So we are so proud that the citizens are finally free from Sadamm

[panerd]

so they can do the "free" and "American" thing and loot all of the stores in Bagdad?

What is your guys second proudest moment, the LA riots?


I am happy that it looks like our soldiers may be close to being out of emminent danger, but lets hope the democratic president focuses on some domestic issues in '04 instead of "liberating" all the oil-producing countries of the world.

[CamEdwards]

not even worth a response.

[tucker342]

YES!!!

Completely agree.

[panerd]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
not even worth a response.

Because you know one Iraqi citizen who got out and hated it there.

[tucker342]

I feel that what's the point of helping out other countries, when there are issues here in the states that need to be looked at.

[mrskippy]

The idea behind the looting was to give the people the chance to let off some steam. However, I don't think they wanted it to go beyond looting Saddam's palaces and government buildings.

[panerd]

Originally posted by tucker342
I feel that what's the point of helping out other countries, when there are issues here in the states that need to be looked at.

What gets me is that somebody who is anti-war is labeled as un-American even if their reason is that they would rather see the billions of dollars being spent saving and feeding the Iraqis go towards saving and feeding Americans. The money spent on one attack helicopter could operate a school district for a year. (A quite large one at that) I guess I would rather my taxes go to helping the less fortunate here instead of there. But I guess the 7 & 8 year old kids "chose" for their parents to be deatbeats and be on welfare, so screw them.

[Noble_Platypus]

Instead of weakening our military, why not just say fuck them and stop all foreign aid? hat way we can still defend ourselves but we have money for the states.

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by panerd
What gets me is that somebody who is anti-war is labeled as un-American even if their reason is that they would rather see the billions of dollars being spent saving and feeding the Iraqis go towards saving and feeding Americans. The money spent on one attack helicopter could operate a school district for a year. (A quite large one at that) I guess I would rather my taxes go to helping the less fortunate here instead of there. But I guess the 7 & 8 year old kids "chose" for their parents to be deatbeats and be on welfare, so screw them.

Hey, I understand that alot of people have troubles in there life, but how much more does the government have to do for people? The school districts waste so much money and then when the government says they have no more to give they fire the teachers, not the 3rd or 4th assistant principal whose salary is that of 3 or 4 teachers. We have people who live on the streets instead of shelters because the shelters won't let them drink. And that is my problem no. There are things we can do here, but that doesn't mean we should say fuck the rest of the world.

And panerd, if you think everything is so bad, move into in effeciency apartment, ride your bike to work, and donate all your excess pay and possessions to charity. That is your way you could help.

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by Noble_Platypus
Instead of weakening our military, why not just say fuck them and stop all foreign aid? hat way we can still defend ourselves but we have money for the states.

And you think they hate us now, what would happen if we didn't feed them?

[Noble_Platypus]

Originally posted by The Afoci
And you think they hate us now, what would happen if we didn't feed them?

It was a rhetotical question for panerd.

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by Noble_Platypus
It was a rhetotical question for panerd.

Sorry, this just pisses me off so much. There are millions of options for people in this country. Just because a majority(not all!) don't want to get off there asses and do something, it is our problem. This isn't communism.

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by panerd
so they can do the "free" and "American" thing and loot all of the stores in Bagdad?

What is your guys second proudest moment, the LA riots?


I am happy that it looks like our soldiers may be close to being out of emminent danger, but lets hope the democratic president focuses on some domestic issues in '04 instead of "liberating" all the oil-producing countries of the world.

God this pisses me off. How did you feel when you saw the kurds getting beaten after we left in the first war? did you say, well, since they aren't americans, fuck em. My kids can't go to a brand new school with high speed internet access because we were trying to help kuwait? God forbid that on there first day of freedom in over 20 years, they raise a little hell.

[Noble_Platypus]

I am on your side, dude.There are many ways to generate more money for the country. First thing is to stop rewarding laziness. Without even touching the unemployment issue, I can tell you one way. I do controls work at the State capitol here in Harrisburg, Pa. You wouldnt believe how much some state workers get paid to play solitare all day.

