jeremybrooks

Posts: n/a/0

Threads:

Actually now according to the Bush Doctrine, Iraq was in direct violation due to the harboring of Abu Musab Al Zarqari (sp?). Amazingly enough John Kerry was right in 1998, I have this theory that John Kerry really truely at heart isn't a flip flopper. He let the heads of the Democratic Party and his advisors tell him oh no the Iraq War is going bad, you have to come out like Howard Dean against it. Now I can respect you for atleast having the same view on it all along, I'm assuming you have.

Jimi

The war IS going badly! Are you kidding me? 100,000+ civilians have died. Soldiers are dying every day. My twin sister just left for Iraq, as no other than a convoy driver, and it's killing me. We harbor terrorists every day. We must also be in direct violation.

jeremybrooks

Posts: n/a/0

Threads:

This war is going badly, is it going badly lets say in comparison to WWI, WWII, heck even the Cold War. This is our generations WWII. These Terrorist have just the same hatred and passion for killing that Communism and Hitler combined. What makes the gassing of Thousands of Jews and Christians anymore wrong than the beheading of innocent people, bombing of ships and night clubs? In Iraq you have a horrible regime who shredded children in front of their parents if they didn't do what they were told. Establishing a democracy in Iraq will go along way to stablizing the Middle East, I suppose it could be called the 21st Domino Effect. I apologize for any grammatical errors, I'm doing this and listening to UK play

Jimi

Are you serious? Show me where they "shreaded children in front of their parents". Establishing democracy in the Middle East will serve the US better. However, your comparing Iraq and Hitler is absurd. And the communists? Do you have a clue about what communism is? Cold War? Man, that wasnt a war. You're really trying to pull things from oblivion to make a rather obscure point here.

The only thing, as far as "terrorizing their own people" that we have in Iraq is really the gassing of the Kurds, who are not Iraqis, and were attacking Iraqi villages in the name of Iran. Who gave them those weapons? We did. And we gave them for that exact purpose. So.... if you're going to point fingers at the Iraqi regime, you're going to have to point those fingers at us as well.

jeremybrooks

Posts: n/a/0

Threads:

I'm not for sure if the story about the Children are on here, but I remember it on an episode of Scarborough Country and MSNBC show. However, even if that's not true, these are plenty cruel enough..
http://www.defendamerica.mil/specia...atrocities.html

You have to look at Iraq as a part of the War on Terror and, yes terrorism is just as bad as Hitler. And I must ask you if you truely know about Communism, it was responsible for more deaths in the 20th Century than any wars we have had, and if i'm not mistaken all of them combine!
http://www.internet-encyclopedia.or...title=Communism
"approximately 100 million deaths have resulted from the crimes of Communism over its 85 year history."
I sure bet you John F. Kennedy thought the Cold War was a real war too

Jimi

click on one of our sponsors! OR REMOVE ADS

I assure you, it was not a real war. People weren't on any frontlines. It was tension between the US and Russia. It could have sparked war at a moment's notice, but it was not a war.

As far as your communism statement, you have to take into accord that Russia is not the only communist country. China, Cuba, North Korea, and other countries still retain communism. The article you've supplied is pretty vague on what regime may or may not have been at fault in particular amounts of death, but I guarantee, it's mostly Southeast Asian countries, like Cambodia.

jeremybrooks

Posts: n/a/0

Threads:

I would have responded earlier but I didn't see the second page, i'm sorry

The Cold War was the conflict between the US/USSR yes, however, without it we would have had no Korea or Vietnam. Well there are also many nations that are supporters of Terrorism, just like there were many countries that supported Communism.

Juana!

elections are over... bush won.... enough said...

jeremybrooks

Posts: n/a/0

Threads:

Agreed

psychobilly

I didnt read this whole thread...sorry. However I dont think you cant compare what Clinton or Kerry said to what the bush crew said. Does kerry get daily cia reports on the subject? Sure Clinton could get them if he wants them but pappy Bush I believe to be the only former prez to take advantage of that oppertunity. On top of that add the frauldulent reports...or rather "suspicions" that were sold as fact. The "Democrats" simply had faith in our nations leader and his administration, they were fed and ate the same shit we were given in my opinion.

Jimi

Yes, Bush did win, however politics, especially wartime politics is a never-ending conundrum that needs constant scrutiny. When something is awry, it needs pointing out. I am simply pointing out that the Bush admin is now admitting the same thing I have been saying since the beginning, because their hopes of these WMD existance were not met. Psychobilly has just made a good point... something I was getting at earlier on in this thread before I took a trip to San Antonio. Kerry went with what the current US regime told him. Then, after gaining more facts, he reached a new conclusion. You can't condemn a man for doing so. You can, however, fault the current administration for not giving all the facts, and going into an unjustified war without evidence to support their claim.

Wayne Brady

I wouldn't be a suprised to me if Saddam wanted the Clinton, Bush, and Blair to think he had WMD to prevent the Allies from invading. It wouldn't be the first time he has done something crazy. If it's true, to bad it didn't work.

lastexit

Did anyone actually believe them when they said there were WMD? I can only imagine how long our troops are going to be stuck there.

Bush Sr. on the war:
In his memoir, "A World Transformed," written six years ago, George Bush Sr. wrote the following to explain why he didn't go after Saddam Hussein at the end of the Gulf War.
"Trying to eliminate Saddam...would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible.... We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq.... There was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."

Jimi

He said from the beginning that he didn't have them. There was no proof that he did. We went in on a hunch, and that's not a very solid reason to start a war.