It's war time...

[Savant 10+ year member]

Last time.. last post.. only because you haven't been in the thread the whole time..

Originally posted by joshpoints Savant. I will mention my point once again that you didn't respond to. Why should we go to UN when the main countries like Germany, Russia, and France have given them illegal military equipment. France and Germany helped them build a nuclear weapons facility that was built. Russia was found to have given them equipment also and we have told them constantly to stop.

It's not just about the UN, it's about being just.. justice.. it's an international LEGAL issue, we didn't do what I feel was the extent of legal limits (final resolution with guns in his face with clear deadlines, etc). that would have been the just thing to do, and we would also most likely have much more global support than we do now..

"Conservatives make laws on what they 'feel' is right or wrong.. Liberals tend to make laws to 'protect' while still allowing for choice.."

 

Savant isn't proper to base a country off what is right and wrong? If you allow people to decide what is right and wrong relative to themselves immorality will sweep the nation.

There is a line that must be drawn and abortion crosses that line. We are dealing with a child here. There is no need for abortion. If you don't want kids don't have ***, or use a contraceptive.

First, anal *** is illegal because conservatives FEEL it's immoral.. that's what I'm talking about, not abortion.. that's a TOTALLY different matter and should NEVER have been brought up in this kind of context.. Making laws about perceived morality is the problem.. right from wrong is pretty well known, but things that are 'distasteful' to conservatives are also persude (like sodomy).. That's what I was getting at..

Savant I didn't read the earlier posts, because there are pages and pages.

And, like most Americans, you can't be bothered to take time to become informed.. you need to be special and addressed individually.. on your time, when you want.. Had you bothered to read all the posts, you'd notice that you are part of what I consider to be the problem in the US today.. Lazzy, arrogant, narssicisitc..

You have said you are against the way Bush went about taking Sadam out. You feel Sadam is a bad man. In these areas we semi agree. In a sentence or two with detail explain how we should have taken him out. You mentioned that we could have had more troops over their, I assume you mean the UN. So do you feel we should have gone through the UN? AS you know I now have very little respect for the UN.

More US troops.. we did the first war with 1.5 - 2 mill people, 250,000 for this action? and not having people to stay back and keep the rear secure? Stupid plan if you ask me.. UN has nothing to do with that.. if you are gonna go alone, do it right, don't take stupid risks like we are now..

As I said, we could have snippered him.. or used some excuse to drop a few bombs like Clinton did, only make sure it's big enough to kill Saddam.. Or, get a much larger support base and have a multinational front.. any would be much more preferable to have almost only US troops there, and in way too few of numbers to be safe..

What really pisses me off is the news on television giving away our soldiers position. For example they showed pictures of our fuel trucks saying exactly where they are going. The picture also showed that the trucks had no military support. THey need to take this stuff off television.

It's not like there have been any attacks on our units from any of this.. remember, they are in a friggn desert..it all looks the same, and just because you don't see the tanks/support around the trucks doesn't mean it's not there or isn't close.. That said, I agree that we need to be careful about that stuff to make sure we don't get troops killed letting the public know whats going on..

I do question the lack of supplies that our soldiers are now having. We have our best men over there and they aren't getting enough rest and are lacking supplies.

Aren't you the one that said we wouldn't have gone into this without Bush having a great plan in place, wouldn't spend billions of dollars if it wasn't being done right? Perhaps now that the experts are looking at it and going "shit, this isn't gonna work, it was rushed into" people will understand that our leaders rushed into this, which also implies a lack of justification.. it's not like there was suspicsion that he would have a nuke built in 2 wks or something.. no reason not to have waited and gotten things set up better..

So conservatives do allow you a choice you can have *** and use a contraceptive, not have *** at all, or put the baby up for adoption.

Let it go dude, this isn't something to discuss here.. this is even more rediculous an internet topic than war..

Savant we can take our differences into philosophy, but we will find that it is impossible for us to agree in certain areas, because our bases for our ideologies are based on different beliefs. I believe establishing right and wrong is more important. I do not base right and wrong off of man's beliefs, because I believe man is sinful by nature.

Just because it feels good doesn't make it right or healthy.

But, just because YOU think it's not 'right' doesn't mean it should be illegal either (anal *** for example.. feels good, as I understand it.. don't like it myself.. is a 'sin' but isn't "wrong" ).. just because your personal 'feeling' is that it is a sin (which is a religious state and should NOT be brought into government policy either, if you ask me) doesn't mean you have a right to tell others they can't do it.. if you don't want to do it, fine, but to make a LAW about it is pathetic.. we have more important things to do with out time..

