"Social Security Will Go Broke in 1988" - Bush

[Bodacious]

then why did you sign this?

Call me stupid if you want but tell me what that has to do with anything.

 

[Bodacious]

woops, double post, sorry.

 

[CptStern]

Call me stupid if you want but tell me what that has to do with anything.

you (the US) signed that document did you not? that's the original UN charter that formed the United Nations. well you broke one of it's rules:

"from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

you said:

"Give me a break. Kofi Anan's opinion mean nothing to me or America"


again I ask you, why did you become a member of the UN if you're not going to follow it's rules? :

"from the charter point of view, it was illegal."

 

[CptStern]

I can't speak for all of the cases but the ones I can speak of they innocents killed were given fair warning. English doesn't matter, you have to be pretty dense to disregard someone waving at you to stop from a heavily armed checkpoint. I am aware of cases where entire families were killed.

in one case 10 women and children ..in one car

Morally? Are you prepared to give your life and be resonsible for your mates deaths if you wrongly assume that what might look like a family running a checkpoint but in reality is a car bomb?

morally you shouldnt even be there ..you have NO justification

When it is all boiled down it is you or them and your mates. Do you risk your life and your mates or do you stop the possible oncoming threat?

you shouldnt have been there in the first place

You will never know until the last round is fired and the car inspected, but that is how things are.

I agree but you shouldnt be there

Bush might not have admitted it but I know some gernerals on the ground have acknowledged that mistake. I acknowledge that mistake.

mistake? they were guarding the ministry of oil! hospitals full of viral specimens, heavy duty drugs and equipment is less important than a building?

Truth is the troops weren't prepared to be a police force. I am pretty sure the DoD acknowledges that shortcoming.

probably because you shouldnt have been there

PM me the link if you wish.

nah, I'd rather not ..it's no big deal it was shown on CNN awhile back. if a mod says it's ok then maybe ...the soldier in question says this to the camera after killing a wounded iraqi:




"Like, man, you guys are dead now, you know. But it was a good feeling ...I mean, afterwards you're like, hell, yeah, that was awesome. Let's do it again."




___

 

[Bodacious]

in one case 10 women and children ..in one car

And? Do you want me to feel sorry for their deaths? Maybe the driver should have been paying attention to their surroundings. Had that happend they would be alive. Now they are just a statistic.

morally you shouldnt even be there ..you have NO justification

you shouldnt have been there in the first place

I agree but you shouldnt be there

That is your opinion and doesn't change the fact that we are there and are going to be there for a while.

mistake? they were guarding the ministry of oil! hospitals full of viral specimens, heavy duty drugs and equipment is less important than a building?

Of course that medical stuff is more important. I never said it wasn't. And as I said, generals have admitted their mistakes.

nah, I'd rather not ..it's no big deal it was shown on CNN awhile back. if a mod says it's ok then maybe ...the soldier in question says this to the camera after killing a wounded iraqi:


"Like, man, you guys are dead now, you know. But it was a good feeling ...I mean, afterwards you're like, hell, yeah, that was awesome. Let's do it again."

And that really sucks.

 

[No Limit]

And? Do you want me to feel sorry for their deaths? Maybe the driver should have been paying attention to their surroundings. Had that happend they would be alive. Now they are just a statistic.

Wow. You amaze me. Yes, these people who were poor as f*ck, probably didn't own a tv and had no access to any media were supposed to see some American in the dusk and know what they were supposed to do. But you are right f*ck em, they are just a statistic; its their fault for being f*cking stupid and they should die for it. I wish there was a smilie to show how 'stupidifed' I am by reading your post.

That is your opinion and doesn't change the fact that we are there and are going to be there for a while.

There not being one valid justification for the war in Iraq is not an opinion, it is a fact. As been pointed out, the WAR IS ILLEGAL!!!

Of course that medical stuff is more important. I never said it wasn't. And as I said, generals have admitted their mistakes.

Yeah, you f*ck up and kill a few people but its ok if you admit your mistake. I wonder if you would be so forgiving if it was one of your family members that was killed because they couldn't get medical attention.

BTW: You say that they admitted not guarding those hospitals was a mistake; did they ever fix this? I don't recall any mention of protection around hospitals or schools.

 

[CptStern]

And? Do you want me to feel sorry for their deaths? Maybe the driver should have been paying attention to their surroundings. Had that happend they would be alive. Now they are just a statistic.

if you werent there they would still be alive ..technically Bush' lie is responsible for their death

That is your opinion and doesn't change the fact that we are there and are going to be there for a while.

nope, not my opinion: FACT

FACT: there is NO justification for the invasion of iraq ...none whatsoever ..saddam was never a threat to national security, saddam didnt have WMD (when he did possess WMD and used them on civilians and military, you called him friend), saddam may have been a tyrant but during his worst period you supported him and armed him ..that's just a little hypocritical if you ask me

Of course that medical stuff is more important. I never said it wasn't. And as I said, generals have admitted their mistakes.

you dont seem to see the point ..it wasnt a mistake, they have to protect their investment. The whole reason the US went into Iraq was WMD ..yet when the real threat of dangerous materials being released into the public (bubonic plague, anthrax, small pox ..all stored at the hospital) you do nothing ..it realy begs the question: were you there to find WMD or guard the Ministry of Oil ..man you really dont have to look to far to fit the pieces of the puzzle together

And that really sucks.

