posted on October 11, 2002 05:33:17 PM new
Borillar, your proximity to the Vietnam war just demonstrates my point. Not every war is Vietnam. This one isn't. It isn't about ideas. It's about a real threat to Americans on American soil. Can 9/11 have left doubt in anyone's mind?
If we don't remove Saddam now, on his turf, then we will fight him later on our turf, when he is armed with WOMD. No, I am not for simply kicking his ass, but eventually his WOMD will be discovered and then we will have to act.
Do you think Bill Clinton, that lovable crook and womanizer, would do things differently? No, he wouldn't.
What really bugs me is the cowardly attitude of Americans who fear to confront Saddam today. Hey, if we look the other way, he will come back much worse tomorrow. We can expect attacks that make 9/11 look like a picnic.
Those of you who enjoy freedom in America should understand that freedom carries a price. Nobody gave freedom to us. We fought to gain it. And the world is still full of people who would love to take it away.
posted on October 11, 2002 05:38:38 PM new
>You can fight and win against "ideas". It has been done many times, but it requires total war, total victory, and a total re-building of the vanquished. It was done in the American Civil war, and WWII to name two instances of "ideas" being buried, and minds being changed.
REAMOND, I can't believe that you've made such ignorant statements of fact! The "South" to this day hasn't dropped many of its attitudes - including separating from the USA! And Germany never lost it's Nazi beliefs - those anti-Jewish notions were long held in Europe and Hitler only played the cards that were already dealt. To this day, Germans STILL attack foreigners and "sub-human species" over there! Your remarks that military power can conquer and change ideas goes beyond the foolish and ignorant!
What changes Ideas is education and association. What we educate our kids with and what we as parents tell them do the trick of changing ideas. History shows time after time after time that the use of military force and other reprisals only strengthen the Idea and the resolve of those who believe in it! Just look at Christianity for an example!
REAMOND, what both Israel and America does not need are a bunch of hot-heads promoting violence over diplomacy. Such has always made things WORSE in the past! Our diplomatic efforts have failed in the past because too many countries were willing to sabotage supporting the sanctions and other measures passed by the UN.
Your analysis is even more off-center, as the culprit behind the IDEA is Saudi Arabia, who has funded terrorist dictatorships throughout the middle-east and central Asia and western Africa to spread their IDEA of Holy War against the West and Israel. You can go in there and take out Saddam, you can take out Quidaffi and the leadership of Iran, and Syria, and so forth BUT YOU WILL NOT BE ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM! If you want to support an attack on SOMEONE who is behind the Islamic Jihad against Israel and the West and funds, supports, and consequently trains and supervises Terrorists - GO ATTACK SAUDI ARABIA!! Cut the head off of the Spider and the web falls apart! Cut off the flow of funds from Saudi Arabia to Iran, Iraq, Syria, and other terrorist "Hot Spots", like Pakistan, and the Islamic Jihad will fade away! And if you go to take out the Saudis, make sure you do it in the name of Islam, or else you will setting yourself up for reprisals as serious as a nuclear strike.
posted on October 11, 2002 05:48:25 PM new
>If we don't remove Saddam now, on his turf, then we will fight him later on our turf, when he is armed with WOMD
Baloney! I've heard this nonsense from the White House, along with the White House economic forecasts of how wonderful our economy is. You believe that nonsense? Make ME believe it! I don't often ask someone to provide any links, but twinsoft, you're going to have to provide some PROOF of where Saddam intends to attack America, with or without weapons of mass destruction. You won't find anything of substance, because all there is out there is just a lot of hot air and quotes from those who are quoting others who are quoting others. I've L@@KED and there ISN'T any proof!
Twinsoft, your hot-head ideas will get Israel destroyed and America attacked again on its own home soil. Maybe people like you would enjoy that, I don't know, but from the continual nonsense that you spout in support of killing, War and murder it doesn't show any respect or support for Israel and America. In fact, you advocate anything violent, even if it will lead to Israel's destruction!
I have to wonder about you, twinsoft. I don't believe that you support Israel for an instant.
posted on October 11, 2002 11:05:50 PM new
Borillar, if you're waiting until the average Joe American on the street has absolute proof that Saddam Hussein owns nuclear weapons and is planning a direct attack on American soil, you are playing a dangerous ... a suicidal game. You've looked and found nothing? Ha. Maybe the CIA forgot to brief you this week....