If we base laws off of man's belief then I personally feel that our laws will be faulty.

We agree, you just don't understand the difference between belief and fact.. 'sin' is a belief, not fact..

Because our bases for right and wrong or freedom as you stated above varies we can not prove each other to be wrong. When the end times come we will find out who is right and who is wrong. I'm not saying you are going to hell because I don't know you. But we will all find out what is really right and what is really wrong.

I happen to think I'm a pretty damm decent person.. I make mistakes, we all do.. but I try to help my fellow man, while most I have come across in this life care more about themselves than anything else.. I don't really believe in heaven and hell, just don't know that it makes a lot of sense.. Religion isn't something I can swallow given it's nature and what it tries to do to people.. I'm agnostic (and since I'm dyslexic too, I'm not sure if there is a dog).. I tend to think I'm 'spiritual', but not relgious and certianly not Christian.. As such, I'm personally offended when someone in this country tells me a law that dictates what I can and can't do is based on their belief in god and 'his' laws and rules.. I know what is right and wrong without the bible or god.. I know it's wrong to cause hurt on another person, and even in more contexts than most conservatives since they don't see greed and taking advantage of someone for their money as 'wrong', I do.. I guess that's because I don't define myself by religion and it's skewed mandates..

Saying this I'm still interested in how you feel we should eliminate Sadam.

As was said many many many times.. we could sniper him, bomb him during a known meeting or something, or at least tried to have more global support before having our own troops absorb the bulk of the strain of a war..

 

[jlaine 10+ year member]

Originally posted by ss3079 Get thrown in Josh's bad locker and LOOK OUT //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif

 

- Steve

It's like a being turned into cold slab of beef... just waiting fo' the butcher boyeeeeeeee...

It's all good, but I think joshpoints may not like me anymore... //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

Savant, LWW - listen guys - walk outta here with a smile for each other OK? Seriously - if you can't debate/argue and then walk away without animosity - you shouldn't be debating... You both have opinions, express them, express them once, then if they aren't received, they never will be... There is NOTHING more impossible to get into than a closed mind.

 

[Savant 10+ year member]

Originally posted by joshpoints Seriously - look at yourselves. You have nothing intelligent left to say, so you look for moronic garbage to nit-pick apart like some overjealous three year old after his little brother just took away his blankie... What the heck... You are grown men right?

 

What moronic garbage? Look at your statement above that has absolutely no content at all. Wow. It takes a lot of brains to name call like you and Savant.

 

Nevermind this quote you posted another message before I could post it.

You should learn to either use the HTML tags for quotes, or hit the "quote" button when you want to quote, it makes it very difficult to keep track of what is being said and what is being referenced (well, not for me since I actually read posts and don't just post junk without knowing what's in the thread)..

As far as moronic garbage, most of what's been posted for the last 1/2 of this thread has been mostly crap.. either rehasing previous statements (being overly repetitively redundant) or pulling in totally pointless statements (LWW does this alot, trying to tie me and others to being 'friends' or 'buddies' to Saddam and the likes, that way readers dislike me because they see me linked to Saddam despite there being no such link.. but since LWW needs all the help he can to stand on that quicksand he's in, he uses these tactics).. nothing new has been discussed for a long while, and points certianly aren't being debated in any sense of the term debate.. it's all a bunch of "I said, no you said, no I think, that's dumb, no that's dumb, But I saw, no you said"... bah.. Like jlaine said, this is moronic now.. it's dead and should be left alone..

 

[Savant 10+ year member]

Originally posted by jlaine It's like a being turned into cold slab of beef... just waiting fo' the butcher boyeeeeeeee...

 

It's all good, but I think joshpoints may not like me anymore... //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

Savant, LWW - listen guys - walk outta here with a smile for each other OK? Seriously - if you can't debate/argue and then walk away without animosity - you shouldn't be debating... You both have opinions, express them, express them once, then if they aren't received, they never will be... There is NOTHING more impossible to get into than a closed mind.

And I agree with you completely..

