Iraq

[sassy]

Is anyone scared of going into war with Iraq? Do you think your life will change, will you do things differently? Do you think President Bush is doing the right thing? Do you think we should go into Iraq? What's your thoughts? What will be the future of our generation?

[turnpikebandit]

The thought of war is absolutely terrifying and, I think, wholly unneccessary right now. Is Iraq the genuine global threat that many of our nations perceive it to be? Are there more diplomatic channels to prevent the tragedy of thousands of innocent deaths? Should we be more concerned with South Korea at this given time?

Yes, terrorism both domestic and abroad needs to be addressed and justice must be swift against those who perpetuate and support it. However, peaceful solutions, although more arduous to acheive and less vendictive in nature, are what are going to keep this world together in the decades and centuries to come.

As for myself personally, I'm a Canadian so my personal stake in this war from a patriotic perspective is perhaps somewhat diminished from many of yours. Of course our government will eventually fall into line with whatever the US deems as an appropriate course of action and we'll most likely be on the front lines with American and British soldiers as opposed to our more customary peace-keeping role. Here's to hoping that some sort of peaceful agreement can be acheived, unfortunately it would appear that George Bush's patience is about as short as his fuse.

[TankgirlyC]

The best way to get more info was to watch Dan Rather interview Sadam last night...

If we go to war...we are going to dip into another recession. Each time we think we are closer, consumer confidence dips along with the stock market...

Our lives here will not change. They Iraqis are not going to come over here and take over the land...we probably wont have a draft either...

We just need to make sure that Korea doesnt make a move when we are in Iraq...we need to make sure we can cover all our basis.

Blix found evidence of missles that have a range larger than what the UN sanctions allow...the UN stated these need to be destroyed. Sadam claims they dont exist. You cant reason with this man and he doesnt care about his people. Last night in his interview he said that Bush is trying to kill innocent people and that Allah decides the all mighty fate...he avioded questions answering that only Allah knows...

He has too much pride to admit that he has these weapons. He is too proud to go in exile and spare his people. He puts women and children in the front lines to die for him....and then says we are out to kill women and children...these people dont have a choice..if they speak out against Sadam they are killed....1984 much?

He even stated last night that he won the election to become president with 99.1% voting for him... .9% voting against..he thinks this means that he won the majority vote...

When have you EVER seen a vote THAT unanymous? Think about school elections, voting in town halls....COME ON!

Just my thoughts.

[klo1335]

I hope this isn't offensive but a part of me thinks Saddam's sons are really hot! I'm not saying that they still aren't bad people. However, Udai is a cutie!

[TankgirlyC]

His son rapes women and Sadam pats him on the back and congradulates him...

Sadam killed 2 of his other sons when they talked to Americans....killing your own offspring OMG your insane!

[AMB25]

What a family!

As far as the economy goes, we must also remember that if we fall into recession, it also affects other nations that rely on us for trading. My bf's family in Taiwan is in danger of losing their house since 9/11. They have several properties that they have fixed up and rented out, unfortunately no one can pay them decent money for those properties at this time. His mom is so depressed because they had to go back to work after retirement and still can't pay the bills.

I'm terrified of war for this reason and many others.

[StateNAurora]

Bush has not made the case for war. Just because you repeat the same lines over and over again does not make them true. Perhaps Hussein has these weapons, prove it and your war will be justified.

Personally I think Bush is a pathetic leader. He has performed 7 open news confrences in 2 years. If you didn't know nay better you could think Ari Fleisher was pres. Tony Blair has to go before Parliament once a week and answer questions off-the-cuff. Did anyone see Blair last night when he sat down with 6 people who do not support the war. He was articulate and able to handle himself in a room with no supporters.

I myself think some wars are just, but not this one. And I don't forsee Bush being able to present a good case any time soon.

[sassy]

I think my question was more on the lines of do you fear that we could be attacked again. Such as bio-chemical or bombing? I am aware of what is going on. I read cnn.com and the news every day. If we do go to war will anything change in your life? Will you still go out in the city? Will you stay home more? That was what I was trying to get at. Are you afraid?

[M4A1]

Yea, Aurora, I agree with you about GW. But for the war itself, I can only agree to some extent. I saw a report on PBS. Basicly, W is trying to finish what his dad couldn't. It was our intention all along to have Saddam to be overthrown. We encouraged rebellion back in the Gulf War. Iraqi people did took up arms against him and were successful for awhile until we signed the cease-fire agreement with Saddam where it stated that he has full sovereignty of his air-space. The Iraqi general who signed the treaty made sure that General Norman Schwarzkopf agreed with Iraqi using helicopters to provide aide and support to its people. Once the Iraqi general got the approval, he immediately sent out attack helicopters to mow down the rebllion. Hundreds of rebel forces died within days, hundreds more died after Iraqi army broke their defenses. Most were tortured to death.

Disarmament isn't the real reason and even if it is I can't support that as a just cause to start a war.

[TankgirlyC]

I didnt run out and buy duct tape and plastic sheeting....it wouldnt help you anyway...as soon as something was dropped you dont have the time to put that crap up to save youself.

If we are at war...I will pay more attention to the news but thats about all that Ill change...
I will still go into cities....go to the movies...walk around.

