Iraq War Showdown On Hill -- Pullout Vote Set For 7pm

[DiSTuRbEd]

Well they have to right to be there.
Its like being caught robbing a house and then arguing that you might as well let him finish robbing it.

Just be quiet for the time being. That analogy isn't going to work with something as big as this war.

 

[Solaris]

Its as ridiculous as youre argument.

-You don't start something only to run away at the end.

When people are dying by the day you don't base your course of action on a saying like that. You look at the evidence, draw a logical conclusion and then take a course of action. Saying "Well we might as well finish it now", has no weight behind it, and trivilises the descision.

 

[DiSTuRbEd]

When people are dying by the day you don't base your course of action on a saying like that. You look at the evidence, draw a logical conclusion and then take a course of action. Saying "Well we might as well finish it now", has no weight behind it, and trivilises the descision.

You keep thinking that, really please do so. This is why there is General's, and luckily you aren't one of them.

 

[Solaris]

You keep thinking that, really please do so. This is why there is General's, and luckily you aren't one of them.

So you really think:
"We might as well finish it now"
Is an argument of suffeicent enough weight to warrant millions of dollars, and a good lot of lives for the continuation of the war?

 

[DiSTuRbEd]

So you really think:
"We might as well finish it now"
Is an argument of suffeicent enough weight to warrant millions of dollars, and a good lot of lives for the continuation of the war?

A. I never said "we might as well finish it now"
B. I rather them stay there until the Iraqi's have their own stable government and military.
C. Money? Why do you care, its not like you pay taxes.
D. In war, you lose men, its what happens, every marine/army/etc has the possibility of dying, they know this when joining a military branch.

 

[Solaris]

A. I never said "we might as well finish it now"
B. I rather them stay there until the Iraqi's have their own stable government and military.
C. Money? Why do you care, its not like you pay taxes.
D. In war, you lose men, its what happens, every marine/army/etc has the possibility of dying, they know this when joining a military branch.

You said "You don't start something only to run away at the end." Same thing really. And I pay VAT don't I? Money I make from working, goes to stuff, which has a 17.5% tax on, so I do. People do die in war, and people sign up aware that they might die in war. That however, doesnt mean its acceptable to send troops to die, for imperliast desires.

 

[DiSTuRbEd]

That however, doesnt mean its acceptable to send troops to die, for imperliast desires.

Hey guess what happens in war? People die. *sigh* I'm done trying to debate, its not even worth it.

 

[Solaris]

Hey guess what happens in war? People die. *sigh* I'm done trying to debate, its not even worth it.

Yes people do die.
Firefighters sign up willing to risk there lives, that doesnt make it right to send them into a volcanoe.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

No one has sent firefighters to a volcanoe, so your rhetoric is flawed.

 

[Ikerous]

No one has sent firefighters to a volcanoe

Lol, how does that invalidate his point?

 

[French Ninja]

Yes people do die.
Firefighters sign up willing to risk there lives, that doesnt make it right to send them into a volcanoe.

Iraq =/ Volcano
Iraq = Big house on fire with alot of suffering people.

 

[bliink]

Iraq =/ Volcano
Iraq = Big house on fire with alot of suffering people.

I believe you have overextended the analogy so far you have snapped it in half.

 

[Glirk Dient]

Yes people do die.
Firefighters sign up willing to risk there lives, that doesnt make it right to send them into a volcanoe.

No but if there is a fire whether or not it is large and people in danger then they go in there. Same with soldiers. They signed up for the infantry knowing they will be sent off to war whether or not they want to. They could have chosen a technical job or some non combat job but they signed up for a combat arms job. They knew what they were getting themselves into.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Dood, sending Firefighters to a volcanoe makes little to no sense -- and beyond that, I think thats all I can give the rhetoric.

 

[Sulkdodds]

So, uh, can anyone here spell volcano?

 

[Solaris]

No but if there is a fire whether or not it is large and people in danger then they go in there. Same with soldiers. They signed up for the infantry knowing they will be sent off to war whether or not they want to. They could have chosen a technical job or some non combat job but they signed up for a combat arms job. They knew what they were getting themselves into.

Yes, they signed up to fight for there country. Not to fight for oil. Just becuase there willing to risk there lives doesnt make it right, to send them to a hell hole that Iraq currently is.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Isn't it 'currently a hellhole' because they sent the troops in?

