US Troops Deserting

[BelgianBoy]

lazyphil said:

What are Belgium, Danish troops doing there....other western European countys to I think. I think the world should've be run from Stockholm since the early 1930's, I wonder what the world would be like now?

Dunno about Denmark, but no Belgian troops in Iraq.....

 

BB

[The_Munchmaster]

AF16 said: US had nothing to do in Iraq. Iraq was a sovereign nation.

I thought Iraq was a dictatorship?

[Nervous_Dog]

Actually now it's a democrasy, but are dictator ships not sovereign countries? That makes Sillypore, China and a lot of other places = to North Korea

 

DOG

[AF16]

Nervous_Dog said:

Actually now it's a democrasy, but are dictator ships not sovereign countries? That makes Sillypore, China and a lot of other places = to North Korea

 

DOG

 

Actally, when the US have to clear who is going to able to run and not, it's not quite a democracy, it's just the Iraqis being able to vote on which of the preaproved candidates by the US they can choose between, but other than that you are correct, Iraq was a dictatorship and a sovereign nation.

 

We don't attack sovereign nations because ... look at what has happened in Iraq and that everyone beside Bush told would happen before he went in expecting flowers thrown at the occupation forces.

[Flashermac]

<< Take for instance a bomber pilot on a mission to Baghdad. He knows full well that in all probability his bomb will not only obliterate the target but also finish off a lot of innocent people, be they men, women, children or babies. They still have no problem pressing the 'fire' button and then afterwards parade around like hero's. I wouldn't be able to live with myself, let alone sleep at nights particularly when the war is illegal, immoral and unnecessary. They just shrug it off as collateral damage. >>

 

 

What do you think both sides did in WWII? Bombs don't descriminate. War is by definition barbaric, even when suposedly "justifiable".

 

"The total estimated human loss of life caused by World War II, irrespective of political alignment, was roughly 62 million people. The civilian toll was around 37 million, the military toll about 25 million."

 

(source: Wikipedia )

[Flashermac]

<< The sad thing is, in America, if you are rich enough and hired the right lawyer, you could probably get off on a self defence charge. Just ask OJ. >>

 

 

Even sadder is that if your daddy is rich enough and powerful enough, you don't even have to go to war. Just ask GW Bush, Dan Quayle, the late Sen. Lloyd Bensen's son (who was in the same ANG unit with GWB) etc. Even Al Gore only had to serve 6 months in Vietnam, John Kerry just 4. How come I did 13 months???

[teddy]

Flashermac said:

What do you think both sides did in WWII? Bombs don't descriminate. War is by definition barbaric, even when suposedly "justifiable".

 

"The total estimated human loss of life caused by World War II, irrespective of political alignment, was roughly 62 million people. The civilian toll was around 37 million, the military toll about 25 million."

 

(source: Wikipedia )

 

What the fcuk has the conflict in Iraq go to do with WWII? Comparing what the allies did to conquer tyranny and ensure freedom in WWII to what they are now doing in Iraq which amounts to the invasion of another country on totally false pretences is an insult to those who died fighting for freedom in WWII. Can't you see that?

[teddy]

Flashermac said:

 

Even sadder is that if your daddy is rich enough and powerful enough, you don't even have to go to war. Just ask GW Bush, Dan Quayle, the late Sen. Lloyd Bensen's son (who was in the same ANG unit with GWB) etc. Even Al Gore only had to serve 6 months in Vietnam, John Kerry just 4. How come I did 13 months???

 

In reality though you were probably a lot safer without those cnts in your unit ::

[Flashermac]

<< Comparing what the allies did to conquer tyranny and ensure freedom in WWII to what they are now doing in Iraq which amounts to the invasion of another country on totally false pretences is an insult to those who died fighting for freedom in WWII. Can't you see that? >>

 

 

Maybe it is to the western allies. But do you think the folks in Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia etc were ecstatic to have Stalin replace Hitler? Was tyranny conquered and freedom ensured there???

 

The US and UK went into Iraq with good intentions. But good intentions aren't always enough.

[AF16]

Flashermac said:

<< Comparing what the allies did to conquer tyranny and ensure freedom in WWII to what they are now doing in Iraq which amounts to the invasion of another country on totally false pretences is an insult to those who died fighting for freedom in WWII. Can't you see that? >>

 

 

Maybe it is to the western allies. But do you think the folks in Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Hungary, Romania, Czechoslovakia etc were ecstatic to have Stalin replace Hitler? Was tyranny conquered and freedom ensured there???

 

The US and UK went into Iraq with good intentions. But good intentions aren't always enough.

 

No they did not have good intentions. Bush and his cronies had a philosophy that the US could do whatever to ensure US safety and the only threat towards the US were energy. China and other contries were making headway and there will be a problem with the supply of energy.

 

Thus Bush had to do something, which meant taking controll over energy in the ME.

 

How to achieve that? Bush thought that the US would do well in a situation where contries were democracies. Ecconomic warware and depandancies, so as a _ tool _ he attacked Iraq and tried to put inplace a US friendly government that would both be stable and friendly towards US interests.

 

In other areas he support dictators because that suits him best, but in the ME he tought democracy would work well, but his main goal were not democracy but access to energy.

 

An advanced form of highway robbary.

 

Bush belongs in jail.