Support our troops!!!

[Kevin]

I haven't been following the Iraq threads too much lately, so I'm sorry if this topic has already been discussed.

Last Saturday (3/22), hundreds of thousands of protesters flocked to NYC's Times Square to protest the war and mock President Bush. The following day, only a mere 1,000 people showed up at a Times Square rally to show their support for the troops. Sad. Just sad.

WAKE UP! By protesting, you are beating a dead horse. The war has begun, and protesting it is not going to make it end any quicker. Instead of ranting & raving and making a fool out of our own President, why don't these people rally behind our troops so that we can have a dignified, unified war?

You think people would learn from the Vietnam War that protesting AFTER the war has started doesn't do any good. How do you think the troops feel when they're over in Iraq busting their asses for our country, and these selfish protesters are crying out against them? And what do you think the Iraqis think when they see images of Americans disgracing our President and the war?

I think the time has come to overlook what differences you may have about President Bush's decision to go to war. Now it is time to support our troops that are overseas fighting for our freedom and safety.

[John Corn]

:righton:

[James_F]

Or stand up for what you believe in... Americans have the right to protest against their president, a right that Iraqis do not have.

[RichW]

"You think people would learn from the Vietnam War that protesting AFTER the war has started doesn't do any good. How do you think the troops feel when they're over in Iraq busting their asses for our country, and these selfish protesters are crying out against them? "

As a vietnam vet myself, I have more animosity toward a US government who sent me over there under false pretexts and lied to the US citizenry, than i have over those 60s protesters. While I still cannot warm up to Jane Fonda, I have the feeling that GWB is leading us into an ultimate disaster.

"And what do you think the Iraqis think when they see images of Americans disgracing our President and the war?"

Certainly the thugs there who are our enemies may be emotionally bolstered a bit. But, on the other hand, we also show the world that we are truly free to criticize the actions of our government when we think it is wrong.

Many of the same people who now cry that we need to support GWB were highly critical of Clinton during the War in Kosovo. I certainly support our troops, but Bush has greatly disappointed me... and I worked hard for his election.

Supporting a government simply because it is at war is not patriotism. It is jingoism.

[Frank Z]

I've been watching as much coverage of the war as I can and saw 2 representatives of a Christan organization being interviewed in Jordan. They had recently left Iraq after going there to protest the war and show solidarity with friends and family that lived there. They made the amazing discovery that the war that they opposed so vigorously was actually welcomed by the same people that these 2 people actually thought would be against the war. The comments that they heard were enough to change their stance! Some of the people in the villages actually prayed for war, others stated that if the war did not start soon they would commit suicide. These comments were from Iraqi Christians that have been oppressed for years....Yeah we should pull out and bury our heads in the sand here at home! Peace is a wonderful thing, as long as you can totally ignore those that are weak and cannot defend themselves against a murdering tyrant! Peace is great if you don't have a care in the world except where your next joint, beer, or bottle of wine is coming from. Peace is great if you don't take the time to look at the world around you and see that the tyrant on the other side of the world is as close as the terrorist cell down the street from you that he is supporting. Peace is great until a radical fanatic starts flying hijacked airliners into our cities...Ohh did you forget about that?!?

[Steve Mehs]

Very well said Kevin!

[Karl Foster]

As a current soldier, my view may seem odd, but I'll stand with a weapon to protect a person protesting my very existence. Freedom of speech is our MOST IMPORTANT civil right, and no accident that it is in the first amendment of the Constitution. I believe most soldiers feel the same way I do.

My orders come from the President of the US and the Governor of the state of Utah. I pay no mind to those who protest. My political views are irrelevent to my mission, and as long as a lawful order is given to me, I'll execute it. That is my duty.

I do appreciate those who have rallies and other expressions of support for the troops. It is gratifying to see yellow ribbons and flags being flown.

Now that I have rambled and probably make no sense, may I give some advice on supporting the troops in the field. They are on the move or in areas with very little personal space. The best way to help them is to help their families left behind. One thing our Family Support Coordinator requests for the familes are long distance calling cards. Many of these families (especially of reserve component soldiers) are in remote locations, and calling the state headquarters for insurance issues, pay issues, etc, are all long distance calls. Even calling friends and family can be long distance. Something as simple as a calling card can help ease some of the financial burden these families face. Also, gifts for their kids like coloring books, crayons, and things little kids like are always appreciated. Let your teenagers babysit their kids, so mom can have a break, mow their lawn, fix their sprinklers, things like that. A soldier whose family is well taken care of is a much better soldier and better able to perform his or her mission. A soldier will appreciate his family being taken care of much more than anything you send to them in the field.

