You have stated your absolute disfavor towards the American troops and the Allies being in Iraq. Since you believe there is no meaningful purpose for this, please tell us why.
Also, you claim to be a person caring about human life, but disreagrd the human suffering cause by Saddam. So to end this human suffering, which includes torture, rape, murder, and using chemical weapons on his enemies which include the citizens of Iraq, then what would be an alternative solution? This human suffering is well documented in the media, so please don't say it doesn't exist.
The clear purpose of the US led war effort is to disarm Saddam so he won't have the chance to build a more offensive military. With his past, and the way he's abused his power towards his enemies real or imagined, he should he stopped. What is the answer to Iraq?
Will you answer this question? Or is reamnod correct when stating you don't like tough questions?
please do feel free to amswer in Helen's place, but only with her permission. Also, you may wish to invest in a new keyboard. It seems that your E A G and R are sticking.
Now really, you also have been a advocate of the anti war movement here on this board. If you really had plausible answers, you would have given them here. Right?
posted on March 22, 2003 01:11:59 PM new
Thats it! Reamond was right. Helen is afraid of tough questions. She laughed it off, giving permission to another poster. If she really believed in her positon, she would have done it for herself and not brushed it off onto another poster. Her answers would have been related to these questions. However, these seem to be to clear and to the point for her to sensibly answer. If that is not the case Helen, then answer for yourself.
spelling edit.
[ edited by yeager on Mar 22, 2003 01:12 PM ]
posted on March 22, 2003 01:23:30 PM new
I am curious as to neonmania's answer, seeing how he has already stated he has plans on living in another country soon and therefore has no valid interest in the safety and protection of the American people.
posted on March 22, 2003 01:25:47 PM new
More wrong info by yeager....Where did Reamond say that?
For the past twelve years, Iraq has been under control.
There is no reason to believe that Iraq was responsible for 9/11.
Weapons of mass destruction have not been found...other than the ones that we gave to him.
Continued surveilance and negoitation should be continued.
We need a President with an administration willing to use diplomacy. We need allies througout the world to help solve the problem of terrorism.
If we can survive until election day, removing George Bush and his administration will be a major step in the right direction. In the meantime, we should protest this war.
posted on March 22, 2003 01:42:01 PM new
::You have stated your absolute disfavor towards the American troops and the Allies being in Iraq. Since you believe there is no meaningful purpose for this, please tell us why.::
In my case, It's very simple. I think there are more fiscally responsible ways of dealing with the situation Our economy is in the pits. Our budget surplus is a figment in the distant past and we simply cannot afford a 100 Billion dollar a day war. Whie I agree that Saddam must be removed, my opinion is that htis war is a matter of political manuevering than military neccessity.
::What is the answer to Iraq?::
Use the funds that were spent during the first 2 hours of the war to back a military coup. Give financial and arms backing to the Kurds and aid them in an incursion on Bagdahd. Furnish a weapons stockpile that would allow them to arm the "common man" who choses to join the fight. Back the Iraqi people in taking control of their destiny and their own country and then the world will come together to help them reorganize. As you have stated and as we all know, the Iraqi people do not support Saddam, they fear him. We should have tried giving them a bigger a stick... ok, and maybe a little air support just for fun
If that fails, then yes, notch it up a few, but there were other alternatives.
posted on March 22, 2003 01:47:13 PM new
::I am curious as to neonmania's answer, seeing how he has already stated he has plans on living in another country soon and therefore has no valid interest in the safety and protection of the American people. ::
Twelve - can we tone down the retoric just a bit please? I am looking at a move however I still have friends and family in the US and I'm not giviing up my citizenship.
I actually feel that this war is a greater risk to American safety as it will only incite further acts of retribution on the part of individual terrorist groups.
posted on March 22, 2003 01:58:16 PM newWe need a President with an administration willing to use diplomacy If we can survive until election day, removing George Bush and his administration will be a major step in the right direction.
It's a shame Gore didn't win the election!
None of this would have happened.
He could have given them (free internet service)
Since he did invent it!
If I had to pay AOL prices I'd be defiant Too!!
Free internet or not,in the end the people of the world will see we did the right thing!
Like They Say: The ends justifie the means!!
posted on March 22, 2003 03:08:02 PM new
neon, nice thought, but considering what you are proposing would take YEARS to accomplish, if it could succeed, and what do you think Saddam would be doing during that time?
His Republican Guards are some of the best trained troops in the Middle East, he has knack for quickly disposing of any "preceived" threats, he does not wait for it to actually be a threat.
We tried what you are suggesting in Cuba... that didn't turn out so well.
El Salvador also...
I for one and not much on "wait and see" that is good for them and bad for us, President Bush gave them time to disarm, he even offered Saddam the chance to leave the country. I doubt if we know the whole story behind this, there maybe human intell that our government has received and No they can't tell every thing they know... Do you understand what human intell is? By President Bush saying he knows "certain" things could get those people killed.