you fail to see the point. He is an example of a certain ideology of the soldiers in iraq: he really doesnt see that he did anything wrong, in his mind he is justified for killing that iraqi because in every soldiers mind they are doing what is right because saddam is a threat to american national security ..or so they were told. Many US soldiers believed saddam had something to do with 9/11, many US soldiers believed saddam had WMD and was going to use them on america ..despite the fact that saddam has never killed an american in a terrorist attack ......the propaganda machine worked a little too well

You've said you were/are a soldier ...I'd assume that you are no better or worse than the average american soldier (not an insult). That said, it stands to reason that your viewpoint is shared with many of your fellow soldiers. You yourself justified the needless deaths of civilians by saying "it had to be done" ..well no it didnt ...the US invaded iraq under a false pretense ..you negated your justification for invasion once it was proved that the reasons behind the war turned out to be trumped up lies

 

[Bodacious]

Wow. You amaze me. Yes, these people who were poor as f*ck, probably didn't own a tv and had no access to any media were supposed to see some American in the dusk and know what they were supposed to do. But you are right f*ck em, they are just a statistic; its their fault for being f*cking stupid and they should die for it. I wish there was a smilie to show how 'stupidifed' I am by reading your post.

These types of events happened at all differnt times of day, most of the time in broad daylight. That is a broad gerneralization saying they were poor (I don't know how that makes any difference), were driving at dusk, and didn't know the American forces were in their country.

A lot of these events happened weeks after the war had started. It is a shame, but shit happens. Natural selection at it's finest.

There not being one valid justification for the war in Iraq is not an opinion, it is a fact. As been pointed out, the WAR IS ILLEGAL!!!

Humanitarian reasons alone are justification. Getting Saddam out of power is justification enough. I am sorry it is not justification enough for you and you ilk, but to me, and alot of other people it is.

Don't give me that BS abou how that wasn't our reason in the first place either, because I already proved to you there were more than WMDs when we went in. Don't give me the BS about how it is not our place to overthrow dictators. For one, it happened and there isn't anything you can do about it. And for two, if the oppressed Iraq people had the power to overthrow Saddam they would have, but Saddam instilled his fear and the oppressed peopple's revolt wasn't happening. We stepped in to save the day.

Yeah, you f*ck up and kill a few people but its ok if you admit your mistake. I wonder if you would be so forgiving if it was one of your family members that was killed because they couldn't get medical attention.

If, you really like that word huh?

BTW: You say that they admitted not guarding those hospitals was a mistake; did they ever fix this? I don't recall any mention of protection around hospitals or schools.

No, they rebuilt the hospitals and schools and did a lot more things to better the country.

 

[Korgoth]

Oooh ooh! I got another funny one!

"Iraq has wmd and is an immediate threat to U.S. security and U.S. interests, so saddam and his regime must be taken out now!"

 

[CptStern]

"Natural selection at it's finest."


you are unfit to represent your country

 

[No Limit]

Humanitarian reasons alone are justification. Getting Saddam out of power is justification enough. I am sorry it is not justification enough for you and you ilk, but to me, and alot of other people it is.

It is not justification enough for the world and it surely isn't enough for me. So how do you explain Stern's point that Rumsfeld and company were supporting Saddam at the time when his atrocities were the worst? What he did in the 90s was nothing compared to what he did when Rumsfeld and our government were supporting him.

Don't give me that BS abou how that wasn't our reason in the first place either, because I already proved to you there were more than WMDs when we went in. Don't give me the BS about how it is not our place to overthrow dictators. For one, it happened and there isn't anything you can do about it. And for two, if the oppressed Iraq people had the power to overthrow Saddam they would have, but Saddam instilled his fear and the oppressed peopple's revolt wasn't happening. We stepped in to save the day.

You seem to have a problem with what is fact and what is bs. The entire resolution to go to war talked about WMDs, there might have been a couple worlds that talked about humanitarian problems. Same goes for Bush's state of the union address.

If, you really like that word huh?

Ok, forget it, when someone close to you dies I expect you to come on here and say f*ck it, they are just a statistic. Deal?

No, they rebuilt the hospitals and schools and did a lot more things to better the country.

Really?

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/nov2004/mal-n26.shtml

A 3% jump out of 400,000 children is 12,000 more children pretty much killed because of our invasion. And this is just 1 out of thousands of problems.

I can find a lot more examples if you wish but I think you know they are out there and it isn't necessary.

 

[No Limit]

"Natural selection at it's finest."


you are unfit to represent your country

+1

I really wish the mods allowed me to call this guy an asshole.

 

[Bodacious]

if you werent there they would still be alive ..technically Bush' lie is responsible for their death

Technically this and technically that. Too bad technically isn't reality in this case.

If we werent there. We are there and are going to be there.

Last, If you think Bush lied, then you also think Aristotle lied when he said the world was flat.

nope, not my opinion: FACT

FACT: there is NO justification for the invasion of iraq ...none whatsoever ..saddam was never a threat to national security, saddam didnt have WMD (when he did possess WMD and used them on civilians and military, you called him friend), saddam may have been a tyrant but during his worst period you supported him and armed him ..that's just a little hypocritical if you ask me

So we are hipocrits. No changing that now and we will probably do a lot more hipocritical things. That doesn't get us out of Iraq or bring the troops home. The only thing accomplished by complaining about the US's past transgressins is the expenditure of a bunch of hot air.

Humanitarian reasons alone are justification. Getting Saddam out of power is justification enough. I am sorry it is not justification enough for you and you ilk, but to me, and alot of other people it is.

