Recreation War in Iraq protest.

Yes, the american government likes to scapegoat who it can while it can to distract the general public from it's glaring flaws. Osama was kind enough to lend himself to us so that we could mask the economical depression, and Sadaam is just here to mask the rising of petrolium-based product's prices. The government assumes we'll all be distracted by a shiny fancy declaration of war, but as Ark said, we ain't no Rednecks.

 

Tony Blair's gettin' no public support here in Britain, I can tell you.
People are accusing him of being Bush's poodle, okay, so perhaps Tony Blair's not that loyal to Bush, but it's getting a little out-of-control.

And Bush is not the best person to follow around, I mean, he's a...well...moron.
He once said something like, "I have strong opinions. Sometimes my opinions are so strong, that I don't even agree with them myself."
Say what!? :dizzy2:
That made no sense what-so-ever.
In fact, nothing that the worlds politicians are doing/saying makes much sense these days....

 

I just wish that there was a better way to solve this problem than war. I just don't want to see anyone else get killed, innocent or not, ally or enemy, ya know? And I really think that people will need someone to be their for moral support if there is a war, that's one of the reasons I want to be a priest

And Bloodberry if you do come to Canada, I'm not exactly sure if it will be safe... Canada may not go into the war right away if there is one, but like the other World Wars we will be part of it sooner or later. I just hope that this doesn't come to World War Three and some kind of terms can be set up to prevent war. Because if a war does occur, it will be rather scary I predict with nuclear weapons and stuff...

I leave you with some famous quotes on LOVE AND PEACE

"I truly believe that individuals can make a difference in society. Since periods of change such as the present one come so rarely in human history, it is up to each of us to make the best use of our time to help create a happier world." - Dalai Lama

"I believe all suffering is caused by ignorance. People inflict pain on others in the selfish pursuit of their happiness or satisfaction. Yet true happiness comes from a sense of peace and contentment, which in turn must be achieved through the cultivation of altruism, of love and compassion, and elimination of ignorance, selfishness, and greed." - Dalai Lama

"We must learn to live together as brothers, or we are going to perish together as fools."- Martin Luther King Jr.

"Conflict is inevitable, but combat is optional." -Max Lucade

"It is easier to lead men to combat, stirring up their passion, than to restrain them and direct them toward the patient labors of peace." -Andre Gide

"In all of his suffering, as in all of his life and ministry, Jesus refused to defend himself with force or with violence. He endured violence and cruelty so that God's love might be fully manifest and the world might be reconciled to the One from whom it had become estranged. Even at his death, Jesus cried for forgiveness for those who were executioners: 'Father, forgive them.'"
-The Challenge of Peace

"You killed them. Even though they did terrible things, the decision of who should and who should not live was never and never will be yours to make!" -Vash the Stampede

"Love one another as I have loved you" - Jesus

 

ohhh.lol....just to hear that sung from the president would be heaven, imagine that....that is just funny, you my friend should be a song writer !

 

How does one talk reason to a mad man or someone who refuse's to listing?

Answer me that!

KaMe

 

While I believe the war is a necessary evil, i'm not a war monger. If there is a better way to completly eliminate the problem, then screw the war. But being realistic, people almost never settle things peacefully. When it comes to settling something, its usually with violence or brute force. While that might not be the first choice of many people, its usually the last resort. The same can be said about nations.

In all seriousness, what would you recommend we do different? Hussain does not want to cooperate, he is secretly delving into other means of getting influence over the middle east and if he gets them will at the minimum, brandish them as a show of force. At that time, we'd have to treat them like we did with the Soviets. We'd be on equal terms just because Iraq developed something like that and is ready to use it. The government doesn't always do what the people like, but we'd have to look at the future. The what we do now affects our future. Having a wild threat like that will cast a shadow over what we believe will happen. Sure, Iraq cannot attack the U.S. or Canada directly. But he can get to the surrounding region, maybe even Europe and Asia. He can indirectly attack us by attacking our allies. What happens then? What are we going to do, make concessions? Try and be nice? Hell, he just might use one anyways whether we do any thing or not.

About the weapons inspectors. It's like a group of five guys trying to find something in the state of California. While they can show up to places without prior notice, that still is a hell of a big area to search.

Last thing, the draft has been voted down by the congress. But if war does happen and it does turn into some big thing were the draft does get re-instated, i'll go if my number is picked. I'm no wuss, thats just tough **** for me. But forget the army, they have no pride (no offense, that just the way it feels). I'll be a marine, Hu-Rah!