What you have to tell yourself is that we will never have another WW2 with black out sheets on the windows....our detection systems are too fine tuned for that...

lets say that Iraq sends a missle to the US....the US detects this and blows it up over the ocean WAY before it comes near our country. Planes wouldnt make it here, nor submarine, nor ship....

Really you cant live your life in fear..you have to live it....

[TankgirlyC]

Another thought...

Wouldnt it have been cool if Dan Rather was able to kill Sadam while interviewing him?
Like Rather was some secret agent thats been doing news all these years and since he was able to get THAT close to Sadam he could just get him?

I mean in the last war we almost got him...but didnt..and no one has been able to get that close to Sadam since...

Eh just a thought.

[klo1335]

HAHAHAHAHA! That's funny!

[LittleLady23]

TankGirlyC That was soooo funny!

[Benwa]

I watch Rather all the time and I can't believe I missed the interview! It would be impressive if Rather pulled out some SEAL training and took out Saddam. Dan is getting pretty old though. What if they became best friends after. Maybe they went out for icecream and Saddam confesses he has a secret crush on Britany Spears. And over the second serving of cookie dough icecream, Dan says he thinks Ben Affleck and J-Lo won't last, but saddam believes its true love. Then saddam breaks down in Dan's arms, sobbing about how he didn't get enough hugs from his mom. Which is why he's so cruel now, latent hatred for his mothers lack of love. They have a good cry and saddam decides to reveal and destroy all weapons. Then he renames Irag to Super Duper Happy Land and they plant wild flowers all over the desert. They then dry the flowers and Super Duper Happy Land's major export isn't Oil, but potpourri made from the dried flowers.

I'm not a supporter of Bush, but I generally don't support any leader. He reminds me of a giant child. I can't believe he used "Sadam tried to kill my dad" as a reason. Isn't that something a kid would say? Also the way the administration is doing this seems fishy. They are trying their damndest to convince people this war is a good idea. You shouldn't have to convince someone, they should come to the conclusion on their own. It feels like they are running it like some marketing ploy. The way they are doing it seems the same way advertising execs meet to figure out how to sell more Tide. Try to BS with me with Tide is fine, but not with something a serious as war.

Right now I would consider supporting it if they just stopped trying to feed me a line of crap. Just tell me the fu*king truth! Why is he really so hellbent on this. And it isn't like they are giving away military or tactical secrets by doing the truth. Give us an honest answer for a change! If Super Duper Happy Land's main export is Potpourri, then America's has to Grade A bullcrap.

[TankgirlyC]

Picture this:

George W in his Oval office with Colon Powell ....George W is on the floor kicking his legs and flailing his arms....Powell looks concerned....
*Whats the matter George?*

*I WANNA WAR!! I WANT MY OWN WAR!* George Wails

*Why do you want your own war Georgy?*

*Daddy had one and I want to be known for a bigger and better war so mommy will notice me* George replies

CONCLUSION: George W just has classic freudian edipus complex...he wants a war to gain notoriety, look stronger than his father and gain his mothers attention.

[M4A1]

LMAO! That's too funny Tank. :lol: ...flailing his arms

Did you see his televised speech on Wednesday? I only saw 10 minutes of it, but he must have stuttered at least 5 times-- truly amazing.

[TankgirlyC]

I love reading Bush-isms in the papers..
I adore it when he takes a simple word and messes it up and the whole sentance takes on an entirely different meaning..

He surrounded himself with all of Daddys cabinet...you would think they could help him with this problem...maybe get a speech patholigest in there? I dont know...

I really think Bush might have been saying to little Bushy read my lips when he was little...and big Bush was concentrating so hard on it that he dropped little Bushy on his head...

George W is a coyboy..he is from Texas (no offense to ANYONE in that state) and he is an oil tycoon of sorts...he wants to ride wild bulls and have the country watch him as he does it..

we all know the Chads lied...GORE WON....so really Florida..this is your fault.

[M4A1]

Yup, it's all of daddy's cabinet alright. Cheney worked as the Defense Secretary during Desert Storm. On that PBS show, I saw everyone, but Candice Rice, in the old Bush administration.

Yea, if a person is going to be a puppet-- especially one in the leading role. He/she should at least have the ability to ACT like a leader and be convincing at least. Gore might have lied (who doesn't), but he doesn't trip over his tongue or choke on pretzels (then fell and bump his head to the floor).

[TankgirlyC]

The fact that FLA couldnt get their act together and had all these chad problems should have constituted a RE VOTE...I mean really is a panel of people in a room looking at all these punch cards and making their best educated guess and arguing over what they thing ANY way to pick a leader....the whole world was laughing at us.

If anything a re-vote would have been a good idea...
But George W really needs to work on his act. I liked him through the 9/11 tragedy I gained much respect for him then..but right now he sounds like a wild cowboy screaming that Sadam tried to kill his Dad so he needs to create war over that....he needs to CALM down (good leaders are level headed and dont jump to conclusions) and let the information come back to him then talk with the UN...

We need a girl for president!

[M4A1]

ROFL Weirdbrake!! Good one! :lol:

[Benwa]

Bush just isn't very intelligent person. I'm talking just on the basic IQ problem solving level. He seems like the classic case of a rich boy who is a F-up and daddy keeps bailing him out. A perfect example is his oil business went bankrupt. How the hell can you not sell oil? It's a product that virtually sells itself. Its like not being able to sell crack. All you got to do is get the word out you have some and the rest falls into place like Tetris. Maybe there's an element to the oil business I don't get. Maybe you need to know people. Maybe it would help if your dad was president!

