looks like the US grunts are losing it.

[AF16]

The US profits if the ME is stable under US control, so I don't buy the company/profit side of the argument.

 

The fact is that the US is aware what would happen if they went any harder than they does, which is way of base as it is. The US is afraid of the consequenses and still try to portray them self as the land of the free.

 

If they start slaughtering people on a massive scale the US would be isolated and loose power in importaint fora. The US can not go it alone.

 

It's pure logic and either descarfman knows it and tires to stirr up something or he is completly clueless in his macho man world.

[Old Hippie]

War is big money for the elite dude, better face that fact...as for the US slaughtering people...we did it in El Salvador, Panama, Iraq...and we are doing it again...how many dead?

 

The USA is losing power in the world...but, we will remain in good graces as long as there is money to be made from it...every bullit, every garmet worn by soldiers, medical supplies, food everything going into the effort is at an inflated price, with someone connected/elite making the big bucks...the tax payers pay it, the world suffers, and the Bush crime family gets richer...as do the people they bought off abroad...

 

"...It's pure logic..."

 

Logic? in a war? in Politics? what planet are you on? logic truth and fact has nothing to do with it all...

[chuck6660]

Many boardmembers are quick to criticize the US military and US foreign policy. However, I have not heard any of these eteemed statesmen bring forth a viable alternative to the present situation.

What is the "correct" response to Islamic terrorism..911, Bali, London, Jordan etc.? Also, what do you with rogue nations developing WMD, such as nKorea, and Iran...remember that in 1991, Iraq had WMD (chem and BIO) and had used them before, where are they 15 years later???? I was really impressed with the progress the EU made in "negotiations" with Iran.

Yes I too, question why the US went into Iraq as they did, however you have to play the cards your dealt, even if you were the dealer. So, what is your correct response to the GWOT, how should it be fought, or not fought?

It is obviously easy to sit in Europe or "Baghdad by the sea" (SF) and second quess the policy makers. But how do you start questioning and mocking the actions of the Soldiers and Marines on the ground? Do you really think that US Soldiers and Marines are sadistic killers, massacering unarmed women and children as policy, I for one believe Haditha was an isolated tragedy. I can personally tell you that US forces take great caution in avoiding civilian casualties, I have seen US Soldiers injured trying to get Iraqi civilians out of the line of fire...I can't say as much toward the terrorist shooting at the civilians.

I will end my little diatribe by stating that the Islamic terroist have an agenda, which is the destuction of the western (non-Islamic) world, do not disillusion yourself about this. So, all you Chamberlains', what should we do?

Since 911 there have been no terror attacks in the US, why?

 

[bust]

chuck6660 said: Also, what do you with rogue nations developing WMD, such as nKorea, and Iran...remember that in 1991, Iraq had WMD (chem and BIO) and had used them before, where are they 15 years later???

 

 

This is the most laughable comment in the whole debate.There is only one country that has used WMD not once but twice against other countries. Gee I wonder who that is????????? The mess they left is still being felt allover the world, yet they want to dictate who can and who can't have them. Perhaps if they had continued with the nuclear disarmament they were so passionate about themselves we would be living in a much safer world today. The second thing they should be looking at is their foreign policy. The core of most of the problems today.

Your statement about Muslims wanting to take over the west is absurd, ill informed and displays the paranoia that the US want the west to live in. You seem to forget that it was the US who refused to leave the middle east once they were asked to. I really think the shoe is on the other foot here.

 

Since 911 there have been no terror attacks in the US, why?

 

Maybe because that' the way the US wants it.

[Old Hippie]

O.k. Fair enough question...I and a few guys on this board have been in wars...I and another I know are against this war...how to stop it? tough call. All inteligence pointed to this exact situation happening, and advised the asshole not to go full into Iraq. Best way was not to do it, as for how to end it...your guess is as good as mine. Frankly, I can't see an end to this mess. Certaibnly, we will not win in the long term...

 

As for the WMD...where are they? were they really there? again, tough call, "experts" say no. WOuld the UN have come up with a better solution, maybe, all hind sight. But we should have played along a bit longer. Remember, Hussain tried a peaceful resolution with Kuwait and the UN, prior to the start odf the first gulf war. If there was no oil would the need have been as urgent?

 

US soldiers killers? murderers committing atrocities? yes, some of them, most of them no. In time of war, people do stuff they would never do otherwise...most soldiers would prefer NOT to be there, others thrive on it. Blame the bulk of them? no, not at all. We have no clue what is really going on there...I can say from my own experience, war can make you do weird shit, and not think bad about it all.