Regardless of what side you fall on the actual politics of the war, please don't forget the families left behind. They didn't ask for dad or mom to be gone for a year. Even if they knew it could happen, it doesn't make it any easier. Thanks for letting me ramble.

[RichW]

Karl, your post is probably the best that has been written in this entire debate. I believe you are correct that most soldiers feel the same way. I suspect that many demonstrators, both pro and con, have never seen any kind of military service. They have never disciplined their minds or bodies to put duty over ego. I probably differ with you on the need for this war in that I wanted to see other avenues travelled first. But since I have a nephew in the Marines over there and another in the Army Reserves who was activated two weeks ago, I can hadly be accused of nbot supporting our troops.

And to Frank Z who says:
"Peace is great until a radical fanatic starts flying hijacked airliners into our cities..."

Did you ever stop to think that this may actually happen MORE because we crushed Iraq? Who else do you think loves this war. The very terrorists who make up those radical fanatical cells. They don't care a hoot about Iraq or Saddam but they see our attacks as a way to galvinize Arab and Moslem opposition to the USA world-wide. I fear that this war will increase, not decrease, acts and attempts by terrorists.

Certainly there are people in Iraq who desire and deserve liberation. But so do people in Cuba, North Korea, Malaysia, Iran, some Balkan states, and yes, even in Palestine. But the rest of the world is actually feeling less free because of our actions.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by RichW
And to Frank Z who says:
"Peace is great until a radical fanatic starts flying hijacked airliners into our cities..."

Did you ever stop to think that this may actually happen MORE because we crushed Iraq? Who else do you think loves this war. The very terrorists who make up those radical fanatical cells. They don't care a hoot about Iraq or Saddam but they see our attacks as a way to galvinize Arab and Moslem opposition to the USA world-wide. I fear that this war will increase, not decrease, acts and attempts by terrorists.It's a lose-lose situation. If we ignored Saddam any longer, he could have unleashed nasty attacks on the U.S. at any time. Then by going to war, we're eliminating one threat (Saddam), but creating another (possible terrorist attacks fueled by hatred towards America). Either way we're screwed. However, I think it's good that we're taking out Saddam because he is a blatent and immediate threat to both the U.S., his own people, and god knows who else.

[Frank Z]

Originally posted by RichW
And to Frank Z who says:
"Peace is great until a radical fanatic starts flying hijacked airliners into our cities..."

Did you ever stop to think that this may actually happen MORE because we crushed Iraq? Who else do you think loves this war. The very terrorists who make up those radical fanatical cells. They don't care a hoot about Iraq or Saddam but they see our attacks as a way to galvinize Arab and Moslem opposition to the USA world-wide. I fear that this war will increase, not decrease, acts and attempts by terrorists.

Certainly there are people in Iraq who desire and deserve liberation. But so do people in Cuba, North Korea, Malaysia, Iran, some Balkan states, and yes, even in Palestine. But the rest of the world is actually feeling less free because of our actions.

I think that the time for talk, and pacification ended on Sept. 11, 2001. It is now time for us to hunt down terrorists and put an end to them and all that support them. I'm not talking about genocide, I'm talking about not allowing what happened on 9/11/01 to weaken our great nation, to turn us into a bunch cowards that do not have the backbone to stand up for our way of life, to stand up for what is RIGHT! I'mtalking about getting rid of those that would see our country destroyed for any fanatical beliefs.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Frank Z


I think that the time for talk, and pacification ended on Sept. 11, 2001. It is now time for us to hunt down terrorists and put an end to them and all that support them. I'm not talking about genocide, I'm talking about not allowing what happened on 9/11/01 to weaken our great nation, to turn us into a bunch cowards that do not have the backbone to stand up for our way of life, to stand up for what is RIGHT! I'mtalking about getting rid of those that would see our country destroyed for any fanatical beliefs. Agreed.

[Mike123abc]

Well maybe we send the message to terrorist countries too bad we do not care if the UN tries to stop us, you look at us the wrong way, much less launch an attack, you will lose your country.

It has been said that the terrorists were emboldened when we pulled out of Somalia because they killed a few of us. When we look weak for the pickings they will attack. They learn we will take their country, their governments will prevent them from attacking us.