Remember when saddam won his election by 99% and Bush admin condemned it. Saddam should have talked to George for tips on the best way to rig an election. Another thing about bush I don't like is he's always at his ranch or camp david. I know he can do his job from any location, but I expect him to show up everyday. Especially now, it sends a bad message that he seems to be taking a vacation when everythings a mess. Stop horseback riding and do your damn job. If it's too much work for him to handle then I guess he shouldn't have rigged the election.

I don't think we should switch to a computer voting system. Any programmers here know how easy it would be to rewrite a program to do what you want it to do. I bet a twelve year old could be taught to fix an election be rewriting programming. It could be done in a way where no one would know either. I don't mind the manual counting of ballots. It takes longer but so what, it's worth the wait. Another aspect of computer voting is that old people make up a large portion of voters. In fact I've only seen elderly people "working' at the booths. And is there anything the elderly fear more than a computer? It's seems like a bad idea to me.

[LittleLady23]

Call me a redneck if you wish, I don't care!

I've said it once, and i'll say it again. I am all for George W!

So you don't think Bush is a very intelligent person? Okay, then how can a person with no IQ be responsible for one of the best education programs in the United States? Bush was governor of Texas, have you seen their scores? Far above all the rest my friends. Bush made sure that education was priority. And it really is, without we will keep on graduating complete morons that will run this country in the future! George W's dad keeps bailing him out? I don't see his dad giving the speeches against terror attacks, or wars. I see George W up there not backing down, and taking all the blame. George W's oil business went corrupt? Its not like selling crack? EXACTLY! Selling crack is by complete losers who prey on the vulnerable and try to distort America. Selling oil is ran by MANY different people. Haven't you ever heard of sabotage or higher ups imbezzeling? As for my father who runs a business and I work in accounting, it's easily done if your not careful!

Hmm. Saddam won his election by 99% and Bush should have taken lessons from that? WHAT? You can't even run a PTA meeting or town counsel meeting with those percentages. It's called Saddam has put the fear in his people. If they even speak out against him, they are killed and so are their families. Okay so if Bush should take lessons from Saddam, then I guess that would mean our police departments and Army should be up and down our streets with heavy armory and missles pointing at us and firing if we look at them wrong or for too long. And I guess that would mean all of us women here should quit our jobs, go bear a dozen children, wear masks over our face, and be beaten if we show too much skin. And for you guys I guess that means you will have to live in fear for expressing your opinion or not having the right job, and you will have to bear all the weight of your family on you if any of them act out wrongly. Oh yeah and I guess we all should give back our tax refunds that we are given each year from the government so that they can get even more corrupt and powerful and kill each other until the biggest A$$hole of them all runs it and then uses all resources to make biological and chemical warfare weapons and then practice using them on us!

WOW! Gee, that sounds great! I can't wait for President Bush to become just like Saddam!

When was the last time either of you had to run a corporation and take the blame for all the mistakes your employees made? Or better yet, when was the last time you ran a country and had to take the blame for all the crime, the drug dealers, the stupid citizens, the wrong doing of police officers, the wrong doing of some politcal figures, or the wrong doing of America? A lot of you seem to be pessimists instead of optimists! You can't change a country of millions in two years, you can make a dent. And I think he is doing great for whats been handed to him. We honestly could be a lot worse! If Gore were president, next thing he would be doing is preaching that he made oxygen, just like he preached that he was responsible for the internet!

GIVE ME A BREAK!

[Benwa]

Who said bush should take lessons from Saddam? I said saddam should take a lesson from bush. And it was intended to prove a point that both were elected under extremely shady circumstances. As for comparing crack dealers to oil business, it was also meant to illustrate a point. Plus I don't think its fair to call crack dealers complete losers. It isn't like they have many options and their profession may be seen as unethical by many is it really that different from people who sell alchohol or tobacco. And for preying on the vulnerable and distorting america, I would say oil business does that too. Aren't we extrtemely dependent on oil to the piont where we are vulnerable. And aren't the huge oil companies distorting america. A big factor in the american revolution was getting away from huge global companies of england. The little shop owner was being starved out, he american people didn't like it so the revolution started. Are we seeing a recurring theme now. The idea was to have a diversified economy with free choice and he who provided the best product/service was compensated. Do we have any real choice besides petroleum? I think not. Alternative technology is there, it;s just being held back.

I don't fully blame W for everything, because it is mostly an issue of the system we have. It's just too large. Any screw up by the guy in charge will be magnified under this system. All we need to do is break up into smaller units, where every one can truly participate. We just need to reorganize the way we do things.

You can't say it would be worse with Gore, just as I can't say it would be better. It would just be different. My beef is I don't trust anyone who comes at me with their title. I won't listen if you come at me as a president, police officer, boss or clergy. But if you come to me as yourself then lets talk and find a common ground. Once a title is brought in, the meeting stops being productive and starts being about power and control.

[LittleLady23]

Sorry for not seeing that you didn't compare Bush to Saddam. I read it wrong. But I jumped on it anyway, because there actually have been some people say stuff like that. So I got that cleared up.

I am not trying to be mean, but Benwa, some of your stuff is soooo completely twisted around the subjects that they make no sense whatsoever.