Ten years ago Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait and was pushed back by American and coalition forces. Since then, Hussein has violated every condition of the peace agreement. We are not going to run recklessly into Iraq. We are seeking inspections, and building international support. The time will come when Hussein denies weapons inspectors access, and then we will be faced with the inevitable.
Twinsoft, your hot-head ideas will get Israel destroyed and America attacked again on its own home soil.
I don't claim to be an expert but I do know something about terrorism. Terrorists have no political agenda, other then the destruction of innocent men, women and children. Yet these same terrorists hide in civilian areas for protection. Terrorists have no honor. They fight dirty. And one other thing I can tell you is that negotiation with terrorists doesn't work.
Israel has been attacked many times in its brief history. All without my help. And it has survived. The only successfully demonstrated tactic to combat terrorism is to strike back at terrorists much harder. If those poor Palestinians who support and protect terrorists won't stop it, then Israel must raise hell.
Does anyone really believe that Israel can buy its security by shaving off bits? For every suicide bombing, we should give the Arabs ten square miles? Yeah, that's a sure path to peace. You'd have Arabs blowing themselves up on every #*!@ street corner. It's Israel's recent harsh response that has compelled the Palestinians to start policing themselves.
... the continual nonsense that you spout in support of killing ...
Make ME believe it!
I don't support killing. You're hiding in a closet, hoping it will all just go away. It won't.
If you can look blithely at what used to be the World Trade Center, and can't see how dangerous Saddam Hussein is about to become, then you need a serious REALITY check.
posted on October 11, 2002 11:36:19 PM new
>If you can look blithely at what used to be the World Trade Center, and can't see how dangerous Saddam Hussein is about to become
I've looked at the World Trade Center attack and wondered Why when America was still asking How. Since then, more than enough facts have come into the light to support the idea that the attack was meant as a pre-emptive strike, as a means of showing us that we aren't safe from reprisals. That it has nothing at all to do with Saddam and those who is DOES have to deal with are silently being dropped from the Hit List ought to appeal to anyone's mind. I firmly belive that when Saddam asked the US Ambassador if the USA would allow him to invade Kuwait, the response was Yes, even thoguh it was later denied. I can smell a set-up and this time, it's the American people who are being set up. I suggest that those Americans who are all so fired-up to killing people in the name of War ought to go grab a rifle and invade with the rest of the ground forces. In fact, they ought to be a human shield for our forces when we get there. That means you, twinsoft, and the rest of you who want to see a War happen.
There is NO PROOF that Saddam has any designs on attacking the USA. Does the mouse attack the bear in its cave? With a fifth-rate millitary at best, Saddam is hardly planning any attacks on us ever. To attack us would be to bring on the full might of the US Millitary and the Will of the American People which NO LEADER in any country in the world can withstand! Saddam is a lunatic, but he isn't stupid by any means. The justification that you mention over and over again, the nonsense coming from the White House, is crap!
posted on October 12, 2002 12:22:30 AM new
Twinsoft, you need a reality check. Possibly also an oil change. How long since you've been lubed, baby?
Your post above wafts back and forth between the Palestinians being "the problem" and Hussein being "the problem".
Problem for Israel, that is.
Nowhere in your (or George Bush's) Scheme of Things Conquerable lies a clear, worthwhile path for a real America to follow. If you think the USA should be 100% aligned with Israel, come out and say so, and advocate a full-blown Israeli/U.S.-led war against the (Islamic) middle east.
That's what we're headed for, anyway, no matter how convincingly we sugar-coat our objectives.
Last year at this time it was Afghanistan and the Taliban that needed to be toppled, because Osama was hiding there. Still haven't caught him but suddenly this year we need to whack Iraq, because Hussein might use on us the very weapons we gave him fifteen years ago. (Follow me down the rabbit hole... )
The fact that neither of these reasons were/are the REAL reasons for our aggression seems to have eluded all but the most astute ( i.e.: independent) observers. ( - Sadly, Molly Ivins does not run the country.)
Don't get me wrong, Twinsoft; in an all-out war between Israel and the muslim middle east, I'd vote to support Israel all the way. I just have the feeling that you perceive America's current "intervention" in the middle east as something it's not. We're not over there to keep Hussein from bombarding Israel with dud scuds; the fact is, TPTB in America don't give two slaps for Israel, but if they can cite "preserving Israel" as the moral arm of their cause, they won't hesitate to do so. Heh, that's probably next week's rationale -- already scripted and ready to be spewed from the pulpit by Ari Fleischer.
