Forums → WEPR → i do not like the war on iraq
| 36 | 6441 |
- 36 Replies
@kielzanie
You made it very clear that you didn't want your opinion to be taken offensively and it wasn't. I'm not confident that I'll be able to change your mind on anything, but I'd like to make sure you know all of the facts and then let you reevaluate your opinions.
they say that it is for restoring peace
This is partially true, but it wasn't the original idea. And no, it was not for oil. We didn't start the fire. (I love that song) There was a war there before we came. We came to put out Saddam Hussein which we did. The reason we're still there is because we didn't want to leave a job unfinished. If we're going to take down a dictatorship, then we're not going to leave them in anarchy. We're going to restore their government and police force so that they can be better than they were before.
does bush really want peace??? hes too stupid.
Bush wants to do what I said above this quote: to restore democracy and militia so that Iraq can handle their own problems. Bush being stupid, which I don't believe, would imply that the millions of Americans that voted for him are also stupid.
most people are in devistation because of the inflation and leaves the nation in debt.
I wouldn't say most, but I'm sure there are a few out there that are suffering because of inflation. I don't know if you are Christian or not, but it says in the Bible that you will never get rid of the poor. POverty will always find a way to exist. No welfare system can fully correct it. Also, the nation was in debt before the war. The USA spends the most money each year, but also makes the most money each year which is a couple billion more than our debt. Like I said in my last post, the war is helping the economy.
lastly, when the war is finished and everything, what will happen to the soldiers. they have no jobs or anything. we cant support them like this. thats why if we end the war now this will also happen!!
The US Military provides food, water, shelter, and everything neccessary for healthy soldier while enlisted. In addition, they get free college schooling while they attend and still on top of that get paid to serve. I think the soldiers will do just fine.
@Ichibon
Where do you think the military was before the war? Do you think that they were just sitting on there @$$#$ playing chess in a barracks room waitng for a fight to break out? Are you really that ignorant of the way the military works? I'm not saying that oyu are ignorant yourself, but I'm wondering if your knowledge is.
Ok. Maybe you misunderstood me, or you really dislike me and my opinions. Or both. No, I didn't think that just waited for a war to happen. I said that they had jobs. Being a soldier is a job. I said that they were consumers of vehicles, ammo, and guns. They use those for training before the war and if they get sent to war then obviously they would utilize them there. I'm not sure if there was a miscommunication, but you sure did get the point across.
No, I do like you from what I've before in other threads. It's just a touchy subject with me.
Ok "Ichi", yes. But the point the person was saying when they made this post was it is a waste and we should not be there at all and that it was a bad thing. Yes i think we should get are troops out of there, and the system you recommended was a PERFECT way to go. I never said anything along the lines that i was not. What i was saying was that we needed to have are troops in there in the first place. Otherwise we would be screwed right now because they did have Weapons Of Mass Destruction and everyone knows it (we just have not find them yet because the United states sucks at hide and go seek (see Osama Binladin) so they are still yet to be recovered). I was also saying that if we pull all of are troops no, they can seize the government or atleast kick it out because it is not able to take care of its self yet and then they have control. So then they can send some of there men over here to hi-jack another plane or whatever the hel1 they are in the mood for. Also, when i said " when a missile hits your backyard" it was metaphorical to say "we are screwed they are gonna blow are @sses off).
I forgot.
@Ichi: Well my apologies to the people over there who got targeted. War is ugly my friend, and if we were not there there would have been that many more families targeted. Also, i am sorry for your buddy. Yeah, people get hurt in war. He went in there with that risk, and if he thought that fighting in Iraq meant baking cookies and passing them out to the insurgents and they would all have a lovely tea party then he was mistaken. And, i would laugh when the missile hit his backyard because thats just one less ignorant @sshole who does not know what he is talking about that is off of this planet. Nad if it hit my backyard, well then frick i am going to go over there and be like b1tch hold up. K?
To try to ease tensions here I think I will interject. First Ricador it is true that they had WMD, chemical weapons they used in the gulf war and the Irani-Iraqi war, so I don't think that can be debated for everyone thinking bout it.
Secondly the goverment in Iraq has had a lot of success recently against terriorists, or insurgents whatever you want to call them at this point, and that is the reason that the war has now kicked ack up in the media and such.
Thirdly both of shutup and calm down this a disscusion not a fight.