[panerd]

Originally posted by The Afoci
Hey, I understand that alot of people have troubles in there life, but how much more does the government have to do for people? The school districts waste so much money and then when the government says they have no more to give they fire the teachers, not the 3rd or 4th assistant principal whose salary is that of 3 or 4 teachers. We have people who live on the streets instead of shelters because the shelters won't let them drink. And that is my problem no. There are things we can do here, but that doesn't mean we should say fuck the rest of the world.

And panerd, if you think everything is so bad, move into in effeciency apartment, ride your bike to work, and donate all your excess pay and possessions to charity. That is your way you could help.

Actually I am a teacher and think I do give a lot back. But again I appreciate being labeled because I don't happen to agree with the way the government spends our taxes.

[panerd]

Originally posted by The Afoci
God this pisses me off. How did you feel when you saw the kurds getting beaten after we left in the first war? did you say, well, since they aren't americans, fuck em. My kids can't go to a brand new school with high speed internet access because we were trying to help kuwait? God forbid that on there first day of freedom in over 20 years, they raise a little hell.

Yawn. Lets send our boys to die in Africa and Asia also. There comes a point where we can't save the world. It's called isolationism and as much as we denounce the French and Germans for not participating in this exercise, they also aren't losing members of their country in a war for oil.

[panerd]

Originally posted by Noble_Platypus
It was a rhetotical question for panerd.

You actually made a pretty good point, but you had to go and spoil it by saying it was rhetorical. Unfortunatly rhetorical questions usually only have one answer. I happen to very strongly agree with the other one.

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by panerd
Yawn. Lets send our boys to die in Africa and Asia also. There comes a point where we can't save the world. It's called isolationism and as much as we denounce the French and Germans for not participating in this exercise, they also aren't losing members of their country in a war for oil.

Hey if this is for oil, gas prices better go down...I am waiting.

[CamEdwards]

Originally posted by panerd
Because you know one Iraqi citizen who got out and hated it there.

no, that's not it.

Originally posted by panerd
So we are so proud that the citizens are finally free from Sadamm
so they can do the "free" and "American" thing and loot all of the stores in Bagdad?

What is your guys second proudest moment, the LA riots?


I am happy that it looks like our soldiers may be close to being out of emminent danger, but lets hope the democratic president focuses on some domestic issues in '04 instead of "liberating" all the oil-producing countries of the world.

The great thing about this world is that there will always be something for you to bitch about. Yes, there's looting going on in the buildings in Baghdad. Yes, there was some looting in Basra.

There are also 150 children in bed tonight with their families. Children that for years have been imprisoned by the Saddam regime. Why? Because they refused to join the Ashbal Saddam... the junior Fedayeen.

There are men at home with their wives tonight, imprisoned because they wouldn't join the Ba'ath party.

There are wives at home tonight, imprisoned because a husband or son dared to speak out against the regime.

It's not that I know one Iraqi who got out. It's that I know about 25 million who didn't.

It's not that I didn't want to start a flame war. It's that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

In the days ahead we'll find the WMD we're looking for. I'm sure you'll believe those weapons were planted by the Bush administration. In the days ahead you'll hear more and more Iraqis praise America for coming to their aid. No doubt CIA propaganda.

Today, when the seeds of liberty are being sown in a country that has been oppressed for three decades, you care more about continuing the hatred of our president than sharing in the love of democracy.

Today, when people can feel free to express themselves for the first time in 30 years, you express your ignorance and hate instead of appreciation for the men and women of our military.

And you have that right. You have the right to express yourself freely. You have the right to make an ass out of yourself with your uninformed comments. You have the right to spew forth with your weakass rhetoric.

I had the right to not dignify it with a comment. Now I'm exercising my right to respond.

[tucker342]

Originally posted by panerd
Yawn. Lets send our boys to die in Africa and Asia also. There comes a point where we can't save the world. It's called isolationism and as much as we denounce the French and Germans for not participating in this exercise, they also aren't losing members of their country in a war for oil.

damn, it's scary how right you are... I've agreed on just about everything you've said.

