War in iraq

exodus

exodus

New Member
how can people be against this War?

Do the citizens of our country not trust our Intelligance organizations? If they confirm that Sadam has chemical weapons as well as delivery systems, not to metion his past history AND the fact that he is a know supporter for terrorism WHAT IS THE QUESTION HERE?

There's even some question if he has some type of nuclear device. How can we NOT attack?

Bush made a great comment in his speech last night that He'd rather fight with the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines and Coast Guard then Firefighters, Policemen and Doctors here in our own country.

I heard some of the teens in my youth group make comments like "the US is just being a big bully. there is no way we should go to war."

I guess I just don't understand this thinking...
 
pacifist..... and they like some of their parents may not like the idea of WAR or anything like that and they think it will hurt the economy... more than likely just a mindless mass though who oppose the war for no real grounds most people I have talked to dont know y they oppose it" i just dont like war" is all they end up saying.....
 
I asked my student what they thought about the war, and how they felt. Juniors and seniors, most of them were well-informed about the issue (wOOt! to Channel 1). Most of students approved the war, and understood the necessity to disarm Saddam now.

One cool thing that we saw in Channel One was the interview with a soldier inside an aircraft carrier.

He believed the President had the best intentions for Americans in his mind, and trusted his decisions. If the President decided for war, he would obey and gear up.

At this time, the interviewer asked "Even if this could cost your life?".

All the soldier replied was: "I swore to protect my country."

*teary eyed SuN sobs emotionally* As the students beg to "practice against terrorism" - aka CS time - during a test review...
 
I suppose most of the people I know who are against the war are the extreme pacifists or people who dont want to do anything that would cost them more money, profiteering, money for the war, and so on. Truth being there are lotsa greedy peoples.
 
This topic is moved. SO moved. Please post all future general discussion not related to Tribe of Judah and its Counter-Strike sub-chapter on the Christian Gamers Alliance shared General Discussion forum.
 
I think north Korea is a much bigger threat than Saddam. After we know that they hate us and we know they have nukes. Recently they even said that if the U.S. tried to dissarm them they would hit targets on the west coast.
 
Ok I'll keep this as short as I can but those who know when I try to keep posts short it doesn't happen. :) War is a bad horrible thing that even in todays highly advanced age of weaponry still costs many live and is a horrible horrible thing. This does not mean it is not a necessity though as even God told Israel to go to war at times.

The main thing I see from people who are against war is that they choose not to see that we live in freedom because countless times people have given their lives for it. To preserve freemdom those who wish to threaten it must be sought out and dealt with. This is the only way we have the freedom we live in today.

There's that old cliche about if we don't learn from history we're bound to repeat it, and without blowing this up too much, things were starting to move into pre-WW2 territory where the UN would pass resolution after resolution and not enforce any of them. The Leauge of Nations did the exact same thing against Hitler choosing to ignore the atrocities he commited against his own people and gave him whatever he wanted instead of making a stand when they could have. There's alot more historical similarities that justify the course of action our President has taken as being the right one.

I also believe quite strongly that our President is a man of God and that he has surrounded himself with at least a few others and that they seek God in their decisions. Bush really knows what he's doing and I believe that he's following God's will in doing so. Like he said last night we send our combat armies to fight now so that we don't have to fight in our streets with armies of policmen, doctors, and firefighters.

As far as North Korea goes that is a situation that will have to diffused through diplomacy if at all possible. This is because of their incredibly fragile position with South Korea, Japan, and China. Definitly agreed that it's a major situation but one that can't be dealt with through force at this time, especially now that they've got nuclear capabilities.

-Trevor
-amusedtoe
 
The problem is that WE KNOW NORTH korea has them, they flaunt it. They do not want to attack or us to attack them what they really want is for our santicitions to be lifted off of them and they think this is a way for that to happen
 
Firstly, I support the current War, although I'll be the first to admit that I don't like how we got here, and I'm not sure I'll like where we end up after the conflict.

THAT said, I'll try and sum up the main objections I hear against the war, when I discuss the matter with friends here in the UK.

1. There is no trust in the altruism of America. People find it entirely possible that America would foment this whole situation merely for the economic gain, or in order to mask problems back home under the cover of sabre rattling and flag waving.