Don't give me that BS abou how that wasn't our reason in the first place either, because I already proved to you there were more than WMDs when we went in. Don't give me the BS about how it is not our place to overthrow dictators. For one, it happened and there isn't anything you can do about it. And for two, if the oppressed Iraq people had the power to overthrow Saddam they would have, but Saddam instilled his fear and the oppressed peopple's revolt wasn't happening. We stepped in to save the day.

you dont seem to see the point ..it wasnt a mistake, they have to protect their investment. The whole reason the US went into Iraq was WMD ..yet when the real threat of dangerous materials being released into the public (bubonic plague, anthrax, small pox ..all stored at the hospital) you do nothing ..it realy begs the question: were you there to find WMD or guard the Ministry of Oil ..man you really dont have to look to far to fit the pieces of the puzzle together

And you are not far from being labeled a conspriacy theroist. As you have already pointed out hospitals weren't the only thing not guarded. Schools, water treatment and power plants, banks, and museums probably should have been guarded.

Maybe the troops were guarding the ministry of oil and other locations of the like because they were afraid the wells were going to be lit on fire like in the last gulf war. Ever think of that?

you fail to see the point. He is an example of a certain ideology of the soldiers in iraq: he really doesnt see that he did anything wrong, in his mind he is justified for killing that iraqi because in every soldiers mind they are doing what is right because saddam is a threat to american national security ..or so they were told. Many US soldiers believed saddam had something to do with 9/11, many US soldiers believed saddam had WMD and was going to use them on america ..despite the fact that saddam has never killed an american in a terrorist attack ......the propaganda machine worked a little too well

You've said you were/are a soldier ...I'd assume that you are no better or worse than the average american soldier (not an insult). That said, it stands to reason that your viewpoint is shared with many of your fellow soldiers. You yourself justified the needless deaths of civilians by saying "it had to be done" ..well no it didnt ...the US invaded iraq under a false pretense ..you negated your justification for invasion once it was proved that the reasons behind the war turned out to be trumped up lies

I can't speak for soldiers because I was a marine and we were lectured many times on the rules of war. I remember being specifically told all the details of when to use deadly force. I can't justify the actions of that soldier. From your description he was in the wrong and as were the others who cheered him. I wold hope that because there is video of the incident that the soldier would face prosecution.

Read the resolution to go to war. There were more reasons to go to war than just WMDs. I have posted that and highlighted the passages time and time agian.

Even still, WMDs or not, we are there and are going to be there. IF we weren't there those people were alive. Well, IF I put my money on red instead of black I would be $1000 richer right now and IF I picked 4 instead of 5 I would have won the lottery.

 

[Bodacious]

"Natural selection at it's finest."


you are unfit to represent your country

Oh noes!, a canadian disagrees with me, what shall I ever do?.


Well I did, and there isn't anything you can do about it except complain on a message board.

 

[No Limit]

Technically this and technically that. Too bad technically isn't reality in this case.

If we werent there. We are there and are going to be there.

Last, If you think Bush lied, then you also think Aristotle lied when he said the world was flat.

Technically isn't reality? I think you simply aren't one with reality.

Also, comparing Bush to Aristotle isn't accurate. The entire world thought the world was flat in that time and there wasn't anything there to prove otherwise; in this case it is the direct opposite. The entire world was telling Bush the war wasn't right, there was a huge chance there were no WMDs, and there was actual intelligence that said Saddam had no WMDs which Bush simply ignored.

So we are hipocrits. No changing that now and we will probably do a lot more hipocritical things. That doesn't get us out of Iraq or bring the troops home. The only thing accomplished by complaining about the US's past transgressins is the expenditure of a bunch of hot air.

No it doesn't bring us out of Iraq; however, it does prove that the war was strictly based on WMDs and wasn't justified so what's your point? This is what we were saying all along.

Humanitarian reasons alone are justification. Getting Saddam out of power is justification enough. I am sorry it is not justification enough for you and you ilk, but to me, and alot of other people it is.

Don't give me that BS abou how that wasn't our reason in the first place either, because I already proved to you there were more than WMDs when we went in. Don't give me the BS about how it is not our place to overthrow dictators. For one, it happened and there isn't anything you can do about it. And for two, if the oppressed Iraq people had the power to overthrow Saddam they would have, but Saddam instilled his fear and the oppressed peopple's revolt wasn't happening. We stepped in to save the day.

What the hell is wrong with you? You just copied and pasted that from an earlier post that I already addressed?

 

[Bodacious]

It is not justification enough for the world and it surely isn't enough for me. So how do you explain Stern's point that Rumsfeld and company were supporting Saddam at the time when his atrocities were the worst? What he did in the 90s was nothing compared to what he did when Rumsfeld and our government were supporting him.

Humanitarian reasons aren't enough? Why don't you go stroll down to Rawanda and tell them their genocide isn't enough justification for the world to interven?

As far as sterns point: "So we are hipocrits. No changing that now and we will probably do a lot more hipocritical things. That doesn't get us out of Iraq or bring the troops home. The only thing accomplished by complaining about the US's past transgressins is the expenditure of a bunch of hot air."

You seem to have a problem with what is fact and what is bs. The entire resolution to go to war talked about WMDs, there might have been a couple worlds that talked about humanitarian problems. Same goes for Bush's state of the union address.

The words were there. Just because there were fewer words about them doens't make the reasons less valid.

