Home » xyzzy » Dungeon » ??
First and foremost.. They are not "Freedom Fighters" [message #56761 is a reply to message #56760] Fri, 26 August 2005 15:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mr Vinyl is currently offline  Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
They are if anything "Anti Freedom Fighters". Terrorists and nothing else. This political correct crap is just that.

As far as the rest of your post all I can say is I disagree. I think the vast majority of people in Iraq are good people that want freedom. As evidenced by the recent election. The people risked their life to vote. Women for the first time voted. People want to be free.

The terrorists I think are losing the fight. Suicide bombings are a last ditch effort because nothing else works. As it was for the Japanese in WWII. In any case the Democrats and the Media should be doing everything they could to help the US and the coalition forces succeed. Instead of the other way around. It would be better for the US, it would be better for the world.



Re: First and foremost.. They are not "Freedom Fighters" [message #56762 is a reply to message #56761] Fri, 26 August 2005 16:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
Well I guess you are entitled to your position but truthfully I had hoped for a real answer to the post. All the touchy-feely stuff doesn't really amount to much when peple are dying.
Make no mistake this is no last ditch effort; it's only the beginning.
This war was predicated on lies about WMD's and it is beginning to sour in the public eye. I lived through Vietnam and this is the same thing.
The Vietnamese did not defeat us; we defeated ourselves because we insisted on pursueing a false premise just like we are doing here.

Re: First and foremost.. They are not "Freedom Fighters" [message #56763 is a reply to message #56762] Fri, 26 August 2005 17:53 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mr Vinyl is currently offline  Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
Please spare me the Vietnam comparison because they have nothing in common (except the example given below). WMD was only one of many reasons for the war. Not the only reason like the liberals would have us believe. How about this reason: After the first Gulf War Saddam signed an agreement to abide by any and all UN Resolutions (he did this probably knowing that the UN was absolutely and completely corrupt. And is nothing more than an Anti US organization). If he didn't abide by the resolutions then the war continues and he is taken out of power. How many resolutions did he break? 17? 18?. That is more than enough justification right there.

You are right about Vietnamese not defeating us. But we didn't defeat us. The liberals did. By doing the same exact thing they are now. By using the media to convince people that everything is going wrong. If we lose this war, make no mistake, it will be history repeating itself.

So let me ask you a question. What would you have us do? Let Saddam continue to break resolution after resolution? More food for oil aggreements? More tough talk with no action? This is exactly the reason we are in this war to begin with.

Re: First and foremost.. They are not "Freedom Fighters" [message #56764 is a reply to message #56763] Fri, 26 August 2005 18:00 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
He was punished with sanctions; thats what civilised nations do. We wanted the oil more than he wanted the food. Whats tough talk; we had no business messing with him in the first place. He invaded Kuwait; we drove him back to his country; we placed sanctions on all trade with Iraq until he complies with the rules . So why are we there?

Re: First and foremost.. They are not "Freedom Fighters" [message #56765 is a reply to message #56764] Fri, 26 August 2005 18:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mr Vinyl is currently offline  Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
And if he doesn't comply? Like he wasn't doing. Isn't it the liberals that complain that sanctions only hurt the innocent people of the country?

The agreement that he signed was not, you can comply if you want to with the UN resolutions but if you don't we will impose sanctions. It was you comply or we take you out of power. Plain and simple. The sanctions were not in the agreement at all. And we all know how the food for oil plan turned out don't we?

So what would you do? He doesn't comply and never will. After 17 or 18 broken resolutions. What do you do? Continue to starve the people of Iraq? While its leader bribes the UN officials? Clinton tried sanctions? Did they work? Did 911 happen anyway?

I ask again. What would you have us do? This is the reason the Democrats are losing election after election. They have no answers. All they can do is use the media to bring opponents down. It still works but not for long. The media is slowly losing power. Thanks to cable news and the internet.

Republicans need to be careful [message #56766 is a reply to message #56765] Fri, 26 August 2005 18:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
colinhester is currently offline  colinhester
Messages: 1349
Registered: May 2009
Location: NE Arkansas
Illuminati (3rd Degree)
President Bush has made the Gulf War his sole agenda. You're right. If he can pull off mid-East peace, he will go down as one of the great Presidents. But history is against him.

Read some of the conservative boards. Most of the attention is now focused from supporting the war, which is still high, to fighting illegals, high gas prices, and China/India. The talk is not about the war anymore, but about domestic problems, which President Bush has ignored.......Colin



Re: Republicans need to be careful [message #56767 is a reply to message #56766] Fri, 26 August 2005 19:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mr Vinyl is currently offline  Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
Look, I know it sounds like I am supporting Bush in whatever he does but I do not. That said, I don't believe Bush has made the Gulf War his sole agenda (although it certainly will be the most important aspect of his administrations, as well it should be). He has tried to fix the Social Security problem (which the Democrats are now denying is even a problem), he's handled some of the problems with drug coverage for seniors, Tax reform etc.

Fighting illegals he hasn't done and probably won't. This is one of the points I disagree with him on.

High gas prices. Not much he can do about this. Except start a war for oil (Oh that's right. Hmm guess that war isn't about oil after all :-).

China/North Korea are potential problems in the future I think. Just going to have to handle these things as they come up I guess. I don't have all the answers.



