| Should the United States do active world policing ? |
| Yes |
|
27% |
[ 5 ] |
| No |
|
72% |
[ 13 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 18 |
|
| Author |
Message |
teampo
Lifeless Raider
Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 2352
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:44 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
At least the US can back up what it says.
I cant say the same for the UN, who are always making threats, condeming acts, yet not doing anything about it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
WonkasWilly
Adept Poster
Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 71
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 9:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bush didn't go into Iraq for it's oil, or to fight another religion. Bush went into Iraq to get rid of Saddam because Saddam threatened his dad. Bush Sr. started the war, Bush Jr. wants to finnish it. If Bush had went into Iraw for the oil, then gas prices wouldn't have risen 50 cents since before the war. If Bush was in Iraq to fight the Muslim's religion, he would have turned Iraq and the rest of the middle east into a parking lot.
Seriously, how can you be ignorant enough to even suggest this is a religious war for Bush? Bush has good relations with Israel, which is a Jewish country, not Christian.
This is a war that we cannot win, Bush started it again because it's what his dad was starting and now it's going to be just like Vietnam, and just like Korea. We aren't prepared to go into another country and fight people who are willing to drive a car into a camp and set off a car bomb just to kill a few Americans, we will end up leaving the war when Bush is out of office.
I will agree that Bush is one of the worst things to happen to the US Administration and maybe even the contemporary world. In my opinion he is taking his power and abusing it like a schoolgirl in his own self-interest.
P.S. SolidRaven, I'm sorry to single you out with the whole "religious war" and "in it for the oil" theories, but seriously, if you look at things you'll notice that those theories aren't as solid as people make them out to be.
_________________
[img:6c6842955e]http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/9214/sufi26mj.gif[/img:6c6842955e] |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
LP-SolidRaven
Dictator of the Dump
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 7030
Location: The cheese is made out of moon
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| teampo wrote: | At least the US can back up what it says.
I cant say the same for the UN, who are always making threats, condeming acts, yet not doing anything about it. |
The UN works on smaller scale 
Look a bit around, in the bigest warzone's you will always find UN troops.
But in Iraq it was difrent, because bush is fighting for Oil in iraq.
_________________
| Quote: |
<bart416> I just realized something
<bart416> we celebrate the fact that this piece of rock made one rotation around a glowing ball of plasma that is kept together due to its own gravity well
<njsg> HAPPY NEW YEAR
<Easter> ^^
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
kenoodo
Lifeless Person
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 1088
Location: MengDai
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| kazunoben wrote: | | kenoodo wrote: | To abstract the general public's attention from 911 and for business revival, it is a nice choice to go outside USA and, as you know, the chance came. He just did it and it did help.
|
Are you being sarcastic? Or are you seriously suggesting that invading Afghanistan and Iraq were good "distractions"? I was hesitant about Afghanistan, but believe the US ultimately did something valuable there. In Iraq, the stated reasons for war were shaky, but I will never believe that it was done with the justifaction of being a good distraction.
A lot of people call Bush "evil", but I seriously doubt that his intentions are malicious in nature. His evil lies in the fact that he is a misguided zealot. Far from being a distraction, I believe that he really was spurred by the 9/11 attacks into thinking the US not only should hunt down terrorists abroad, but also to play more of a policing role in the world. He surely believes our system of life is the best, and that all other nations should have the "privilege" of living like we do.
The problem is that the U.N. hasn't shown itself capable of policing the world.. There are those who expect the US to do so, and those who resent when the US does so. As long as we live in the current hegemony, those who resent it will always speak loudly against the US and against any policing it does. Whether a stronger China, or a unified Europe would change this is yet to be seen. |
I agree that the U.N. is losing its power these years, and more and more countries expecting the US would be the do something to keep in world running in the proper way.
I don't think we are talking if the US has the right to do the world police, or that is right or wrong to do so. It did and does so, I mean just say out what I am feeling and thinking about this problem, that's all.