Benway you said "I don't think its fair to call crack dealers complete losers. It isn't like they have many options and their profession may be seen as unethical by many is it really that different from people who sell alchohol or tobacco. And for preying on the vulnerable and distorting america, I would say oil business does that too." First I do think it is fair to call crack dealers complete losers. Thats my opinion. And to say they didn't have many options? Sorry, but YES they did. Its called motivation to go to school. Its called respect for fellow mankind. Its called respect for yourself! You can get anything you put effort towards! I know plenty of friends who were brought up poor and their family was on welfare, but they worked hard in high school and had little jobs here and there and eventually worked harder to get into Universities. So to say they didn't have options is a cop-out! There are plenty of options open to all of us, its just not many people want to work for them! They want something for free!

And to say the oil business preys and distorts America is a crock too! We freely buy vehicles and pump them full of gas on our own, they are not preying on us! There are plenty of Americans who walk, ride a bike, or ride a bus to work. But the Americans who want a luxury in life of having a car, and who knowingly go into the purchase with knowledge that it needs fuel are fine paying that price, because we are offered another solution of battery operated ones. Nobody forces a car down our throats! And its a legit business. So to say that the oil business distorts America is wrong, you should say it distorts the WORLD. And when you preach to humanity that all cars should be banned, I don't want to be around to hear the backlash.

I do agree with you however about how its not all George W's fault, its our system. Yes it could be better. Once anyone thinks something is perfect, they are mistaken, nothing is perfect, we can always strive for better.

And about when you said "My beef is I don't trust anyone who comes at me with their title. I won't listen if you come at me as a president, police officer, boss or clergy. But if you come to me as yourself then lets talk and find a common ground. Once a title is brought in, the meeting stops being productive and starts being about power and control" See, I am the other way! When I'm not getting anywhere lets say with a sales clerk, I automatically say "Let me speak to your manager". I never go through the middle man, I go to the top. I deal better with power people. Because I know nothing is going to get twisted about what I said from the beginning or through the grapevine. I go to the source.

I think I just got confused myself writing that! :)

[mo1]

Littlelady i like your style. For anyone to even compare Bush and Saddam is ridiculous and pathetic. Unforunately many liberals feel that it is more productive to bash the president than to work for the change they wish to see in this country. They believe without hesitance the rhetoric spewed by their party leaders and the media and fail to take a moral stand of any kind. Just look at those dumb "human shields" (people who went to Iraq vowing to stand in front of Iraqis if war arrived)....and what did they do just this week.......most of them left saying "we fear for our safety". Seems like they kind of missed the point of their own mov't. I have no doubt that a considerable number of the people protesting the war would not be able to back up why they are protesting war with a logical and informed reasoning. Here where i live we have had numerous anti-war protests. But on Saturday we had one supporting the war and guess who its participants were........Iraqi immigrants! Shouldnt that say something? When people from Iraq now living here are for getting rid of Saddam Hussein. That's why Saddam has 99% support in his country b/c noone can voice any dissent. Read the HumanRightsWatch report and see if you can stomach the atrocities committed on a daily basis there. At some point you run out of diplomatic options and have to stand up against someone who is willing to murder and torture his own people at will.

p.s. As a correction Littlelady you made the reference to Iraqi women having to cover up their skin and faces....i dont believe that is the case in Iraq. Your likely thinking of Iran, Saudia Arabia and Afghanistan when under the Taliban.

[StateNAurora]

Does anyone else think that this war could lead to an even larger conflict? When we started to build up our troops a few months back others took adavantage of the worlds focus on Iraq. Isreal and Palestine saw an increase in violence, and N> Korea took the opportunity to throw away arms treaties and fire up their nuclear program again. Yesterday you had MIGs intercepting a recon flight over Korea, something that hasn't happend since the 60's. I think we should tread slowly before we set off something that we never expected.

[LittleLady23]

Thanks mo1

Yeah, and anyone on here knows, I tend to write with intense passion and not proofread what I wrote before submitting it. I was getting the women confused with the Taliban rule. But hey, its almost all the same. Saddam, the Taliban: Both equal freaks with guns who are on a power trip! It was easy to group together! haha ;)

[Benwa]

It is wrong the way saddam treats his people. Everyone can agree it is wrong to murder and destroy people who can't really defend themselves. I mean saddams henchmen are way more equipped than the villagers the Iraqis they slaughtered. I mean it could even be compared to a militarised super nation picking on a smaller nation with a lesser army.

North Korea's an interesting factor. They seem more of a threat to world peace than Iraq. You know who we really need to keep a heads up on. China. Everyone says they are our allies. Bull! Their MO is to buddy up to a nation and strike with surprise. They run it strictly like something out of the Art of War. they match us militarilty. They have technological and information warfare capabilities. Think how many things in our country are computer automated. They have the ability to (just like our military) to get into those systems and manipulated them. Reverse sewage flow to spill into aquifers, simultaneuosly open all doors in a prison, or altering the ingredients in a Baby formula plant to toxic levels. They have the technology and we know they do. They also have us licked economically as well. Think how many goods are made in China. They control the panama canal (the shipping companies on each side are owned by chinese companies that finance the Chinese army). There military isn't funded through gov't but through mafioso like families. These families sell anything to anyone, in fact, alot of the weapons of mass destruction in MidEast most likely came from them (during iran/Iraq war they sold ammunition to one side while selling sandbags to stop the ammo to the other, that sounds almost capitalistic). Plus they have a country that is nearly impossible to invade with a gazillion people (one out of four people on this planet is chinese).