Why do we have to be the police of the world?

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by tucker342
damn, it's scary how right you are... I've agreed on just about everything you've said.

Why do we have to be the police of the world?

Because if we didn't Europe would be Germany.

[vtbub]

This is really the dumbest thread I've ever read.

[astralhaze]

It's certainly up there.

[panerd]

Originally posted by CamEdwards


It's not that I know one Iraqi who got out. It's that I know about 25 million who didn't.

It's not that I didn't want to start a flame war. It's that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

In the days ahead we'll find the WMD we're looking for. I'm sure you'll believe those weapons were planted by the Bush administration. In the days ahead you'll hear more and more Iraqis praise America for coming to their aid. No doubt CIA propaganda.

Today, when the seeds of liberty are being sown in a country that has been oppressed for three decades, you care more about continuing the hatred of our president than sharing in the love of democracy.

Today, when people can feel free to express themselves for the first time in 30 years, you express your ignorance and hate instead of appreciation for the men and women of our military.

And you have that right. You have the right to express yourself freely. You have the right to make an ass out of yourself with your uninformed comments. You have the right to spew forth with your weakass rhetoric.

I had the right to not dignify it with a comment. Now I'm exercising my right to respond.

The simple fact is that I didn't say half the things that you attributed to me. Never hated any of the military or the president. I voted for Bush because he promised tax cuts. My opinion was this is a stupid war and a waste of my tax money. I wish no ill will on our soldiers, but I would rather they were safe here. I wish no ill will on the Iraqis, but I would rather see our country's money go towards our country. There are millions of people who could be saved around the world a lot easier than the Iraqi's. But the public won't support a liberation of Africa or Asia. I am anti-war, but not from the viewpoint you attribute to me.

[NoMyths]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
"The great thing about this world is that there will always be something for you to bitch about. Yes, there's looting going on in the buildings in Baghdad. Yes, there was some looting in Basra.
Yes, there were some civilian casualties. Yes, there were some lies. Yes, there were some hidden agendas.

"There are also 150 children in bed tonight with their families. Children that for years have been imprisoned by the Saddam regime. Why? Because they refused to join the Ashbal Saddam... the junior Fedayeen. There are men at home with their wives tonight, imprisoned because they wouldn't join the Ba'ath party. There are wives at home tonight, imprisoned because a husband or son dared to speak out against the regime. It's not that I know one Iraqi who got out. It's that I know about 25 million who didn't.
And yet the entire reason we went over there was not to liberate any of them, but save our own worried asses. Don't confuse the fact that the administration is now portraying this humanitarian war with the actual reasons we're over there--the most publicized of which is the "WMD" argument.

In the days ahead we'll find the WMD we're looking for. I'm sure you'll believe those weapons were planted by the Bush administration. In the days ahead you'll hear more and more Iraqis praise America for coming to their aid. No doubt CIA propaganda.
If we find chemical weapons it will certainly relieve my mind about some of the decisions leading up to the war. And that's good--it would be nice to see the administration prove that it is more trustworthy than it has seemed. Many Iraqis will praise us, and most of those will not have been coached by CIA agents. I don't know that I find the "planted weapons" argument viable--too fringe for my more moderate tastes--but I can understand the argument, esp. in light of the fact that some of our evidence turned out to be faked.

Today, when the seeds of liberty are being sown in a country that has been oppressed for three decades, you care more about continuing the hatred of our president than sharing in the love of democracy.
Here comes the soapbox.
Seeds of liberty -- what, by destroying their country and selling it back to them?
And for our history buffs (and our Frederick ones): the argument you're beginning to make is the exact argument we used to get involved in Vietnam. It's both amazing and worrisome that decades have gone by and yet an informed person (and I do respect you, Cam, regardless of our differences in opinion) could still make that argument as a reason to attack another country.

Today, when people can feel free to express themselves for the first time in 30 years, you express your ignorance and hate instead of appreciation for the men and women of our military.
Hey, I think it's great that it seems to be working out well, since this is the course we're on. But I still want to be sure that since we're in their country we're actually looking out for those cats, and not merely our own strategic interests.