What do we have now? One country for each of the towers? Now we just need one for the Pentagon (Iran?) and one for the jet that crashed (N. Korea?). Not that I think we will attack Iran/NK, but you know they have to be worried now.

[Jacob S]

I also think its a shame that so many more people will go against the war vs. those that are for it. The polls show how the majority are for it and confident in the president yet more are protesting against it than for it. Maybe those that are for it are smart enough to actually keep up on the news instead of protesting for something in which needs not be done when war is going on anyways. Maybe those that are protesting against the war could learn something from those that are not protesting at all.

Now I am not saying that it is wrong that lives are lost but its also wrong to just sit here and let them attack us and do nothing about it. It does not matter what we do, someone is always going to be against what we do, no matter what.

[James_F]

Originally posted by Jacob S
I also think its a shame that so many more people will go against the war vs. those that are for it.
Wait, you can't be serious. America is best when we are not fighting wars.

[RichW]

"It's a lose-lose situation. If we ignored Saddam any longer, he could have unleashed nasty attacks on the U.S. at any time."

Let me offer a couple of other possibilities:

1. Saddam is a really nasty guy and a despot (even most Arabs agree with this). It is more likely he would have unleashed that nasty attack on the Kurds, Shi-ites, or the Israelis, or even another Moslem country in the Midlle East than he would attack the USA directly. At that time the USA could go in with support of most of the world and crush him. We woulkd be viewed as heroes by the world instead of warmongers.

2. Saddam does attack the USA via suicide terrorists. Again the world will understand our use of the full force of our military to crush him, as we did the Taliban in Afghanistan.

3. Saddam plays his silly game of cat-and-mouse until he dies or is assasinated. At that time a moderate Iraqi government comes to power. This is what may be happening in Syria. Don't forget, Syria's Assad was just as evil, but he sort of supported us in the Gulf War. Now, with Assad dead and gone, Syria may be turning more moderate.

I keep hoping that our government has some compelling reason for waging war now, some rationale for preemptive strikes. Otherwise, much of the world will view US as the ugly enemy.

You guys keep linking this War to 9-11 but there is no credible evidence yet presented to link Iraq to this terrible day. If anything, Saudi money financed this terror. Why not go kick their butts? Yes Saddam has sponsored terrorism during his regime.

And we, or more correctly, the Reagan and Bush administrations "rewarded" him for it by giving him bank credits and selling him weapons.

As for Somali - well thats another hypocrisy in that many of the voices saying that we need to support GWB did not support Clinton over Somalia or Kosovo.

[Frank Z]

Originally posted by James_F

Wait, you can't be serious. America is best when we are not fighting wars.

No!! America is best because we don't kill each other because we have different beliefs.

I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it

God Bless America!!

[Jacob S]

This country come about having to fight for our freedom, and every so often we may have to fight again to keep the freedom alive. To say that we are best when we do not have to fight is to say that we should just let everyone attack at free will without defending ourselves. We are not just dropping nukes and other types of bombs that would totally wipe them out but using precision bombing so that we dont wipe them out completely.

[Jack White]

Originally posted by Kevin
I haven't been following the Iraq threads too much lately, so I'm sorry if this topic has already been discussed.

Last Saturday (3/22), hundreds of thousands of protesters flocked to NYC's Times Square to protest the war and mock President Bush. The following day, only a mere 1,000 people showed up at a Times Square rally to show their support for the troops. Sad. Just sad.

WAKE UP! By protesting, you are beating a dead horse. The war has begun, and protesting it is not going to make it end any quicker. Instead of ranting & raving and making a fool out of our own President, why don't these people rally behind our troops so that we can have a dignified, unified war?

You think people would learn from the Vietnam War that protesting AFTER the war has started doesn't do any good. How do you think the troops feel when they're over in Iraq busting their asses for our country, and these selfish protesters are crying out against them? And what do you think the Iraqis think when they see images of Americans disgracing our President and the war?

I think the time has come to overlook what differences you may have about President Bush's decision to go to war. Now it is time to support our troops that are overseas fighting for our freedom and safety.

