Thank you for again, not reading what I said.

Its one thing to be open about where you are comming from, its another to lie about it.

Just to give you a nice idea about that website quoted...

You don't need any special knoweledge to see what a website is about and who its catered to, all you need is acess to google.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&...rch&sa=N&tab=wg

Didn't you just search which groups use the information on the website quoted?

How does that tell you -anything- about the website itself? Unless I'm misunderstanding something.

Edit: I mean, a LOT of anti-Bush protesters quote his speeches in order to point out idiocy, does that make Bush anti-Bush?

Actually it does, he is a walking advertisement for being anti-himself.

Edit:Five pages on a controversial topic, with godly comments and I didn't notice this thread until now? I must be slacking.

Well to be fair cuba is in a better state socially if not economically than it was before the revolution, Cuba wouldn't have even gone communist if the trade sanctions hadn't forced it to, but your point still stands on the other ones.

As you said sadam didn't do anything special to warrent the attention of the world definatly not when compared to places like china and the huge number of human rights they ignore and that the western world ignores because china is profitable.



Well I said it before, mr simpson the satirist said something like "Bush is putting us out of work, we just cant make up stuff as stupid as he says"

US cannot use the "removing a dictatorship" excuse after sponsoring endless dictatorships in South America where people where dragged out of their homes at night, and only the very very very lucky got back home, suffering severe problems the rest of their lives wich tended to be short. This happened not 30 years ago.

Political debates! How fun!

Saddam Hussein had to go, fifteen years ago when he was removed. Whether or not you agree on the removal of him based on the evidence of WMD is irrelevant at this point, it happened. The sole reason America is staying there is because, not for the 250k Iraqis that died, or the 2000 Americans that died, or the regime of one man, or the need for oil for the rest of the world, but for one simple thing:

26 million.

That is the amount of people in Iraq that have been given a chance at the freedom that the rest of the world enjoys, the luxury that brings it to them, and the freedom of choice. They are no longer ruled by a corrupt government who's sole mission is strength in arms, or a government who killed four million of it's own people in genocide at much little response by the rest of the civilized world.

Second, America, in the Cold War, supported dictatorships of anti-communists over democracy. That era is gone, this is a new era, since the end of the Cold War, America has pressured every dictatorship around the world to change their ways, to become democratic. Whether or not their actions in the past even should be brought up in question, when it was the old World that did mcuh worse then any American has done. If you want examples, here they are: The 11 Boer wars, the Indonesian exodus, the Holocaust, the slavery of black men and Indians, the Spanish position in South America and the willingness to slaughter any who stand in their way, the imperialism of Africa.

Add in the fact that, the death total is, altogether, less then 300k. Their sacrifice for the freedom of 26 million, it took over 500k Americans for the freedom of America (Civil War), it took 70 million people around the world for the freedom from fascism and hatred. This is the last fascist ruler still in power, and he needed to be removed.

Whether or not you think Bush is an idiot or not, Americans are there to stay in Iraq until the country can support itself. I mean support, support to the globalization of the world, support to the standards of the world.

Obviously, you need to stop looking at the pictures of dead, or people crying, but the new schools, the new electricity, the happiness there. People are enjoying their freedom, they are enjoying their freedom from fear.

So silvanus why arnt the americans invading china korena or Iran next then?

If freedom and democracy are as you said the main reason why america is in iraq then why arn't they getting ready to go and fix the moral injustices in china or elsewhere?

Because China has nuclear arms.

China is protecting Korea.

And if you notice Bush's "direct speaking" to Iran during his Inaugaural address was the exact same as his "direct speaking" to Iraq three years ago.

So you want us to ignore the innocents and the suffering that is going on because the Iraqi people arnt happy with the new way of life, you want us to ignore the human rights violations of the army? You want us to just look at the upsides and not compare them to the downsides? Sorry no if the war had produced a free and democratic iraq where the iraqi people are safe and free then yes the war would have been a success, but it hasnt we went to war for dodgy reasons and the war has caused a lot of suffering and pain and continues to cause suffering and pain to the iraqi people. It could have gone a lot better.



So its ok to fight for freedom and democracy when you know you can win but its not ok to fight for freedom and democracy when it isnt definate that you are going to win?

Gah and while your talking about ignoring the past no, american has been the biggest funder of terrorism in my country and many others for the past 50 years, actions speak louder than words.

You want us to ignore the number four million, the number of Kurds gassed just like the Jews in the HOlocaust? You've been looking at only the downsides, why can't it go both ways? People are living better, houses are being built, schools are being built, females are recieving education, Iraq is on the path of a developing nation.