I don't see Hussein as a great threat to America; I can understand why you might see him as a great threat to Israel. If you're willing to acknowledge that distinction, we probably have more to talk about.
posted on October 12, 2002 09:06:06 AM new
I can almost bet one thing about all these war-mongers calling for the killin' of A-rabs...
THEY AIN'T GOING!
If Bush asked for volunteers to go fight the Iraq terrorists, how many of these Brave Mouths would go, willingly?
By the way, to date, how many Iraq terrorist flew the planes into the WTC????
Thought so.
How many Iraq terrorists are interned in Cuba?
How many Iraq terrorists drove the van into the WTC?
How many Iraq terrorists drove the boat into the USS Cole?
By golly, those Iraq terrorists MUST BE STOPPED!!!!
.
A Man will spend $2.00 for a $1.00 item he needs.
A Woman will spend $1.00 for a $2.00 item she doesn't need.
[ edited by mlecher on Oct 12, 2002 09:07 AM ]
posted on October 12, 2002 09:48:55 AM new
I'm glad the voting in both the house and the senate went the way it did.
The first duty our leaders have to our country is to protect us. And that doesn't mean sitting back and waiting until another WTC incident [or worse] occurs. Any country that is deemed to be a threat, ANY president [just like HILLARY said] should have the authority to move IF and WHEN necessary to do so. And this opinion doesn't come from FEAR. It comes from a strong belief that America is a strong country, that we believe in being STRONG, not AFRAID of what might happen if we do this or if we do that.
Bush is right to be working at forcing the UN to make Saddam accountable. It shouldn't have taken all these years for them to do so. The demands being make to Saddam aren't unreasonable. Go ahead...support all the other terrorist countries you want, rather than your own.
Different people here keep saying how all this 'sickens' them. Well it sickens me, and many more like me, that many appear to support what these oppressive, dictator nations stand for, what they do to their own people, rather than your own country. Bush is a dictator in your minds. Well...try living under ANY of the middle-eastern countries leadership and then tell me how bad Bush is. Bush is NOT acting alone. Now you can see he has the support from the majority of the elected officials.
Many were screaming about needing to set sentate and house approval...well now Bush has it.
And mlecher...just because one may be too old to volunteer to serve their country, doesn't mean they can't support the belief that what this administration is doing is right. And just like in vietnam, many people volunteered to put themselves where their mouths were. There are many serving right now who joined the armed services because they are willing to put their lives on the line for their country. They'll be the one's protecting all the rights you enjoy by living in this country. Their lives will be the one on the line...not yours.
posted on October 12, 2002 10:10:16 AM new
The obvious link between Saddam and the US, which you do not see, is his support of terrorism.
That means you, twinsoft, and the rest of you who want to see a War happen.
I was in basic training in the IDF when the invasion of southern Lebanon occurred, to stop terrorist attacks. Been there, done that.
plsmith, in the Middle East, Israel IS the US. To leaders of Saudi Arabia and the other terrorist-supporting nations, Israel is the representative of western democracy that those leaders despise. If Israel were removed from the equation, Islamic Jihad would still exist. Jihad is the mechanism by which corrupt leaders maintain their political status.
I can understand why you might see him as a great threat to Israel.
I don't see Hussein in particular as a threat to Israel, to the extent that the US doesn't tie Israel's hands. I do see Hussein as a general threat to world democracy. Were Hussein to develop nuclear weapons, it's speculation whether he would launch a nuclear attack on Israel, or provide weapons to terrorists for covert operations. Either possibility is unthinkable.
The world is too small anymore. America is no longer insulated from what happens in the Middle East or elsewhere. The war on terrorism doesn't begin or end with Bin Laden, or Hussein, or Arafat, or anyone. We've seen how vulnerable we are. This is about preserving democracy, not oil. It is not the American government which is whittling away our personal freedoms. It's the people who refuse to fight to support democracy.
mlecher, American isolationism just won't work any more. We can't keep hiding from the world. Not while nuclear weapons and terrorist groups proliferate. Hussein has already used WOMD. He's already invaded Kuwait. He openly supports terror attacks agsinst civilians. What kind of conscience can justify ignoring the threat he poses to world peace? Can we really afford to wait until a nuclear attack occurs on American soil? And will you still be saying, where is the PROOF?