Fourthly lets get back to the educated standerds set by kanethebrain and nijacube(there might be more but those are the only ones on this page)
Ninjacube altho u mentioned many companies who prosper from war time deals, is that a good thing? Many companies became rich through selling arms to the Nazis which started WW2. Also even though a few companies prosper it doesnt effect the US or UK positively as a whole. The US still has to buy the weapons off the companies with tax money that normal people have to pay. The Us military budget in 2007 and was 439.3 billion dollars. The UK spent 65.2 billion dollars in 07/08 aswell not as much but still a lot of money for a smaller country. This money could be spent of helping solve the economy problems reinforcing banks and spent on schools and hospitals. If we put all this money into the Iraqi economy and spent it on their education health service and police service i am very confident that a lot of the insurgents would stop. One of the main reasons they dislike us is that they think we come to their land and take and take and take and give nothing back. It is understandable they see it that way. However if the governments spend the money in a positive way to stop the violence instead of sppending more money to contain it, it would be much better for everyone.
yo this guy is my son!!! Ninja cube read woody. its what i was trying to explain to you.
@Strategy_guy. OK so you just confirmed my point THEY HAD WEAPONS, THEY WOULD OF USED THEM AND WE WOULD HAVE BEEN SCREWED IF WE HAD NOT GONE IN THERE.
Actually the government has not had a whole lot it has still been mostley us. So finally, butt out and shut up.
I swear it turned out that the Iraqis didnt have WMD's and the invasion was based on false info. That is why it recieved such a hostile reception from civilians in US and UK.
@woody_7007. But they had those weapons in the gulf war and Saddam used those kind of weapons against his own people. So i am serious, EVERYONE almost, agrees that they did have weapons it's just that we have no fucking hell what they did with them, but they are not idiots so it must have been something clever.
@woody_7007
Ninjacube altho u mentioned many companies who prosper from war time deals, is that a good thing? Many companies became rich through selling arms to the Nazis which started WW2
I wasn't talking about selling arms to Nazis. No American company ever sold anything to the Nazis because America refused to have any involvement with WW2 until Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. American companies sold arms to American militaries.
This money could be spent of helping solve the economy problems reinforcing banks and spent on schools and hospitals.
I don't believe that our economy has many major problems if any at all. And, the few that do occur aren't related to the Iraq war. We're not fighting over oil or we would have hit a country that has more oil like Yemen or Saudi Arabia. As far as reinforcing banks and building schools and hospitals, I think that's nice and all, but we have bigger problems. Like babying Iraq until they can get along by themselves.
One of the main reasons they dislike us is that they think we come to their land and take and take and take and give nothing back. It is understandable they see it that way.
Well, for one, they the majority of Iraqis greatly appreciate alot of what we've done, and the ones who don't like us better than the insurgents. After Saddam Hussein was captured, the Iraqis cheered and tore down a statue of him in their capital. Some even helped in the search effort. Two, I'm not even sure what it was you were talking about when you said that we took and took and took. We given alot, and we're hoping that in the future they will give back by making the new Iraqi democracy our ally.
However if the governments spend the money in a positive way to stop the violence instead of sppending more money to contain it, it would be much better for everyone.
I agree, but it take more money, and it would make alot of people mad, if we were to carpet bomb all of the suspected terrorist camps. Plus, they've been there years before we came and will be there after we leave. It's not our problem. The thing that made it our problem was the planned attack on 9/11. We did what we needed to do and now we're making sure it doesn't happen again. It's Iraq's problem and we want to make sure that they can handle it when we leave.
@Ricador
I do understand what you mean, its just when he got hit, I was about 15 or so meters away. This is just a touchy subject, as I stated earlier.
@Stategy_guy
This isn't a fight, but I see this on a totally different level than I'm assuming 99% of the users on this site.
@everyone else
First, there were no WMD's. I personally patrolled over 10 square miles last year including some seriously tight and scary caves. I don't know a single soldier who did. I agree with Ninjacube when he stated,I agree, but it take more money, and it would make a lot of people mad, if we were to carpet bomb all of the suspected terrorist camps. Plus, they've been there years before we came and will be there after we leave. It's not our problem. The thing that made it our problem was the planned attack on 9/11. We did what we needed to do and now we're making sure it doesn't happen again. It's Iraq's problem and we want to make sure that they can handle it when we leave. But what's getting most of the soldiers down is that they are taking our help begrudgingly. Its like overstaying your welcome at a party. We should've left a long time ago.
Well i am sorry for your buddy. I won't mention it any further because i understand it for my own personal reasons.
Also, just because you patrolled of 10 square miles means nothing. I am [i]pretty sure[b] that Iraq is bigger than 10 square miles. I would assume there would be more places to hid them then were you were, or anybody else for that matter. There are other ways of hiding things than buildings and caves.
I think we were right to go into Iraq. So their were no WMDs. They lined up people by giant ditches, shot them, and buried them with bulldozers. They killed more of their own people then have died in the war.
You must be logged in to post a reply!