Re: First and foremost.. They are not "Freedom Fighters" [message #56768 is a reply to message #56765] Fri, 26 August 2005 19:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Manualblock is currently offline  Manualblock
Messages: 4973
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (13th Degree)
We can't have a reasonable dialogue if you insist on tieing 9/11 to Iraq. Thats rediculous and you know it.
Second; you keep bringing up Republican/Democrat. This is the Oil cartel headed by Bush/Cheney appropriating the oil for the U.S. If that is admitted than maybe some real discussion can take place.
That aspect of Bush's policy at least makes sense. The oil reserves in the world are becoming depleted at an ever faster rate and the explosion of need from the far east will accelerate that eventuality. Sending troops into the oil producing region in order to secure our ability to acquire oil and the means to guard our interests is the real reason we are there. That is not open to debate. It's the means by which we accomplished this and the needless deaths resulting from this assbackwards policy that concerns most of the civilised world.
Venezuela is headed by a marxist dictator who hates the U.S. Saudi Arabia has been cheating us and disrespecting us for fifty yrs. Russia has the bulk of the rest of the oil.
Israel can no longer provide the security in locus parentis for us in that area anymore.
The argument is why the administration has overridden all reasonable approaches to negotiating from a position of strength by throwing the military into the field prematurely and proving how precarious our military options are. Dumbass shit by a fool.
And bottom line; where are the tower bombers? Happy somewhere I suppose since they don't seem to care much about getting ahold of them.

Ridicules in your mind not mine... [message #56769 is a reply to message #56768] Fri, 26 August 2005 20:27 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Mr Vinyl is currently offline  Mr Vinyl
Messages: 407
Registered: May 2009
Illuminati (1st Degree)
"We can't have a reasonable dialogue if you insist on tieing 9/11 to Iraq. Thats rediculous and you know it."

No I don't. Iraq has a lot to do with terrorists. Why are we fighting them there then? Are we just fighting nice civilians that don't want us in their country? Are these the people that are cutting off Americans heads? Why did the terrorist bomb the train in Spain? Why did they bomb the subway in London? Why would they want us out of Iraq if they have nothing to do with Iraq?

"This is the Oil cartel headed by Bush/Cheney appropriating the oil for the U.S. If that is admitted than maybe some real discussion can take place."

Why would I admit to something so ludicrous? If it was about oil why didn't we take it during the first Gulf War? Why aren't we taking it now?

"That aspect of Bush's policy at least makes sense. The oil reserves in the world are becoming depleted at an ever faster rate and the explosion of need from the far east will accelerate that eventuality. Sending troops into the oil producing region in order to secure our ability to acquire oil and the means to guard our interests is the real reason we are there. That is not open to debate. It's the means by which we accomplished this and the needless deaths resulting from this assbackwards policy that concerns most of the civilised world."

Not open to debate in your mind. But lets say the above is true. Ask yourself why are we so dependant on foreign oil? Could it be because the liberals won't allow a nuclear plant to be built anywhere in the US? Could it be because the liberals won't let us drill for oil anywhere? Hmm? Iraq has what 2% of the worlds oil supply? Why don't we go after Saudi Arabia where there is more oil if that's what we are after? None of what you are saying makes sense. Yes we have oil interests in the area. No it has little to do with this war. Why did the Democrats in congress vote for the war if it was about oil?

"The argument is why the administration has overridden all reasonable approaches to negotiating from a position of strength by throwing the military into the field prematurely and proving how precarious our military options are."

After 18 broken resolutions, I would say we gave him all resonable appoaches of negotiation. More than 18 broken resolutions would be unreasonable. "Throwing the military into the field prematurely"?? Are you serious? How long did Saddam have to comply? Please. This one statement right here is the reason the Democrats have lost control of congress and the presidency. It's proof that Democrats have no ties to reality. IMO we gave Saddam way too many chances. IMO when he broke the first resolution that would have been it. After 18 broken resolutions and years of sanctions, you say lets give him another chance. Give negotiations a try. Surely this is self delusion.

So I noticed you dodged my question. Let me repeat it for you. What would you do? Sanctions didn't work. More sanctions? He wasn't complying. He wasn't going to. The sanctions were starving the innocent people of Iraq. What would you do?



Re: Ridicules in your mind not mine... [message #56770 is a reply to message #56769] Fri, 26 August 2005 20:48 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
colinhester is currently offline  colinhester
Messages: 1349
Registered: May 2009
Location: NE Arkansas
Illuminati (3rd Degree)
Sadam was a scumbag that needed to be taken out of the region. I only wish it had been in a bodybag. If, after his trial, he receives the death penalty, he will only rise to martyr. If he is kept alive, he will be used a negotating tool for every terrorist group known. This is a no-win situation for the free world.

The region has been politically unstable for as long as records have been kept. It is a pipe dream to think President Bush can bring peace to the region. I wish him all the power God can grant him. My wife is Arab, and I would love to take my kids to Nazarath someday to meet their cousins. The culture and people must be experienced to really appreciate the land.

Yeap, Sadam was a scumbag and violated all the UN "rules." But are we really better off now? Personally, I don't feel much safer .....Colin

Previous Topic: John Doe
Next Topic: Sunni's Refuse To Sign
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Mon Nov 25 05:13:25 CST 2024

Sponsoring Organizations

DIY Audio Projects
DIY Audio Projects
OddWatt Audio
OddWatt Audio
Pi Speakers
Pi Speakers
Prosound Shootout
Prosound Shootout
Miller Audio
Miller Audio
Tubes For Amps
TubesForAmps.com

Lone Star Audiofest