 

in all seriousness i agree 100% with Phalanx,... That is so far the best arguement ive heard about this topic.. and its what i feel.

and if you want an example of what may happen if the world does not do something about Iraq now just look at Hitler for an example of something that could have been stoped.

I just hope that if it does come to war its because the UN thinks its time. THE UN not one or two contries..


Right now im just sitting back and waiting to hear what happens and if they start drafting!

KaMe

 

sigh... I don't want this to develop into a flame war so I should tell you that I am an idealist who follows the philosophy: "what would Jesus do." (and if someone starts mocking me because of that it would be totally off topic.)

I'm just saying that if there is a way to stop a war from occuring then that would be great. But looking at the whole thing realistically action needs to be taken, before this whole thing gets any worse and more people suffer because of it. And it seems that the people who do solve problems with peaceful methods just get screwed over at first, but in the long run the easiest course of action (war compared to peace) is not always the best...

And then there's another argument that I'm questioning right now... maybe after a 3rd war is over then there will be peace because humanity will have learned its lesson(I think Nostredamus predicted that, but then again he predicted that a person from the sky will come to the mid east and help them to fight against the great continent or something.... and then again he predicted Napolean and Hitler too)


I'm digging myself into a deeper and deeper hole @_@x

 

Well, think of it this way:

What if the US is right? What if Iraq IS developing a nuclear weapon, or a chemical weapon? If they do, Saddam is the type of ruler that would not hesitate to use one. So suppose we ignore them because the peaceful protesters don't want a war. In 5 years, Iraq has a nuclear weapon. Saddam is old, he doesn't care if he dies, but hey, if he nukes someone, what a way to spite the US and the UN, eh? And who do you think thier first target will be?

This should be a no-brainer.

Israel.

And the US considers Israel to be an ally. What will the reaction in the US if Israel is nuked?

This is another no-brainer.

NUKE IRAQ.

Once Iraq has proven that they do indeed have weapons of mass destruction and use them, there will be very little qualm (in the US) in the use of massive force against them.

At this point, YOU, as the ones who protested the war and came up with no other viable options, are the ones responsible for the deaths of thousands, maybe millions. But, it gets better. With 2 nukes having been fired, what will the international community do? It is quite possible that threats of war against both the US and Iraq will be issued, and possibly even enacted. At this point, what do you have?

World War 3.

Congratulations, as a protester of this war, you've brought about the death of not only millions, but billions of people.

This is all hypothetical of course. Iraq might actually not be building a nuke. The US might not retaliate for Israel if they are. The world might not descend into WW3 even if 2 nukes ARE used.

Personally, I don't like chances like that. And although I don't support a war on Iraq yet, if it is proven that they ARE pursuing a weapons program to develop nuclear/chemical weapons, then I will fully support the war.

That is just my opinion though, your milage may vary.

- Ark.

 

this may just go down as the stupidest thing I've read all week.. but then again maybe not, I post on alot of forums

 

Actually, through the philosophy of Cause and Effect, the protesters would have had a hand in those deaths, because due to them, no action was taken, and schemes could go along unfettered.

Basically, the point he's trying to make is that its better to glass one nation (for those who don't know, 'glassing' means nuking a nation to the extreme) than have MANY nations ruined.

 

i agree, so let's just glass the states?

****in yanks

 

Wow, how exceptionally tactful.

So, if you want to call my point stupid, provide some evidence. Defend your position, or go away. Ad hominem attacks are not justifiable debate.

If I take no action against a man who is about to stab someone, am I not partially responsible? That's the situation on an international level. Iraq wants to stab people, and is grinding a dagger for that very purpose. Iraq's aggressiveness is not a presumption, it is a fact, demonstratable. Try searching any news archive for news relating to Iraq pre-1991, when the US stepped into it. (Post-1991, it's all about the conflict between Iraq and the US in the archives... With the US watching Iraq like a hawk, they haven't had much opportunity to BE aggressive.) If Iraq comes into possession of a nuclear weapon, it is exceptionally naive to think they would not use it.

If you think the US has not tried peaceful alternatives to war, look at the news for the past 10 years. Iraq has, over and over, denied, lied, and obstructed. With Bush around, the threats of war have at least gotten inspectors back into Iraq, which is one of the few things I think he has done right.

As I've previously stated, at the moment I don't think there is adequate cause to war against Iraq. However, if they are working on nuclear/chemical programs (I feel like I'm repeating myself here) then it is in the best interest of both the US and the surrounding nations that Iraq's leadership is removed.

Anyone want to argue? Fine. I welcome arguement. But don't argue with insults, argue with fact and thoery.

- Ark

 

I just finished watching Mr bush adress to congress I think it was.