My only problem with this entire thing is, it seems as though LWW 'could' actually debate reasonably, yet he insists on antagonizing and using false logic and subverted personal attacks and shady tactics to try and win a point... that's what bugged me the most. If he would just argue points and debate this thread would be a LOT smaller.. most of it is (or seems to me) my defending the same position over and over as it's being attacked from different positions with different types of tactics, but none that serve to better the over all debate.. I mean, how many times do I say I do not like Saddam, that I think he is, in fact, a bad man? WAY too many.. why? every 3 or 4 posts it would come back up how I like him or support him or believe him over Bush, etc etc..

Anyway.. as you said.. there is no point in continuing this.. so I won't //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[joshpoints 10+ year member]

I'll put it to you nicely. I already mentioned this point earlier. Our bases for our Ideologies differ so we will be unable to persuade one another because we base our beliefs on separate things. Savant bases his on humans which I consider to be "naughty by nature".

And if you are talking about the other issues that I brought, I brought those up for a point and purpose to show why I'm against extreme liberalism. I brought up my point about homosexuality being taught as being normal in school and how children are taught that we evolved from apes yet this has not been proven. So they allow this but not religion. Rather than telling children both sides, one side is given. The child in this sense is losing their freedom of choice, which is a violation of the liberal beliefs. In order to have free choice a child should be taught both sides fairly and the child should be allowed to choose. Some may say go to a private school. I say give me my tax money back and give those that can't afford private school a fair argument that tells both sides. We could go into the whole racial profiling crap also. But I will state that I'm white and I have been accused of things by many people through out my life. There was some guest speaker that came to my high school and talked about how someone was racist because they told her that there were some great deals on a clearance rack in the store. The guest speaker was black and said that it happened because she was black. How do you draw that kind of connection. I have people tell me that there is a great deal on this or that item. I love it when people tell me that. That's all I have to say for now. The same is true for extreme conservativism which isn't seen much anymore. I would consider this to be those that are racist, feel a certain group is superior. In a sense the Taliban was an extreme conservative group. They were against women's rights, against dancing, against women's education. Both extremes are dangerous. Closed minded is relative. It could be argued that liberals are closed minded and that conservatives are closed minded. I've explained this concept in other posts though.

 

[joshpoints 10+ year member]

I do question the lack of supplies that our soldiers are now having. We have our best men over there and they aren't getting enough rest and are lacking supplies.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote

Aren't you the one that said we wouldn't have gone into this without Bush having a great plan in place, wouldn't spend billions of dollars if it wasn't being done right? Perhaps now that the experts are looking at it and going "shit, this isn't gonna work, it was rushed into" people will understand that our leaders rushed into this, which also implies a lack of justification.. it's not like there was suspicsion that he would have a nuke built in 2 wks or something.. no reason not to have waited and gotten things set up better..

No, actually I didn't say this. I'm surprised. I actually would be okay with your idea of hitting him by surprise. THis pissed me off. We keep telling him we are coming we are coming. Then we give him one last deadline date. At that point if Sadam has any brains which I think he does, he is already underground. I will also agree with you on the point of more troops as I said a few threads back. I troops need to get some rest. Why are we giving our best troops little rest? And your comment about anal ***. I don't really have an opinion on this and I would consider this a very minor point. What people do in a bedroom is only their business not the publics. There are much larger things to worry about, like abortion. You all already know my stance in this area.

Boy Savant I've really persuaded you. Just kidding. One more thing. There are conservatives that don't like the style of this war. THe lack of supplies and troop problem that we are having is scarry.

It seems like all of us are for taking out Sadam but each has an opinion on the tactics being used to do it. This doesn't bother me.

Hitting Sadam by surprise would also be a darned if you do darned if you don't. Bush must choose which darned if you don't he likes more. Sadam probably has his meeting in highly popular areas. If we hit him by surprise we will kill people. Not to say this is the wrong thing to do, but I bet he feels that he must warn the citizens like he did in this war to get out of town, for whatever it's worth. But who knows maybe his advisers told him to warn the people before dropping bombs. I don't think they are the best. They could have done better with his campaign. His cabinet allows the media to ask loaded questions and rather than shoot them down or throw some hardball back they just ignore it. Again this is the big sissy problem that I find with the republican party. That's why the independent party has grown so much. Being soft isn't going to gain liberals or democrats and being soft will only lose conservatives.

Quote

As was said many many many times.. we could sniper him, bomb him during a known meeting or something, or at least tried to have more global support before having our own troops absorb the bulk of the strain of a war..