Ok, forget it, when someone close to you dies I expect you to come on here and say f*ck it, they are just a statistic. Deal?

Depends on the circumstances of their death. In the end we are all a statistic.

Really?

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/nov2004/mal-n26.shtml

A 3% jump out of 400,000 children is 12,000 more children pretty much killed because of our invasion. And this is just 1 out of thousands of problems.

I can find a lot more examples if you wish but I think you know they are out there and it isn't necessary.

Yah really, I watched seabees build desk after desk and whatever else was needed to get a school in Ah Hillah operational.

You expect that country to return to normal overnight? I am sorry things didn't go your way. If you are so passionate about the Iraqi children's well being why don't you do something about it?

 

[No Limit]

Oh noes!, a canadian disagrees with me, what shall I ever do?.


Well I did, and there isn't anything you can do about it except complain on a message board.

Ok, listen. When your mother and father die somewhere down the road I want you to come on this message board and say you don't give a f*ck, they are just a statistic. If you do not do this you are a hypocrite and an asshole, deal?

 

[No Limit]

Humanitarian reasons aren't enough? Why don't you go stroll down to Rawanda and tell them their genocide isn't enough justification for the world to interven?

OUR GOVERNMENT IGNORED RWANDA!!!!! What is going on down there is 5,000x worse than what happened in Iraq in the 90s.

The words were there. Just because there were fewer words about them doens't make the reasons less valid.

Yes, it does make it less valid. The entire resolution was about WMDS!!!! There were maybe 10-15 words about humanitarian issues out of about 1000.

You expect that country to return to normal overnight? I am sorry things didn't go your way. If you are so passionate about the Iraqi children's well being why don't you do something about it?

Ok, so lets look at your point of view on this.

10 people die in a car = f*ck it, who cares?

12,000 children die = f*ck it, who cares?

About 50,000 civillians die = f*ck it, who cares?

shall I go on?

And after this you are going to feed me this bullshit about how we are there for humanitarian reasons and that is a good enough reason for you?

 

[No Limit]

Iraqi children's well being why don't you do something about it?

I don't think I need to comment on that. Do you see how your points are getting more idiotic with each of your posts?

 

[Bodacious]

Technically isn't reality? I think you simply aren't one with reality.

I stand by what I said. Because Kofi Anan thinks the war is illegal we should drop what we are doing and head home? Technically it is illegal, but the body accusing the war of being illegal is as corrupt as they come, so what credibility does that body have? In my eyes, none.

Also, comparing Bush to Aristotle isn't accurate. The entire world thought the world was flat in that time and there wasn't anything there to prove otherwise; in this case it is the direct opposite. The entire world was telling Bush the war wasn't right, there was a huge chance there were no WMDs, and there was actual intelligence that said Saddam had no WMDs which Bush simply ignored.

All the major world powers thought saddam had WMDs. Show me your "facts" that say that there was a huge chance there were no WMDs, and there was actual intelligence that said Saddam had no WMDs which Bush simply ignored.

No it doesn't bring us out of Iraq; however, it does prove that the war was strictly based on WMDs and wasn't justified so what's your point? This is what we were saying all along.

How does us supporting Saddam in the past and being hipocrits prove the war was based strictly on WMDs?

What the hell is wrong with you? You just copied and pasted that from an earlier post that I already addressed?

I am haivng two conversations, one with you and one with stern. Disregard if you like.

 

[No Limit]

I stand by what I said. Because Kofi Anan thinks the war is illegal we should drop what we are doing and head home? Technically it is illegal, but the body accusing the war of being illegal is as corrupt as they come, so what credibility does that body have? In my eyes, none.

The body that is saying this war is illegal IS THE WORLD!! Therefore it makes it 100% valid. The corruption at the UN was the fault of the US just as much as every other country.

All the major world powers thought saddam had WMDs. Show me your "facts" that say that there was a huge chance there were no WMDs, and there was actual intelligence that said Saddam had no WMDs which Bush simply ignored.

Lets simply start out with the inspectors that were there and they were saying they needed more time because they couldn't find anything.

How does us supporting Saddam in the past and being hipocrits prove the war was based strictly on WMDs?

Because Rumsfeld was the one that made both decisions, first to support him then to invade him. Since he didn't give a shit about humanitarian issues when he was allies with Saddam he clearly didn't care now. How do you fail to see the reasoning behind this? Rawanda and many other humantiarian problems around the world that were ignored also proves that justification for the war is total bullshit.

I addressed your dumb points, now address my last 3 posts.

 

[Bodacious]

Ok, listen. When your mother and father die somewhere down the road I want you to come on this message board and say you don't give a f*ck, they are just a statistic. If you do not do this you are a hypocrite and an asshole, deal?

How about when my wife or when one of my children die?

What are you trying to get me to say? That Iraq lives are worth less than American lives?

If my mom and dad rode up on a checkpont in a time of war and ignored warning to stop I would hope they die. Doing that would be a stupid thing to do.

I am not saying I woudn't give a ****, because that would suck. I would feel as much remorse as the next person. But that doesn't change the fact they would have done something stupid to cause their deaths. And if my brothers and sisters died as a result of their stupidity shame on them I say.

 

[Bodacious]

OUR GOVERNMENT IGNORED RWANDA!!!!! What is going on down there is 5,000x worse than what happened in Iraq in the 90s.

ALL THE GOVERNMENTS are ingnoring rawanda. NO ONE is doing anything about it.

