How dare *YOU* criticize *THIS* war or *THESE* war plans

epic...

Scan through my previous posts, I never said that USSR was not evil (we need to find another word!).....end of story!

OK! lets see why US is invading Iraq....

Official Reasons:

1) Non-compliance of 1441 (Iraq has WMDs)

2) This regime is an evil regime....links with Al-Qaida

3) Saddam must go....he is a killer...

4) Freedom for Iraqi people

My response....

1) They havent found any WMDs...nor are they going to find any....do u believe that a country who has been under sanctions for last 10 yrs can produce WMDs...

2) Why all Al-Qaida officials are being caught in Pakistan....infact OBL himself is believed to be in Pakistan...still Pakistan receives billions of dollars in AID and Iraq is pounded with weapons costing billions of dollars BTW we have never seen any Iraqi Al-Qaida member....!

3) Similarly US can also be tried for killing millions in Vietnam....

4) Do you really believe that US would risk thousands of soldiers in fighting a war costing billions...which has resulted in some europian allies being angry with US...which has turned world opinion against US....do you believe US would fight such a war only to librate Iraqi people....?? and not for something else...?!
 
deepak: I read your post and started laughing, and then I realized you probably believe what you say. :)

Anyways, Im watching tv and I see people celebrating in the streets of Iraq (some are looting, but thats probably because they have nothing), others are throwing flowers at the tanks of the coalitions, other are tearing down pictures of saddam and using their shoes to hit those pics (big insult in the middle east), iraqi women are cooking food for the coalition soldiers to show their joy.

This made me a bit teary eyed, seeing people realize they now have hope to have a better life. And then I think of you, and the rest of the radical anti war movement that are probably thinking they wished saddam had won, or some such nonsense. I hope we can bring joy to the North Koreans next.

I just thank god (hindu gods :)) that the Pres of the US was bold enough to do as he saw was the right thing to do.

later,
 
But even you will agree (you may not want to show it though :D ), US is in Iraq for anything but to Librate them...why on earth US would fight an 80 billion dollars war in Iraq?? Answer!!!
 
Answer: to remove the chance that Iraq gives WMDs to terrorist groups, which could cause TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF DAMAGE. A couple of envelopes of anthrax cost several million dollars of damage/cleanup costs. If the person used something deadlier it could costs an unimaginable amount of money and many thousands, if not millions of deaths. THATS WHY.

You want me to say *il, not going to say it since thats not the case. :rolleyes:
 
epic....You are a good man!

Atleast you agree that This war is not to librate Iraqi people....Thanks! 8)

I would urge B&B...Bush and Blair to stop harping again and again that this war is to Librate Iraqi poeple!!!!
 
Deepak said:
Atleast you agree that This war is not to librate Iraqi people....Thanks! 8)
:oops: :oops:

What, my primary reason to go to war with Iraq has always been to liberate the people. To me the WMD is second, and still a worthy reason to go to war for.

Let me repeat myself: The people of Iraq should be liberated and war seems to be the only answer.

later
 
Deepak said:
1) They havent found any WMDs...nor are they going to find any....do u believe that a country who has been under sanctions for last 10 yrs can produce WMDs...
Why (or how) would the economic sanctions keep Saddam from developing wmd's? He certainly had plenty of cash to spend on frivolous palaces...

2) Why all Al-Qaida officials are being caught in Pakistan....infact OBL himself is believed to be in Pakistan...still Pakistan receives billions of dollars in AID and Iraq is pounded with weapons costing billions of dollars BTW we have never seen any Iraqi Al-Qaida member....!
I see that you are from India; you really should know enough about your region to not need to ask this question. Some parts of Pakistan are practically ungovernable. In some places, the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan is only a line on a map; it is very porous; for practical purposes in some areas the border could just as well not exist.

As for why Pakistan is recieving aid money, refer back to your very own statement about the Al-Qaida officials being captured there.

As for Iraqi Al-Qaida members, I'm not an expert on the group but there probably were some Iraqis in it. And there are terrorist groups other than Al-Qaida. A number of their camps have been found in Iraq.

3) Similarly US can also be tried for killing millions in Vietnam....
I don't know offhand the casualty numbers of Vietnam, but I don't see how a trial would be justified. If we wanted, I'm sure we could have a debate about a war from a generation ago. However, to be blunt, considering the grasp of history you displayed during the US/USSR debate, it doesn't seem a worthwhile use of either my or your time right now. Particularly when there are events of immense consequence happening right now.

4) Do you really believe that US would risk thousands of soldiers in fighting a war costing billions...which has resulted in some europian allies being angry with US...which has turned world opinion against US....do you believe US would fight such a war only to librate Iraqi people....?? and not for something else...?!
The liberation of the Iraqi people is the major goal of this war, it isn't the major trigger of it. There's definately a lot more to this story. But I can't take time right now to tackle such a big topic... :( (I might need to start a whole new thread for that one.)