One last thing. The U.S. is always the bulk supplier of weapons and troops in all modern wars. We always pay the most. We have the most military equipment so we are stuck using ours. How about we supply the equipment and some troops and all the other nations pay for wars that we agree upon. I would love this, but it will never come true.

__________________

One last thing Savant.

Boarders, Language, Culture. It's an inside joke if you don't get it go to http://www.homestead.com/prosites-prs/index.html

 

[CarAudioAddict 10+ year member]

ok. I'm going to bring a few of the points for and against the war and show, using pure logic, how they are wrong, right, unproven, or moot

FOR:

1. Saddam must be removed from power

Right, Saddam is an evil person, and shouldn't be allowed to run a country

2. Saddam has WOMD

Unproven, we don't know for sure that he does have WOMD, we don't know that he doesn't. All we have is circumstantial evidence that could show many different things.

3. Saddam has lied in the past, and so MUST be lying(sp?) now

Wrong, just because someone has lied before doesn't mean he is always telling lies

4. The war is about liberating the Iraqi people

Moot, This EXCUSE was only brought up after the war was started, and does not justify starting the war in the first place.

5. Another UN resolution would have done nothing

Right, A threat from the UN is empty. The UN has never had any REAL power, and probably never will

6. The chem plant was used to produce chem weapons

Unproven, chem pants are also needed to process and refine oil

7. The Iraqi people want the troops there

Moot, doesn't matter as that is not why the troops are there

8. Saddam had SCUDS/al-somoud II's, and so MUST have WOMD

Wrong, all this shows is that he had SCUDS/al-somoud II's

AGAINST:

1. There were other ways to remove Saddam from power

Right, He could've been sniped or bombed, or any one of the many other ways to get rid of someone. I'm not going to list them all, but I can think of at least 5 off the top of my head.

on a side note: The recent attempt at bombing Saddam couldn't have worked, as soon as war was declared Saddam was probably already out ofhis Palace(s) and into hiding. After all wouldn't you be?

2. The war is unjust

Unproven, although the facts that we have point toward this, the govt may have more info that either justifies or doesn't justify the war

3. Saddam hasn't posed a threat to the US

Right, In the past twelve years Saddam hasn't launched an attack toward the US

4. Saddam was disarming

Right, However reluctantly, he was destroying his illegal weapons

5. Bush is only after the oil

Unproven, although a viable reason, there is not enough evidence either way

6. (related to the liberation thing) The US didn't care about the Iraqi people before, why now all of a sudden?

Right, Untill now, the US wasn't doing anything to help the Iraqi people, why now?

-------------------------

I tried to come up with 7 of each, but couldn't. Notice that the Against side has more "right" points than the For side.

If anyone can REASONABLY argue with this I will listen.I will not listen to anymore of the "reality its good for...." bs, as it is just meaningless.

Stats from 03/26/03

Number of people killed

Allies Soldiers: 143

Iraqi Soldiers: 46

Reporters: 4

Civillians: 267

Looks like my 1000+ was wrong, but there have been more civillian lives lost than soldiers. It aso appears that the Allies are LOSING.

 

[LWW 10+ year member]

(final resolution with guns in his face with clear deadlines, etc).

Hey Savant. We did that in 1991 as you conveniently ignore repeatedly.

First, anal *** is illegal because conservatives FEEL it's immoral.. that's what I'm talking about

I don't even want to know why that is the first example you chose. TOO MUCH INFO.

We agree, you just don't understand the difference between belief and fact.. 'sin' is a belief, not fact..

So if I believe it's OK to break in your house and take your stuff that's OK. Let's not be judgemental.

As I said, we could have snippered him..

Ahhh...a haircut...the final solution. It could turn into a "shear atrocity".//content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/wink.gif.608e3ea05f1a9f98611af0861652f8fb.gif

And for the record I walk out of this debate each time with a smile. One thing I am is consistent as opposed to shifting arguments made up to satisfy the last sane argument. WHETHER any of us like it or not their is GOOD and their is EVIL and their is RIGHT and their is WRONG. Sometimes they are very gray. Sometimes they are black and white. This my friends is one. As the president has said you are either with us or you are with the terrorists. Look who is coming to Saddam's side now. Syria, Iran, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda. A fine group. Also note the person who calls the most names of the most people from the president to the members of this forum also is the only one who minds it if Saddam is made fun of??? Interesting. But they also were mad because it was illegal for someone to put their penis in...oh never mind.