 

[Solaris]

Isn't it 'currently a hellhole' because they sent the troops in?

Idd it is. This started when I made the argument about how many troops are dying, and someone said something like: "They signed up knowing they might die" as if that invalidated my argument, about the people who have died.
Just becuase there in the armed forces, that doesn't make them sub human and there deaths are still sad, and very valid in a argument.

 

[DiSTuRbEd]

Yes, they signed up to fight for there country. Not to fight for oil. Just becuase there willing to risk there lives doesnt make it right, to send them to a hell hole that Iraq currently is.

*sigh* do us a favor, quit posting you're really pissing me the **** off. I have friends/relatives over there right now, asshole. If you ask them what they are fighting for, they obviously don't say oil, pull your head from your ass please. KTHXBAI.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

I agree (not with making Solaris shutting up however, but just agreeing the rest of the post above mine ) The people over there are'nt oil company footsoldiers. Infact, the irony is the oil company is'int over there fighting this war themselves.

 

[Solaris]

*sigh* do us a favor, quit posting you're really pissing me the **** off. I have friends/relatives over there right now, asshole. If you ask them what they are fighting for, they obviously don't say oil, pull your head from your ass please. KTHXBAI.

Yes, becuase calling people asswholes and telling them to **** off really validates your argument.

Ok tell me. What are the troops fighting for. I don't mean the troops as individuals, I mean the coallition as a whole. Well some groups are fighting to stay freinds with the USA, but lets look at America.

Iraq is high in oil, and to have troops stationed there is good, becuase its of high strategic importance. Haliburton has won alot of contracts, meaning a boost to the shareholders, and Dick Cheney continues to get his $1million a year from them.

What have our troops been sent there for then? The troops may have different opinions, but there all just pawns in the fight for imperalistic desires.

 

[ComradeBadger]

Shorten your signature.

I'm sorry but I don't quite get what you're on about.

Ok tell me. What are the troops fighting for. I don't mean the troops as individuals, I mean the coallition as a whole. Well some groups are fighting to stay freinds with the USA, but lets look at America.

Let's look then:

Iraq is high in oil, and to have troops stationed there is good, becuase its of high strategic importance.

Why aren't we occupying Saudi Arabi or Kuwait? Or Russia or Venezuela?

Haliburton has won alot of contracts, meaning a boost to the shareholders, and Dick Cheney continues to get his $1million a year from them.

However the war has cost well over $222,550,000,000 dollars. All so Cheny gets his $1 million a year? And to help out the shareholders ?

I supported the invasion of Iraq simply on the removal of Saddam. I do believe that the US should stay until the country is rebuilt. Finish what they started.

 

[Solaris]

-Why aren't we occupying Saudi Arabi or Kuwait? Or Russia or Venezuela?

I'm sure there next.

 

[DiSTuRbEd]

-Why aren't we occupying Saudi Arabi or Kuwait? Or Russia or Venezuela?

I'm sure there next.

You've lost all your credibility now kid.

 

[Solaris]

You've lost all your credibility now kid.

Well not Russia, but the US is being a complete b**ch towards that venus place .
And they won't attack suaidia arabia, becuase there economy would go to sh*ts.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

That however, doesnt mean its acceptable to send troops to die, for imperliast desires.

I don't think Imperialist is the word -- a concerned, wounded, and lied to country perhaps might not be the word, but the words we should hound for as a description.

America has already proven it questions everything -- Imperialist societies and dictatorships DON'T usually question without something protecting them.

What are the troops fighting for.

An American's right to live, no matter what ally he chooses (Israel), no matter what religion he is or is not, and no matter what sexual orientation he might choose to be.

9/11 occured not just specifically because Bush had been farting around in Saudi Arabia's governmental problems and its oil exports, but because the United States was allied with countries who founded Counter-Terrorism principles. (which meant that if for say Israel, Germany, Italy, Britain, or France came under attack, he most certainly knows the first ally up to the plate would be America.)

I think Bin Laden attacked America because of some sort insult -- something he decided to take directly with himself, and to the rest of his men in Afgahnistan. Middle easterner's have always been proud of their Oil industry and its ability to make money from Western or Eastern societies, and they usually get mad when any country tries to weasle out of something.

I think his attack was meant to scare us out of doing anything with our foreign affairs -- and I don't think Abu Masab Al-Zarqwai was a random instance.