The protesters are trying to save the lives of tens of thousands and perhaps even hundreds of thousands of people that will die as a result of the war.
They're trying to save the lives of Troops, civilians and everyone.
Protesting is the MORAL duty of people who believe the there's even a one in a billion chance that protesting will cause a cease fire and save lives.
Many religous leaders including the Pope have said that this war is DEAD WRONG.
The WHOLE WORLD says this war is wrong.
THOUSANDS of people are dying in Iraq from the war and now that their water treatment facilities are not working because of the war, a possible DISASTER of incredible proportions is awaiting Iraqi Civilians.
Protesting is the MORAL AND RIGHT THING TO DO.
500,000 people will die from this war according to UN estimates.
Even if the number in real life is smaller, it's still going to be a VERY HIGH number of deaths in Iraq.
HUMAN LIFE IS PRECIOUS.
Some pro war people may think that Iraqi Civilian's lives are worth less than dog's lives, but anti-war people believe that ALL HUMAN life is precious.
Anti-War people believe that a war is like THROWING THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER.
This war will probably cause MUCH MORE DEATH AND SUFFERING to Iraqi civilians than even Saddam killing civilians in Iraq would have during the rest of Saddam's natural life.
I just DON'T believe that most people who cares about Iraqi civilians can be pro-war.
All the Iraqi civilians Arab cousins around the Middle East are AGAINST this war because they care about Iraqi civilians.
I don't believe that most people who are pro-war really care about Iraqi civilians the way they claim.
I'd like to see these pro war people in front of a polygraph machine and see how much they really care about Iraqi Civilians.
99% of the world's population is against this war.
Even in countries like Spain, almost ALL THE PEOPLE are against war.
The leaders of these countries have been pressured to support this war by coersion by Economic(carrots and sticks).
Turkey was coerced by DOZENS of billions of dollars to allow ground forces in Turkey.

[Jacob S]

So the right thing to do is to wait for them to cost us several thousands of lives again like they already have? Would you rather us die than them? I do understand about how lives will be lost and war is not pretty, but we can't just sit here and do nothing.

[raj2001]

Originally posted by Jacob S
So the right thing to do is to wait for them to cost us several thousands of lives again like they already have? Would you rather us die than them? I do understand about how lives will be lost and war is not pretty, but we can't just sit here and do nothing.

Umm, I still don't see how Iraq has cost us thousands of lives already, except if you're talking about Desert Storm. I hope you're not referring to 9-11, because it's already been established that most of the 9-11 hijackers were Saudi nationals.

[Mark Lamutt]

Saddam Husein is a despot. Under his iron thumb, thousands if not 10s of thousands have died. The people live in fear, because if they say or do the wrong thing, they are arrested or tortured or executed. But the raping of women is acceptable. You tell Saddam to F**k off, you're put up against a wall and shot. Women are subjugated, forced to live as 3rd class citizens with no rights, and no voice. Yeah, it's their culture, but does that make it right?

This war isn't about forcing American ideals down the throats of Iraq and its people. This war is about forcing HUMAN rights down the throats of the Iraqi government. And yes, most of the world doesn't support this action. Just because its a majority opinion doesn't make it right. It's much easier to turn away and say that's not my problem. My life is good, why should I care? But maybe it's time for the world to pull its collective head out of its *ss and take a hard look at what's going on. Maybe it's time for the Iraqui people to be valued as human beings just as much as you or I are. Or as much as the Pope is, or the people of Spain.

But no, apparently from the arguments here, the status quo is preferrable. It's not our problem. If we ignore it, it will go away. Eventually Saddam will die 30 or 40 years down the road, and then everything will be fine and dandy good again. Yeah right...and I've got a bridge for sale too...

Why is America stepping in and doing this? Because we can, and because it needs to be done. Because, while this country is be no means a state of utopian perfection, at least you can go out into the streets and tell our president to F**k off, and you won't be executed for it. At least you don't have to live in the fear of speaking your opinion and being tortured, raped and murdered for it.

Why is it that you don't think that the Iraqi people deserve the same kind of freedom? Who are you to deny them the freedom you exercise?

And if not now, then when and if not us, then who will step to the plate?

[firephoto]

Didn't Saddam live in Saudi Arabia for part of his life?

And Jack,
Quit quoting pojected war statictics that are based on WW1, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam numbers. Have you ever looked at the Gulf War numbers and what was originally estimated?
The Saudi's are much against it because it is very likely that Iraqi oil reserves are the biggest in the world. A liberated Iraq would spend their time developing their oil recources instead of building a suppressed society.
It's not even worth replying to most of the untruths you state in ALL OF YOUR POSTS. (u like the caps?)