 

"...Since 911 there have been no terror attacks in the US, why?..."

 

yes, very good question...I have serious doubts about what really happened on 9-11 and who really knew/knows what about it. At this point, nothing would surprise me. What about all those terrorists arrested in Ohio, planning to blow up a mall, why haven't we heard anything? in the wake of 9-11 a lot of lies were told to drum up support for action...was Afganistan really involved? Was Iraq? are the wars in both countries really related to 9-11? Bali? etc...?

 

How would I end it...? Pull out, go home, let them live with what they have/can get, let the Muslim world deal with it...which is what they should have done in the first place, and stayed out of it...there is no winning solution now, this mess will NEVER really end...

 

As for North Korea, and Iran...rogue nations...? maybe yes, maybe no...maybe just more bullshit hype to scare us into suporting a war...after the lies told to justify the Iraq war, do you really believe all you are told about Iran and North Korea? To be fair, can we afford to ignore them?

 

To date, only one country has ever used a Nuclear bomb in a war...are we a rougue nation? we had the bomb, then another country got it, than another...Isreal supposedly has them, do you blame their enemies for wanting them also?

[MaiLuk]

>>Since 911 there have been no terror attacks in the US, why?<<

 

Because we rolled up al quaida in afghanistan. Doubt the invasion of iraq has anything to do with it but will keep an open mind if someone can make the connection.

 

Bin Laden was determined to hit the US and did. We took him out. Well done. But this idea that we need to have a permanent all out war on terrorism has gone too far don't you think?

 

What is the justification for the central gov to place the entire US population under surveillance, spend $200 billion a year on the iraq fiasco and suck up 20,000 american military casualties (all young kids) while we are at it?

 

The justification is that in the last 25 years 3000 americans have been killed by terrorists. Three fucking thousand. Compare that to 1.5 million who died from chirrossis of the liver; 2 million who died in car accidents; 5 million who died from heart disease; 6 million who died from lung cancer; 20 million who died from old age. Lets see. How much money have we spent to stamp out cigarette smoking and alcohol? Oh yeah, we haven't spent anything on that.

 

Fifty times more people in the US have died from Aids then from terrorist attacks.

 

Fact is we are being sold a bill of goods called the "war on terror" and its somewhat embarassing that we actually buy into it.

[Julian2]

http://bulletin.ninemsn.com.au/bulletin/site/articleIDs/1590A6BAB157EBABCA257184000567BA

[chuck6660]

Old Hippie said:

O.k. Fair enough question...I and a few guys on this board have been in wars...I and another I know are against this war...how to stop it? tough call. All inteligence pointed to this exact situation happening, and advised the asshole not to go full into Iraq. Best way was not to do it, as for how to end it...your guess is as good as mine. Frankly, I can't see an end to this mess. Certaibnly, we will not win in the long term...

 

As for the WMD...where are they? were they really there? again, tough call, "experts" say no. WOuld the UN have come up with a better solution, maybe, all hind sight. But we should have played along a bit longer. Remember, Hussain tried a peaceful resolution with Kuwait and the UN, prior to the start odf the first gulf war. If there was no oil would the need have been as urgent?

 

US soldiers killers? murderers committing atrocities? yes, some of them, most of them no. In time of war, people do stuff they would never do otherwise...most soldiers would prefer NOT to be there, others thrive on it. Blame the bulk of them? no, not at all. We have no clue what is really going on there...I can say from my own experience, war can make you do weird shit, and not think bad about it all.

 

"...Since 911 there have been no terror attacks in the US, why?..."

 

yes, very good question...I have serious doubts about what really happened on 9-11 and who really knew/knows what about it. At this point, nothing would surprise me. What about all those terrorists arrested in Ohio, planning to blow up a mall, why haven't we heard anything? in the wake of 9-11 a lot of lies were told to drum up support for action...was Afganistan really involved? Was Iraq? are the wars in both countries really related to 9-11? Bali? etc...?

 

How would I end it...? Pull out, go home, let them live with what they have/can get, let the Muslim world deal with it...which is what they should have done in the first place, and stayed out of it...there is no winning solution now, this mess will NEVER really end...

 

As for North Korea, and Iran...rogue nations...? maybe yes, maybe no...maybe just more bullshit hype to scare us into suporting a war...after the lies told to justify the Iraq war, do you really believe all you are told about Iran and North Korea? To be fair, can we afford to ignore them?

