Title: Middle Eastern War
nerdysweet - October 18, 2007 01:35 AM (GMT)
Blech. War is my least favorite thing on the planet. How can we call ourselves civilized when we solve our international disagreements through sending men in to kill each other?
War doesn't determine who's right, but who's left. :/
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 18, 2007 12:32 PM (GMT)
Your first comment is best fit for those whom we are fighting. They have a disagreement with us (they hate western culture, want us to conform to their religion, etc), and they send men (hiding behind women and children) to kill our innocent. No, I don't believe these people are civilized, not in the slightest (this refering to the Jihadists, not the Middle East as a whole).
Of course, America didn't simply barge into the Middle East because we "disagreed" with them, we went in because thousands died at the hands of terrorists, and because seemingly reliable intelligence told us that there was an immenant threat from Saddam (who also harbored terrorists). This isn't killing out f disagreement, it's war in order to protect the innocent and destroy a murderous network of terrorism. I know war doesn't "determine who's right", but I think it can be seen pretty clearly.
nerdysweet - October 19, 2007 12:43 AM (GMT)
Three quotes readily come to mind.
One, which I've already said, is "War doesn't determine who's right, but who's left."
Then there's "An eye for an eye makes us all blind."
And lastly, "Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity."
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 19, 2007 01:59 AM (GMT)
One thing that's always bugged me about the Left is their perception that small quotes of rediculous logic are a good argument. "Impeach Bush", "Bush lied, people died", and so on.
"War doesn't determine who's right, but who's left." - That is only in the immediate sense, history eventually shows the just and unjust nature of each side. This is not saying that war cannot be for a just reason, it only shows that the side who is morally lacking integrity can also win.
"An eye for an eye makes us all blind." - Yes, but when it comes to those who kill innocent American women and children and use their own women and children as shields, I honestly think the eye concept should be abandoned in preference to the protection of the innocent.
"Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity." - Boy, do I hate this one. Totally false. Look at the Police Force fighting against drugs. Are they fighting for peace? Absolutely! Fighting terrorists who wish to kill innocents whether we stay out of their hair or not is most definitely fighting for peace. (here's a good quote, it's used by the Marines; "if you want peace, prepare for war")
nerdysweet - October 19, 2007 02:02 AM (GMT)
Noooo, I beg to differ, Spoons.
But unfortunately, I must away to me sleep-time. I'll dream up a good argument. :D
falloutboylove8 - October 19, 2007 02:08 AM (GMT)
nerdy have you ever read (heard ect.) the speech "Give me Liberty or give me Death!" it is so powerful and moving, its about he we shouldnt just sit back against the wall while there is injustice in the world. its about how its our duty (a Roman concept formed) to fight for what we believe.
ever heard of "Might is Right"
sadly in the middle east this is how they function and it is wrong, there are people killed every day for idk, showing their wrist, not doing the exact temple rituals, ridiculous stuff.
in America we have found a wonderfull thing called freedim, why not use it and share it?
nerdysweet - October 19, 2007 10:28 PM (GMT)
Other governments, no matter how evil they are, are really none of our business unless the other country CHOOSES to make it our business. I don't think the entire world should think the same things that Americans do.
falloutboylove8 - October 20, 2007 09:12 PM (GMT)
true nerdy, our ideas shouldnt be forced on people but should they still be an option? these people have no choice on whether they want to be oppressed.
nerdysweet - October 20, 2007 11:52 PM (GMT)
Who would want to be oppressed? lol America does not mean "the whole world's ideas". America means a strip of land in North America who thinks that they are always right.
cosmobeak - October 21, 2007 03:49 AM (GMT)
I agree. Political ideologies are are best figured out by a country by itself, no matter how long it takes. It's kind of like listening to your parents :lol:, they tell you to wear a coat when it's cold again and again, and it's not until you actually get sick that you actually take their advice.