2. There has been no process. It is felt that there is nothing that Iraq could have done to forestall this problem - save to surrender its leader into US custody. This is not a situation ANY sovereign nation should be placed in.

3. There has been insufficent cause given. Where cause HAS been given, it has later been found to be unprovable or else actually factually incorrect. There is still no proof that Iraq maintains WoMD. There is still no proof that Iraq is linked to Al Qaeda - in fact Saddam Hussein is on Bin Ladens death list.

4. There has been casual disregard of the international community as a whole, the alliances of the UN and NATO in specific and the country of France in particular.

5. There is no mandate for war, there is also no popular belief that war is just - even in the countries supporting America.

6. This war is counter to all peaceful intentions. It will fragment the UN, it will set the major powers at each others throats. It will destablise the Middle East. It will spawn a whole new generation of motivated terrorists.


Now, I don't happen to agree with the statements above - but I'm willing to admit that all of them hold SOME truth.
 
"America would foment this whole situation merely for the economic gain..."

I find that paticular argument "it's all about the oil!" to be rather ridculous, as we will be wasting billions of dollars to get saddam's oil when I would just be easier to go and drill in alaska. In fact, I believe the nations that are against the war are actually doing so because of their economic relations to the current Iraq.
 
Not to mention the fact that it'd probably take 10 years to put the Iraqi oil industry back on its feet.

10 years of investment and infrastructure growth.

Eon
 
On the note that "North Korea is a much bigger threat:"

Do you think our leaders are incapable of multitasking? I'm sure steps are being taken on that matter, even if they aren't being publicized like the war in Iraq is. Or, maybe it's better that we don't know what's going on at this time.
 
In response to Eon the US has been "in process" through the UN for over a decade never taking action when the time was appropriate because they wouldn't back us. The fact that he has almost gone to Bosnian extents in racial persecution of his own people is just one of the many things that is widely ignored but more then justifies war. NATO has no power in anything by the way, and the UN has become Leaugue of Nations II: The Sequel even bigger and more ineffective. There has been something like 11 resolutions passed against Iraq in the past decade and none of them were even close to carried out. Ya know it does really bother me that the British are giving no support whatsoever to Tony Blair. One of the few European leaders who will acctually take a stand once in a while and doesn't shrink away from conflict because they openly exchange weapons for oil(ala France), or are owed money (ala Russia). The UN still has it's place but there's a problem when you have half the security council made up of countries smaller then Vermont. On North Korea again it's obviously being worked on, but because of the fragile geographical position of our allies we would be foolish to put them at any greater risk. I also doubt anyone's looking to have something that'll be a bigger disaster then the Korean War.

-Trevor
-amusedtoe
 
Well I'm not surprised that most people here are for war, I am a little disheartened that nobody is against it though. I am against the war in Iraq. I am not an "extreme pacifist", and neither are most of the 49% of the people in this country who are against it. I will admit that Saddam more than likely has some deadly chemical weapons. He is however many years away from nuclear capability. Bush has managed to convice this country that Saddam has it in for us and is going to attack our babies here on American soil. The fact is Saddam Hussein has NO real history of aggression towards the United States. He isn't in any way connected to 9/11 or Al Quaida. I disapprove of Bush using scare tactics to goad people into supporting his war.

Now there is the fact that he is a mean and nasty dictator with a bad past. That is true, but if these are the only criteria for making war, then we will be engaging many more countries before we finish. Pakistan, Iran, China, North Korea, many African countries, Vietnam, Libya... The list of countries under the control of tyrants goes on.

Most of the country of Iraq is quite improverished. Many embargoes have left the common people without enough food and medicine. The idea that we are going to be shooting cruise missiles into these neighborhoods, killing people, families who are totally innocent. We are the most powerful military force in the world, and we are making war on a country that cant even feed itself. To the rest of the world this seems cruel and will further the anti American sentiment througout the world.

Saddam lives in lavish luxury. Statues and posters honoring him are all over the country. He has enormous wealth and prestiege in his country, and lives in grand palaces. Were he to strike the United States as Bush would have you believe he would surely be signing his death warrant. He isn't stupid, he knows he would never beat us in a war. Why would he give up everything just to kill a few Americans? However, if we make war on him before he has done anything to us then he is finished anyway. He will fight like a cat cornered in an ally with nothing to lose. We are putting our allies in the region in danger by making war on him. He has already launched missiles into Kuwait, a country which he hadn't attacked since the Gulf war. That was since Wednesday when we started bombing him. There is concern that he will attack Isreal as well, which I feel he certainly would not have done if we didn't attack him.