---
btw, I'd still like to know your thoughts regarding my analysis of why you so strongly despise the US... to save you the trouble of going back to that post, I'll quote it below. (The reason I'm belaboring this point is because I'd like to know why people hate us even when our goals are honorable.) Whether it is or isn't the reason for your anger against the US, please let me know.
Zoinks! said:
The cause of the bias against the US is emotional resentment, which in the US/USSR comparison clouded your judgement of the historical facts. The US has power and, from time to time, has been willing to use that power. The USSR once upon a time had power and, from time to time, was willing to use that power. Therefore you decided that the two nations were the same.

I don't know if it is the power itself, the way the power is used, or the fact that the power is used to influence others; but there's something about it which you find abhorrent. Please let me know if this analysis is anywhere close to the truth.
 
epicstruggle said:
Let me repeat myself: The people of Iraq should be liberated and war seems to be the only answer.
later

So, as you think war is the only answer, maybe you could answer me that question, as no one I tried to discuss this with seemed to have an answer:

In order to liberate millions of civilians - is it ok to put up with the (predicted) death of thousands of them? (Please no bickering about exact numbers - its the order of magnitude I'm referring to) That you calculate a small part of casualties so that the greater part can live in freedom sometime?
 
listen if i had to kill myself or someone else to save thousands of lives. Id do it. I could not live with myself if i did not help save those people. (movie choice, hard to believe it would ever come to it).

I would sacrifice the thousands of lives to liberate the millions, as I know that saddams regime costs about 5000 lives a months. So in one month youve made up the diff. Too bad we couldnt get the rest of the sissies (france, germany, russia, china) to help show a united front, could have gotten saddam out without any fighting

later,
 
Deepak, get real: of course America expects to get something out of this, given the human and material resources we're putting into it. But the moral aspect, which is right/good/just, shouldn't be lost amidst economic reality.

To refute your response #1 above, just look at North Korea's nukes. #2 & 3 are also overly simplistic, but I don't feel like typing out a response just now. :p

Snyder: thousands of people had and would have died under Saddam's regime. The question is, will they die (accidentally) in the name of freedom, or (wilfully) in the name of Saddam's gilded toilets?

The question of whether it's worth sacrificing a thousand lives for a million's freedom is much more difficult, but not one that applies to the current situation.
 
I think some people need to keep in mind that we have declared war against Terrorism, not just al-Qaida, and not just Iraq.

Pakistan's government is relatively acceptable. Pakistan's militant organizations that are not controlled by the government are not. And if you want a connection between Iraq and al-Qaida through Pakistan, try looking in the other direction. Al-Qaida are being captured in Pakistan, where their friends are hiding them. These same militant groups that are hiding al-Qaida members are the ones who have pledged their support to Saddam's regime in Iraq. It's hard to argue that there is no connection, some people just like to nitpick and say that the connection doesn't matter until there's hard evidence that Iraq has given material support to al-Qaida.
 
Now that *Operation Iraqi Freedom* is more or less over, do you guys think that US will take military action against Syria/Iran as few US officials seem to suggest??? :?:
 
No, I think a successful Iraqi democracy may be enough to topple the other thugocracies in the region by itself. The excuse of "America the imperialist" will be irrelevant; neighbors would now be able to look to their "fellow Muslims" for a better example of government than their own.

This all hinges on a successful Iraqi democracy presiding over a unified Iraq, though.
 
A difficult question for you....how do you justify US/UK support to Saudi/UAE/Bahrain/Qatar and other Kingdoms which are nothing more than theocracies in true sense....? People in these countries have no voting rights....atleast in Iran, President is elected by Irani people...still US talks about bombing Iran... :rolleyes:
 
I'm not sure I can. Bernard Lewis said something interesting in his BookTV interview, that paying taxes guarantees your right to vote, and most Arab countries are so oil-rich that the ruling class can do away with the pesky technicalities of government.

Iran is interesting, as I believe the religious council still rules supreme. The mere fact that they hold elections, democratic or not, is a positive step toward real democracy. They might be the first to change on their own.

But I certainly don't approve of a thousand princes running around with their own "allowances" while the rest of the country goes without. Heck, I don't even approve of one price on a government payroll. Nor do I approve of Saudi Arabia's apparent blind eye to Wahhabism [sic?].

And I don't profess to know much more about the Middle East than the reading and news-watching I've done in the past few months, so my opinions on what should happen in the region are based on very recent and perhaps superficial facts. So I don't know who would be governing now if America didn't value a steady supply of oil as much as it does. I don't even know if American troops are there to prevent foreign invasion or internal change, though, judging by troop deployments elsewhere, I'd guess it would be the former more than the latter. South Korea only recently transitioned to a democracy from a military dictatorship, I was told, so I doubt America would be opposed to progressive governmental change.
 
South Korea has been a democracy since 1988!.....History of South Korea...

I am surprised that a country like South Korea who is an industrial powerhouse has been under military rule for many year...

and even more surprisingly, India has been a democracy despite poverty (reducing), curruption, mal-governance etc/// since 1947 when she got her independence from UK....

I salute our people for supporting democracy!! 8)
 
Back
Top