Saddam had the oil fields mined and booby trapped, is that someone who cares about how many he destroys in his quest to remain in power... Saddam has a track record of using gas.... I for one favor the odds of less chance of attack here on this soil now that he will be gone.
We are a more vigilant nation, but we also need to remain strong.
posted on March 22, 2003 03:15:13 PM new
How could we have gotten rid of Saddam before now...
Let the agent who has had his crosshairs on Saddam for the past fews years squeeze off the shot...
But this Administration wouldn't have gotten the Oil....
And it hasn't worked well in some other countries because we always try to install the "Government" of OUR choice, not the population.
And for those of you who don't think the US has had someone on him all these years are only fooling yourselves. If you had ever seen the way these "special" people operate, you would know the nobody, but nobody, is invulnerable. The movies and TV shows don't even begin to show their "skills"
"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both boldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar."
- Julius Caesar
[ edited by mlecher on Mar 22, 2003 03:18 PM ]
While your thoughts are as nice as warm freshly baked Apple Pie, I don't think they would work for the reasons Twelve gave. Do you really think an army of the commmon man couldn't be quickly squashed by Saddam's army? I would rather use professionals.
posted on March 22, 2003 10:44:05 PM new
Yeager, Considering that a large percent of their army are political prisoners, barely paid, hardy trained, poorly fed I don' think it is a huge stretch that many would turn. Yes, the Republican Guard is an entirely nother matter however even minor successes on the part of a "peoples army" would inspire more to join helping to turn the tide based on mass I'm not saying that we leave them entirely to their own tactics. We should definately lend a hand in stategy, intelligence, play the "Psych Ops" game and like I said, air support is a good thing.
We would still be involved but let the nation have the pride of freeing themselves as we save trillions of dollars. Additionally, you forget that Saddam is far from loved by his neighbors. Don't you think that many of them would join in, give public, moneitar and military support if it meant that the madman was gone AND the westerners were not in control? The Saudis have bought a nice little Air Force from us
[ edited by neonmania on Mar 22, 2003 10:45 PM ]
posted on March 22, 2003 10:47:53 PM new
::neon, nice thought, but considering what you are proposing would take YEARS to accomplish, if it could succeed, and what do you think Saddam would be doing during that time? ::
You forget, or overlook that the Kurds are well experienced in fighting Saddam. Six months, definately not years to arm and raly.
posted on March 23, 2003 10:20:32 AM newUse the funds that were spent during the first 2 hours of the war to back a military coup. Give financial and arms backing to the Kurds and aid them in an incursion on Bagdahd. Furnish a weapons stockpile that would allow them to arm the "common man" who choses to join the fight. Back the Iraqi people in taking control of their destiny and their own country and then the world will come together to help them reorganize. As you have stated and as we all know, the Iraqi people do not support Saddam, they fear him. We should have tried giving them a bigger a stick... ok, and maybe a little air support just for fun
This is known as the "Let somebody else do it" camp, the results of which are nothing ever gets done.
Imagine the slaughter and carnage if we followed this ridiculous path. I am sooo glad we don't have idiots with these types of ideas in the State Dept.
posted on March 23, 2003 11:25:55 AM new
Wow Helen, and to think how many more civilians would die trying that...
Men, women and children...
Why if we were able to prepare in weeks do you think it would take "years" to arm and rally a community with a great deal of their own experience?
neonmania, you talk intelligent, but getting your information from a book or the internet is not real life, why not try experiencing some of the less than ideal places before stating things like that...
Being a paid soldier means you are professional, I am beginning to think you really have no concept of that, and living in San Diego too... why not go down the 32nd street and talk to some professionals awhile or go over to Coronado and talk to some of those fellows...
posted on March 23, 2003 12:00:32 PM new
Twelve, go back and read the section your quoted again. I said weeks to ARM and raly. Not to train. Kurdish forces have been training for many years, an d fighting, and been successflul enough at it that the Reppublican Guard has pretty much accepted that Kurdistan is their and they were fighting a losing battle to try to control it. They have held their own for quite awhile now.
posted on March 23, 2003 12:22:08 PM new
::neonmania, you talk intelligent, ::
Thank you
::but getting your information from a book or the internet is not real life,::
Hey I wanted to move to Saudi Arabia when I tuned 12, my mother forbid it.
::why not try experiencing some of the less than ideal places before stating things like that... ::
I've experienced a great deal of "less than ideal places" in my life. I've been lucky enough that none of those places were a field of battle. One thing that I have learned is that if your give people a leg up (in this case - arms, intelligence, and a promise to back them up if need be) and chance to stand up for themselves and retake control of their lives, their are capable of more than even they thought.
Would the process I I described result in higher body count in this particular action? Absolutely. However I believe it would lessen loss of life in further conflcts down the line as opposed to the ongoing battles and attacks that will take place with groups that oppose US occupation as we attempt to install and lend support to a new Iraqi governmant.
posted on March 23, 2003 01:10:14 PM new
Twelvepole,
I wasn't advocating a revolution. I was just explaining to Reamond what it was. The poor guy was calling the operation suggested by neon, "Let somebody else do it" camp."