Maybe as kazunoben said, a stronger power would present itself and lead the world. But I can see no evidence showing that is happening, China has too much problems of its own on the developing affairs, and with its one party in power police, it is not easy to solve that much corruption game and that kind of matters. There would no any other country would replace the US to do the world police job for hundred years long. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
kenoodo
Lifeless Person
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 1088
Location: MengDai
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 6:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SolidRaven wrote: | | teampo wrote: | At least the US can back up what it says.
I cant say the same for the UN, who are always making threats, condeming acts, yet not doing anything about it. |
The UN works on smaller scale
Look a bit around, in the bigest warzone's you will always find UN troops.
But in Iraq it was difrent, because bush is fighting for Oil in iraq. |
Yes, you are right. The UN does less job, I personally think that because the UN needs money, and all it does not make any money, but spend money. The USA has money to act when she feels it is need to do.
But dose it is worth to fight for the Oil that costing so many lives? |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
WonkasWilly
Adept Poster
Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 71
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How many times do you need to be told that we're not fighting for their damn oil. Bush is fighting a war his father started, nothing more. Gas prices haven't gotten lower, and Bush's riches haven't increased in proportion. Oil has nothing to do with it. The fact of the matter is that Saddam took things to a personal level when he threatened Bush Sr.'s life. Gas prices have been raised 50 cents since the war started. This isn't about oil.
Sure, we went and stopped Saddam from burning all their oil but you need to use your brain instead of spreading this liberal nonsense. Since World War One, the treaties stated that all countries invaded must be rebuilt, and it will be much easier to help them rebuild their country if they have a wide margin of income. Oil is high in demand, therefore high in price. This means the new Iraq will be rich after they rebuild their country. This is why we stopped them from basically burning money. Now unless you're going to make valid points about why we are fighting, just be quiet. Oil isn't what we're fighting for, it's the Bush families' personal interests.
_________________
[img:6c6842955e]http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/9214/sufi26mj.gif[/img:6c6842955e] |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
commonsense
Penguin Army Publishing
Joined: 09 Nov 2004
Posts: 2039
Location: between time and timbuktu
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 3:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SolidRaven wrote: | Bush is the worst thing that has happened to the world after Hitler & Iran i gues. But thats not really the point here, or is it?
Bush is a fundamentalistic bitch in my opinion.
He says stuff like: "God Bless America"
Why is that bad:
-Not everybody even believes in religion
-Not everybody in the world believes in the same religion (if they believe a religion )
-Dicators say such stuff to
-He is annoying everybody on the world with his endless patriotism, if the europeans wouldn't have gone to America in the first place it would propably still be filled with Native Americans (what wouldn't be so bad from some points of view)
And i can go on for a while bashing 'mr. bush' |
I want to start off by saying i do not like george bush i think he is an idiot and should never have become presiden and only became president because the american people as a whole are prettyl lacking in sense.
But after i say that i also would like to say to call him an idito is one thing but to call him a fundamentalist just shows ignorance of the situation. For one Bush does not say God Bless America, thats a prejudice set by political satirists. And he doesnt create policy based on fundamentalist ideals he does it based on what he thinks is best for the country(remember i had said he was an idiot so he probally isnt a good judge on whats best) and his image.
As for the original issue I do think the USA have a responsibility to police the world, this may seem like a supremist view but is not. Purely economicly the US has a greater GDP the the entire EU and about 25%-1/3 of the entire world. Pretty much every country imports or exports to or from the US.
Also the US being the first powerful democracy and having to deal with 40 years of fighting communism world wide has sort of grown into the position of policing the entire world. And I dont think this is a bad thing because without the USs help the iraqi and afghani people would still be under a cruel dictatorship and all the jews would be wiped out, not to mention the entire world would be under a corrupt communist dictatorship.
Also I would like to point out that the US does not stay in a country as soon as a stable government is established they leave or stay to provide support. and that they are trying to provide a government by the people.
Just a short little point that the supposedly most hated country ,the USA, is the reason everyone has the right to speech and that the country,russia, that tried to suppress everyone and take away all forms of freedom is not as hated. Why in the world is this?
And fo my final point, this is based on first hand experience, the iraqi people are happy that the US is there. And that those whom the US are fighting are terrorists and fanatics.
mu second final point is about israel, probally the second target on the terrorist most hated list, they have never gone on the offense they have given the palestinians the gaza strip and the west bank and the hamas led palestinians still wont agree to peace until israel is wiped out so why does hamas have a better reputation then the country that is trying to create peace.
And a point that everyone should know, the US is the largest financer of the UN and they are beginning to lose faith in the UN because all they can do is pass resolutions but not act and the US believes it is more efficient in acting on its own than under the flag of the UN.
"I hate police because they can fine me but without peace id probally get shot, so if the US want to be the world police and as i can see no one else is stepping up I say let them be the police cause i dont want to be shot"
P.S. in relation to the religious issues. The war could not have been on a religious issue because true islam would not condone blowing ones self up to get 40 virgins, or to fight those of a different sect of your religion. Also about Iran this country is not a truely islamic theocracy, its a fundamentalist version in which the religious leaders who happen to be the secular leaders use bits and pieces of al' quran in order to justify their actions and i am disgusted that people like those ruling iran and the hamas give such a bad name to such a beautiful culture and religion.
_________________
[img:764bf48b96]http://penguinarmy.org/blueleetpengborder.gif[/img:764bf48b96]
Last edited by commonsense on Sun Feb 19, 2006 9:16 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
WonkasWilly
Adept Poster
Joined: 15 Jan 2006
Posts: 71
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| commonsense wrote: | | I want to start off by saying i do not like george bush i think he is an idiot and should never have become presiden and only became president because the american people as a whole are prettyl lacking in sense. |
Thats pretty ignorant, not everyone voted for him. In fact, versus Al Gore, Al Gore won the popularity vote. Bush had the connections so Bush won it's that simple. If you can't accept that then you're pretty lacking of sense.
| commonsense wrote: | | But after i say that i also would like to say to call him an idito is one thing but to call him a fundamentalist just shows ignorance of the situation. For one Bush does not say God Bless America, thats a prejudice set by political satirists. And he doesnt create policy based on fundamentalist ideals he does it based on what he thinks is best for the country(remember i had said he was an idiot so he probally isnt a good judge on whats best) and his image. |
That and his own self interests.
| commonsense wrote: | As for the original issue I do think the USA have a responsibility to police the world, this may seem like a supremist view but is not. Purely economicly the US has a greater GDP the the entire EU and about 25%-1/3 of the entire world. Pretty much every country imports or exports to or from the US.
Also the US being the first powerful democracy and having to deal with 40 years of fighting communism world wide has sort of grown into the position of policing the entire world. And I dont think this is a bad thing because without the USs help the iraqi and afghani people would still be under a cruel dictatorship and all the jews would be wiped out, not to mention the entire world would be under a corrupt communist dictatorship. |
I can see where you're going with the history, but where does our economy come into play with militarily policing the world?
| commonsense wrote: |
Also I would like to point out that the US does not stay in a country as soon as a stable government is established they leave or stay to provide support. and that they are trying to provide a government by the people.
Just a short little point that the supposedly most hated country ,the USA, is the reason everyone has the right to speech and that the country,russia, that tried to suppress everyone and take away all forms of freedom is not as hated. Why in the world is this?
And fo my final point, this is based on first hand experience, the iraqi people are happy that the US is there. And that those whom the US are fighting are terrorists and fanatics. |
Not everyone in the middle east is happy with US presence. The palestinians overwhelmingly elected a terrorist organization to lead their government, so we really have no idea of how some of these people feel about the presence of the US.
| commonsense wrote: |
mu second final point is about israel, probally the second target on the terrorist most hated list, they have never gone on the offense they have given the palestinians the gaza strip and the west bank and the hamas led palestinians still wont agree to peace until israel is wiped out so why does hamas have a better reputation then the country that is trying to create peace.
|
They were in the land first. Wouldn't you be upset if your government said you had to share your house with another person or group of people indefinately? We have no idea how they feel so we don't have the right to police them.
And a point that everyone should know, the US is the largest financer of the UN and they are beginning to lose faith in the UN because all they can do is pass resolutions but not act and the US believes it is more efficient in acting on its own than under the flag of the UN.
"I hate police because they can fine me but without peace id probally get shot, so if the US want to be the world police and as i can see no one else is stepping up I say let them be the police cause i dont want to be shot"[/quote]
_________________
[img:6c6842955e]http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/9214/sufi26mj.gif[/img:6c6842955e] |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
memoryproblems
Liberal Progressive
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 2647
Location: Anartica
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Bush didn't go into Iraq for it's oil, or to fight another religion. Bush went into Iraq to get rid of Saddam because Saddam threatened his dad. Bush Sr. started the war, Bush Jr. wants to finnish it. If Bush had went into Iraw for the oil, then gas prices wouldn't have risen 50 cents since before the war. If Bush was in Iraq to fight the Muslim's religion, he would have turned Iraq and the rest of the middle east into a parking lot.
Seriously, how can you be ignorant enough to even suggest this is a religious war for Bush? Bush has good relations with Israel, which is a Jewish country, not Christian.
This is a war that we cannot win, Bush started it again because it's what his dad was starting and now it's going to be just like Vietnam, and just like Korea. We aren't prepared to go into another country and fight people who are willing to drive a car into a camp and set off a car bomb just to kill a few Americans, we will end up leaving the war when Bush is out of office.
I will agree that Bush is one of the worst things to happen to the US Administration and maybe even the contemporary world. In my opinion he is taking his power and abusing it like a schoolgirl in his own self-interest.
P.S. SolidRaven, I'm sorry to single you out with the whole "religious war" and "in it for the oil" theories, but seriously, if you look at things you'll notice that those theories aren't as solid as people make them out to be. |
finishing up old rivalries still isn't a very solid justifacation for a war, in my opinion. Besides, its not Bushes fault the oil went up, nor would it be his fault if it had wen't down. The whole deal was caused by the greedy managerrs of companies such as Exxon-Mobil, a company that i might add netted 36 billion in profits in 2005.
| Quote: | I agree that the U.N. is losing its power these years, and more and more countries expecting the US would be the do something to keep in world running in the proper way.
I don't think we are talking if the US has the right to do the world police, or that is right or wrong to do so. It did and does so, I mean just say out what I am feeling and thinking about this problem, that's all.
|
Maybe as kazunoben said, a stronger power would present itself and lead the world. But I can see no evidence showing that is happening, China has too much problems of its own on the developing affairs, and with its one party in power police, it is not easy to solve that much corruption game and that kind of matters. There would no any other country would replace the US to do the world police job for hundred years long.[/quote]
The whole thing is just that George W. Bush thinks that he knows what is best, which i'm sure is far from the truth, considering that his IQ is somewhere in the 90's.(If you didn't know, thats low). If Bush would just listen to other, smarter, more logical people, this war wouldn't have occured, America would have been in better condition.
George W. Bush and his tyrant-like ruling style will always be a scar on america. even if people don't realize, he's done little else than screwing up America.
_________________
-memoryproblems- supporter of truth at frozenglaze.com
[img:90758e47ae]http://feeds.feedburner.com/frozenglaze.2.gif[/img:90758e47ae]
KingShady - Superb Eminem Fansite |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
commonsense
Penguin Army Publishing
Joined: 09 Nov 2004
Posts: 2039
Location: between time and timbuktu
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2006 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| WonkasWilly wrote: | | commonsense wrote: | | I want to start off by saying i do not like george bush i think he is an idiot and should never have become presiden and only became president because the american people as a whole are prettyl lacking in sense. |
Thats pretty ignorant, not everyone voted for him. In fact, versus Al Gore, Al Gore won the popularity vote. Bush had the connections so Bush won it's that simple. If you can't accept that then you're pretty lacking of sense.
|
That is my point. Bush didnt win on ability he won because hes rich and his dad was the president and while everyone didnt vote for him the majority of states wanted him twice but i really cant blame the american people because bush is better than a guy who thinks he invented the internet or a guy as slippery as a fish. So at least we know what bush wants and he doesnt hide it.
| WonkasWilly wrote: |
| commonsense wrote: | As for the original issue I do think the USA have a responsibility to police the world, this may seem like a supremist view but is not. Purely economicly the US has a greater GDP the the entire EU and about 25%-1/3 of the entire world. Pretty much every country imports or exports to or from the US.
Also the US being the first powerful democracy and having to deal with 40 years of fighting communism world wide has sort of grown into the position of policing the entire world. And I dont think this is a bad thing because without the USs help the iraqi and afghani people would still be under a cruel dictatorship and all the jews would be wiped out, not to mention the entire world would be under a corrupt communist dictatorship. |
I can see where you're going with the history, but where does our economy come into play with militarily policing the world? |
While i dont like the fact of this it is reality, because money is so intertwined with the worlds stability and the US has such a large percentage of the worlds economy, Every threat to the stability of the world, is a threat to the stability of the US.
| WonkasWilly wrote: |
| commonsense wrote: |
Also I would like to point out that the US does not stay in a country as soon as a stable government is established they leave or stay to provide support. and that they are trying to provide a government by the people.
Just a short little point that the supposedly most hated country ,the USA, is the reason everyone has the right to speech and that the country,russia, that tried to suppress everyone and take away all forms of freedom is not as hated. Why in the world is this?
And fo my final point, this is based on first hand experience, the iraqi people are happy that the US is there. And that those whom the US are fighting are terrorists and fanatics. |
Not everyone in the middle east is happy with US presence. The palestinians overwhelmingly elected a terrorist organization to lead their government, so we really have no idea of how some of these people feel about the presence of the US.
| commonsense wrote: |
mu second final point is about israel, probally the second target on the terrorist most hated list, they have never gone on the offense they have given the palestinians the gaza strip and the west bank and the hamas led palestinians still wont agree to peace until israel is wiped out so why does hamas have a better reputation then the country that is trying to create peace.
|
They were in the land first. Wouldn't you be upset if your government said you had to share your house with another person or group of people indefinately? We have no idea how they feel so we don't have the right to police them.
|
Okay the palestinians hate the supposed Israeli occupation of their land and they dont recognize that israel is an actual country. I just want to say that the land is the size of new jersey and that when the israeli states were created ,by the United Nations i might add, there was also an arab state created also. This land was not a palestinian soveirgn nation it was a piece of the decaying ottoman empire. This land was conquered by the british and the ottoman empire was defeated fairly. After the empire fell someone had to establish a new government in the area that had been under the empires control. In the area of israel an arab and israel state was created, but the arabs were not happy and this anger eventually led them to attack israel and they lost. And the Israelis have given back all the land that they had taken in these confrontations. Also the Israeli government would be happy to include the arabs into Israel but how can you let someone be part of your country if they have pledged your destruction. And the palestinians are basically living in refugee camps because hamas, plo and every other head organization has spent to much trying to destroy israel and not enough time working with the israelites to establish a working economy and government.
Also their isnt a mid eastern country that has a non-extremist government like saudi arabia, UAE, Qatar, or pretty much every country besides iran and palestine that hates the US. It is organizations like al quaeda,etc that hate the US and it is news organizations like CNN and BBC that focus on
these terrorists opinion but not on the majority of Arabs in the mid-East.
IN REPLY TO MEMORYPROBLEM: I have to say that i think the US entering the middle-east militaristically was inevitable because the only threat to world peace of today are the terrorists of the middle easte and the extremist corrupt dictatorships. Also i dont think you can downplay 9/11 even if you dont think thats why bush went in I firmly believe that because bush is a texan hes just like most texans if you encroach upon our land and punch us we will take you out, texans are too proud to turn the other cheek. And if you kill thousands of innocent hard working people it would be a disgrace to them and their families if you let those at fault to go free. In the world terrorism is the last threat to peace(at least no more violence) and the largest percentage of terrorism is in the middle east so that is where you send the army.
_________________
[img:764bf48b96]http://penguinarmy.org/blueleetpengborder.gif[/img:764bf48b96] |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
thunderboltz
Hear the thunder!
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 1809
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| WonkasWilly wrote: | | Bush didn't go into Iraq for it's oil, or to fight another religion. Bush went into Iraq to get rid of Saddam because Saddam threatened his dad. Bush Sr. started the war, Bush Jr. wants to finnish it. If Bush had went into Iraw for the oil, then gas prices wouldn't have risen 50 cents since before the war. If Bush was in Iraq to fight the Muslim's religion, he would have turned Iraq and the rest of the middle east into a parking lot. |
That only makes him look even worse. What you are saying there, is that he started the war, disrupting the peace in the entire world, and made almost the whole world to hate the middle east, because he wanted to take revenge? Nice president you got there. 
And oh..by the way, do you know that Condoleeza Rice has her own Oil company?
| commonsense wrote: | | As for the original issue I do think the USA have a responsibility to police the world, this may seem like a supremist view but is not. Purely economicly the US has a greater GDP the the entire EU and about 25%-1/3 of the entire world. Pretty much every country imports or exports to or from the US. |
That is indeed a supremacist view. Why should an economical giant police the whole world? They have no right to. This is the age of democracy. While the US represents only a small fraction of the worlds population (which, according to wikipedia, is 4% of the world's population - when China represents 20% and India 17%), they have NO right to police the world, on whatever grounds.
If the economical powers were given the right to control the world, how different are we from the yester-years?
| commonsense wrote: | | And fo my final point, this is based on first hand experience, the iraqi people are happy that the US is there. And that those whom the US are fighting are terrorists and fanatics. |
Ya, ya. They are happy that their brothers and sisters were killed and abused by the US soldiers. They are happy that they are all living in a battle field. They are happy knowing that they might get killed any day. They are happy that they cant get out of their house without any assurance that they will ever return.
And they are most happy that the US is not stopping by just helping the Afghanis and Iraqis, but is now moving on to Iran and Israel. Yay! They couldn't be happier.
_________________
LiVinG iN a DemOcraTicalLy eleCtEd CoMmunIsT stAtE |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
commonsense
Penguin Army Publishing
Joined: 09 Nov 2004
Posts: 2039
Location: between time and timbuktu
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| thunderboltz wrote: | | WonkasWilly wrote: | | Bush didn't go into Iraq for it's oil, or to fight another religion. Bush went into Iraq to get rid of Saddam because Saddam threatened his dad. Bush Sr. started the war, Bush Jr. wants to finnish it. If Bush had went into Iraw for the oil, then gas prices wouldn't have risen 50 cents since before the war. If Bush was in Iraq to fight the Muslim's religion, he would have turned Iraq and the rest of the middle east into a parking lot. |
That only makes him look even worse. What you are saying there, is that he started the war, disrupting the peace in the entire world, and made almost the whole world to hate the middle east, because he wanted to take revenge? Nice president you got there.
And oh..by the way, do you know that Condoleeza Rice has her own Oil company?
| commonsense wrote: | | As for the original issue I do think the USA have a responsibility to police the world, this may seem like a supremist view but is not. Purely economicly the US has a greater GDP the the entire EU and about 25%-1/3 of the entire world. Pretty much every country imports or exports to or from the US. |
That is indeed a supremacist view. Why should an economical giant police the whole world? They have no right to. This is the age of democracy. While the US represents only a small fraction of the worlds population (which, according to wikipedia, is 4% of the world's population - when China represents 20% and India 17%), they have NO right to police the world, on whatever grounds.