 

To date, only one country has ever used a Nuclear bomb in a war...are we a rougue nation? we had the bomb, then another country got it, than another...Isreal supposedly has them, do you blame their enemies for wanting them also?

 

 

OH, I agree you that we were in a good position to sit and wait prior to invading Iraq. We had an enhanced brigade from the 3rd Infantry Division sitting on the Iraqi border in attack positions, sanctions were squeesing saddam, he started destroying rockets for the benefit of CNN. He wasn't going anywhere and we had eyes on all his activities.

Now Saddam was being a "bad" boy...paying $10,000 to the families of suicide bombers, praising the 911 bombers etc.. Was this enough reason to invade Iraq? Apparently the Bush administration thought this and faulty "intelligence" pointing to Saddam continuing to produce and acquire WMD, was enough.

IMO we should have waited.

 

It is a fact that saddam did have WMD (chem and BIO), and he did use them on the kurds. Chem and BIO munitions were found and destroyed after the Gulf War in 1992. IMO any munitions he still had are sitting in Syria. I do not believe he had any nukes, the Israelis took care of that ambition at Osiris.

As for Iran and nKorea, rogue nations, YES. Do we invade them? Hell No, who would go do it!

I don't have any expertise on Iran; however nKorea is definitely a "rogue' nation. nKorea is not a direct threat to the US or South Korea...at this time. IMO the US and South Korea are taking the right approach in dealing with nKorea. The south placates the north, giving them huge economic aid (the last thing South Korean businessmen want is to inherit the norths broken economy) The south wants to see unification in a very sloooow gradual process. On the other hand the US plays the bad guy, placing sanctions on nKorean banking (for counterfeiting US $100 bills, "supernotes") and bringing up nKorean human rights abuses.

 

Finally, IMO we are now fighting a war against Islamic terrorist, if we did nothing and let the Muslim nations handle the terrorists, we would soon be fighting a war against the Islamic people. IMO there is no "light at the end of this tunnel"

[McBif]

MaiLuk said:

>>Since 911 there have been no terror attacks in the US, why?<<

 

What is the justification for the central gov to place the entire US population under surveillance, spend $200 billion a year on the iraq fiasco and suck up 20,000 american military casualties (all young kids) while we are at it?

 

The justification is that in the last 25 years 3000 americans have been killed by terrorists. Three fucking thousand. Compare that to 1.5 million who died from chirrossis of the liver; 2 million who died in car accidents; 5 million who died from heart disease; 6 million who died from lung cancer; 20 million who died from old age. Lets see. How much money have we spent to stamp out cigarette smoking and alcohol? Oh yeah, we haven't spent anything on that.

 

Fifty times more people in the US have died from Aids then from terrorist attacks.

 

MaiLuk,

 

The entire U.S. population is "under surveillance"? Even Kim Jong-il hasn't managed that yet. Perhaps you refer to the IRS?

 

I think it's more like $150 billion has been spent since 2002, not $200 billion a year. Not peanuts of course but the financial cost of a war isn't necessarily a knock-out reason for not waging it.

 

"Young kids". What are we to infer from this? Soldiers have always been young for obvious reasons, but that doesn't necessarily mean a war cannot be justified.

 

I won't argue with your figures for highway deaths etc., but counting deaths from old age is a curious thing to factor in - I mean, what the hell?

 

I would hazard a guess that considerably more than zero dollars has been spent on anti-tobacco and alcohol programs.

 

150,000 Americans have died from AIDS? You underestimate: I think it's closer to 500,000.

 

But the meat of your argument as I understand it is that 3,000 people killed in a terrorist attack is ho-hum because so many more die of this and that. I respectfully ask: What number would satisfy you?

 

I, by the way, have never subscribed to the Bush Doctrine of bringing stability to the region by actively encouraging representative government, a free press, rule of law, sanctity of contracts, the emancipation of women, etc. I would like to believe it is possible, but I don't. I hope to be proved wrong. The jury IS still out. We'll see in five or ten years maybe.

 

As if anybody really gives a fuck...

[elef]

North Korea is impossible to touch without China accepting it and that possibility is zero.

 

Invading Iran is impossible without a russian accept, but IMO the US want to bomb the nuclear industry. Even that is difficult because it may result in a coup d'ètat in Saudi Arabia. So probably Bush will ask Israel to bomb instead.