I think their something ridiculously wrong that people feel that military enforcing freedom does anything. What message are we trying to get across, exactly? Adopt Democracy, Be Free or we'll shoot you? That seems extraordinarily hypocritical to me.
nerdysweet - October 21, 2007 05:00 PM (GMT)
Yes. "Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity." Ahhhh, I love that quote. :P
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 21, 2007 05:14 PM (GMT)
"Other governments, no matter how evil they are, are really none of our business..." Ok Nerdy, in that case, who cares about Darfur? None of our business if dictators are killing thousands upon thousands. What kind of logic is that? Fyi, Iraq wasn't entirely about the murderous dictatorship of Saddam, we also saw an immenent threat. And we gave Iraq Democracy, which gives the people of Iraq the ability to choose their own government while we work with them and assist in their growth as a peaceful country with those who would want it destroyed along with America attempting just that every day.
cosmobeak - October 21, 2007 06:14 PM (GMT)
I'm pro-war for that reason, and that reason only! I'm glad we got Saddam and stopped the terrible things that was doing! However forcing them to become a Democracy just promotes this image of the US as even bigger elitists if that's possible. There are other governments! And I love Democracy as much as the next guy, but we can't say it's the only one that works, because it's not.
nerdysweet - October 21, 2007 07:05 PM (GMT)
The people in Iraq hate us for coming in and reforming their government.
If the people in Darfur ASK for our help, we should give it. But it's not really our business if they don't feel that they want it or need it. (Now, how they would ASK for our help, I have no idea...) But it's not America's job to save the world.
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 21, 2007 07:57 PM (GMT)
Nerdy, that is the most ill informed comment I've ever heard from you. Do you have selective amnesia when it comes to the icredible number of people who went to vote on election day in Iraq, and the smiling citizens proudly showing their purple thumbs to the camara? No government is immediately super-effective, including that of the USA in it's youth. I don't think the Government here was very good until the original Constitution (The Letters of Confederation) was replaced with the Constitution we have today, which took a couple decades.
I realize that other governmental systems have worked aside from Democracy. The biblical government of Israel set by God Himself was that of kings, bloodlines, and no ballot boxes. The point of giving Iraq Democracy is that they are able to choose another government after things have settled if they so choose. We're just working with them in this tough start for a country surrounded by terrorists.
Oh, and we never threatened to kill Iraqis to accept Democracy with anything, much less death. You guys need to stop making comments that are out of touch with reality and make you look extreme.
nerdysweet - October 21, 2007 08:09 PM (GMT)
I don't really care if I "look extreme" if that's my opinion.
But you really do have a point with that. I accept that I was wrong on that point.
falloutboylove8 - October 21, 2007 08:20 PM (GMT)
we dont have to force them to become a democracy, we are mainly over there trying to establish any form of government now. if we all the sudden left they would probably fall and it would go back to the way it was with illegal bombs, persecution, ect. yes sometimes we need to let them find out for themselves, like with our parents. but you dont let a 4 year old cross the street alone so they can learn. no you hold their hand and help them.
nerdysweet - October 21, 2007 08:32 PM (GMT)
Well, now that we're in there we can't just back out. And Spoons reminded me that they are generally pretty happy about getting a representative democracy. But the entire war was unjustified. We could have found a peaceful way to bring Saddam to justice.
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 21, 2007 08:49 PM (GMT)
That's all hind-sight, nothing we can do about that. Saddam was shown to be an extreme threat by our intelligence from multiple reliable sources, was also a supporter of terrorists, and on top of that a mass murderer. Although going in without there being WMDs was not the best outcome, the countless bodies of those murdered by Saddam and his rape rooms justfy it, even if it didn't turn out being as smart a decision as it seemed at first (to next to all of Congress, fyi).
cosmobeak - October 21, 2007 09:08 PM (GMT)
The boy that says evolution is all lies is calling us extreme?
I didn't say that's what we were doing, if you read my post it's the impression we're giving that's the issue. What conclusion would you come to if you were in a different country and you heard that MILITARY TROOPS were helping Iraq adopt democracy? It's not a good thing, my friend.
nerdysweet - October 21, 2007 09:10 PM (GMT)
Yes. But I am a crazy pacifist (lol) and war is never ever right. We should have just found a better way to do it, that's all. So many people have died for a war that has just gone on way too long.