Feb 5th Powell will be going to the UN for a big meeting of nations to show there evidence against Iraq. That they do have chemical weapons and are trying to develope Nukes..
And By the look of things right now there is going to be a war unless something comes up soon. And im sure the US is not bluffing.

And frankly if it comes to war which By the looks of things will happen.. I hope, I seriouly hope that Iraq does have these weapons. Or it will be all for nothing and there will be an even bigger mess for the world..

But one must think for a minute.. How long have the UN inspectors not been in Iraq.. a few years at least.. So thats plenty of time to hide weapons so well that the UN inspectors cant find them...



But at least one good thing about this address to congress.. bush is sending 15 billion $ to africa to help with aid. Best thing ive ever heard him say

KaMe

 

Well...

(warning: I'm about to post! *GASP!* )

Isn't it a coincidence that one or two years after 9/11, without success in punishing Bin Laden, and with a horrible economical crisis at hand, suddenly the US discover a "secret nuclear plot" in Irak?

(yes, i'm speaking about money.)

And unfortunately, many of us are shivering with the nuclear fear - remember the missile crisis a few decades ago? Everyone was scared to death of nuclear missiles and communism. Back to the inquisition times. Instead of "witch" you only had to say "communist".

And now, history repeats itself... who's the enemy? Irak. Who's our hero? The all-mighty president! (everyone bow, please).

Frankly, i doubt Hussein will say, all of a sudden something like "Alright, I'm bored, let's bomb the US!" He's too smart for that. In fact, i think he WANTS war so he can have a just reason to grow anti-american hatred again. He just needs a cause.

And there are other ways to destroy the US than with bombs. Information wars, hackers are an example. Specially with our extra-safe-foolproof operating systems, browsers and servers. (Bravo, Microsoft!)

Or... who knows. Maybe we should just let the mega corporations eat the US (and all the continent and the poor countries) all by themselves.

Who needs an enemy when the enemy's at home?

OK, bash me now.

(end of my 2 cents)

 

Luvweaver:

The US had been putting pressure on Saddam for a long time BEFORE 9/11, which put Iraq back on the back-burner, as it were. There was no discovery of a 'secret nuclear plot'. Iraq got to be mostly ignored during the campaign against the Taliban, and once that was done, El Presidente decided to put the focus on Iraq again.

- Ark

 

I have a few things to say. First off, lets avoid turning this into a flame war. Lets keep it intellectual, I don't mind people who disagree with whatever comes up here (or anywere for that matter), just as long as you have something more to say about it and evidence, or reasons why you think that way (comon Mordeth, putting something like those two sentances up turns you into a pretty brash person. Put up something better than that [sheesh]).

The United States is not worried about a nuclear strike from Iraq on our soil. The BS about the anti ICBM testing was all just a hoax. The capability to shoot down missiles has alway existed, it even did way back in the late 60's and early 70's (altho they were not as efficent as they are now). Considering the fact that it is reliable and the U.S. has other far unique tools that can be used on anything, be they people, aircraft or Missiles, thereis no immenant threat on us. Iraq knows that they cannot bomb the U.S. (short of creating a nuclear bomb the size of a suitcase), so they will attack our allies, or anyone for that matter (we'll be drawn in regaurdless of who Iraq threats).

Thats also another major fear, the suitcase sized nuclear bomb. A nuke can now be shrunk to a size of 12cm, yet still posses more power than the two the Allies used on Japan in WWII. It can also be seperated into fewer than twenty parts which are all common (or slightly unusual) materials except for the Plutonium alloy, but that would not be hard to concile. You already see the suicide bombers in Israel, imagine if they had nukes instead of shrapnel bombs. How do you fight that? Better yet, who do you fight over that?

I wish the cold war between the Soviet Union and Nato was still going on. There were only two sides back then, the Democracies, and the Communists. France tried to create a third side, but as far as I learned, all their attempts failed. Now that the cold war is over, Iraq wants their own way, North Korea wants this, India and Pakistan are at each other's necks and the situation in the Balkans seems to be smooth for the moment. The world has gotten vastly complicated since the fall of the Soviet Blok (I think thats how you spell it "Blok")

Hey "That Guy" war is by no means a easy course of action. It would be easer to settle things on the diplomatic stage. But if we don't take decisive action and close the deal, then there might be a whole lotta hurt, destruction and problems on the horizon.

 

it seems that two threads have been squashed into one.
and i was looking for if your happy and u know it thread, and it took me like, half a year to find this.
well...
war is not good.
but its has to go ahead.
no one can stop it now.
bush is on a roll.
cant stop him.
and i guess...
*sighs...
Aust is goming too.
oh well.
Tally-ho.