[CamEdwards]

honestly, arguing about this is like talking to my two year old, and since he's cuter than both NoMyths and panerd, this will be my last comment in this thread.

We're never going to agree, and that's fine. In fact, that's one of the things that makes this board so much fun.

If you think I twisted your words, panerd, I'm sorry. It just seems to me that by bringing up the 2004 elections, you were bashing the president.

NoMyths, I don't even know what you're talking about when you say that we're destroying their country and selling it back to them a piece at a time. I'm assuming your talking about using Iraqi oil money to pay off reconstruction efforts. I would say if we wanted to make money on the deal, we did a pretty shitty job. We should have gone after the power plants, roads, dams, radio and television stations, etc. If what we're seeing holds steady, the actual war could be over in days... and it won't cost nearly as much as some of the estimates to rebuild.

Remember, the same people who said it will take billions and billions to rebuild Iraq are the same people who said the war would last months, would kill tens of thousands of our troops and hundreds of thousands of civilians, and lead to widespread acts of terror against the United States.

[NoMyths]

I hope you're right.

[CamEdwards]

me too

[Drake]

I still don't care what the government's motivation for getting into this war were. I support the liberation of Iraq because it is morally right (in my estimation), and because when I lay down to die, I don't want it said of my generation that we allowed the 21st century Pol Pot to reign unmolested.

[Ksyrup]

You know, I've seen the same isolationist arguments from liberals on 2 other boards I visit, and I find it all tremendously ironic.

To them, I say - Vote Pat Buchanan for Democrat President in 2004!

[BishopMVP]

Originally posted by NoMyths
Seeds of liberty -- what, by destroying their country and selling it back to them?
And for our history buffs (and our Frederick ones): the argument you're beginning to make is the exact argument we used to get involved in Vietnam. It's both amazing and worrisome that decades have gone by and yet an informed person ... could still make that argument as a reason to attack another country.

You seem to have missed that that argument has been proven right in Vietnam since we left.

Also, I agree with what Drake said, and he said it much more succinctly than I can.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Cam Edwards = Howard Beale ?

[MJ4H]

Originally posted by Drake
I still don't care what the government's motivation for getting into this war were. I support the liberation of Iraq because it is morally right

That's exactly what I think whenever an argument comes up about what this war is "about." I don't care what someone claims it is about, either some guy on FOFC or the president. I weigh all the pros and cons, even if they aren't what the war is claimed to be "about."

This war is just about oil. I think we slipped in the oil and accidentally freed the Iraqis. Darn we should have said that's what all this was "about" then it would be ok.

[CamEdwards]

I've been mad as hell and not taking it for quite some time, Jon

[lytic]

If you think this war is about Oil, than you are ignorant... and just go off what other people tell you.
Go do some research on what % of the oil that is imported comes from Iraq. In fact, the country we get the most oil from isn't even in the middle east!

Then again, if any of you watch South Park, you would know what this war is "about."

[MJ4H]

I hope you didnt interpret my post as saying I thought the war was for oil That comment was intended to be sarcastic. Maybe a failed attempt though.

[Radii]

that was a great south park episode. The Osama south park was a better "current events" related episode but still that was great

[TroyF]

Drake,

I agree 150% with what you said. I would have supported this war if it were Clinton's. I would have supported this war if it were about oil. I would support this war if it was just a means for the president to make money.

Sometimes people do good things for bad reasons. I believe Bush's were good reasons, but even I were to be proven wrong I think we did what we had to do.

At the end of the day, the Iraqi people will be free. The terror that they go through on a daily basis slow to a crawl. Two 14 year olds who six years from now marry and have daughter won't have to worry about her being gang raped in a prison if they say something bad about their leader.

I'm damned proud that in this case America was the police. I'm certainly happy I didn't have to wait for the UN or the French to do something about it.

TroyF

[EagleFan]

Did someone say Kirby Puckett?