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 22, 2007 12:37 AM (GMT)
Cosmo, you are taking words out of my mouth. I never said that "evolution is all lies" as you claim, I said some of the evidence presented for it in our textbooks is false and I personally argue that it is bad science.
Oh, the fact that those oh so scary "MILITARY TROOPS" are doing their best to protect the Iraqi people from Islamic extremists, and have sacrificed many of their own lives in that mission is irrelevent?
One thing I've found about Pacifism is that it demands the impossible, like successful negotiations with terrorists. People need to come to realize that we live in a fallen world, and that there are those (like those we are fighting) who have no interest in peace. Instead, they use their own women and children as shields, and when they die because of their evil, they use that as ammunition against those who are protecting the innocent instead of deliberately putting them in harms way.
cosmobeak - October 22, 2007 12:40 AM (GMT)
I wasn't bashing the troops, sir. I actually have one of those support the troops stickers on my door. The thing is, is that from a different perspective it looks terrible having our military enforcing their democracy.
And I'm sorry. I guess that was a cheap shot with the evolution thing. You just need to stop calling opinions that aren't yours ridiculous. It's getting obnoxious.
nerdysweet - October 22, 2007 12:42 AM (GMT)
I think the troops are doing a really brave job. In no way am I blaming them for the war. I blame the politicians, the draft-dodgers in the air-conditioned rooms, that send these boys off to die. True, they did sign up for the military, but the whole war is, let's say... misplaced. They aren't putting in the effort where they should.
Can't we at least try to negotiate??
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 24, 2007 01:11 PM (GMT)
Do you understand who you'd be trying to negotiate with? These are people who believe SO STRONGLY that anyone of Western heritage should die that they kill themselves in the process, using women and children as human shields. Not only would they ignore negotiations (because all they want is us dead), I would not want us to negogiate with such a barbaric group of people.
nerdysweet - October 24, 2007 11:59 PM (GMT)
So you're saying that if someone seems barbaric we are just going to kill them? I am not trying to defend what they have done, but think of the Ameridians. We slaughtered them by the millions and they were just trying to protect their way of life.
Two wrongs don't make a right, Spoons.
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 25, 2007 02:18 AM (GMT)
You don't understand what I mean. It's not that negotiations are bad and that brute force is preferable, that's completely wrong. The point is that these people we are fighting are not interested in any way, shape, or form in negotiations. When what they desire is for western culture to be destroyed, and force an Islamo-Fascist mentality on the world, and kill those who don't embrace it, the option of negotiations is long gone. These people are un-negotiatable (probably not a word, lol). And it's not that they seem barbaric, they ARE barbaric. Not much makes my blood boil more than hearing people like Cindy Sheehan (sp?) refering to terrorists as "freedom fighters". So yeah, I hope you see my point. Negotiations would be nice, if these people would stop blowing themselves up long enough to listen.
nerdysweet - October 26, 2007 12:23 AM (GMT)
The Sons of Liberty were terrorists.
You're right, though. They're not being reasonable. But this war has resulted in so many unnecessary deaths on both sides.
Besides, it's common knowledge that this war was an excuse to raise gas prices and get Haliburton rich.
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 26, 2007 03:42 AM (GMT)
No, that's a myth in the highest order. Yet another Liberal bumper-sticker too, or at least a chant at protests (*Haliburton!*). Come on, it's about a major threat to our country and terrorism, not crack-pot Liberal conspiracies claiming that it's all about oil and money. I honestly thought you were smarter than that.
-x-Crushed-x- - October 26, 2007 07:35 PM (GMT)
Excuse me for bardging in on your debate but I though that the war on "terror" was supposed to be based in Afganistan. You know finding Osama, stoping the group of people who hate Western cutlture. How we got pulled into Iraq, I don't know. I keep remenbering that whenever I see debates like this there is always someone saying " if we pull out now we will look weak." No we will turn down the knotch on our country's "jack ass-o-meter." Nerdy (i think) said something earlier about how we shouldn't (ugh stupid typos) be runing into other countries to "help" them if they didn't ask for it first. I agree with that alot. I mean to us it might seem like help but to the country we are entering it seems like we are sticking our noses were they don't belong. Spoon some people's opinions on the war aren't "crack-pot Liberal conspiracies." In fact alot of these "conspiracies" make alot of sense. Why are we in Iraq? To help them into a democracy. Did you ever think that a democracy isn't the best type of government for them, or perhaps there might be some more peacful way to help them?
nerdysweet - October 27, 2007 12:12 AM (GMT)
x-Crushed-x, that is PRECISELY what I am talking about. Thank you for wording it more eloquently than I could.