It's like the anti-drug commercials. Supporting Saddam's gov't a little is like supporting terrorism just a little. :(

[Bill R]

Very well said Mark.

[tampa8]

I have avoided responding to the "War" threads because others are saying pretty much what I will now say, but perhaps I will not be as pleasant about it.

Dissent is one of the things that make this Country great. So do not misunderstand that. We need to hear opposing views to help validate or change our minds.
However, if you think being "nice" or "diplomatic" or simply saying "peace not war" or that appeasement is going to make any difference at all to leaders such as those in Iraq and some other countries then you are either very very naive, have agenda against the US, or - sorry - stupid. History tells us otherwise. 911 tells us otherwise. Time and time again, by reading carefully newspaper accounts and TV reports, it is seen that many opposing the war are not there because of the war per se, they are still mad that President Bush won. It would be very dangerous to let our national security be diminshed because of a grudge. Where were these people when President Clinton was bombing? There was barely a peep.

In another thread the question is asked how much would you pay for this war. This shows the misunderstanding of what is happening. The correct question would be "What will you not give up to keep your freedom and way of life." Would you give up your right to dissent, as in China, Iraq, and some other countries to avoid war? Those are the questions. Most Americans seem to know the answer, and our President seems to know the answer. Thank God.

[Kevin]

Originally posted by Jack White


The protesters are trying to save the lives of tens of thousands and perhaps even hundreds of thousands of people that will die as a result of the war.
They're trying to save the lives of Troops, civilians and everyone.
Protesting is the MORAL duty of people who believe the there's even a one in a billion chance that protesting will cause a cease fire and save lives.
Many religous leaders including the Pope have said that this war is DEAD WRONG.
The WHOLE WORLD says this war is wrong.
THOUSANDS of people are dying in Iraq from the war and now that their water treatment facilities are not working because of the war, a possible DISASTER of incredible proportions is awaiting Iraqi Civilians.
Protesting is the MORAL AND RIGHT THING TO DO.
500,000 people will die from this war according to UN estimates.
Even if the number in real life is smaller, it's still going to be a VERY HIGH number of deaths in Iraq.
HUMAN LIFE IS PRECIOUS.
Some pro war people may think that Iraqi Civilian's lives are worth less than dog's lives, but anti-war people believe that ALL HUMAN life is precious.
Anti-War people believe that a war is like THROWING THE BABY OUT WITH THE BATHWATER.
This war will probably cause MUCH MORE DEATH AND SUFFERING to Iraqi civilians than even Saddam killing civilians in Iraq would have during the rest of Saddam's natural life.
I just DON'T believe that most people who cares about Iraqi civilians can be pro-war.
All the Iraqi civilians Arab cousins around the Middle East are AGAINST this war because they care about Iraqi civilians.
I don't believe that most people who are pro-war really care about Iraqi civilians the way they claim.
I'd like to see these pro war people in front of a polygraph machine and see how much they really care about Iraqi Civilians.
99% of the world's population is against this war.
Even in countries like Spain, almost ALL THE PEOPLE are against war.
The leaders of these countries have been pressured to support this war by coersion by Economic(carrots and sticks).
Turkey was coerced by DOZENS of billions of dollars to allow ground forces in Turkey. Who cares about what these other countries think about the war. I'm sure they'd all like to appease Saddam for another 13 years since ignorance is easy and involves little effort at all.

The point of this war is that there is good evidence that Saddam has enough weapons to wipe the U.S. off the face of the Earth, and even worse. If Saddam had the opportunity to push a button and kill 50 million innocent American lives, he would do it. Why should we live with that threat and that fear? If human life is so precious, then should it be our obligation to erradicate Saddam, who holds enough hatred to kill every human being on this planet. The cost of this war will be FAR less than waiting for Saddam to strike first.

[Jacob S]

If Saddam dies, his elder son would take over, or someone else that may be far worse than Saddam that could cause a lot more probelms. Just because Saddam may die someday if he does not get killed dont mean all will be well.

[Jack White]

Originally posted by Kevin
Who cares about what these other countries think about the war. I'm sure they'd all like to appease Saddam for another 13 years since ignorance is easy and involves little effort at all.

The point of this war is that there is good evidence that Saddam has enough weapons to wipe the U.S. off the face of the Earth, and even worse. If Saddam had the opportunity to push a button and kill 50 million innocent American lives, he would do it. Why should we live with that threat and that fear? If human life is so precious, then should it be our obligation to erradicate Saddam, who holds enough hatred to kill every human being on this planet. The cost of this war will be FAR less than waiting for Saddam to strike first.