Yes, it does make it less valid. The entire resolution was about WMDS!!!! There were maybe 10-15 words about humanitarian issues out of about 1000.

Explain to me why it is less valid then because there were more words on one subject than another.

Ok, so lets look at your point of view on this.

10 people die in a car = f*ck it, who cares?

12,000 children die = f*ck it, who cares?

About 50,000 civillians die = f*ck it, who cares?

shall I go on?

And after this you are going to feed me this bullshit about how we are there for humanitarian reasons and that is a good enough reason for you?

Like I said, things aren't going to go *poof* and be fixed overnight. The forced on the ground are doing the best they can with what resources they have and all you can do is sit there and complain about how we shouldn't be there in the first place.

 

[No Limit]

If my mom and dad rode up on a checkpont in a time of war and ignored warning to stop I would hope they die. Doing that would be a stupid thing to do.

Ok, so if you mom and dad don't see a check point or see it and if they do see it don't know what to do you are saying they should die? Ok, fine, arguing with you is pointless.

 

[CptStern]

Technically this and technically that. Too bad technically isn't reality in this case.

oh but it is reality ..your enemies have already found you guilty ..for generations to come. Unfortunately it'll be american civilians who pay the price for the greed of a few

If we werent there. We are there and are going to be there.

doesnt matter, the fact is that if you werent there there'd be 14,000 less dead civilians

Last, If you think Bush lied, then you also think Aristotle lied when he said the world was flat.

not the same thing and you know it:

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George Bush February 8, 2003


that's a lie, and you know it


this is the truth, and you know it:


"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on."

Paul Wolfowitz May 28, 2003

So we are hipocrits. No changing that now and we will probably do a lot more hipocritical things. That doesn't get us out of Iraq or bring the troops home. The only thing accomplished by complaining about the US's past transgressins is the expenditure of a bunch of hot air.

so in other words you're washing your hands of the blood of thousands of innocents? shades of Pilate and Nero

Humanitarian reasons alone are justification.

really? is that why you vetoed a iran UN resolution calling for the trial of saddam for crimes against humanity?

Getting Saddam out of power is justification enough.

really? why didnt you do it when he was at his worst? why now? because it suits you? because 9/11 gave you an excuse to dupe the american public

I am sorry it is not justification enough for you and you ilk, but to me, and alot of other people it is.

I'm sure meany people justified Kristallnacht or segregation or slavery, still doesnt make it right. You destroyed a country, killed it's civilians all based on a false pretense

Don't give me that BS abou how that wasn't our reason in the first place either, because I already proved to you there were more than WMDs when we went in.

really? then why say this?

Don't give me the BS about how it is not our place to overthrow dictators.

no you dont, it is NONE of your business ..there was absolutely no justification for regime change. Saddam was never a threat to national security

For one, it happened and there isn't anything you can do about it.

you're right, but someone else will do something about it ..you've set into motion a series of events that will mean the death of thousands of americans for generations to come ..you've opened a pandoras box that you will not be able to close. As a military man, surely you can recognise that an eye for an eye is the only likely scenario

And for two, if the oppressed Iraq people had the power to overthrow Saddam they would have, but Saddam instilled his fear and the oppressed peopple's revolt wasn't happening.

probably because they were dying at such an alarming rate due to the sanctions they couldnt think about anything besides survival

We stepped in to save the day.

that almost made me choke on my own bile ...Saving by killing 14,000+ civilians ..that's a new concept

And you are not far from being labeled a conspriacy theroist.

it's not my idea, many many many people have pointed out this same fact

As you have already pointed out hospitals weren't the only thing not guarded.

but it was the most important thing considering the bacteria cultures, virus' ect that were stored there ..not too mention that if you wanted to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis you'd at least give the appearance that you were trying to help

Schools, water treatment and power plants, banks, and museums probably should have been guarded.

right off the bat you proved to iraqis that all you wanted was their oil (whether validated or not)

Maybe the troops were guarding the ministry of oil and other locations of the like because they were afraid the wells were going to be lit on fire like in the last gulf war. Ever think of that?

nope, the minitry of oil was in Bagdad, there are no wells no refinaries etc ..it was just a building

I can't speak for soldiers because I was a marine and we were lectured many times on the rules of war. I remember being specifically told all the details of when to use deadly force. I can't justify the actions of that soldier. From your description he was in the wrong and as were the others who cheered him. I wold hope that because there is video of the incident that the soldier would face prosecution.

you ignored my point, frankly I think the higher ups are more responsible than that soldier ..they gave them a liscence to kill carte blanche

Read the resolution to go to war. There were more reasons to go to war than just WMDs. I have posted that and highlighted the passages time and time agian.

come on where were you in 2002-2003? that's all you ever heard, I can give you a list of who said what if you'd like

Even still, WMDs or not, we are there and are going to be there. IF we weren't there those people were alive. Well, IF I put my money on red instead of black I would be $1000 richer right now and IF I picked 4 instead of 5 I would have won the lottery.

well then you'll have to live with the consequences ..personally if I was american I'd be calling for bush' impeachment and full investigation but that'll never happen because you've been so indoctrinated in propagandist ideology that it's like you're all chanting the same mantra "USA! USA! USA!" ..I feel bad for the future victems of iraqi retribution ..they really have no understanding as to why they will die

 

[Bodacious]

The body that is saying this war is illegal IS THE WORLD!! Therefore it makes it 100% valid.