-x-Crushed-x- - October 27, 2007 12:20 AM (GMT)
I don't think I totaly understand what "eloquently" means (if it means nice, ah ha i spelt like half of every sentence wrong) but your welcome & I'm flattered.
nerdysweet - October 27, 2007 01:23 AM (GMT)
Eloquently is something akin to "poetically" or "persuadingly". :D
You are quite welcome. :D
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 27, 2007 02:07 AM (GMT)
Those Iraqis at the voting booth beaming with happiness at their freedom of the vote, and those Iraqis chasing the head of Saddam through the streets, hitting him in the face with their shoes? Oh yes, they seemed really pissed at us for "sticking our noses where they don't belong." Not to mention we brought them out from under the rule of a tyranical dictator and mass murderer of his own people. How can we have such nerve?! Come on.
nerdysweet - October 27, 2007 02:19 AM (GMT)
No, Spoons, I see what you mean. (No need to resort to sarcasm.) The majority of the Iraqis were very very happy about their new Democracy, which is great! But the entire war has been removed from its original intention, which is to hunt down the people who caused 9/11 and "bring them to justice". But it's grown into something it wasn't originally supposed to be. We should have declared a seperate war.
The main point is, America thinks it is always right. We all do.
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 27, 2007 03:24 AM (GMT)
Incorrect. Operation Iraqi Freedom was for the purpose of overthrowing the murderous dictatorship of Saddam and assisting the Iraqi people in the foundation of a new democratic government, and it is just that. Saddam supported terrorists (directly or indirectly, he did), and did have WMDs at one time (heck, he used them on his own people), and there was well-grounded reasons to believe he possesed them in 2003. Not to mention there actually was and is significant terrorist activity in Iraq, also needing opposition. These are all reasons to invade that Congress accepted. That is what the Iraq War was, and is, about.
nerdysweet - October 28, 2007 12:19 AM (GMT)
Uh huhhhhhh. Where are those WMDs, then?
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 28, 2007 02:13 AM (GMT)
Are you going to try and deny that Saddam used chemical weapons (gases) that could kill thousands at a time on his own people (specifically the Kurds), which is a documented fact? He used those gases, and we found them in Iraq when we invaded (along with the bodies of tens of thousands of people to boot). I'm sorry if that's not destructive enough for you. Based on those weapons, countless sources of intelligence, and Saddam's attempts of creating nuclear weapons in the past, we were almost certain he was doing so again. Yes, there are no nukes (that were found, at least), but that was one of countless reasons to invade.
(btw, yet another stereotypical Leftist pot-shot about the WMDs, way to stick to the Liberal songsheet :rolleyes: )
nerdysweet - October 28, 2007 02:26 AM (GMT)
Ah, no problem.
Besides, I'm not that liberal. I am for capitalism and a smaller government, which would be closer to Republican views, wouldn't it?
Anyway, my main point is that war is always stupid and wrong. I am standing by my view that there was a better way to do this. This war killed off all our reasonable American boys along with Al Qaeda.
xThereIsNoSpoonx90 - October 28, 2007 12:20 PM (GMT)
Nerdy, that's where your logic runs dry, because although war is and always should be the last option, alot of times it is innevitable, and even necesarry. WWII is one good example of a necesarry war, there was no way around it except to fight it. I believe WWI was more of a pointless war resulting from a simple buildup of pressure due to power increases on all sides. The pressure finally was too much, and it exploded into WWI. However, when it comes to Saddam and terrorists, I find that the war is a necesary action, but feel free to disagree with me.