You're not being realistic, There's NO WAY Iraq can have enough WMDs to wipe out the US like you have been lead to believe by false propoganda.
First of all, ONLY THERMONUCLEAR WEAPONS can create the kind of destruction that you're talking about.
Even India and Pakistan don't have thermonuclear weapons and their nuclear programs are DECADES more advanced than Iraq's.
Pakistan and Indian only have fission weapons.
Iraq is a million times weaker than the US and it doesn't have any ICBMS, Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles Aircraft Carriers, Long Range Bombers, or any other ways to deliver WMDs long distances.
Saddam was his MOST dangerous between 1979 and 1992, that's when he did 99% of the bad stuff he did in his life, and the US SUPPORTED him through most of this time.
Iraq is containable and deterable.
One thing that proves this is that Iraq didn't use WMDs in the Gulf War against the US troops or Israel.
This was because Saddam was DETERED by James Baker and Israel saying that there would be a nuclear response against Iraq if Iraq used WMDs.
There's a DIFFERENCE between Iraq and Al Queda.
Iraq is CONTAINABLE and DETERABLE.
Another example of how Iraq was deterable was when Netenyahoo said in like 1998 or 1999 that he was 100% sure that Iraq would NOT fire missiles at Israel if there was a war.
The US and Iraq almost had a war when Netenyahoo was Prime Minister of Israel and Netenyahoo said that he had a talk on the phone with Saddam and that he(Netenyahoo) is 100% sure that Iraq won't fire missiles at Israel if there is another US/Iraq war.
Some people think that Netenyahoo threatened to use nukes if Iraq fires missiles at Israel.
All this shows that Iraq was CONTAINABLE AND DETERABLE.
Pro War people act like they know for a FACT that Iraq would have attacked the US if the US didn't attack Iraq.
Now EVERYTHING in history and logic OPPOSES that point of view.
Iraq has NEVER started a war against a stronger opponent.
Iraq has ONLY started wars against and killed those that it considers WEAKER(like Iran in 1979, Kuwait, The Kurds, the Shiates, etc).
In fact, another thing that shows that Iraq is containable is when in 1981 Israel bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor, Iraq was AFRAID to attack Israel because Iraq was AFRAID of stronger countries like Israel and Saddam is a bully who would only wants to start a fight against WEAKER opponents and would NEVER start a fight against a stronger opponent.
Iraq is the "CONVENTIONAL" enemy that that the US has had in the past like The Soviet Union, China, etc.
It's a CONTAINABLE AND DETERABLE enemy.
People who think they know for a fact that Iraq would have attacked the US if the US didn't attack Iraq are just PARANOID.
Lets's say a woman was raped, and then she was paranoid after that, and she just took a gun with her everywhere and she just SHOT ANY MAN that even stared at her.
That's what being paranoid is all about.
Paranoid people act based on what might(even if it probably will NOT) happen.
People who are not paranoid act based on what actually is happening or has happened.

[firephoto]

This is the support our troops thread, not the support Saddam Hussein thread.

[Jack White]

Originally posted by firephoto
This is the support our troops thread, not the support Saddam Hussein thread.

The VAST majority of Anti-War people DON'T support Saddam.
Look, EVEN Iran is against this war.
Iranians are the MOST ANTI-SADDAM people in the whole world.
Saddam has killed MORE IRANIANS(over 1 MILLION) than he has killed any other type of people.
Now if EVEN the Iranian public can forgive the Iraqi civilians and not want Iraqi civilians to die in this war, then what does it say about people who hold a GRUDGE FOREVER and EVER.

[Mark Lamutt]

Who are you, Jack, to begrudge the Iraqi people the freedom to do exactly what you are doing right now in this thread?

They protest, they get shot in the head. You protest, you just get argued with. Why do you believe they shouldn't have that right? There's no way in hell that right will ever be theirs under the rule of Saddam. The world knows that. The world hates Saddam. Are the civilians under Saddam to be damned because the world is too afraid to do something about Saddam?

[Cheyenne]

About time a "super power" had the spine to put this dictator out of control.
Jack, You really have to walk out of your rose garden to smell the sh*t.

[Jack White]

Originally posted by Mark Lamutt
Who are you, Jack, to begrudge the Iraqi people the freedom to do exactly what you are doing right now in this thread?