Let the inspectors go in. And let Hussein comply with UN resolutions. If he doesn't do that, we can only assume the worst. The president understands this. The Congress understands it. The American people understand it. If the UN doesn't understand, then we will make the UN irrelevant. I don't have a problem with that.
posted on October 12, 2002 10:31:33 AM new
First of all just let me say that I can't stand looking at Ari Fleisher! He has the fakiest sincere look of anyone I have ever seen. Sappy. Just plain sappy.
Second, Twinsoft, I am just plain sick and tired of being called a coward,anti-American, traitor and god only knows what else simply because I disagree with whatever the current concept of "patriotism" seems to be. A true patriot...a TRUE American questions the government when they believe it to be wrong. A coward goes in with guns blazing out of fear for ones own safety.It takes bravery for a person to stand up for what they... and this country stands for ....for what they believe and tries with all their might to prevent wars , to prevent more killing.I do not want anyone killed for my safety EXCEPT those that are responsible for the terrorist activities. Just this week we find out that there is a very good chance that Osama and his buddies are still alive and planning more attacks on this country. Surprise!!! All these good patriots thought our big smart bombs killed him in his caves. Well guess what..the real terrorists are still out there and we are not going after them we are going after Iraq!
Furthermore...I keep hearing from Bush that Saddam is seeking weapons....WELL...Why wouldn't Saddam be trying to arm himself? "We" have been telling him we are gunning for him for the last year or more.[ I found it ironic when Bush stated how much he hated Saddam because he tried to kill his daddy...well guess what?? We were trying to kill Saddam and he is someones daddy too!] He has every right to protect his country against aggressors just as we do. He is a danger to the countries around him, he is a danger to Israel. He is not an imminent threat to US and Osama et al are! Yes, he might get his hands on a WOMD if he is lucky, but again the only ones he can really threaten with it are people in the middle east. Telling me that we have to take Saddam out and take over Iraq for an undetermined time is ridiculous! Half the countries over there have WOMD of one sort or another and they all hate us. If a terrorist want's to get something they can. Pakistan would probably give it to them. You know, our best friends over there are not our friends at all.
If we are going for the reasons we say we are then we are wrong.Of course, it could be for many other reasons unknown to us..like to gain control of oil fields so that we can go after the Saudis. After all they are our closest friends and our greatest enemy.
Yes, Saddam is a tyrant. Yes, he is a dictator. But if he is so dangerous why aren't his people trying to get rid of him? Why aren't his neighbors jumping on our bandwagon in fear?
This war feels more like a personal vendetta or a grab for oil and less like trying to make us safe.
Sorry this is rambly but I am still on my first cup of coffee .
LindaK, Just because Hillary thinks something doesn't mean I do.The nice thing about not belonging to any party is that you do not have to go along with the party line. I lost a lot of respect for her and some of the others for voting the way they did even though they came out stating they had reservations about some of the parts of the resolution . There was no need to hurry it through like they did. They should have worked harder to remove or alter the things they thought were wrong.
posted on October 12, 2002 10:54:20 AM new
rawbunzel - a TRUE American questions the government when they believe it to be wrong.
I guess my question to you would then be why you believe it to be wrong? Why do you see it as your country being wrong, rather than Saddam being in the wrong by violating 16 UN sanctions? Why is that okay? And why do you think nothing has been done about it for the last 11 years? Couldn't we at least agree that if Saddam was willing to have open, un-restricted inspections that this issue wouldn't be before us? Why do you take Saddam's side [in agrument] and don't believe a thing your own government or previous UN inspectors tell you?
posted on October 12, 2002 11:08:16 AM new
rawbunzel - But if he is so dangerous why aren't his people trying to get rid of him? Why aren't his neighbors jumping on our bandwagon in fear?
They have tried to oust him, three separate times. Is it that you can't believe that they have great fear of him and what he's capable of doing to them? Are you under the impression that those who object to his administration are listened to ....no...they're shot.
Do you not believe reports from your own country that his military shoots at American and British airforce planes all the time? [Over the no fly zone] If you do believe he's doing this, do you support Saddam in doing so? Is that not a threat to our military pilots and is that not breaking an agreement he had with the UN?
