The war on Terror

JustSumDude
Posts: 657
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 09:52
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

Post by JustSumDude » 29 Oct 2005 07:06

<span style='font-family:tahoma'><span style='color:green'>The ends don't justify the means. Whether or not Iraq benefits down the line from this war in no way changes the fact that the United States sold this war on a lie.</span></span>

steampunk
Posts: 132
Joined: 16 Sep 2004 00:55

Post by steampunk » 29 Oct 2005 09:34

I don't agree, JSD, that the war was sold on a lie - but I do agree it was sold in an extremely poor manner. Yes, the intelligence was incorrect (Iraq having weapons of mass destruction), but to call it a lie gets too close to a conspiracy theory to me. Given that the Clinton administration, John Kerry, most of Congress, the UK, France, Germany, and Russia all believed that Saddam was hiding WMDs - they all happened to be wrong - I wouldn't label that a lie. Wrong? Yes. A lie? No. Hell, he was moving stuff around his country and burying stuff in the sand during the whole standoff - why would he act like that if he didn't want the world to be suspicious? (I just hope the Hajis in Syria didn't get anything "good"... :()

I would have rather heard the more fundamental reasons to enter Iraq were: first, to give an example to other tin-pot despots (like Qhaddafi, who immediately yelped), and second, to begin to reform the region, and third, to give us a staging area in the Middle East to directly combat terrorists and rogue regimes. Saddam had nothing to do with September 11th, but he was a dictator who had the capability to start up a WMD program once the sanctions were lifted and he had strong ties to terrorism.

And I could give two fucks about whether Iraq benefits from this invasion and rebuilding. If they are able to govern themselves in a manner that makes their young men less willing to become terrorists, and their example shows the way to that entire region (mainly Saudi), and the financial and logistical support for terrorism is hampered, then I'll be satisfied.

What was the solution if it wasn't to invade Iraq? Was it to invade Afghanistan, stop there, and go back to treating this entire thing like a crime and not a war? Was it to keep up the sanctions? Twelve years of sanctions (and UN corruption) weren't long enough - we should have gone for another eight? From the time of the Iranian hostage crisis, we treated terrorism like a crime and we've shown tyrrants how tough we are through a corrupt United Nations and hole-ridden sanctions. And the only thing we've got is the USS Cole bombed and two embassies destroyed and Khobar Towers destroyed and the World Trade Center bombed and the World Trade Center destroyed and the Pentagon damaged and a big smoking crater in a field in rural Pennsylvania.

JustSumDude
Posts: 657
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 09:52
Location: Orange County, CA
Contact:

Post by JustSumDude » 29 Oct 2005 17:15

steampunk wrote:I could give two fucks about whether Iraq benefits from this invasion and rebuilding.
<span style='font-family:tahoma'><span style='color:green'>This is the only thing that rings true in your entire post. If you truly "don't give two fucks", then do us all a favor and go gawk at some celeb hi-res and stop subjecting us to your Bush ass-kissing in this thread.</span></span>

UncleMao
Posts: 401
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 12:30
Location: The Heart of the Proletariat

Post by UncleMao » 29 Oct 2005 18:02

Yeah. Mr. Junior KKK. Kabbalah reading mothe... (ok the rest doesnt really apply here) [/American History X]

steampunk
Posts: 132
Joined: 16 Sep 2004 00:55

Post by steampunk » 29 Oct 2005 21:28

<!--QuoteBegin-steampunk+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(steampunk)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Hell, even if they can't supply facts, I'd love to see the anti-war side give a multi-point plan on exactly how they would counter the terrorists directly while reducing the breeding of new terrorists.

What was the solution if it wasn't to invade Iraq?
[/quote]
JustSumDude wrote:<span style='font-family:tahoma'><span style='color:green'>. . . do us all a favor and go gawk at some celeb hi-res and stop subjecting us to your Bush ass-kissing in this thread.</span></span>
Thanks for answering my question, JSD. *thumbs up*

UncleMao
Posts: 401
Joined: 17 Jun 2004 12:30
Location: The Heart of the Proletariat

Post by UncleMao » 29 Oct 2005 22:40

Yeah punk. Too much talkababble and not enough pr0n

steampunk
Posts: 132
Joined: 16 Sep 2004 00:55

Post by steampunk » 29 Oct 2005 22:54

Sorry.

Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests