Supply Officer
Sorry -- but I saw something and have to backtrack a little bit ...
graymatter said (a while ago) about this cartoon....
Wow! That is a pretty extreme statement.
I admit that I haven't seen the cartoon (doesnt load anymore) so I haven't seen firsthand what you are referring to.
On a similar note - I think burning the flag is absolutely wrong (hey - if you don't like being in this country, you are free to leave), but I would never support any law that bans such an act. Whatever that cartoon was may annoy a lot of people, but everyone in the country has the absolute right to express their thoughts no matter how unpopular they are.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" -Voltaire
graymatter said (a while ago) about this cartoon....
Wow! That is a pretty extreme statement.
I admit that I haven't seen the cartoon (doesnt load anymore) so I haven't seen firsthand what you are referring to.
On a similar note - I think burning the flag is absolutely wrong (hey - if you don't like being in this country, you are free to leave), but I would never support any law that bans such an act. Whatever that cartoon was may annoy a lot of people, but everyone in the country has the absolute right to express their thoughts no matter how unpopular they are.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" -Voltaire
akamifeldman
Interplanetary Ambassador
And I'm going to have to agree with snizo.
As I said before, lets debate the message, not the messenger. Personal attacks on me and my state do nothing but further my dissatisfaction with you and your perspectives.
A few made some points, and I'll respond to those:
Here's a question I've been thinking about lately: Is it our (USA) job to actively spread our way of life/government around the world, or merely to provide the spark for other peoples to take the initiative and have their own revolution? (my thinking is that since the Revolutionary War was fought by our ancestors seeking an end to oppression, and not by an outside power doing what they thought was in our best interest (like what we're doing to Iraq), are we doing our job?) I probably made that too confusing, I'll sum up: Aren't people 'suppposed' to fight for their freedom, not have it given to them by a foreign power "acting in their best interest"?
oh, and 'BTW', my "salty" aviation quote is meant in a joking manner, not in a professional "Standard Operating Procedure" manner...sheesh, bite me already
As I said before, lets debate the message, not the messenger. Personal attacks on me and my state do nothing but further my dissatisfaction with you and your perspectives.
A few made some points, and I'll respond to those:
You're right, nittany, increasing the troop totals by 20,000 is a great exit strategy!
Who's side in this debate are you on? Oh, right, torturing, killing and raping your own people is completely sane...
It is not the only justification, but it's what Bush used! Colin Powell didn't speak to the UN about Saddam's human rights violations, his abuse of the Oil-For-Food program, he spoke about his puported WMDs! You can't change the justification for war after the WH already stated it was about the WMDs!
Here's a question I've been thinking about lately: Is it our (USA) job to actively spread our way of life/government around the world, or merely to provide the spark for other peoples to take the initiative and have their own revolution? (my thinking is that since the Revolutionary War was fought by our ancestors seeking an end to oppression, and not by an outside power doing what they thought was in our best interest (like what we're doing to Iraq), are we doing our job?) I probably made that too confusing, I'll sum up: Aren't people 'suppposed' to fight for their freedom, not have it given to them by a foreign power "acting in their best interest"?
oh, and 'BTW', my "salty" aviation quote is meant in a joking manner, not in a professional "Standard Operating Procedure" manner...sheesh, bite me already
akamifeldman said:
But California is just SO EASY to pick on!
akamifeldman said:
In the Cold War era, it was seen that it was our job to spread democracy to the people of the world. Some peoples don't have the power to fight their government. The Iraqis asked us to help them at the end of Desert Storm, and we didn't. That was a huge mistake of course, but it's history now. Now we've tried to make even. There is a reason we try to let the Iraqis take the fight before we do, why we tried to get them to police, and such. So that their freedom can be seen as their own.
And the French helped us in the Revolution. It wasn't alone.
Most of this argument – I could turn CNN on and hear the same thing. I’m just going to make one simple point. As a life long student in the art of war, there is a concept where there is a balancing act between making a decision and the level of intelligence. If you wait until you have 100% intel, it is to late for action, the enemy force is already in motion. If you make a decision too soon, you will not likely have enough intel. This applies at both the tactical and strategic level.
Most of the people on the right feel that Bush had enough intel to base his decisions. While those on the left feel that he should have gathered more intel.
For the sake of the argument, lets say that WMD are never found. It is besides the point. At the time the decision was made, intel pointed in that direction. Waiting for the U.N. to agree on something would basically mean inaction, which when applied to the use of military, hesitancy is the worst thing. It either has to be a green or red light, the yellow light/beating around the bush type of attitude just allows the problem to persevere.
After watching the Kay interview live, I picked up on a few things that the media seemed to ignore. From the scientific standpoint he made it clear that at some point in time, Iraq would be a very probable threat. If you want to wait around until Sadam teams up with common interests against the U.S., then that is your choice – personally, I would rather see the bastard put down.
One more point, from the tone of your voice I assume you liked Clinton. So what is up with him helping the Albanians out. Why didn’t we just let them die. I mean, if we were to rate a gene pool, they would probably be the bottom of the barrel anyway. Screw helping other people out. As long as people can have butt sex in San Francisco, then that’s all that matters right?
Most of the people on the right feel that Bush had enough intel to base his decisions. While those on the left feel that he should have gathered more intel.
For the sake of the argument, lets say that WMD are never found. It is besides the point. At the time the decision was made, intel pointed in that direction. Waiting for the U.N. to agree on something would basically mean inaction, which when applied to the use of military, hesitancy is the worst thing. It either has to be a green or red light, the yellow light/beating around the bush type of attitude just allows the problem to persevere.
After watching the Kay interview live, I picked up on a few things that the media seemed to ignore. From the scientific standpoint he made it clear that at some point in time, Iraq would be a very probable threat. If you want to wait around until Sadam teams up with common interests against the U.S., then that is your choice – personally, I would rather see the bastard put down.
One more point, from the tone of your voice I assume you liked Clinton. So what is up with him helping the Albanians out. Why didn’t we just let them die. I mean, if we were to rate a gene pool, they would probably be the bottom of the barrel anyway. Screw helping other people out. As long as people can have butt sex in San Francisco, then that’s all that matters right?
- Status