His neigobors: Two of his neighbors have said they will support the US, in different ways, IF the decision is made to go in. An airfield has been in the process of being built for months, for the purpose of our planes having a place to refuel.
posted on October 12, 2002 11:13:47 AM new
My answer to you is that disagreeing with the methods to remove Saddam does not equate to thinking Saddam is right. It does not mean I back Saddam. It only means I can see out into the future and see that what we are doing will have grave and more far reaching consequences then trying to go along with the UN and then if that fails going in with a true coalition. We are rushing it and there is no reason for this great hurry.Pointing out the hypocrisy of an arguement for going after Saddam is not the same as backing him or taking his side. I have always stated and still do that I believe Saddam needs to go.I am not against my country, far from it. I love this country. But I do not love this administration any more than some of you loved the last one. Is that not my right...still?
I do believe some of what this government tells me. But you are right, I don't believe much. Why? Because so far every single thing I thought would happen if Bush & co. got into office has happened and then some. It is worse than I could have imagined.
Let me ask you something...why in these last 11 years if we were so afraid of what Saddam would do would we have ever given him anthrax spores and worse? We did, right up until 1993.While the first Bush, the one that went to war with Saddam in 1991,was in office. Do you not see hypocrisy there?I truly believe there is much more going on here than you or I know and it is not all pure and idealistic.No matter what spin you put on it.
posted on October 12, 2002 11:17:38 AM newFurthermore...I keep hearing from Bush that Saddam is seeking weapons....WELL...Why wouldn't Saddam be trying to arm himself?
Now that statement really scares me. Why shouldn't a man who killed his own people and who is a threat to the whole world's well being be allowed to arm himself? OMG!!! So..it's your position that dictators like Saddam have a right to arm themselves with nuclear weapons? And if he had agreed NOT to do so and signed that agreement with the UN, would it matter to you at all that he is not allowing the UN to find out whether he's in violation of that agreement or not?
posted on October 12, 2002 11:21:25 AM new
His neighbors say they will help if we try the UN first and then if that fails they will help. They do not approve of our going in willy nilly.Except Quatar. They have offered their airstrips and aid.
Do I believe that we are being shot at in the no fly zone? Yes, I do believe that. But since it has been happening for the last 11 years that is still no arguement for immediate action.
Some of his people have tried to oust him,yes. If they all wanted to it would be done. If the right ones wanted to it would be done and I hope that the right ones will soon before we go in. The right ones being the ones with big guns aimed at his head.
posted on October 12, 2002 11:26:06 AM new
Good grief Linda! I didn't say he had the right to do it from our stand point or the worlds. I said I can see the hypocrisy of wondering why he would be doing it or thinking he is doing it just to terrorize us...WE ARE THREATENING HIM AND HIS REGIME. He is trying to arm himself against us. Why is that a surprise? Do you think that all our rhetoric about gunning for him would make him disarm?
I guess we are now even since much of what you say scares me.
posted on October 12, 2002 11:30:53 AM new
You know Linda, this is not agood medium for discussing these things. If we were talking face to face you would understand what I am saying and see that I am not PRO saddam but absoloutly against him. I have a terrible time getting my ideas across in type.One reason I haven't ever written a book.
We would still disagree on a lot of things but I think you would find that we are on the same side.
posted on October 12, 2002 11:38:50 AM newIt does not mean I back Saddam. It only means I can see out into the future and see that what we are doing will have grave and more far reaching consequences then trying to go along with the UN and then if that fails going in with a true coalition. We are rushing it and there is no reason for this great hurry.
Bush believes Saddam's played games with the UN and their inspectors long enough. Four years to be exact. You think all of a sudden Saddam is going to reverse himself? I don't.
As far as rushing in goes? You've shared that your husbands have served our country. Then surely you must be aware that preparing our military for a war can't be done in one week. Takes months to plan and move the forces in. Bush is of the opinion that Saddam won't allow the UN inspectors free reign, and IF he doesn't, then we will be prepared to take action. I support him in this and also hope/believe that if Saddam sees we're preparing...he might just back down and agree [once again] to allow full inspections.
