Ok. I’ll give it to ya. We shouldn’t go in for oil. We shouldn’t go in just because of 9/11. Forget about the Bio-Bombs. I can understand how you see Bush as an evil war mongrel. Whatever.
What about just a plain ol’ simple regime change? Uday Be-heads women in the street for sport. No matter how you view Bush and his politics, his daughter’s are not cutting off the penises of men in public (I don’t know about privately though :eek: ). There’re drinking illegally and generally having a good time in this place we call America.
When our prisons get full, we don’t run statistics on how to “clean” it up by hanging 1/4’s (x/x give or take) of the population. We let our finest prisoners go. (The pot heads, DUI offenders, etc…)
200,000 people just go missing? Yeah, sure give or take a few thou’. That number is just too high for the amount of people that live in Iraq. Face it, those people’s dicks were cut off.
Maybe we shouldn’t go in now. But should we wait and go later? Is it safe to say some action besides resolutions should take place?
I’ve never understood the fascination with motive. Hussein needs to go, period. The rest of the world is too gutless to take care of the problem, so we’ll play the bully again.
It’s a shame that we didn’t finish him the first time around.
I’m for a damn regime change, if that was why we were really going to fight there. We should regime change every crackpot dictator on the planet, but since the ones threatening to nuke us have no oil, we are ignoring them. I refuse to sit back and allow Bush to run wild with Oil Imperialism. At least we only have two more years of this crap left. If you really cared about people, why aren’t you talking about the dozens of other countries that are ruled by mad idiots? Oh, yeah, that’s right, you are just a fucking tool with no free thought, fed with lies of “we’re doing this for the people” meanwhile we can suddenly save $0.07 on gas, and millions starve in NK.
Not that any of this will sink into your thick skull.
Look, if we go into war to make a regime change, and happen to stumble along some oil. I see that as a bonus.
Oh yeah. Which other “dozens” of countries are you refering? Cite please? (Ha Hah!, my first cite question). Contrary to my posts, you’d be suprised, I’m the most empathetic person towards people, that you would ever meet.
Dang, Tars, I don’t think yme would have any problem with those despots being removed as well. Iraq is at the forefront of the world’s focus now and I think that’s why he’s talking about Hussein.
The point is that if all we’re concerned about is improving the lives of ordinary Iraqis, where is the pressure to do likewise in a large number of countries with either oppressive regimes or a complete breakdown of law and order?
I have said this before, in other threads and I will say it again here. This whole theory that some folk have that we are going to go in just because Saddam Hussein is a bad man and we are going to save the people from his is a big fat load of dung.
If that were what we were after, we would also be trying to end slavery, famine, disease and a thousand other wrongs that exist. As we are not, I have to conclude that the reasons that we are being given for Iraq are a lie.
Honestly, you folks sound as if you are grasping at straws. Every time I turn around, someone is coming up with another spurious reason for this obvious fuckery. Give it a rest already.
I don’t see why we should feel obligated to liberate every oppressed nation on Earth. Even if we pick-and-choose, liberating only those countries that we stand to profit from, we’ve still done more good that other countries who sit on their thumbs and refuse to help anyone.
ymoron, take your 7 cents and shove it up your ass. better yet, give it to the families of our boys who are about to be killed to save you some money. I’m sure they will appreciate it!
Clint, imagine a police officer who also owns a car dealership. In his neighborhood, there are many reported crimes. The only ones which lead to arrests all happen to be people who either work at or buy cars from competing dealerships. No problem, right? He’s still fighting more crime than if he didn’t arrest anyone at all, right?
We are part of a world community of nations, and I would like to see us leading and guiding others to improve the lives of people like the Iraqis, not annexing nations who have resources we want. We should be a leader, not a thug.
yme, I think the point was that there are plenty of other dictators in the world not currently facing an invasion. What does that last post prove other than a pretty simplistic approach to international relations?
Tars Tightass, you cease to amaze me. I do not want to go there for oil, but if we run into it. Bonus. If our boy’s are going to die, it wasn’t for oil, it’s for sustaining peace and keeping our freedoms. Atleast were trying. I do not want any of our soldiers to die. But if we do go through with it, we must face the possibility that we will lose some. And that’s sad. But the return will be much greater. Also, our boy’s joined the service on their own, we did not force them.
Sorry, that post you saw was me accidently hit enter by mistake. I didn’t mean to double post.
Otherwise, like it was mentioned before, we cannot invade everyone that deserved it, that would wipe out our resources. But wholeheartedly, we would if we could.
yme, do you propose simply overthrowing these 30 governments and then leaving the countries in anarchy, or do you propose that the United States annex all 30 of them? Considering the hundreds of billions its going to cost to annex and occupy just Iraq, this is a tall order.
See, the thing is, international politics are incredibly complicated, and rarely benefit from simplistic quick-fix solutions. Without support from the rest of the world to help defray the cost and find the best solution for everyone (not just the U.S.), you’re likely to just make things worse. If the U.S. is truly commited to removing corrupt dictators, it will take a long-term commitment of slow careful work and comprimise. I would applaud any leader that endorsed such action. I’m not holding my breath.
But before this turns into a pissing match. Does Saddam running a country like that deserve to be put out? No matter what the ulterior motives are, if there even are any? The US wanting a little oil on the side does not bother me. I’m sorry, there’s nothing wrong with benefiting at the same time.
yme, I think there is a case to be made for humanitarian overthrow of despotic regimes.
But if this is the motivation, purely in the interest of self-preservation, in the current climate shouldn’t the west pick a regime that isn’t Arabic? Mightn’t it be an idea to start with someone else on your death-list? If we’re talking humanitarian grounds alone, sadly many of those fuckers are more worthy of overthrow than Hussein.