I just don't like Saddam

Saddam had to go. However, the government under him didn't need to, nor did power, food, water, order, and other small little things necessary for a functional democracy.

I saw a letterman show once. It had "Before the US invasion for freedom.." And the Iraqi national anthem playing, marching nicely and in line, step and order, saluting the flag. Then "After the US invasion for freedom.." Played the baby elephant walk music with people rioting and looting.

Sadaam may have had to go, but did the 250,00+ Iraqis now dead since the start of the war have to die?

Invading that damn place is just another thing to add to Bush's "stupidity" file... It was a bad move from the get go. I cant believe we actually followed a retarted cowboy into battle. But now we are there it is about us supporting the troops more than supporting the war. Saddam was a tyrant and Yrael is right his son was a major threat also... But our reasons for going just because of WMD's was a fallacy. We went for more reasons than that. Harbouring terrorist orginizations and the threat of losing our oil intrests were much more a political motivation than trying to bring Saddam to justice or finding these so called WMD's. I mean do you think we are going to catch the "biggest terrorist threat" aka Bin Ladin roaming the streets of Bahgdad? Hell even if we keep hunting him in Afghanistan... he will be almost impossible to catch... he was trained by our top military/intelligence outfits. Sending troops of regular military personel after him is like sending a mute to the spelling bee championship.

And on a side note.... after we sent troops into Afghanistan and rooted out the Taliban from power the warlords took over... now Afghanistan is the highest producer of opium poppies in the world. The Taliban did not allow the farming of poppies under its control. Hmm now what are we going to have, a replay of Vietnam there too? The US imports an incredible amount of raw opium for pharmacuetical companies to process into pain killing drugs. We used to get most of it from the "Golden Triangle" aka Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam. Which was one of the major reasons we were in that war too. Now we get it from Afghanistan. Hmmm. Sorry ranting...

Anyways I dont agree with the war there. I do support the troops there and my friends who are over there fighting. And I hope a safe return for them.

That's always puzzled me, why support the troops who are doing something you disagree with?

Because the troops are doing as told. Never, ever, give soldiers shit for following orders. They don't deserve crap for doing what they're ordered to, and hearing of events where they have in the past just really, really pisses me off. So support them while they are away from home, and risking their lives doing whatever for their country.

If I were told, in my job, that I should let a paedophile work with children as a school teacher and I did so, would the fact that I was told to do it by my boss mean I was void of responsibility? Surely, as cognitive animals, our own values and morals come into every decision we make. A soldier is not an unquestioning grunt, though they are trained to be, and as such as far as I'm concerned 'following orders' doesn't excuse them from responsibility.

I know that's an unpopular opinion, but there you go.

I'm not thinking hiring a potential rapist and fighting for your country are quite the same thing....

Its a real shame that people seem to not know history from 5 years ago. I'm going to just assume that nobody was really paying attention untill then, and similarlly has had no intrest to look into the actual events that took place between 1992 and 2003.

However, I just wanted to point out in the "equvilancy" debate between iraq and other countries, (such as Saudi Arabia) that no other current leader save maybe Castro has killed as many of thier political oppneents within their own country as Saddam did.

I love it how people will argue about countries and thier long histories in one hand, and compare that directly to individuals and thier personal histories, as if they are one and the same, which they are not.

I also find it interesting how when people say "support the troops" they never seem to care to ask the troops what they want to do.

The Military shouldn't be blamed. Bush should. But, the military leaders should have doubled checked, and so should have the FBI Or CIA or which ever secret service is in charge of that sort of thing.
Also, the troops shouldn't be given crap because they're away from home. Do you think that they enjoy killing these people? That they enjoy going and raiding on someone's home? I doubt any of them do. I think most of them just want to come home. If a solider didn't obey an order, you can, I think, get charged for that. In the military courts. They can go to jail for disobeying a direct order. What do you want them to do?

Couldn't it be argued that way, however?

So many cases go on without being brought up - it's usually covered up, I'd imagine, especially for people of high standing. There is bountiful proof that raping women has been done by American troops, however - apparently, on orders. Should they be given a free pass because of this?

eh, that's a bit extreme of a comparison, seeing as that's illegal in the first place, and different circumstances apply...

When you join if the army/navy/whatever you're expected to fight, if you go to war, without major complaint and do what you're told. Not doing that stuff, for reasons such as I don't like Bush/I don't agree with this war, can result in consequences, which could end up badly for you.

I personally don't agree with the war, and am not enlisted, nor plan to be, in any of the armed services.
I don't agree with Bush's ideals, and think he is a complete idiot, and that we should not be in Iraq in the first place, but saying, "We shouldn't be in Iraq, I hope all of our troops die," is not right. (ok, a bit extreme, I'll grant you that in advance, to lazy/don't want to delete it, can't think of a better way to put it...) I will support our troops, provided that they are not doing something extremely heinous. I don't like the idea of war, and I don't like the idea of killing real, living people. I will support the troops anyways. They are someone's families and friends, and some of them may be ours.

I hope you are aware that there was not a single government who suggested or hinted at the possibility that the U.S and UK intellegence was wrong. Sure there were individuals who stated thier dissagreements, but there are such people who dissagree about which animal to put on the endagered species list.


@Viravain: Just about every grievance brought against a member of the U.S. military for doing an atrocity has been looked at and punished. Thats not nearly the same as talking about the overarching "war."



Its one thing to be against killing people and wars in genearls like those activists who get rescued by the U.S and UK army last week, and then proceded to talk about how evil the Western world is, and another to be a rational human being discussing the particulars of this war in particular.

Edit: Nm, Viravain beat me to it.

No, that kind of action is extremly heinous, and shouldn't have been ordered in the first place. If someone followed orders on this, I would lose all respect for them immediatly.

The army is expected to kill people, hopefully not innocent people.
The army is not expected to, nor legally allowed to (I think...), rape innocent people, or guilty people either.

Not really... so different in so many different ways.



Again, fighting for your country is NOT RAPING PEOPLE, and raping people is not fighting for your country. Bad things happen yes, but thats not what I'm talking about. In general, the people who risk their lives for their country should be respected for doing so. There have been times where troops returning home have had rotten food thrown at them just for doing what they are legally forced to do. So blame the government for things you don't like, not the people who are forced to enforce it. I may disagree with you, but I can understand where you come from for the most part. Blaming people for things they have no choice about... just sickens me.

I am for this war for one major reason.

Its changing the people who need changing to become better people.

would you care to clarify, and show an example?
otherwise your opinion sounds baseless and consists of pure bias...

He said hiring a POTENTIAL rapist, not hiring someone to kill the enemy (+innocents) and rape everything with the correct orifice they come across.