You talk about the UN and how if we dont back up the resolution then its useless. What about making war in violation of the UN, as we are doing? Doesn't that make it more useless?
 
well spoken first response toe.

If you were always this eloquent I may just have to fall in love with you.

biggrin.gif


two quotes to throw in the mix here...

"All that is needed for the forces of evil to triumph is for enough good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke

"One ought never to turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half." - Sir Winston Churchill
 
Ok I've got some quotes too:
"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?
Mahatma Gandhi, "Non-Violence in Peace and War""

"Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary.
Mahatma Gandhi, 'Satyagraha Leaflet No. 13,' May 3, 1919"

"Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.
Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)"

"One day President Roosevelt told me that he was asking publicly for suggestions about what the war should be called. I said at once 'The Unnecessary War'.
Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965), Second World War (1948)"

" Nonviolence is the greatest force at the disposal of mankind. It is mightier than the mightiest weapon of destruction devised by the ingenuity of man.

- Gandhi"
 
Well, if you'd read my post properly you'd know I don't actually support the arguments I gave, I merely acknowledge the shadow of truth in them.

And as for the Brits not supporting Blair - well, 55% of us do, which is only 12% less than the percentage of Americans that support Bush.

To reiterate, I don't disagree with what is being done, but I do feel it could have been handled better. There have been very mixed messages coming out of the US administration over the course of the march to war. Some of them have been moderate and diplomatic, and some of them have been out and out arrogance and sabre rattling.


Most of the world, for example, thinks well of Colin Powell, but few people rate Rumsfeld.

Eon
 
Well my long posts are always very lovely written Ex. ;-)

Well as far as shooting cruise missles into neighboorhoods the blame for that lies mostly on Saddam. He uses his people as human sheilds and puts critical defenses and various buildings in highly populated areas. These missles are accurate within 3 meteres I believe and are reportedly able to hit any place on any building. The US is really doing everything it can to convice the Iraqis to surrender (dropped like 17 million leaflets about it, have had agents paying commanders to sign agreements to surrender so they won't be attacked, etc) so we don't have to fight till we get to the most core loyalists.

In reality you don't have to have UN approval for war. We didn't in Bosnia, and there are many more countries out there who have gone to war without it. Going through the UN is simply "the proper channels" diplomaticly. Having UN approval would just mean that the whole world pretty much is backing us. That quote from Churchill, Ex used is really spot on I think as everyone's too concerned with keeping peace in the short term as a threat to peace is looming in front of them. Has anyone also noticed that one the human rights council in the UN is a nation that in the past decade was like commiting genocide against itself(crud can't remember whch one it was, was an African one like Ethiopia or some such)?

Ok so he's not a huge threat to us at the moment, but just the missles he has in violation of UN ordinances of range make him a threat. Once again not to us but to the whole middle east, i.e Jordan, Kuwait, Irael, Egypt, Iran(someone he's threatened for many years), etc. I do find those quotes from Churchill rather interesting. Especially seeing as without WW2 all of Europe would be speaking German and that includes the English. Of course in alot of ways they're true as there were many timesthat Hitler couldv'e been stopped if anyone had taken a stop against him in the many years before hand. Once again you gotta learn from history lest you repeat it.

Not really sure what the message of this is but it's funny and I got linked to it as I was typing this. http://parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk/~jmr/saddam.swf It's perfectly good clean fun unless I missed something.

-Trevor
-amusedtoe
 
"He isn't in any way connected to 9/11 or Al Quaida."

And just how do you know that?

"I disapprove of Bush using scare tactics to goad people into supporting his war. "

It's OUR war pal. And what "scare" tactics is he using?
 
It's all moot at this point anyway, let it blow over. Soon, Saddam and his regime will be dead and gone, Iraq will be a better place, the world will be a better place, oil prices will drop, and full attention can be given to North Korea. Hey, if we're lucky, the French may even quiet down. The truth of it is, right or wrong, we're committed now, and that's good. Now we just have to get this small problem over with so we can turn our attention to other things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top