Would you prefer we lose the war in Iraq?

MLC2006

Heineken Helen wrote:

But what about that whole freedom of speech thing? Just cos YOU think a certain way or even feel STRONGLY about it, doesn't mean we're not entitled to think differently.

I'm looking out for this person by telling them how ignorant they look claiming that the military doesn't do anything for them. I never said anything about or against freedom of speech. they are free to sound as stupid as they want, and others are free to point out their stupidity.

I also don't know what you mean by "think differently". whether or not the military benefits the citizens is not an opinion up for discussion, it's a fact, and to try to claim otherwise is ignorance.

Heineken Helen

MLC2006 wrote:

I'm looking out for this person by telling them how ignorant they look claiming that the military doesn't do anything for them. I never said anything about or against freedom of speech. they are free to sound as stupid as they want, and others are free to point out their stupidity.

I also don't know what you mean by "think differently". whether or not the military benefits the citizens is not an opinion up for discussion, it's a fact, and to try to claim otherwise is ignorance.

No it's still opinion, and one I happen to agree on but don't claim those who disagree with you are ignorant because THAT in itself is ignorance. The American army in Iraq aren't doing much for your country right now and THAT is a fact. All that's happening is you're gathering more enemies, so if you think that's a good thing, well then I guess they ARE doing lots for ya.

El_Kabong

MLC2006 wrote:

here's what they're doing for you, genius. they're volunteering so that there doesn't have to be a draft, so that YOU don't have to join. if there weren't a voluntary military, there would be a draft (because nations must have armies, since this isn't fantasy world) and then it could be YOU found mutilated yesterday in Iraq instead of 2 who volunteered for it.

I'm not saying you need to be some flag waving, chest thumping patriot that bows down and kisses the feet of the military. but maybe at least show a little respect where it's due or have enough intelligence to keep the mouth shut. to say they're not doing anything for you is just complete ignorance.

they are not doing it so we won't have to go...that's just a byproduct of their numerous decisions on joining (like it, nothing else around them, only way to college, want to travel...) i doubt anyone says 'i want to join so no one else will have to!'

and i think the majority of ppl here wouldn't mind serving their country, the key word is 'country', not serving the corproate interests of the administration, their friends and their investors.

El_Kabong

MLC2006 wrote:

I'm looking out for this person by telling them how ignorant they look claiming that the military doesn't do anything for them. I never said anything about or against freedom of speech. they are free to sound as stupid as they want, and others are free to point out their stupidity.

i think it was this:
'at least show a little respect where it's due or have enough intelligence to keep the mouth shut.'

Pegasus

MLC2006 wrote:

here's what they're doing for you, genius. they're volunteering so that there doesn't have to be a draft, so that YOU don't have to join. if there weren't a voluntary military, there would be a draft (because nations must have armies, since this isn't fantasy world) and then it could be YOU found mutilated yesterday in Iraq instead of 2 who volunteered for it.

I'm not saying you need to be some flag waving, chest thumping patriot that bows down and kisses the feet of the military. but maybe at least show a little respect where it's due or have enough intelligence to keep the mouth shut. to say they're not doing anything for you is just complete ignorance.

In case you (obviously) did not read my previous post:
I would not go to war. Ever. whatever the consequences to me. So I'm sure as hell not asking anyone to do it.
I there was no volunteers, they might try a draft, but then if people reacted sensibly and said no, we're not going...there'd be no bloody war!

so saying they're going so you don't have to go is stupid: NOBODY has to go. there's only wars because they find suckers to fight them.

Idea for the UN: bring back the duels! I'm sure suddenly the politicians would find ways to resolve problems

slightofjeff

Regardless of your stance on the war, as an American you really have no other choice but to hope the U.S. wins (If you don't think it's a war, I will say, "hope the U.S. gets the job done.")

Like it or not, Iraq has become the central proving ground in the fight against terror. Go home before the job is done, and the terrorists have won, regardless of what strides have been made.

It would demonstrate -- again -- that tactics of fear and terror work wonders against Americans. They don't like to get their hands dirty. They don't like the smell of their own blood. You can kill a relatively small number of them, and they will lose their nerve.

That's what it shows Al Qaeda. And that makes Al Qaeda all the more dangerous.

We can argue that Iraq wasn't a front in the fight against terror before 2003. I can buy that. But it is the pivotal front now.

Abuskedti

slightofjeff wrote:

Regardless of your stance on the war, as an American you really have no other choice but to hope the U.S. wins (If you don't think it's a war, I will say, "hope the U.S. gets the job done.")

Like it or not, Iraq has become the central proving ground in the fight against terror. Go home before the job is done, and the terrorists have won, regardless of what strides have been made.