This coming century could/will belong to China. Don't be suprised if we aren't number one for very long. The ole Red Dragon is stirring. Have no doubt they are looking at this impending war as potential for them. This may be the spark they need. Good thing I like chinese food.

[Lady Luck]

my personal belief is that most of the other countries in the world will join against the U.S. in an attempt to quell our aggression. There was a poll recently & most countries in the poll voted the U.S as a bigger threat to world peace than Iraq.

I have thought this since before Sept. 11 & all signs point to me being right on the money.

[weslarson]

Originally posted by StateNAurora
Does anyone else think that this war could lead to an even larger conflict? When we started to build up our troops a few months back others took adavantage of the worlds focus on Iraq. Isreal and Palestine saw an increase in violence, and N> Korea took the opportunity to throw away arms treaties and fire up their nuclear program again. Yesterday you had MIGs intercepting a recon flight over Korea, something that hasn't happend since the 60's. I think we should tread slowly before we set off something that we never expected.

No. It's obvious that leaving the middle east alone for the past decade was a BIG mistake. Anyone remember September 11th? Do you think that if these were civilized countries, that terrorist would have a nest there? It's clear that terrorists (not necessarily Osama's group, but terrorists) have been welcomed in Iraq. Leaving these regimes alone has only allowed this to continue.

As heavy-handed as it sounds, some folks only listen to violence. Saddam is one of those folks. And if it creates a bigger conflict, that's just too bad. It's the right thing to do to get Saddam and his whole regime out. The people of Iraq are good, educated and intelligent people who want freedom, but because of the dictatorial military rule they have no way to break out of it themselves.

As for North Korea, they broke their agreement years ago, but just didn't get caught until a few months ago.

Folks, there are evil people out there! Some of which rule countries! These people like Saddam and Kim Jung Ill (sp?) would love to wipe out the US, but can't because we're so militarily superior.

Just think what might have happened if we had been playing watchdog before Japan attacked us 60 years ago. We may have been able to prevent the attack on Pearl Harbor, as well as the decimation of all the asia pacific countries. Because we waited and chose to be isolationists, we paid the consequences. And then, in order to end the war, we had to anniahlate two entire cities in Japan.

I'd rather deal with Saddam NOW, while he's beatable, than later when he controls 10 times as much as he does now. I don't want us to have to use another Nuke.

[KPeler]

Hey Guys! I think this is a great forum for us Quarter Life folks!
Many of us our age have trouble finding jobs or just getting our foot out in the job market because of this economic recession and unfortunatly Bush is the main cause (not all) of this messed up economy. Now, could you imagine how much money will be spent on the war against Iraq and the pricetag for peace keeping and nation building? It just sucks! because whether you like the President or not...A Bush Economy=Economic Recession, Unemployment, Lack of Opportunties and War. It happened in 1991 and it is happening today. I think we should take this opportunity to have our voices heard especially college grads who invest time and money in school and cannot find jobs in this kind of economy. Well I guess that's all I have to say for now.

[sunbear]

a vent board! Hooray! :cool: Please pardon my sarcasm...I really wanted Nader for president. Our national defense is necessary, however I do not believe that our country will manage under wholistic control.

Here are my thoughts. I think this stuff has built up since the 1970's and now terrorist, oil problems, and other stuff is popping up again like it has before.

Back in the 1970's, I guess we had some problems with the middle east, OPEC, and of course those long long lines of cars at the gas pumps. On top of that there were undercover security guards on all plane flights for a while.
then there was the 1980's. 1990's. 2000.

:idea: Once upon a time there was this man named Adam Smith who wrote this book called the "Invisible Hand". The idea was so great that one of our founding fathers decided our country was going to be run so, the "power is in the hands of the consumer".:idea: Or so it should have been.

So since the 70's and maybe earlier, was there not a monopoly on our oil? There is smog in our air, oil all over the roads, and ever so increasing gas prices by the hour.

And someone mentioned that the Chineese was supposed to take over the world? I thought that the Chineese emporer closed all of it's doors to trade in Marco Polo days because he thought that Marco Polo was importing opium, which was destroying his country. Maybe we would be better off under a Chineese ruler. :lol:

I am not a happy consumer of oil, smog clogs my sinuses. And if we have smart enough technology to land man on the moon, how do we not have any more alternative sources of energy already for private transport?

OPEC has always messed with us. Isn't the US the biggest customer for oil from the middle east? Without us, and trickle down economics- I seriously do not believe that Al Queida (sp?), Osama Bin Laden, or Saddam Hussein would have the resources/finances to pull this junk off. I saw this footage of Saddam Hussein on 60 minutes- the people dressed in robes dancing with him looked like the walking dead.
WE are their bread and butter. They can fight their own wars, I prefer we leave them well alone. And I think better management of our resources will be much cheaper than reparations.

Sorry this is so long, this is my gut feeling on this situation. My little cousin is only 20 and already stationed in Iraq indefinately.
I really hope we can resolve this peacefully. :torn:

[TankgirlyC]

It is not the Chinese we have issues with. Its the freak over in North Korea!

I think you have some idea whats going on...but I think you need to read some more details to really know what all the issues are about.