No war has ever been a success, no place is free from death and all other. There will always be suffering, everywhere. The suffering and pain you refer to is weeping moms at home in America, or those who have lost family members in Iraq, whether Iraqi or not. A fact of life: IRAQ IS IMPROVING. Get that through your head first.

And yes, it is ok to fight for democracy when it's not the entire west of coast of America that can be nuclear bombed, it's not the fifty million South Koreans that can be killed by poison gas from North Korea.

And you obviously don't understand about what I said about the Cold War. America's mindset was "Communism Last." They'll take anything over Communism, the Cold War is over, America is changing it's policies, it's diplomatic policies, and it's standing with the rest of the world. First, you need to compare fifty years to one thousand, and that'll be the difference between America and the Old World.

Right, if we defined standing with as:
America: Aprove this war, UN
UN: We need more data, currently thats not a war it's an invasion of a sovereign country
America: I have made funny drawings wich show they have WMDs
UN: Sorry, we need to let our inspectors actually do their work and find them, otherwise it's an invasion.
America: Bah, I don't care if the rest of the world thinks it's illegal. KabOOM!! And whoever isn't on my side, it'as against me! Go me Freedom Defender! ((And I will give oil and contracts to whoever is on my side ))

American and the old world, right well considering the english goverment apologised for what the had done and admited they were wrong here and have tried to repair previous acions, has american and george bush done the same, no they still impose economic sanctions on countries thats only crime was to remove a dictator that wasn't supported by the people. You cant say its all in the past when your still supporting a president with policys like that. If as you say the reason to go to war in iraq was justified and true then why did they lie to start with, why don't they apologise for putting sadam into power, why do they take away the human rights of people the same human rights that they say they are fighting for.

Life in Iraq is improving? Where there was relative peace before, they are now on a brink of civil war. Even those suppressed minorities you name are angry at America for invading. American soldiers raped, tortured and murdered people, most of them innocent is this better then what Sadam did? America used clusterbombs in a city, weapons known to have little precision and cause high loss of civilian life, is this a moral tactic? America bombed a hospital with international doctors on account that they gave medical care to all Iraqi, is that moral? America now occupies (you heard me right, occupies as in holding a country against the will of it's people) a country. Like many said this was for oil rather then these 'knightly' claims US goverment now shows, it is funny how the weapon and oil industry control Bush's decisions. And how the American media (I watched both CNN and EURONEWS, the news was suprisingly different) tried to do everything to support this war, even firing a journalist that made a news report against the war. (freedom of speech huh)

Oh and funny how in Iraq, women where allowed to go to schools even before the invasion. The things being built where the things America destroyed in the first place. Only now they are built by American companies, who can make money on it. America even blew up a bridge for no other reason then a company could rebuild it.

conclusion if you compare pre and post war, Iraq was better pre-war. America attacked a sovereign nation against the wishes of the UN, so they can't claim their war being justified no matter howmuch they try to. When the concience of the world didn't agree on war, one person doing it anyway is either deluded about righteousness or is infact playing people.

And I hope America doesn't make the mistake of invading Iran, Iran won't be pushovers like Iraq, count on high casualties on America's side, with a possible attack on America itself using WMD weapons.

I was watching CNN the other day, and this exactly statement was pointed out; however, they put an interesting spin on it I had not considered:

- New Schools. While it is a correct statement that new schools are being built in Iraq, it is worth noting that because of violence, most parents are afraid to send their children to school. Some of children who had never before had the opportunity to go to school have died in them because building a school without ensuring a peaceful place for them doesn't do a hell of a lot.

- New Electricity. Did you ever visit Iraq prior to the US invasion? They had electricity. However, that was taken away by bombings during said invasion. During the peak of the war and for like 8 months after, the average family had between no power to 8-12 hours of power a day. Imagine trying to feed your children when you can't even effectively (and for 12 hours in a desert without power just plain cannot) refrigerate food.

- Happiness. The idea that Iraq as a whole is happy is very misleading. Whereas I am sure there are some happy people, psychologically speaking, the vast majority of Iraq who has suffered through this war, lost loved ones, had their houses raided, etc. is likely still coping. If someone is still trying to cope, they aren't usually happy.