Your statement about us giving Saddam these items 11 years ago...is an insult to your country. That's what I mean when I say most who post here seem to take the 'against everything America does' side of most issues. Those anthrax spores, etc. were given to a Iraqi UNIVERSITY. Many countries share these types of 'germs' for study purposes between universities and scientific labs. Do I believe it was a smart thing to do? No...considering Saddam was their ruler. But it's not like many here state 'we gave them this to use against Iran...so we're getting what we deserve back'. Statements like that.
[ edited by Linda_K on Oct 12, 2002 11:46 AM ]
posted on October 12, 2002 11:48:20 AM new
Linda, I did not insult my country by saying that...the previous Bush administration, insulted ME by sending things like that to a country that was not supposed to have them. We had embargos on practically everything but NOT anthrax spores? Oh puhleese!My intelligence is insulted. Yours should be too.If Clinton had done it you would think it was wrong.
I am not against everything America does. I am against a lot of what this administration does. HUGE difference. If you can't see that then there is no point in trying to discuss this issue with you.
I'll be happy to discuss other things but I am through with this.I will not be called a traitor for having a different point of view than others do. THAT IS FLAT OUT A LIE.
[ edited by rawbunzel on Oct 12, 2002 11:51 AM ]
posted on October 12, 2002 11:57:37 AM new
rawbunzel - You know Linda, this is not agood medium for discussing these things. I've said that before myself when something I've shared was taken differently than I had intended it to be taken. So I agree with you there. That was the reasons for all my questions. To better understand what you were saying.
I apologize to you if my words come across in a manner I don't mean for them too. This is a hard medium for me to communiate in. Maybe there are times when I take some posters posts in a wrong way.
That said, I also need to say that the last few posts I've made weren't just directed at you. I'm sorry if you felt singled out. But my statements were in general to all here who appear to me to not be supportive of what our country is working at doing; fighting terrorism. What priviledges we enjoy here and what we have to lose if dictators or terrorists get their way and destroy Israel and the Westerners, as they have promised to do is what I believe the Bush administration is working at. I know many don't agree. And that's certainly their right. But there are times when I also need to say how very much I disagree with those comments.
posted on October 12, 2002 11:59:24 AM new
I question everything my government tells me...especially one led by the Bush administration. Surely you are not advocating blind allegiance to George Bush. I don't believe a word of it when Bush promises the Iraqi people a democratic government after the destruction of Saddam. Anybody who does believe it should look at the history of broken promises and lies that this government has told the poor people of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq.
The US has let the people of Afghanistan and Paskistan down before, in 1980 when the promise was a new era of hope...and did nothing. Then again, when President Bush senior urged the Iraqis to rise up against Saddam in 1991 and – when they obeyed – did nothing. ....Look at the situation in Afghanistan right now.
You mention violation of sanctions. Don't you know, Linda that these sanctions are responsible for the deaths of thousands of children? I admire anyone who could manage to violate them.
Linda, put youself in the place of a person living in Iraq. Wouldn't you be afraid? Wouldn't you see the Bush administration as terrorists?
Surely, you don't really believe that we are on a mercy mission or a mission to rid the country of weapons of mass destruction.
posted on October 12, 2002 12:07:48 PM new
I'm going to ask one question here even if it doesn't belong in this thread.
I hear over and over from staunch republicans that this country is a Republic [usually followed by a thank god] and not a Democracy. If a Democracy is so eshewed then why are we always trying to force other countries into them? Why aren't we trying to make them into Republics?
this is not aimed at you Linda, I don't believe I have ever heard you say anything of the sort but I have heard it here and other places as well
posted on October 12, 2002 12:29:29 PM newIf a Democracy is so eshewed then why are we always trying to force other countries into them? Why aren't we trying to make them into Republics?
Well, the terms are often used interchangebly in the vernacular use, Bunz. Actually, we have a Republic form of government, iow, separate but equal branches of government. We elect our representatives to those branches "democratically". IOW, by democratic vote, we elect those people who will represent us, the constituency. Course some people will disagree that the electoral college is representative of true democratic election, and I think that was another thread from long ago.
So we ARE a republic, but we choose our representatives through a democratic process. Does that make sense?
posted on October 12, 2002 12:35:11 PM new
Helen - You and I have always been at opposite poles of the earth. You're totally against ANY war and I'm a firm believer that American shouldn't let these terrorists continue on their present path.