Then where are the UN resolutions denouncing the US? Where are the war crimes charges against Bush?

The corruption at the UN was the fault of the US just as much as every other country.

Source?

Lets simply start out with the inspectors that were there and they were saying they needed more time because they couldn't find anything.

Or maybe we can ask the inspectors that were booted out by saddam, or maybe we can ask the inspectors that were lied to by saddam, or maybe we can ask the inspectors that had an entire 2000 man unit for the sole purpose of delaying and thwarting their inspections.

Because Rumsfeld was the one that made both decisions, first to support him then to invade him. Since he didn't give a shit about humanitarian issues when he was allies with Saddam he clearly didn't care now. How do you fail to see the reasoning behind this?

And how do you know Rumsfeld doesn't care now? That is an assumption is it not? I am sure you konw about what assumptions do to your credibiliy.

Rawanda and many other humantiarian problems around the world that were ignored also proves that justification for the war is total bullshit.

The US isn't the only one not doing anything about Rawanda.

I addressed your dumb points, now address my last 3 posts.

Now how about you answer all of my points that you failed to address?

 

[Bodacious]

Ok, so if you mom and dad don't see a check point or see it and if they do see it don't know what to do you are saying they should die? Ok, fine, arguing with you is pointless.

IF IF IF IF IF

A majority of the cases I witnessed were in BROAD DAYLIGHT and the peple were give FAIR WARNING!

 

[No Limit]

IF IF IF IF IF

A majority of the cases I witnessed were in BROAD DAYLIGHT and the peple were give FAIR WARNING!

I am not only talking about the checkpoint situation. If they are ever murdered, die because of disease, or if they can't get the healthcare they need I want you to come here and say f*ck it, it doesn't matter.

I am not going to reply again unless I see something worthwhile. Everyone here knows you are wrong and everyone sees how little value a human life has to you. Therefore arguing with you is pointless; I already made my point by showing how wrong you are and people reading this thread should be able to see that.

If Bush invaded Iran tomorrow, killed everyone there, you would say it would be ok because it was justified since in war people die. Do you understand that we killed more civillians than we did insurgents or Saddam's military?

 

[Bodacious]

I am not only talking about the checkpoint situation. If they are ever murdered, die because of disease, or if they can't get the healthcare they need I want you to come here and say f*ck it, it doesn't matter.

IF IF IF IF IF!

If frogs had wings they wouldn't bumb their ass when they hopped.

I am not going to reply again unless I see something worthwhile. Everyone here knows you are wrong and everyone sees how little value a human life has to you. Therefore arguing with you is pointless; I already made my point by showing how wrong you are and people reading this thread should be able to see that.

And I hope people see how wrong you are when you say the only thing we went to war for was WMDs when there it is black and white, humanitarian reasons.

Who cares if I am wrong anyways?

Do you understand that we killed more civillians than we did insurgents or Saddam's military?

Source?

 

[CptStern]

bodacious, I made a lengthy post, I'd appreciate it if you answered it instead of skirting the issues altoghter

 

[Bodacious]

I appreciate you spending your time replying to my posts.

oh but it is reality ..your enemies have already found you guilty ..for generations to come. Unfortunately it'll be american civilians who pay the price for the greed of a few

We'll cross that bridge when we get there. Can I use your crystal ball?

doesnt matter, the fact is that if you werent there there'd be 14,000 less dead civilians

IF!

not the same thing and you know it:

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George Bush February 8, 2003


that's a lie, and you know it


this is the truth, and you know it:


"For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on."

Paul Wolfowitz May 28, 2003

The world powers believed Saddam had WMDs. That is a fact. Like I said, if you think Bush lied, then you think Aristotle lied.

so in other words you're washing your hands of the blood of thousands of innocents? shades of Pilate and Nero

Not at all, but complaining about it isn't going to make it all better, either.

really? is that why you vetoed a iran UN resolution calling for the trial of saddam for crimes against humanity?

I have no idea why the resolution was vetoed. Do you know?

really? why didnt you do it when he was at his worst? why now? because it suits you? because 9/11 gave you an excuse to dupe the american public

I bet we could debate on whether saddam was at his worst then or before we invaded.

Why now? Probably because we were tired of Saddam giving the free world the middle finger.

I'm sure meany people justified Kristallnacht or segregation or slavery, still doesnt make it right. You destroyed a country, killed it's civilians all based on a false pretense

And we are going to rebuild it better than it ever was before.

really? then why say this?

I don't know. Maybe things changed between when they said that and when we went to war.

no you dont, it is NONE of your business ..there was absolutely no justification for regime change. Saddam was never a threat to national security

I have already stated what is justification. I am sorry you can't accept that.

you're right, but someone else will do something about it ..you've set into motion a series of events that will mean the death of thousands of americans for generations to come ..you've opened a pandoras box that you will not be able to close. As a military man, surely you can recognise that an eye for an eye is the only likely scenario

That is a risk we are willing to take. I like how you can predict the future.

probably because they were dying at such an alarming rate due to the sanctions they couldnt think about anything besides survival

Or maybe it was Saddam executing anyone who spoke out against him, or maybe it was saddam putting dissenters into mass graves, or maybe it was the fear of being locked up for speaking out.

that almost made me choke on my own bile ...Saving by killing 14,000+ civilians ..that's a new concept

Read this

it's not my idea, many many many people have pointed out this same fact

That many more conspiracy theorists.