The initial purpose of the war was never to bring 'democracy' to Iraq. If you view President Bush's speech from pre-war to present you will notice the gradual switch from Iraq and Sadam H. being an imediate threat and harboring WMDs to Bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq. With this change in purpose such things as new schools and such arent really a good point to the war as that was never the initial purpose. Its like sending a kid to the grocery store with 20 bucks for a steak. The kid comes back and tells you the steak you wanted costs more money so you give it to him and he comes back with bologna saying they are all out of steak. While it is still meat (more or less) that is not why you sent the kid to the store in the first place thus the enthusiasm in recieving bologna isnt great.

Also Americans are selfish mofos, building a new school in Iraq isnt cool when you still have schools here that are less than stellar. So many Americans look at it as "Well he can go spend such and such amount of money here when we have the same problem at home and it is being ignored."

In ethics class we were asked two questions:

1. If a group of people captured 100 other people and then looked at you and said "Choose one person to be killed and the rest will go free" Would you do it? What if he says choose two people to die or what about 99 and one goes free?

2. Your have a new born child who poses the cure for some disease, but in order to receive the cure the baby has to die. Do you give up your child to save everyone else?

When is one too much?

Another website I dislike and try to never bring up for the same reason is www.Honestreporting.com

http://groups.google.com/groups/search?hl=...streporting.com

You can easily tell by the groups of people who discuss the website and bring it as "evidence" who it is written by and who it is written for.

Also Doublestandards quotes Bin-laden but never once points out the hypocracy in his speaches.

Love or Hate America (or at least the policies), I think we can all be thankful for at least one single thing regarding the system of presidency, in that no one person can serve more than two terms - the year 2008 is only a little ways away, and then Bush can never be President again.

I guess that means that students in Los Angeles who get upgraded powerlines in thier area should be very upset at the Government at California then, and California just "isn't worth it"

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169177,00.html

http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=2608&IssueNum=119

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/o...ack=1&cset=true

How exactly does losing power for a minimal amount of time even begin to compare to losing power for 30-50% of the day, every day, for months? Do all your arguements make this little sense, Daganev?

Right, Oil... yes, we went into Iraq to get oil. That is why Sudan, which has one of the world's largest untapped oil reservoirs, have been in a civil war for years, with human right abuses, which I say genocide, but the same people who refused to give permission to US refuse to save the two million who have been whipped and killed in Sudan. And, America hasn't done anything, simply because UN won't give the permission. This is the same bureacrautic organization that intervened far too late in Rwanda, who intervened too late in Bosnia, who didn't intervene in Iraq(pre-Gulf war). Great organization there.

Did you know the United Nations meets at Auschwitz every year at the liberation, poors wine into a wine glass, and makes a toast "Never again." They really are following that policy.


I never said the WMDs are true, I said our reason to go in there is shady. But you have to accept the fact that it happened, and our reason for staying there, instead of like the Gulf War, is to give Iraqis a chance at the freedoms most of the developing and the devloped world enjoy.



And what do you think would've happened after Saddam died? Who would take over, one of his sons, like a typical monarchy? Or how about the people, who won't be able to stand by a dictator for another 30 years.

Second, America did not put Saddam in power. Read this, since you obviously don't understand: http://www.emergency.com/hussein1.htm.

Third, your freedom of speech thing, I'm pretty sure the American government did not fire him but the company. That is entirely different. The company can do that all they want.

Fourth, women were not allowed to go to school. Islam forbade it.


Yes, I have. Have you, or do you just listen to the news? I went into Iraq on March 20th, 2003. I was shot on June 26, 2003, by my friend (a misfire), injured, medically discharged.


Once again, I never said our reasoning for entering Iraq was clear, or that we should've invaded in the first place. I have never once said that, I simply said our reason for staying there.

Have you ever heard the phrase "Don't judge a book by it's cover?" Well, don't judge a country by it's leader, Americans are not selfish mofos. Some are, but everyone has selfish leaders.

To make it clear: I am not supporting America, nor Bush, nor plenty of other things, I hate Bush, I hate most of America's policies, and I hate a lot of other things that most countries do. But I agree that Americans need to stay in Iraq. Everyone here is accusing Bush, or saying the Iraqi war is bad. Why is it bad and what do you think we should do to change it? A simple fact: America needs to finish what it started.

And Nyla, here's a moral question for you:

Germany, in 1933, was pure crap, it's economy was on it's knees. People were starving, employment was well over 20%, Hitler comes to power and fixes it up, but installs the dictatorship regime, removes freedom of just about everything, and kills 11 million people in genocide. In 1939, the country's economy was the strongest in Europe. He invades Poland, the Allies declare war. Skip to 1945, 30 million Germans have been killed, cities destroyed.

Should we have left him in power, because pre-war Germany was better off?