I haven't seen so much flaming BS in one topic in quite a while. Panerd, please try to get some sort of clue. Yeah, this whole thing is about oil. You are so right, how foolish of everyone else to conned by the government into thinking it was about something more humanitarian. Of course, if you meant the reason the French didn't want this to happen was about oil, then you might be on to something.

You moan about the looting. It's called anarchy, that happens whenever any regime is overthrown. You claim to be a teacher, try looking it up. There is a momentary period of anarchy whenever any government is overthrown. It's the natural process, especially when one has been oppressing it's own people for so many years.

As far as the domestic issues are concerned, if parents learned to take responsibility for their own children there would be a lot fewer problems. Throwing money at it is a bandaid and not a solution.

[EagleFan]

dola: Well stated TroyF.

[Fidatelo]

Originally posted by The Afoci
Because if we didn't Europe would be Germany.

Umm, ya, the US was real quick to jump in to that war and help defend Europe

The US government helps where and when it benefits them, plain and simple. Are the Iraqi's better off without Saddam? Maybe, I don't know, hell, lets say 'probably'. But anyone who is so naive to think that America did this to liberate those people should PM me, cuz I have a shitload of stuff I want to sell them.

I'm still waiting for the day that America runs out of fresh water or lumber and decides to 'liberate' the oppressed Canadian people from the tyranical rule of Jean Cretien.

[CamEdwards]

Actually, the last poll I saw showed a clear majority of Canadians disapprove of Jean Cretien and his handling of Canada's position on the war.

So, whenever you're ready for regime change... just let us know.

Seriously, if you honestly think that getting rid of Saddam is only "probably" going to be better for the Iraqi people, then whatever you have to say on this war is probably going to be so biased that I would have trouble keeping a straight face while listening.

[ice4277]

I think most everybody in this thread is a little off base. There is no way this war is about oil; that is way off. And despite what people are now saying, they humanitarian side of this was a secondary concern, not the primary one. If it was the primary one, I could run off a list of about 20 countries that we need to go to next, but we never will. This war was about the idea of protecting ourselves, and making the world in general a safer place to live. I am not sold at all on the supposed links between Iraq and Al-Qaeda; I think we tend to simplify relations between people in the Middle East a little too much, and just assume that everybody who does not like us must be in on everything together. I don't think this is necessarily the case, but, you never know, and we probably won't know the answer to that one for a while, if ever. That being said, I supported the war because of the positive effects I feel it will have on the people of Iraq, and, hopefully, the stability of the Middle East in general. But I do not fool myself for believing we went into this war with these goals as our main concern.

[Fidatelo]

Originally posted by CamEdwards
Seriously, if you honestly think that getting rid of Saddam is only "probably" going to be better for the Iraqi people, then whatever you have to say on this war is probably going to be so biased that I would have trouble keeping a straight face while listening.

it will help them if someone just (or almost) as evil doesn't rise to power and take his place. We've all seen how well America does when it comes time to install governments in foreign countries, so I'm not convinced that these people are going to be guaranteed a better life just because Saddam is gone. That's why I say 'probably'.

As for the Cretien thing... I haven't seen many polls but the majority of people I've spoken with have thought he handled it pretty well (myself included). In fact I've even heard a lot of people make the comment that they don't like Cretien at all, but have to begrudgingly accept that he did a decent job in this situation. But if the polls speak different, that's cool, I wouldn't be adverse to Paul Martin leading us either

[Butter]

Originally posted by ice4277
And despite what people are now saying, they humanitarian side of this was a secondary concern, not the primary one. If it was the primary one, I could run off a list of about 20 countries that we need to go to next, but we never will. This war was about the idea of protecting ourselves...

BINGO!

Once all this patriotic stuff dies down, I'll be most interested to see what President Bush has to say about North Korea. If it's nothing, then I guess we know this whole weapons of mass destruction in the wrong hands stuff was a giant load of BS. If he does something about it, I guess we'll know that he is actually following through with a foreign policy, instead of applying it at will, which is typical of the US.

[panerd]

Originally posted by EagleFan
Did someone say Kirby Puckett?

I haven't seen so much flaming BS in one topic in quite a while. Panerd, please try to get some sort of clue...

As far as the domestic issues are concerned, if parents learned to take responsibility for their own children there would be a lot fewer problems. Throwing money at it is a bandaid and not a solution.

So I oppose American money going to what many people (who have a different opinion than you) feel to be an unecessary war and it is flaming? So your definition of flaming is "anything that disagrees with Eaglefan". Maybe I should have had a less assholeish tone to my orginal post, but the point wasn't to start a flame war it was to make the point that I would rather my tax dollars go to Americans than Iraqis. The other point was that I wasn't the least bit proud of the looting and destruction that the Iraqi people were doing to their own country. We are so proud of democracy and free enterpirse so what about the Iraqi shop owner whose store is being looted by a bunch of hooligans. Do you wish to make a guess about who is going to fit the bill for this? Look at the bottom of your paycheck.

Now as far a domestic issues go, I agree there is definitely a problem with parental responsability and maybe we shouldn't spend as much tax money on some of our government programs. But I have a novel idea, give me that money back. This is what Bush said his goal was when he ran for president. Now instead it goes to build another smart bomb.

I am sorry that most of you are conservatives and don't agree with me, but I would hardly call my own opinion flaming. It is a legitamate counterpoint to spending billions of dollars on one foreign country. (Which just happens to be in the middle east)

Oh and about your cute little Kirby Puckett statement. Stay away from the argument if you want, but don't loop me with Hornsmaniac and rexallic just because I don't share your opinion on the war. This topic is a hell of a lot more intellgent that the thread killer or the squid topics.

[The Afoci]

Originally posted by panerd
I am sorry that most of you are conservatives and don't agree with me, but I would hardly call my own opinion flaming. It is a legitamate counterpoint to spending billions of dollars on one foreign country. (Which just happens to be in the middle east)

I have a question, now that the war has taken place, what do you think we should do? Should we rebuild them, help them develop the oil fields and make some money that should turn them into a productive country(my opinion) or leave them to themselves and see who takes control?

[panerd]

Originally posted by The Afoci
I have a question, now that the war has taken place, what do you think we should do? Should we rebuild them, help them develop the oil fields and make some money that should turn them into a productive country(my opinion) or leave them to themselves and see who takes control?

Yeah, I would have to agree with you. I know that my main view of our government is selfish, but it is how I feel. So if they can replinish some of the costs of the war by rebuilding them fine.

My original point was that the news was showing how great it is that the Iraqi people were out looting and vandelizing statues and I thought it was disgusting. And by some fault of my own (talking down to everyone in my first post) and some fault of everyone else (not even understanding my points) this has turned into me wanting to send 95% of my paycheck to welfare.

[Ksyrup]

Originally posted by Butter_of_69
BINGO!

Once all this patriotic stuff dies down, I'll be most interested to see what President Bush has to say about North Korea. If it's nothing, then I guess we know this whole weapons of mass destruction in the wrong hands stuff was a giant load of BS. If he does something about it, I guess we'll know that he is actually following through with a foreign policy, instead of applying it at will, which is typical of the US.

Don't you think it is wise to deal with each situation as its own unique issue, rather than follow through on foreign policy with broad brush strokes? Iraq was a lot easier to deal with for the reasons we've just witnessed. Just because we used force there, doesn't mean we should also use force everywhere else we perceive a threat. And it certainly doesn't mean that failure to do so means we're not attempting to eliminate the threat by other means. You can't have it both ways - you can't argue we should never use force, then argue that because we used force in one place, we have to use it in every other instance.

I think that if Iraq was at the point that North Korea was at in terms of readiness to use nukes, we probably would not have gone in guns blazing. But we were able to head it off before it got that far. I have no problem with that. Just like I have no problem with dealing with the reality of the North Korea situation by addressing the issue in a different way. if need be.

[Drake]

Originally posted by panerd
This topic is a hell of a lot more intellgent than...the squid topic.

Watch it, now.

(Save the Colossal Squid.)