[sunbear]

Hi Tankygirl,
you're right. I'm only being philosophical and idealistic I admit. It's not that we have issues with China, but sometimes I think that they have some ideas that sound really good.
My mother is korean and was 4 when the korean war ended. I KNOW what their gov is capable of. That freak needs to go.
I'm in socal and for the first time got fully exposed to a korean population with diff. viewpoints on the situation- I'm still trying to absorb it.

[Lady Luck]

I def. think N. Korea is not to be taken lightly... but sunbear may be on to something w/ the whole China thing. I will be doing some more research- I have not studied up on this aspect before.

[mo1]

I really find it hilarious when people put all the blame of the recession, and unemployment on one administration and its leader. If anyone has taken a basic economics course you would understand that the economy runs in cycles, and that today's recession has as much to do with the actions of former administrations as it has to do with the terrible events of Sept 11th and the policies being pursued now.

Their is only so much govt can do to pull the economy out of recession, the rest lies in the hands of CEO's and consumers worldwide.

Yes obviously part of the reason for the slow recovery of the economy is due to the nervousness of the business world over the impending situation with Iraq. My question to all you who are against this war is....what kind of shape do you think our economy will be in if we wait for more inspections and give Saddam more time? Do you think that will ease the anxiety? It is precisely because we are in this limbo of waiting that the economy has been slow to recover. More time is not what is needed. What IS needed now is either to "shit or get off the pot" (so to speak). And if you think getting off the pot is the smarter option than i think your worldview is dangerously misguided. We are in a unprecedented time in our history......we cannot afford to sit back and be passive b/c there our individuals out there who could not care one way or another. All they believe is that America is evil and they would risk their lives to destroy our country. They do not value life......if they did they wouldnt be blowing up human missiles on board buses full of innocent victims, or using nerve gas on helpless citizens, or flying jets into buildings. These people do not think like we do...they are not rational!

Its is undeniable that the American people are making a huge sacrifice and taking a huge risk in pursuing this war on terror.....but if this fight for a democratic world, free of terror isnt worth the sacrifice and the risk than what the hell is????????
Dont be selfish people! And dont believe for one second that the terror in this world will go away without a fight!!!

[sunbear]

Hi Ladyluck,
I am idealistic- feasablity is another story but America hasn't really pursued it. We've had these problems since the 70's. This is the only way I can make sense of it all. Strategy being the most dangerous opponent is one who has nothing to lose (like oil).

MO1, I agree. I think people are a little way to hard on Pres. Bush. He didn't fly planes into the towers, oppress his own people or terrorize other countries. And about the economy,
It was a HUGE bubble. The money wasn't real. It just busted on BUsh's terms. I blame Greenspan. :googly:

[TankgirlyC]

Disclaimer: I DO NOT BLAME BUSH FOR ALL OUR ECONOMIC TROUBLES

Statement: Bushs Tax ideas just make the rich keep their $ and tax the people who have to work their butts off. Basically the run down is...that the more you make the less taxes you have to pay per % gross income. THe less you make the more % you are taxed on gross income.

Wouldnt it be nice to have a tax system that was based on how much you made. If you make $100 you would pay $1 and if you make $100,000 you would pay $1,000. Just for a basic idea....gotta love preportional taxing....

BUt see the rich bitch because they would have to pay more because they make more....well you have the $ to spend....people who make $20K and have a family dont have that $ to spare...

[Lady Luck]

of course the filthy rich wouldnt go for proportional taxes- that wouldnt sit well w/ campaign contributors/ CEO's.

[TankgirlyC]

Thats my point.

[Lady Luck]

sorry... didn't mean 2 be redundant. :p

[LittleLady23]

mo1 RIGHT ON!!!!!

It was like you were taking the words out of my mouth!

Its nice to see another on here with the same hotheaded thinking like I do! haha

[Lady Luck]

looks like most are in agreement that military action is needed...

I heard on CNN yesterday that US troops are in 134 countries around the world. Do you think our military is being stretched too thin?

[M4A1]

You wouldn't want a Chinese ruler, at least not straight out of its current government. China isn't even Marxist anymore. They are only communist in name. Their whole issue and beef with us is one word -- Imperialism which is not just directed at us, but it's very understandable, because the Chinese really had to bent over backwards to avoid total annihilation.

If you know anything about the opium wars was that it was led by the Brits involving 7 other industrilized nations. In the classroom of China today, they make each Chinese kid remember each individual countries that invaded with the league of nations and what China had to surrender to each of these countries. And we were one of those countries. They had to make concessions, give up lands (Hong Kong, etc.), antiques & treasures, better trade status, and allow legal import status for opium. The whole Chinese population were slowly dying from the downer drug. In which the Japanese, one of the nations who participated in the opium war, saw it as an opportunity to take advantage of. They forcefully took over Taiwan in 1850s and build up its forces while planning to take over the whole Asia. WW2 might seem to us to have started in 1938. It actually started in early 1900s. Japs went against the will of The Leauge of Nations and was slowly eating up land piece by piece. They ruled by carnage, in which the league of nation knew for years and did nothing to stop. They reluctantly posed sanctions on Japan after decades of carnage.