but it was the most important thing considering the bacteria cultures, virus' ect that were stored there ..not too mention that if you wanted to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis you'd at least give the appearance that you were trying to help

That wasn't what happened and wishing we had done things a differnt way doesn't make it all better. Maybe in the futere the people on the ground will make better decisions.

right off the bat you proved to iraqis that all you wanted was their oil (whether validated or not)

nope, the minitry of oil was in Bagdad, there are no wells no refinaries etc ..it was just a building

Give me a break. You are basing that off of one picture? There were a lot more things guarded than the ministry of oil. Oil wells were guarded elsewhere.

you ignored my point, frankly I think the higher ups are more responsible than that soldier ..they gave them a liscence to kill carte blanche

Or maybe the soldiers disobeyed the laws of war? I havn't seent he video so all I have is your word for it. I like how you know all the details of what happened and under what circumstances when you weren't even there.

come on where were you in 2002-2003? that's all you ever heard, I can give you a list of who said what if you'd like

Regardless of what was on TV that doesn't change congress' resolution does it?

well then you'll have to live with the consequences ..personally if I was american I'd be calling for bush' impeachment and full investigation but that'll never happen because you've been so indoctrinated in propagandist ideology that it's like you're all chanting the same mantra "USA! USA! USA!" ..I feel bad for the future victems of iraqi retribution ..they really have no understanding as to why they will die

I am willing to live with the concequences. The same thing can be said about you beng brainwashed.

 

[Bodacious]

bodacious, I made a lengthy post, I'd appreciate it if you answered it instead of skirting the issues altoghter

It takes time to reply, I am at work.

 

[No Limit]

IF IF IF IF IF!

If frogs had wings they wouldn't bumb their ass when they hopped.

You didn't address my question, please do. If you mom dies of disease, is murdered, or can't get the medical attention she needs you won't care since she is just a statistic, correct?

 

[No Limit]

I don't know. Maybe things changed between when they said that and when we went to war.

Things changed in less than 2 years? Please, for christ sake, stop saying such idiotic things.

We'll cross that bridge when we get there. Can I use your crystal ball?

You seem to say you can't predict the future. Are you saying that thousands more won't die in Iraq? If you are saying that pass me some of what you are smoking.

The world powers believed Saddam had WMDs. That is a fact. Like I said, if you think Bush lied, then you think Aristotle lied.

Why then did we have inspectors on the ground in Iraq that said there were no WMDs? Are you trying to ignore these points?

Not at all, but complaining about it isn't going to make it all better, either.

SUpporting it, like you do, sure as hell won't make it better also, it will make it worse.

I have already stated what is justification. I am sorry you can't accept that.

Your justification doesn't pass the smell test as already pointed out. The world had many humanitarian problems that were 1000x worse than what Saddam was doing and we supported Saddam when he was the worst. When he was the worst is not a matter of debate, it is a fact. Look at that site you posted that shows Saddam's killings. You also ignored this point.

Give me a break. You are basing that off of one picture? There were a lot more things guarded than the ministry of oil. Oil wells were guarded elsewhere.

The picture PROVES they were more worried about oil than about hospitals. Why are you arguing with this? Because it was a 'mistake'?

Regardless of what was on TV that doesn't change congress' resolution does it?

The f*cking resolution barely mentioned human rights violations as been said. No America person in 2002-2003 thought we were going in to war because of humanitarian issues. This means the American people were mislead by Bush.

I am willing to live with the concequences. The same thing can be said about you beng brainwashed.

How is he brainwashed? You are the one continually repeating the same old Republican talking points.

"Oh, we went in there because Saddam was a bad person, WMDs were only a part of it" - give me a f*cking break.

 

[No Limit]

Let me ask you this because you seem to honestly believe that Bush had no idea there was the chance Saddam had no WMDs. What did Bush want from Saddam to consider that Saddam is cooperating as all Bush would say is "Saddam needs to comply", he never mentioned how he should comply.

 

[Bodacious]

Things changed in less than 2 years? Please, for christ sake, stop saying such idiotic things.

Yes, things change. You and I have no access to the intelligence that Bush and everyone else on the top looked at. and what they believed and the rest of the world believed to be true.

You seem to say you can't predict the future. Are you saying that thousands more won't die in Iraq? If you are saying that pass me some of what you are smoking.

I like how you try to put words in my mouth. Thousands more probably will die. That is the cost of war.

Why then did we have inspectors on the ground in Iraq that said there were no WMDs? Are you trying to ignore these points?

Why then did when we had inspectors on the ground int he 90s did saddam kick them out and defied them every way he could? Are you trying to ignore these points?

SUpporting it, like you do, sure as hell won't make it better also, it will make it worse.

And I suppose you think that is fact right? You have no way of knowing what is going to happen over there for better or for worse.

Your justification doesn't pass the smell test as already pointed out. The world had many humanitarian problems that were 1000x worse than what Saddam was doing and we supported Saddam when he was the worst. When he was the worst is not a matter of debate, it is a fact. Look at that site you posted that shows Saddam's killings. You also ignored this point.

Given that I would have to take off my shoes to count how many points of mine you have failed to address I don't see how me failing to address your points matters.

The picture PROVES they were more worried about oil than about hospitals. Why are you arguing with this? Because it was a 'mistake'?

I offered an alternative reason as to why the oil wells were guarded as opposed to greed.

The f*cking resolution barely mentioned human rights violations as been said. No America person in 2002-2003 thought we were going in to war because of humanitarian issues. This means the American people were mislead by Bush.

And you are the voice of the American people now? You aren't my voice. I knew perefectly well what we were going to war for in 2002-2003 and it wasn't just WMDs.

How is he brainwashed? You are the one continually repeating the same old Republican talking points. "Oh, we went in there because Saddam was a bad person, WMDs were only a part of it" - give me a f*cking break.

And you and stern are the ones repeating the same old Democrat/anit-war talking points. I suppose you are going to call me an idiot next and say you are realist and you are capable of independant thought, huh?

 

[Bodacious]

You didn't address my question, please do. If you mom dies of disease, is murdered, or can't get the medical attention she needs you won't care since she is just a statistic, correct?

I am not going to answer the question because it starts with IF.

You don't address half of my questions I don't see why I should address half of yours.

 

[Tr0n]

And you and stern are the ones repeating the same old Democrat/anit-war talking points. I suppose you are going to call me an idiot next and say you are realist and you are capable of independant thought, huh?

How about this....

Both of you are brainwashed by your "parties"...and both of you are a bunch of idiots who will never understand that this goverment is filled with corruption and lies.Only thing this country (and all countries for that matter) does is get greedy with money and power....if they can't make a buck off it then it ain't worth anything.

As that famous political flash by jibjab went...

Republicans = wacko war dumbassess

Democrats = un lovin pussies

 

[Bodacious]

Let me ask you this because you seem to honestly believe that Bush had no idea there was the chance Saddam had no WMDs. What did Bush want from Saddam to consider that Saddam is cooperating as all Bush would say is "Saddam needs to comply", he never mentioned how he should comply.

Bush wanted Saddam to disarm. Now it seems he didn't have anything to disarm but that doesn't change that we are there does it?

 

[CptStern]

I appreciate you spending your time replying to my posts.



We'll cross that bridge when we get there. Can I use your crystal ball?

I just have to look at 9/11 as an example ..up until then almost all of the attacks on americans were military targets. the gloves came off when you bombed training camps in afghanistan that killed many women and children in retribution for the USS cole bombing

IF!

it doesnt matter, you are still responsible for those deaths

The world powers believed Saddam had WMDs. That is a fact. Like I said, if you think Bush lied, then you think Aristotle lied.

who? members of the coalition? why didnt canada join? because they didnt believe saddam had WMD ..in fact every single country outside of the coalition didnt believe it either

Not at all, but complaining about it isn't going to make it all better, either.

so I should shut up and tow the line? please, if no one complains they'll get away with it, and it will continue

I have no idea why the resolution was vetoed. Do you know?

yes ..saddam was an ally ..Iran wasnt

I bet we could debate on whether saddam was at his worst then or before we invaded.

no you couldnt ..saddam was responsible for over 800,000 Iranian military deaths. It's been proven he was the agressor. It's been proven he used nerve gas supplied by the americans

Why now? Probably because we were tired of Saddam giving the free world the middle finger.

how? by agreeing to disarm? he was doing just that when you invaded ..you said he was lying ..turns out he wasnt

And we are going to rebuild it better than it ever was before.

hahahahahaha that brought a tear to my eye ..is that why the urrent PM is a terrorist and murderer? how is he any better than saddam ..mark my words you'll never control iraq, you will never bring your brand of "democracy" to iraq

I don't know. Maybe things changed between when they said that and when we went to war.

come on, how can they flip-flop so much on such a huge issue?

I have already stated what is justification. I am sorry you can't accept that.

your justification doesnt hold up to scrutiny

That is a risk we are willing to take. I like how you can predict the future.

so it's ok to needlessly put americans at risk just so a chosen few can make tons of $ on fat oil contracts?

Or maybe it was Saddam executing anyone who spoke out against him, or maybe it was saddam putting dissenters into mass graves, or maybe it was the fear of being locked up for speaking out.

he was doing that when he was an ally and friend ...what's the difference? funny how I have no problem admitting that saddam was a lunatic and tyrant responsible for the deaths of thousands, yet when your own government admits responsibility in the deaths of 500,000 children you sweep it under the carpet



Read this

sorry but not a valid source: this in itself proves that:

"British P.M. Tony Blair 1998 - 2003
Malnutrition among children under 5. 400,000"


"Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it. "


seems to me that they're admitting responsibility

this document proves that the US knew what it would do to the civilian populace if they destroyed the water treatment plants in iraq

That many more conspiracy theorists.

really? then why does this document support that assertion? here's a summary

Give me a break. You are basing that off of one picture? There were a lot more things guarded than the ministry of oil. Oil wells were guarded elsewhere.

you're supporting my point

Or maybe the soldiers disobeyed the laws of war? I havn't seent he video so all I have is your word for it. I like how you know all the details of what happened and under what circumstances when you weren't even there.

it's pretty clear from the video ..I'll send it to you when I get home

Regardless of what was on TV that doesn't change congress' resolution does it?

doesnt matter ...you sold the war to americans using WMD as a justification ..man that's all anyone ever said "wmd this" and "wmd that" ...how is it that I knew without a doubt that thetre were no WMD but all of congress didnt? because they wanted someone to gun for after 9/11

I am willing to live with the concequences. The same thing can be said about you beng brainwashed.

how am I brainwashed? because I see the truth? you cant dispute most of my facts ..because they're facts

btw I find it extremely disturbing and hypocritical that you're willing to sacrifice your fellow countrymen for the profit of a few ..god I look like a patriot in comparison