I'd don't BLINDLY follow Bush. I watch and read what's going on, and I'm in agreement with the road he's taken to fight terrorism. After what the terrorists did to our country on 9-11 and what I've read and hear they have in store for us in the future....you're damn right I support Bush in his pursuit to hunt ALL terrorists down. No doubt about that. I believe what the terrorists say they have in store for us. And I fully back the Bush administration in their efforts to do so. You think we can negotiate with them? I don't.
There you go again, Helen with that sanction crap. I've already answered you in saying it's Saddam who is choosing to not feed and take care of his own people. You blame the US for that. Wrongfully, IMO. The UN, not the US alone, ordered those sanctions. It's oil for food Helen. But we cannot force Saddam to use it for the benefit of his people, or to use it to feed them. Put the blame where it belongs...on Saddam. And you do recall why the sanctions were placed there in the first place, right? Always Saddam's choice. So write him a letter and see if he cares.
And if I were in Iraq wouldn't I be afraid? What a laugh Helen. If I lived there how could I possibly know the freedoms I'm missing. How would I know I could say things against my own government, whenever I wanted, and that would not get me shot. Since I've never know anything different, I might see the US as something to be fearful of. But I'll learn how freedom can feel if the US can get rid of this leader who's a madman.
posted on October 12, 2002 12:38:32 PM newshhh KatyD! Of course it makes sense! ...I'm just trying to find out why some people always say Democracy like it is a bad thing when indeed they are nearly one and the same as we practice them in the "Republic for which it stands".
posted on October 12, 2002 01:45:42 PM new
Well Helen - Let me spell it out for you.
I'm on America's side. And Bush is our president. No matter who the president was, if he/she were doing exactly the same thing Bush is...he'd/she'd have my FULL support.
You go support and defend all the terrorists you want. You cry for all those poor people who would like nothing better than to see your country destroyed. It's your right.
posted on October 12, 2002 02:12:53 PM new "You go support and defend all the terrorists you want. You cry for all those poor people who would like nothing better than to see your country destroyed. It's your right."
What illogical nonsense, Linda. The fact that I do not support the never ending war policy of George Bush does not mean that I support terrorists. The fact that I have empathy for innocent children that are dying now and for innocent people that will be killed in George's war for power and oil does not indicate that I support terrorists and want to see our country destroyed.
I don't want to see any country destroyed. But apparently you do.
posted on October 12, 2002 02:42:04 PM new
Helen, I don't think anybody here doesn't have empathy for the innocent Iraquis caught in the middle. Of course those people are suffering. But you have to remember they were suffering BEFORE Bush became President, when Clinton was President. Iraqui children were dying then solely because of Saddam's appropriation of the oil money alloted for humanitarian use by the Iraqi civilian population. The sanctions were put in place by the United Nations. How is the U.S. government supposed to be responsible for Saddam using that money to build palaces and make weapons instead of feeding and medicating his own people? I think we're pretty much all in agreement that the Iraqi people are suffering, and it's very sad. But it is not all Bush's doing. Saddam bears the majority of the blame. Personally, I think the Iraqi people want nothing more than to be rid of him. Unfortunately, they are scared to death of him. The anecdotal evidence from exiled Iraqis shows him to be beyond ruthless and cruel when dealing with people who he feels has (or even are thinking of) betrayed him. What horrifies me more is that he doesn't hesitate to torture and murder these same Iraqi children and their families to keep his own generals and officers in line. I understand how you feel about this war, but don't you think you can at least see the culpability in this mess that Saddam bears himself?
Personally, I am undecided about U.S. military action. One day, I feel one way, the next I feel differently. I do think we are going about it the right way, by presenting it to Congress, rather than Bush taking action on his own. I'm not interested in the United Nations dictating U.S. security interests. History has shown that time and again, the United Nations is ineffective at resolving armed conflicts and even bungles the humanitarian aid programs it is supposed to oversee. IMHO, the real estate in NY would be better used to replace the WTC. But that's another thread.
By leaping to the crazy conclusion that I support terrorism and want my country destroyed, you have insinuated that I am anti-American. Of course you are wrong, Linda.
As Arundhati Roy described in her article, Come September, "If you're not a Bushie, you're a Taliban. If you don't love us, you hate us. If you're not good, you're evil. If you're not with us you're with the terrorists."
That is your reasoning, Linda, and I hope that you can see that it's wrong.
[ edited by mlecher on Oct 12, 2002 09:07 AM ]