But by then the revolution had already begun. Communism was being favored because the elitist who ruled could not stop the carnage and shame. We did get involved, we finance Gen. Chang-Kai Shek who had intially appeared to be democratic. But to make a long story short, Chang-Kai Shek was just a conqueror and had no interest in reforming. He was just as brutal as the Japs. Many Chinese peopel saw Chang as Imperialist puppet. The poor, lower-class intellectuals eventually sided with the communist and started civil war, in which the Japs saw as another opportunity to take advantage of the in-fighting. They pushed further inward in China, and again the league of nation did nothing, in which Hitler saw it as a weakness. And soon after that-- blitzkrieg to Poland!

So you probably have an idea where the Chinese hostility comes from. We invaded them. Make them feel like crap and participated in opium trade. Backed a ruler they hate. Did nothing to the Japs until the very end. Then fought them in Korean war, and Vietnam war (Yes. Chinese troops disguised as NVCs to fight Americans in Vietnam). So yea, the scars are there.

It should be no surprise why they view things differently in the political arena and why they might veto on Iraq.

[M4A1]

Why stop at Iraq? Let's go get them North Koreans too! Who cares they have the most fortified bunkers, most mined country, 3rd or 4th largest army in the world. We can take them on. We'll sacrifice the west coast if we have to. Activiate the draft! Yea! what a good way to end our QLC!

[weslarson]

Sounds to me like they would back the shutdown of Saddam's regime. They saw what happened when Japan went unchecked, and should be able to see the same pattern here. If Iraq goes unchallenged they'll do the same conquering and destruction that Japan did a century ago.

[M4A1]

They would. It's partly why they haven't said that they'd use their veto power to cancel our UN proposal. But at the same time, they also don't want us to control the oil there. We might not be arch-rivals, but also aren't best of friends.

Here's an example, there's theory why we "mistakenly-dropped" a bomb to their embassy in Kosovo back in 1998. Theory was that the Chinese were sending intelligence information to the Serbs, and that's how the Serbs captured 3 of our recon soldiers even with Serb's radar all knocked out. Our intelligence picked up the fact that Chinese was feeding Serbs information from the embassy and decided to take it out. China knew our bombing wasn't an accident but they didn't want to admit to the world that they were feeding Serbs information. So the whole ordeal just kind of went away by us calling it an "accident". They did demand us to pay like a couple million dollars for 2 reporters' death. We end up paying half of that. (Not a bad deal since no one else got captured after that :) )

[weslarson]

And it's for this reason that I can understand why, since the end of WWII, Japan has founded itself on non-aggression. For the same reason I can understand why Germany may not want to take part in another war. They've been the 'bad guy' with military might in the past and are now trying to avoid all military action again. I can respect that. But don't side with the bad guys! Just stay out of it.

But France? well, they have a history of not wanting to even defend themselves. In WWII they practically sold out the rest of their country to the Nazis to save Paris from getting bombed.

[M4A1]

I don't think these nations are siding with the bad guys. Their goal is to disarm Iraq through peaceful means with War as the last resort. And with Iraq destorying its missles at this moment there isn't really a justifiable reason to attack them. I think if we spend more time on making a case for innocent Iraqis who were being slaughtered by Saddam we would have had a better chance to gain international support. But the administration was bent on terrorism, so we use the weapons of mass destruction slogan when it clearly isn't really about that. Because for whatever Saddam has done, that Kim Jong II has done it too. He also possess WMD and has starved thousands of his people to death so that he can have the 3rd or 4th largest army in the world, which makes him less of a pushover (actually pushover isn't the right word, more like "beatable") He has a million active military personnel. No country of North Korea's size, or in the right mind, would keep a million active military personnel. Kim Jong spends most of his budget on training and sustaining these troops. North Korea is the most fortified bunker nation in the world. A friend who stationed there told me that if war had broke out when he was there, he would have died within minutes. So many artillery guns, missle silos have troops positions zeroed in. Whoever (US and Koreans) stationed by that ceasefire line will die within seconds in that first minute of the war with North Korea.

So the concern for other nations is that if we goto war with Iraq. North Korea is basicly a harden version of Iraq. Are we going to do the same to North Korea? North Korea looks forward to a fight. They spent their whole life training and building up. And as long as Sudan or other third world country buys missles from them, they'll live. And for humanitarian reasons, you can't really just starve their innocent people to death to punish their government. If you disregard humanitarian reasoning, then you'll have China laughing at you and saying "Well, I guess you can't be telling me how not to treat my people then, eh?"

[weslarson]

I think that would be ideal as well. If we could get Iraq to destroy ALL their WMD AND get Saddam to retire in exile, I'm positive war would be avoided. But... Saddam ain't gonna step down, and he's going to try to keep some of his weapons.

Further, destroying these missiles is just an act. It's like asking a grocery store to destroy all their food, and they respond by tossing out their candy bars. This isn't real cooperation. It's only buying time and Saddam knows it. We need to give him an ultimatum, saying "ALL WMD must be accounted for and destroyed and proof must be provided by March 31 or else we will destroy them for you--and you along with them."

[M4A1]

I may not be reading your post right. Are you saying that's ideal to disarm North Korea by force as how we are about to disarm Iraq now? I don't think that's ideal at all. I don't think you understand the serious consequence of doing something like that. The death toll will be higher than Vietnam. Bags of mutilated, mangledbodies will be shipped back here to the States. Thousands of draftees missing arms, legs, vision, or on life support, or vegetables. People with their skin melted off looking like the elephant man. People on battlefield squirming in pain and gasping for air while the VX nerve gas melts away their internal intestines.