PEACE

 

[joshpoints 10+ year member]

Quote:

3. Saddam has lied in the past, and so MUST be lying(sp?) now

Wrong, just because someone has lied before doesn't mean he is always telling lies

Sadam has lied from the past all the way to the present. It is wise to not trust him. If he has nothing to hide then there is no need for him limit where inspectors could go.

Quote:

4. The war is about liberating the Iraqi people

Moot, This EXCUSE was only brought up after the war was started, and does not justify starting the war in the first place.

Say what you want, but the inhumane treatment of humans was supposed to be stopped; this was part of the agreement.

Quote:

3. Saddam hasn't posed a threat to the US

Right, In the past twelve years Saddam hasn't launched an attack toward the US

Agreed, unless he was a part of the funding for 9/11, but this has not been proven from what I've heard. I don't think that this theory will ever be proven because they do a pretty good job of covering their trails. THe worry is what he may do in the future.

Quote

4. Saddam was disarming

Right, However reluctantly, he was destroying his illegal weapons

I wouldn't consider it disarming. He was allowing a few items to be found here and there so that the UN felt like they were accomplishing something and so that people would think that he is cooperating and the inspectors could leave the country soon. I'd do the same thing.

Quote:

6. (related to the liberation thing) The US didn't care about the Iraqi people before, why now all of a sudden?

Right, Untill now, the US wasn't doing anything to help the Iraqi people, why now?

Must agree he has been bad to his people for many years. This pisses me off it should have been handled a while ago. I would say possibly because the UN felt no need to so we went along with them. Bush may have wanted to get Afghanistan under under control first. No absolute answer.

Why War?

One problem I see with just sniping Sadam. It would allow his son the chance to take power. His son is no better than he is and after seeing his father sniped will likely run the country from underground. Some may ask so why should we drop bombs they are protected right now because they are underground. I believe they are underground right now, but even if they are not killed in the war the goal of liberating the country and putting dependable leaders in power is possible. This can be accomplished by taking out all his true military followers. Once these men are gone, Sadam or his son will have no military power or authority to rule the country. Having no military support means the people will not listen to him and a near government can be formed.

 

[ss3079 5,000+ posts]

Originally posted by jlaine Savant, LWW - listen guys - walk outta here with a smile for each other OK? Seriously - if you can't debate/argue and then walk away without animosity - you shouldn't be debating... You both have opinions, express them, express them once, then if they aren't received, they never will be... There is NOTHING more impossible to get into than a closed mind.

I agree.

End of story.

- Steve

 

[joshpoints 10+ year member]

LWW what's the weather like in Ohio. How hot does it get in the summer how cold does it get in the winter? Does it rain a lot? How are the house prices? Are there good paying jobs? Is it all farm land out there, or do they have urban areas. I'm pretty much ready to move out of California. Housing prices are insane. There was a 2 bedroom house for sale that my brother was going to buy, but the bidding was up to $550,000. THat's not the worst part the house had to be torn down because it had severe structural damage. So you're paying $550,000 for a small piece of land.

 

[LWW 10+ year member]

LWW what's the weather like in Ohio. How hot does it get in the summer how cold does it get in the winter? Does it rain a lot? How are the house prices? Are there good paying jobs? Is it all farm land out there, or do they have urban areas. I'm pretty much ready to move out of California. Housing prices are insane. There was a 2 bedroom house for sale that my brother was going to buy, but the bidding was up to $550,000. THat's not the worst part the house had to be torn down because it had severe structural damage. So you're paying $550,000 for a small piece of land.

Cold in winter hot in summer but seldom below 20 or above 90. Avg rain. Lower home prices compared to your area....by about 95% in your analogy.

Decent job mkt and reasonable living costs. Lots of farm land but somm bigger cities also. 1 NHL, 2 NFL, 1 NBA, and 2 MLB teams.

PEACE

 

[1zenlunatic 10+ year member]

http://www.aljazeera.net/news/arabic/2003/3/3-22-26.htm

Curious about seeing all that graphic human collateral damage that Aljazeera has posted

but couldnt get into the English translated site>?

Well here u go. The link to the pics page from the Arabic Aljazeera site.

(noteics of the U.S. casualties/POWS have been removed, or at least i couldnt find them!)

ENJOY

 

[denim 5,000+ posts]

sick stuff

 

[LWW 10+ year member]

Without looking I am curious as to whether they show Saddamite Hussinsein's INTENTIONAL atrocities over the years?

PEACE