It would demonstrate -- again -- that tactics of fear and terror work wonders against Americans. They don't like to get their hands dirty. They don't like the smell of their own blood. You can kill a relatively small number of them, and they will lose their nerve.

That's what it shows Al Qaeda. And that makes Al Qaeda all the more dangerous.

We can argue that Iraq wasn't a front in the fight against terror before 2003. I can buy that. But it is the pivotal front now.

not a proving ground at all.. its a breeding ground.

MLC2006

Pegasus wrote:

In case you (obviously) did not read my previous post:
I would not go to war. Ever. whatever the consequences to me. So I'm sure as hell not asking anyone to do it.
I there was no volunteers, they might try a draft, but then if people reacted sensibly and said no, we're not going...there'd be no bloody war!

so saying they're going so you don't have to go is stupid: NOBODY has to go. there's only wars because they find suckers to fight them.

Idea for the UN: bring back the duels! I'm sure suddenly the politicians would find ways to resolve problems

that's tough talk, but it's a claim that you know you won't ever have to back up since people are fighting so you don't have to. and I stick by my original post, everything you've posted is ignorance. this is not a utopian planet where there is no need for militaries so please just stop pretending that it is or could be. am I saying this current war in Iraq is justified? no. but still doesn't change the fact that there has to either be a voluntary or drafted military, so they are therefore doing something for you.

MLC2006

El_Kabong wrote:

they are not doing it so we won't have to go...that's just a byproduct of their numerous decisions on joining (like it, nothing else around them, only way to college, want to travel...) i doubt anyone says 'i want to join so no one else will have to!'

and i think the majority of ppl here wouldn't mind serving their country, the key word is 'country', not serving the corproate interests of the administration, their friends and their investors.

byproduct or not, it's still a fact that a voluntary military keeps other people from having to join against their will.

Irish Al

slightofjeff wrote:

Regardless of your stance on the war, as an American you really have no other choice but to hope the U.S. wins (If you don't think it's a war, I will say, "hope the U.S. gets the job done.")

Like it or not, Iraq has become the central proving ground in the fight against terror. Go home before the job is done, and the terrorists have won, regardless of what strides have been made.

It would demonstrate -- again -- that tactics of fear and terror work wonders against Americans. They don't like to get their hands dirty. They don't like the smell of their own blood. You can kill a relatively small number of them, and they will lose their nerve.

That's what it shows Al Qaeda. And that makes Al Qaeda all the more dangerous.

We can argue that Iraq wasn't a front in the fight against terror before 2003. I can buy that. But it is the pivotal front now.

Jesus you make the dumb American tag that I wished wasn't true....true. I am not saying that there were no terrorists in Iraq before the american war but terrorist organisations are moving to take out the american soldiers as they are easy pickings. Now Al-Qaeda (that massive group) have carried out exactly how many acts of terrorism in the US??? I hate to hear of anyone being killed but there have been many many many more people killed
in Iraq and Afganastan since 9/11. Remember Afganastan, that country with a massive famine and debt and death problem that was invaded by your fucking government....tron to bits and then just left to fucking rot. Jesus you make my blood boil and then we get that fucking inbred bush over in europe today thanking us for support.....FUCK OFF WE DON'T SUPPORT YOU!!

Fuck I'm too angry to carry on.......your a fucking idiot and I'd bet any money you have a fucking gun under your bed ready to shoot the Al-Qaeda member who works in you local shop.....FUCK YOU :mad:

blackredyellow

slightofjeff wrote:

Regardless of your stance on the war, as an American you really have no other choice but to hope the U.S. wins (If you don't think it's a war, I will say, "hope the U.S. gets the job done.")

Like it or not, Iraq has become the central proving ground in the fight against terror. Go home before the job is done, and the terrorists have won, regardless of what strides have been made.

It would demonstrate -- again -- that tactics of fear and terror work wonders against Americans. They don't like to get their hands dirty. They don't like the smell of their own blood. You can kill a relatively small number of them, and they will lose their nerve.

That's what it shows Al Qaeda. And that makes Al Qaeda all the more dangerous.

We can argue that Iraq wasn't a front in the fight against terror before 2003. I can buy that. But it is the pivotal front now.

but what is winning (or getting the job done)? Terrorism will never ever be eliminated (like world hunger, drugs, poverty, etc)... so how do we know it is done? When there is less than one bombing per week? less than one per month? The Iraqi government is propped up, and will be for years to come, they've had elections, so that part is done (or at least celebrated as done by the war supporters).

catefrances

slightofjeff wrote:

Like it or not, Iraq has become the central proving ground in the fight against terror. Go home before the job is done, and the terrorists have won, regardless of what strides have been made.

and like it or not it's because the United States government blundered in and made themselves and in the process Iraq, a massive magnet. did they think that they could invade a sovereign state with no consequences?
it never ceases to amaze me how the hawks never learn a god damn thing.
they thought the 'win' against saddam in the first gulf war, made up for the loss in vietnam. how they can even think this is way beyond my comprehension.

Pegasus

MLC2006 wrote:

that's tough talk, but it's a claim that you know you won't ever have to back up since people are fighting so you don't have to.
and I stick by my original post, everything you've posted is ignorance. this is not a utopian planet where there is no need for militaries so please just stop pretending that it is or could be. am I saying this current war in Iraq is justified? no. but still doesn't change the fact that there has to either be a voluntary or drafted military, so they are therefore doing something for you.

Well I don't believe that thinking for yourself and having principles is ignorant. I think the ignorant one is the one doing something because he's told to, rather than because he believes, after due consideration, it is the right thing to do.

Nothing improves if you just say: that's the way it is.
It does by saying: it doesn't have to be that way, what can I do to change it?

just to clarify:
I don't actually wish anybody dead (not even Bush-Blair-Cheney...locked up for life would be enough ) but if someone dies, I'd rather it be a US or UK soldier than an Iraqi civilian:
a) that might actually save further lives, since the civilian wouldn't kill anyone else, which the soldier might if he lives.
b) the soldier chose to be there (might be a tough choice or badly informed, but it is still a choice. the civilian has absolutely none).

the only reason you can disagree is if you put more value on life of a western person than on an Iraqi's, which would be racist/xenophobic.

FinsburyParkCarrots

Winning the war is the last thing the Bush Administration wants. Empires colonise destabilised countries for their material resources, on the pretext of being there for civilising, humanitarian reasons. The longer the situation in the middle east is considered unstable, the louder will be the calls to "stay here until the job is done". They'll stretch this out as long as possible, in pursuit of private profits. The insurgents are, ironically, doing Bush's work for him.

Heineken Helen

catefrances wrote:

and like it or not it's because the United States government blundered in and made themselves and in the process Iraq, a massive magnet. did they think that they could invade a sovereign state with no consequences?
it never ceases to amaze me how the hawks never learn a god damn thing.
they thought the 'win' against saddam in the first gulf war, made up for the loss in vietnam. how they can even think this is way beyond my comprehension.

Video game talk again unfortunately. It's all just a video game.

slightofjeff

Regardless of your stance on the war, as an American you really have no other choice but to hope the U.S. wins (If you don't think it's a war, I will say, "hope the U.S. gets the job done.")

Like it or not, Iraq has become the central proving ground in the fight against terror. Go home before the job is done, and the terrorists have won, regardless of what strides have been made.

It would demonstrate -- again -- that tactics of fear and terror work wonders against Americans. They don't like to get their hands dirty. They don't like the smell of their own blood. You can kill a relatively small number of them, and they will lose their nerve.

That's what it shows Al Qaeda. And that makes Al Qaeda all the more dangerous.

We can argue that Iraq wasn't a front in the fight against terror before 2003. I can buy that. But it is the pivotal front now.

thankyougrandma

The USA won the moment they've started this stupid war without opposition, other country should have step up and go in Irak to kick American soldiers ass out of there, now it's an occupation and history book will call it a win, for sure. Too late to "prefer" something now. It's already a tragedy in Irak, call it civil war or genocide breeding, fucking stupid americans and their pride to WIN a war are just hiding this fact by talking about THEIR war and how the USA can WIN it. Fucking hilarious... take your flag and hide it in your ass...

JasonVaritek

I just wish people could see how the Bush Administration has made serious mistakes throughout which has jeopardized the mission in Iraq. Whether you agreed with going in or not they may have made this an impossible mission by their serious blunders. This obviousely has nothing to do with the soldiers that were put in this position and if the war is lost in Iraq it has nothing to do with the soldiers and has everything to do with the leadership of the United States.

catefrances

slightofjeff wrote:

We can argue that Iraq wasn't a front in the fight against terror before 2003. I can buy that. But it is the pivotal front now.

says who? the ever trustworthy united states government?
you don't think there are people watching this absolute fiasco, who are far more dangerous that those 'terrorists' in iraq. you don't think they're not laughing their arses off because the US is so preocccupied with it's own disaster?

Milhouse VanHouten

slightofjeff wrote:

We can argue that Iraq wasn't a front in the fight against terror before 2003. I can buy that. But it is the pivotal front now.

And why would that be... ?