Another trillion of dollars is going to be spent. Not only will you need troops to stay in Iraq, Afghanistan, and even with a victory you'll need guys to stay in North Korea as well. There is almost no doubt that we will have to re-activiate the draft if we goto war with North Korea in the near future while things are going down with Iraq that means me and you could be going on a tour.

And judging by how North Koreans is reacting to us moving to Iraq. They might just bring it to us before we can decide. There are very serious conseqences. I thought I'd just bring it up.

[weslarson]

"Their [Germany, France, Russia] goal is to disarm Iraq through peaceful means with War as the last resort."

This would be ideal. The disarming of Iraq without war. But... Saddam refuses to let this happen.

North Korea is an entirely different story though. In Iraq we will see many of the Iraqi militia surrenduring when attacked. Those people want to be out from under Saddam. North Korea has an entirely different populous, though. I think assisanation might be the only way to go there.

Or...*gulp*...fund some other opposition group to take over the country from the inside with the agreement that they'll stand down. I don't much like this idea becuase that's how we ended up with guys like Saddam and Osama. And while it might be easier to put another (evil) group in power and then make war on them while they're unstable, it's not really good policy to double-cross like that. But I have a feeling that's what we'll do... Probably even with China. Help China take over North Korea. That would be pretty slimy, but I could see it working out that way.

[M4A1]

Yea, it'd be interesting to see China take them out. But as erratic as Kim Jong II is, I don't think he's dumb enough to bite the hand that used to feed him. Chinese fought with the North Koreans in WW2. But their relation with each other has deteriorated over the years as China'sincreasingly becoming more involved with free trade. First economic zones, then ownership of indivdual property, now with Hong Kong. China is the not model society that they used to look up to. But on the other hand, China also has enough sway to be able to resolve the situation peacefully.

As for Iraq, the real concern is not the battle that's going to be fought with guns. The kind of battle wouldn't last very long. It's the aftermath we have to worry about. Extremists tend to walk on crowded buses with backpacks packed with bombs.

[mo1]

M41- I agree with you that the situation is North Korea is completely different...and as such needs to be handled with kid gloves. It is extremly frightening and worth considering! However in the same respect i think its a safe bet that the int'l community as a whole would not accept North Korea making such an offensive move.... and North Korea hopefully understands that.

I admire your faith in the French and Germans and other "lets wait" groupees. However even you must admit that their motives are not completely humanitarian. For the past 10 years guess who has been the biggest Iraqi exporter????????? FRANCE. They do more trade with Iraq than anyone else! So please dont go telling me that they are defending peace by not supporting the U.S. coalition. They are acting in pure economic self interest! Chirac (the French prime minister) has even been reported to have a personal rapport with Hussein!

The international community has given Hussein 12 years to dismantle his weapons he was supposed to have gotten rid of after the Gulf War. Then when he finally starts to dismantle some of his missles (which of course are only a small fraction of the arsenal he has stockpiled while breaking UN mandate for the last decade) the French, Germans, Russians and others practically congratulate and thank him for doing it. Am i just missing the picture or doesnt this prove that he has been in violation the whole time. How can these countries put their faith in someone to completely disarm when he has been lying for ten plus years to the int'l community???? Why arent more Americans against war holding up signs saying DISARM SADDAM! GET RID OF YOUR WEAPONS SADDAM! If you are really for peace, if you really believe in making people safe all over the world why dont you stand for this...instead of holding DROP BUSH NOT BOMBS signs! If it wasnt for the U.S. military pressure and the actions of the Bush administration Hussein wouldnt even be putting forth a weak effort to disarm right now!!!!!! Lets get people going...if you really dont want war tell your friends and family and people on the street holding signs to start putting the pressure on Iraq to disarm instead of making a mockery of their own country!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[weslarson]

Well said, mo.

Saddam can stop this war at any time. All he has to do is disarm.

The simple fact that he hasn't disarmed should tell everyone that he plans on using or selling his weapons. And the weapons he's got aren't exactly designed for defending one's country.

[M4A1]

I don't agree with the French with how they want to resolve the problem. I don't know why the Russians are rejecting it so I can't say I agree with them either. I only know our "supposed" reason for attacking, and I definitely don't agree with that.

Why now? after all these years, we had known about this? Why can't we gather enough convincing evidence to show to everyone?

If we go against the UN will, UN will just fall apart. The whole purpose of UN would be defeated. UN depends on superpowers like us to follow and set examples. And I know they can't stop us. That is not the point. So do we just act like a tyrant and do what we want without their support? What happens if other countries follow the same path? When they get defiant and act on their own? for example, China attacks Taiwan? (we'll lose source of watches and cheap computer parts!) or Russia attacks Chechnya?

I'm saying that we are setting ourselves up as bad examples. If any of these formidable countries follow the same path in the future, guess who will have to intervene? and what just reason can we come up with?

[Lady Luck]

did anyone else see the report (only aired once like 2 weeks ago, cant remember which channel) about the 'blueprint' for the Middle East set out by Cheney, Rumsfeld, & Bush before Sept. 11, something about they knew it would take another Pearl Harbor to make the American ppl supportive of war w/ Iraq? Seemed like quite a sensational story for a TV news report... I told my boyfriend about it & kept waiting for the story to play again, but have not seen it anymore. :confused: