Go Back   Sports Central Message Boards > Community Discussion > The Lounge

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-20-2005, 06:10 PM   #1
Shawndo
Sports Virtuoso
 
Shawndo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,947
Shawndo is on a distinguished road
Default 4 more years in Iraq?!?!?

How much of this garbage are we going to tolerate???
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050820/...hief_interview

I admit I supported Bush's initial advance, and I'm embarassed about that, but let's get this freakin idiot out of office and stop bullying the world. I love living in America, but I would be embarassed to be an American if I travelled to Europe or Asia. We look like a big f'ing prick.
Shawndo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2005, 06:47 PM   #2
Ellis
gymnopedist
 
Ellis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hyde Park
Posts: 8,140
Ellis has a spectacular aura aboutEllis has a spectacular aura about
Default

Amen, Shawndo!

Bush did a great job planning this war out. I don't understand how we ever going to leave, feeling secure that the Iraqi government is stable. With all of the insurgent attacks in Iraq, I don't understand how Iraq's government is going to be able to stay on both feet once we leave.

And on top of that, if we spend four more years there we are going to lose thousands of more troops over there. Thousands of troops in Iraq, which was never our biggest threat to begin with.

Well, we did make the Iraqi's free! We did what was right. Our country is against abortion and killing in America, but has no problem with the fact that we have gone and killed thousands of Iraqis. It doesn't make sense.

War is the answer in some cases, but in this case it was just unneccessary. Bush's ignorance has made our country look like ass holes by this war.
Ellis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2005, 07:16 PM   #3
doublee
Sports Virtuoso
 
doublee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 11,138
doublee will become famous soon enoughdoublee will become famous soon enough
Default

I, for one, supported the initial invasions into Afghanistan to flush out the Taliban, Bin Laden, and Al Qaeda, but have never supported the war in Iraq. First of all this was supposed to be an initiative to bring the 9/11 attackers to justice and there is no real hard evidence that Hussein had antyhing to do with 9/11. The whole invasion in Iraq just smacked more of Bush avenging the family name than actually bringing terrorists to justice.

We still have not caught Bin Laden and there seems to be no real initiative or desire to do so anymore. After all we caught Hussein and if Trey Parker and Matt Stone have taught me anything it is that Hussein is more evil than Satan himself.

Ultimately, the elected officials in place today will likely be overthrown once the US pulls out of Iraq. In reality this is our generation's Vietnam. It is painfully clear that the current administration went into this war with no exit plan whatsoever. Our soldiers are fighting an enemy that will go to no ends to achieve their goal.

The one thing that really bugs me about this is I was of the impression that the war was over. At least I seem to remember the Bush Administration claiming victory in Iraq several months ago yet the fighting continues.
__________________
Can I get an Amen from the bobbleheads?
Hey I said pass the ketchup! I'm eatin' salad here!
Oooh, there is so much I don't know about astrophysics. I wish I had read that book by that wheelchair guy.
You SU-DIDDILY-UCK Flanders!!
doublee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2005, 08:39 PM   #4
Richard the Lionheart
Krenzel/Owen Wilson 2008
 
Richard the Lionheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,869
Richard the Lionheart will become famous soon enoughRichard the Lionheart will become famous soon enough
Default

If the military wasn't planning for the worst case scenario (which if you read the article is what the four year timeline is) then you all would find fault with that.

And if you were under the impression that the war was over when Bush declared the end of major combat, you just don't understand anything about the nature of this war. Major combat was over. Saddam's regime was dessimated, we aren't fighting a military anymore. We're fighting terrorists.
__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows...
Richard the Lionheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2005, 08:40 PM   #5
Marc
Administrator
 
Marc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lake Wylie, SC
Posts: 26,476
Marc will become famous soon enough
Default

I have supported the President, but he seems to be living in his own reality and is among the few who still support this. The one point he still has is that if we do pull out before the new Iraqi government can defend and operature itself, we would be throwing away all of the time and effort we've spent there because it would be taken over by extremists. I also wish Bush would be more willing to admit to being wrong as there hasn't been a proven connection between Iraq and 9/11.
__________________
Marc James - SCMB Administrator | Sports Central Managing Editor & Founder
Teams: [Kentucky Wildcats] [Green Bay Packers] [Charlotte Hornets]
Follow on Twitter: @mnjames | @sportcentral
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-20-2005, 09:04 PM   #6
doublee
Sports Virtuoso
 
doublee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 11,138
doublee will become famous soon enoughdoublee will become famous soon enough
Default

Well, if memory serves this was supposedly never about 9/11 in the first place. It was supposed to be about Saddam having this huge stockpile of weapons of mass destruction at his disposal and we were supposed to believe that he had an itchy trigger finger. We were supposed to be going in to thwart another potential terrorist attack by corralling all of these WMDs that were in Iraq. Unfortunately they never found any WMDs as some opponents to this war said they were unlikely to find anything substantial when they went in. Bush and Cheney are the ones who know the real reason we are there in the first place. Depending on who you want to believe in the media there are some who claim that this invasion was in the works before 9/11 ever happened. I am sure that the Bush Administration was secretly hoping to find some concrete evidence that Hussein was either directly involved with 9/11 in some way.

We are definitely past the point of no return now. There is no way we can pull out and hang the Iraqis out to dry like that. Either way I doubt this ends without a bloody Civil War after the U. S. withdraws from Iraq.

Bush is losing public support by the day and the next President will likely be elected on the basis of promising to begin a withdrawal from Iraq.
__________________
Can I get an Amen from the bobbleheads?
Hey I said pass the ketchup! I'm eatin' salad here!
Oooh, there is so much I don't know about astrophysics. I wish I had read that book by that wheelchair guy.
You SU-DIDDILY-UCK Flanders!!
doublee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 01:58 AM   #7
Ellis
gymnopedist
 
Ellis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hyde Park
Posts: 8,140
Ellis has a spectacular aura aboutEllis has a spectacular aura about
Default

When you look back at wars like the revolutionary war and world war two, you can be proud to be an American. In those wars, we actually fought for something. In the revolutionary way, it was to gain independence from Britain and create a fair government which is represented by the people of the country. In World War 2, we faught with Britian and the USSR to destroy the evil powers, which threatened the whole entire world.

But then you look at the war in Iraq. I find no pride in it. We blew off the UN and went into Iraq. We took over a nation that had very little, if any, affect on our future and our daily lives. We were mislead into believing that Saddam had nukes and was planning to bomb us or surounding countries. Of course, we find no evidence of nukes when we take over. Also, our troops get ambushed daily by insurgents, which will destroy the Iraqi government soon after we leave, when ever that is. I just see not pride in it. I don't see why we needed to go in there and what we are getting out of it.
Ellis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 04:53 AM   #8
Shawndo
Sports Virtuoso
 
Shawndo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 3,947
Shawndo is on a distinguished road
Default

So far, Congress has authorized $152,600,000,000 for the Iraq war. This is enough to build over 17,500 elementary schools.

Almost 20% of the billions of dollars American taxpayers are spending to rebuild Iraq are lost to theft, kickbacks and corruption.

Last edited by Shawndo; 08-21-2005 at 05:03 AM.
Shawndo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 12:25 PM   #9
Billy D
Alternative View
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: i move a lot
Posts: 1,299
Billy D is on a distinguished road
Default

If you believed that this wouldn't take a decade, I think you were naive. We'll be in Afganistan that long too. Rebuilding countries is different than just toppling governments.

So, the recent news hasn't changed me. I was against the war before it started, but I can see a way it could still be successful, so i guess you could say i'm supporting it now-- and like Doublee, i think a pull out now would be very bad. But, what is "success"?

It would have been better if the Bush Administration were honest up-front about its reasons and objectives going in, but it's become clear since then. There have been several reasons for war laid out at different times:

1. Weapons of Mass Distruction-- red herring

2. Liberate Iraqis-- red herring (why not liberate Cubans, Koreans, Burmese, etc.)

3. Terrorist Connection-- red herring mostly, though it has given them another battlefield conveniently far from here (distraction technique?)

4. Saddam Violated International Law and UN Process Wasn't Working-- strictly a technicality (doesn't explain the timing or why invasion hasn't been used in other similar cases)

5. Spread Democracy in the Middle East-- BINGO! This is the real reason we went to Iraq-- we saw a region out of control and getting worse and we needed a moderate democracy in that region as an example and a counterweight to extremist Islam (Turkey doesn't count-- they all hate Turkey). All other reasons were put forth simply to win support, but this is the real reason we went (and the one most frequently cited now along with #2... though rarely cited pre-invasion by anyone other than Wolfowitz).

The Bush Administration clearly believed in #5 but didn't think Americans could get behind it... thus the red herrings to create a sense of urgency. The other reasons also helped select Iraq as the Middle East country to start with, as opposed to Syria or Iran. Plus, Iraq is geographically located in the center of the region-- all the better for "spreading democracy".

So, can "spreading democracy" still be achieved? Yes, compared to the Saddam regime, Iraq could become more democratic. And that could influence neighbors who have no Arab-world role model. Would this be a real "success" if Americans keep getting killed? Depends how many, i'd say, but success is still possible. And since success is still possible and instant pull-out would be a disaster, I believe we should support the decision to stay.
__________________
3 SCMB fantasy league championships in 6 seasons
Columnist at www.officeqb.com. Newest column: Poison Pill Drama in the NFL (posted 4/11/06)
Sporting News blog: http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/billy%20d. (updated 3/18/07)
Billy D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 12:28 PM   #10
Billy D
Alternative View
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: i move a lot
Posts: 1,299
Billy D is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Shawndo
So far, Congress has authorized $152,600,000,000 for the Iraq war. This is enough to build over 17,500 elementary schools.
Good point. But now that we're in there...

Quote:
Originally posted by Shawndo
Almost 20% of the billions of dollars American taxpayers are spending to rebuild Iraq are lost to theft, kickbacks and corruption.
Not too bad for a middle eastern country without a govt that controls the whole place. I'm glad it's that low.
__________________
3 SCMB fantasy league championships in 6 seasons
Columnist at www.officeqb.com. Newest column: Poison Pill Drama in the NFL (posted 4/11/06)
Sporting News blog: http://www.sportingnews.com/blog/billy%20d. (updated 3/18/07)
Billy D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 12:38 PM   #11
Richard the Lionheart
Krenzel/Owen Wilson 2008
 
Richard the Lionheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,869
Richard the Lionheart will become famous soon enoughRichard the Lionheart will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by doublee
Unfortunately they never found any WMDs as some opponents to this war said they were unlikely to find anything substantial when they went in.
WHO?!?! WHERE!?!?! Show me an article saying that! AHHH!

Quote:
Originally posted by Ellis

We were mislead into believing that Saddam had nukes and was planning to bomb us or surounding countries. Of course, we find no evidence of nukes when we take over.
WHO SAID THAT!?!? WHERE!?!??! SHOW ME AN ARTICLE! AHHHH!

**************************************************

The farther we move from the time of the initial operation in Iraq, the cloudier people's memories become, and thusly the debate becomes increasingly ridiculous.

If you don't think terrorists threaten "the whole world" then I just really don't know what to say to you all. I think most of you agree with the fact that they are a threat however, so I really don't understand the opposition. If its because you don't think Iraq has anything to do with terrorism, then I would just like to remind you all that we are fighting TERRORISTS in Iraq. They do not want a free, liberal society in the Middle-East, that is why they are fighting so hard to disrupt things. Iraq is a step in the process, and a giant one, to a free mid-east where Iraqi's and Saudi's and Palastinian's no longer look to al Qaeda for answers, they look to democratic institutions.

I didn't support this war because I thought Saddam was behind the September 11th attacks. This is not a war of vengeance, its a war of prevention.
__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows...
Richard the Lionheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 02:48 PM   #12
Marc
Administrator
 
Marc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lake Wylie, SC
Posts: 26,476
Marc will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Ellis
When you look back at wars like the revolutionary war and world war two, you can be proud to be an American. In those wars, we actually fought for something. In the revolutionary way, it was to gain independence from Britain and create a fair government which is represented by the people of the country. In World War 2, we faught with Britian and the USSR to destroy the evil powers, which threatened the whole entire world.

But then you look at the war in Iraq. I find no pride in it. We blew off the UN and went into Iraq. We took over a nation that had very little, if any, affect on our future and our daily lives. We were mislead into believing that Saddam had nukes and was planning to bomb us or surounding countries. Of course, we find no evidence of nukes when we take over. Also, our troops get ambushed daily by insurgents, which will destroy the Iraqi government soon after we leave, when ever that is. I just see not pride in it. I don't see why we needed to go in there and what we are getting out of it.
But you have to understand that this isn't a traditional war. We are not facing a traditional enemy that can easily be conquered. The enemy is spread out, constantly on the move, and secretive. So I don't think you can compare those wars with the War on Terror (or whatever cute nicknames this administration is coming up with).

As far as what we are fighting for, it is definitely not the same thing as in prior wars, but that's not to say it's not substantiated. I think Bush isn't totally incorrect by saying we have to fight the war abroad to prevent it from happening at home (9/11 was the ultimate reminder that we are not doing enough by only protecting our own turf).

I think we need to do more to help Iraq run itself and do it with more urgency. It probably would be wrong to just leave. But this whole conundrum was caused by not getting UN approval before going in because now the burden is entirely on us, whereas we'd ideally like to be able to take most of our troops out and have UN forces finish the job. So the main mistake was getting into this without more support.

Lastly, I do think we need to continue pursuining the Taliban and Bin Laden because those are our biggest threads, not Iraq.
__________________
Marc James - SCMB Administrator | Sports Central Managing Editor & Founder
Teams: [Kentucky Wildcats] [Green Bay Packers] [Charlotte Hornets]
Follow on Twitter: @mnjames | @sportcentral
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 04:00 PM   #13
Ellis
gymnopedist
 
Ellis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Hyde Park
Posts: 8,140
Ellis has a spectacular aura aboutEllis has a spectacular aura about
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Ricky the Kid
WHO SAID THAT!?!? WHERE!?!??! SHOW ME AN ARTICLE! AHHHH!
Who said that!? You never heard that Iraq at WMDs? You didn't see Colin Powell go infront of the UN and show pictures of trucks in Iraq, containing uranium and other materials used to create nuclear weapons?

In this case, it is a truck that we were lead to believe carried materials for chemical weapons, which falls under the WMD catagory:

We never ended up finding WMDs either. Where is the article Ricky? There is none. Want to know why? We never found any WMDs. If we had, it would be big news, and I could have gotten you one.

Last edited by Marc; 08-21-2005 at 05:38 PM.
Ellis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2005, 06:55 PM   #14
Richard the Lionheart
Krenzel/Owen Wilson 2008
 
Richard the Lionheart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,869
Richard the Lionheart will become famous soon enoughRichard the Lionheart will become famous soon enough
Default

Ellis, do you know what a nuke is? No one said Iraq had nuclear weapons at the time of invasion as you stated. The concern was that they had biological and chemical weapons, or WMD. No one ever said nukes.
__________________
You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows...
Richard the Lionheart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-22-2005, 12:31 AM   #15
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Ricky...

You do realize that once a nation is destabilized ( Sierra Leone, Sudan), terrorists take root? Iraq was a horrible regime, yet stable. You are Monday morning quarterbacking this entire argument just like Bush is. Facts are...

1. Terrorists linked to 9/11 had far greater root in many nations other than Iraq.

2. Terrorists not linked to 9/11 that presented a threat to U.S. security had far greater root in many nations other than Iraq.

At best, while terrorists do NOW exist in Iraq, they do so mostly as a result of U.S. foreign policy (destabilizing). And terrorists linked to 9-11 and others who weren't (but represent a greater threat to U.S. security) exist in other nations now which receive far less spending and military action on. If the U.S. government was destabilized at the level of Iraq, I bet many terrorist regimes would thrive here as well ( Nazi groups, Islamic terrorists, anarchists, KKK ). You are using one big brush to paint all terrorists in the same light, which is wrong.

If this is Goldwater's party, how the hell does this make sense financially?

I don't mind the whole WMD debate. Presidents have been lying for years to get us to go to war. If he lied or not makes no difference to me (I prefer being lied to in a convincing manner though). I do have an issue with a foreign policy being implemented (Bush Doctrine of Prevention) and carried out in less than a calender year. I would have defended Vietnam (with some reservations, but that's another topic) 40 years ago because it was actually the result of a foreign policy in place for some time. Whether I believe in the doctrine's goals ( stop Soviets then, plant a democratic seed now) is another debate. I don't mind blowing up anyone as long as they are on the list IN ORDER ACCORDING TO THE DOCTRINE. I do think other alternatives besides military should be scrutinized more closely before military action is given the go ahead, but I'd settle for the order at this point. I guess if you believe setting up a democracy and having it take root (again, another argument if you actually think that is possible) is the best way to wipe out terrorists, you could buy the Iraq argument. I don't know why you wouldn't pick a nation with actual ties to terrorists linked to 9/11 or a threat to national security first though. By doing it this way, terrorism has grown in the short-term, at the VERY LEAST.

These guys are either liars or complete amateurs when it comes to this stuff (I'll go with liars). To put it in sports lingo, Bush is the coach of an NBA team and has to face Jordan's Bulls. Instead of stopping Jordan or Pippen or even Rodman first, this guy is using all his resources on shutting down Jud Buechler. Yeah, he is an "enemy," but where is he on the priority list in accomplishing the ultimate goal...victory?
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:02 AM.