They protest, they get shot in the head. You protest, you just get argued with. Why do you believe they shouldn't have that right? There's no way in hell that right will ever be theirs under the rule of Saddam. The world knows that. The world hates Saddam. Are the civilians under Saddam to be damned because the world is too afraid to do something about Saddam?


I just don't buy it.
If this was the way the American people had acted in the past in their concern for oppressed civilians and the victims of genocide, then I'd accept that they were doing this for the Iraqi Civilians.
Where were these pro war people when hundreds of thousands were dying in Ruwanda and needed to be liberated?
Where were these pro war people when Pol Pot was killing millions of people?
Were were these pro war people where millions were dying in Sudan?
I just DON'T buy that this is for the Iraqi Civilians because the government and the majority of the people in the US haven't given a RAT'S ASS when millions of people are dying in a genocide by Pol Pot, and in Sudan and Ruwanda.
"Liberating Iraqi Civilians" sounds like a nice reason for war if it was true, but there's no way that's the REAL reason.
If Iraq didn't have 334 BILLION barrels of discovered and estimated undiscovered oil reserves(worth like 10 TRILLON BUCKS, and even more than the National Debt), if Iraq wasn't one of Israel's biggest enemies/greatest threats, if this wasn't about revenge for Saddam trying to assasinate Bush Sr, if this wasn't based on a TOTALLY FALSE belief that Iraq was behind 9/11, and if Iraq wasn't an Arab country, then there's NO WAY IN HELL this war would be happening no matter how many WMDs Iraq had and no matter how many civilians Saddam would have killed.

[Frank Z]

Originally posted by Frank Z
I've been watching as much coverage of the war as I can and saw 2 representatives of a Christan organization being interviewed in Jordan.

Here's a link to the story for those that are interested. Talk about a Revelation!
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030323-9543832.htm

[Mark Lamutt]

That's your opinion, Jack. And that's fine. I disagree with it because I think you are wrong. But really, whatever reason or reasons this war is happening now is compeltely irrelevant. The result will be the same for the Iraqi civilians. They will be freed from Saddam. So, while you're arguing the philosophy behind why we shouldn't be there, they're going to go ahead and get the job done, free as many people as possible, and kill as few as possible.

[Danny R]

hundreds of thousands of protesters flocked to NYC's Times Square to protest the war and mock President Bush. The following day, only a mere 1,000 people showed up at a Times Square rally to show their support for the troops. Sad. Just sad.

You are stereotyping all protestors as being against our troops, which is certainly not the case. As many would say, the best way to support our troops is to not send them into harms way in the first place, especially in a war against a country that in my opinion poses no direct threat against us.

And while it was promoted as a rally for America, the pro-war movement was very evident at the later rally. I support our troops, but would not attend such a rally because I do not want to be associated with being in favor of war.

"Liberating Iraqi Civilians" sounds like a nice reason for war if it was true, but there's no way that's the REAL reason.

I concur. Liberating the Iraqi people is just the soundbite that gives the most validity to the war. Even WMD is an excuse in my opinion. Iraq doesn't have nuclear capability, and mustard gas and nerve agents are so easily manufactored its impossible to stop any nation from producing them. Since they didn't use them in the Gulf War, and haven't used them yet in the current conflict, it is not apparent that Iraq can't be detered in that regard.

If Iraq didn't have 334 BILLION barrels of discovered and estimated undiscovered oil reserves

I disagree that its about oil however. Iraq was already selling us their oil. If we wanted more all we had to do was lift sanctions.

if this wasn't about revenge for Saddam trying to assasinate Bush Sr

I think Bush wants his war for political reasons and is taking advantage of the threat of terrorism to wage a war of opportunity against Iraq. While Iraq is an easy scapegoat (tyrant, WMD, etc) and this isn't quite a "Wag the Dog" scenario, it comes quite close in my opinion. Bush's popularity is way up... something that wouldn't be the case given the current economic climate without the war.

if this wasn't based on a TOTALLY FALSE belief that Iraq was behind 9/11

I have to disagree with this statement to an extent. There are training facilities in Iraq that have been used by al Qaeda. While I don't think Saddam funded or promoted the terrorist attack against us, and likely didn't even know what was planned, he didn't do anything to prevent it either and gave the camps a blind eye so long as they didn't threaten his regime.

[Bogy]

Support our Troops! Impeach George Bush! :D