If the economical powers were given the right to control the world, how different are we from the yester-years?
| commonsense wrote: | | And fo my final point, this is based on first hand experience, the iraqi people are happy that the US is there. And that those whom the US are fighting are terrorists and fanatics. |
Ya, ya. They are happy that their brothers and sisters were killed and abused by the US soldiers. They are happy that they are all living in a battle field. They are happy knowing that they might get killed any day. They are happy that they cant get out of their house without any assurance that they will ever return.
And they are most happy that the US is not stopping by just helping the Afghanis and Iraqis, but is now moving on to Iran and Israel. Yay! They couldn't be happier. |
Do you realize that the iraqi people were scared to go out of their houses before the US entered their country they were not happy and the government was corrupt, of course who am i to say that a government that destroys ecosystems to punish their people or freely kidnaps and rapes girls right out of the school yard is corrupt.
Also While i dont condone the actions of the soldiers who abuse prisoners, i do also remind you that they are prisoners of war not innocent by standers and these abusive soldiers have been at war for months to years and have seen many of their friends killed, I am surprised that all they have done are fraternity like pranks.
As for the USA moving into Iran and Israel, One they arent moving into israel the israelites can handle themselves and have no remorse when it comes to dealing with threats to their soveirgnity, secondly I dislike theocracies and i really hate fundamentalist theocracies because most of their policies are not founded on reason but on pieces of scripture read to suit whatever need the leader wishes.
Also I think the every day people of iran,iraq, afghanist and palestine should put a little more thought into who they let lead them. I also think the US should take out known terrorists secretly so it looks like an accident and not the US. Also the US should fight terrorists on a political level instead of just using force. Subtlely influence the iranian people to demand a seperation between church and state, democracy stuff like that.
Just a sidenote I do not think a democracy is foolproof because it is led by men(and women) but i do think it is the most unsusceptable to corruption, Though i also think monarchies and dictatorships as seen with dubai, jordan or denmark when the leader is not corrupt and respects their people are more efficient than a democracy.
_________________
[img:764bf48b96]http://penguinarmy.org/blueleetpengborder.gif[/img:764bf48b96] |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
hossam1987
Novice Poster
Joined: 20 Feb 2006
Posts: 15
Location: Cairo , Egypt
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In my own opinion , I don't think that America should do it .
Sorry .
But , did america bring to the world the peace they calimed to earn , don't think so .
America only is going through her war against terrorism as a try to protect israel from any possible danger .
They attacked afghanastan because ben laden and him damaging the two long towers in new york , i don't remeber there name .
So after going into afghanastan and damaging it , killing innocent people , they didn't found ben laden there , so why are they still there .
They are afraid of the returnof the islamic public again .
They want the resources .
That's one country down.
The next
Iraq
Sadam Hussein and the destructive weapons .
America alos enetered Iraq to protect israel from any possible attack from iraq .
they use sadam as a simbol that they want to destroy him to give iraq people freedom
A good excuse
After falling of sadam , america's army still there using the fuel and taking the resources of the country.
did you know that iraq have been bombed more than germany in the second world war and they will need about 1000 millions dollar and about 50 years to return it as it was , it was such a beatufile country full of palaces and musuems .
Well done america 
and now who is next iran or syria , who is more danger on israel , the answer of this question in the next war ..
Sorry for posting too long .
_________________
In the name of Allah , The Benificant , THe most Merciful . |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
commonsense
Penguin Army Publishing
Joined: 09 Nov 2004
Posts: 2039
Location: between time and timbuktu
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Okay hossam i am going to remind you that afghanistan was run by the taliban a known terrorist state, and they did help in the bombing of the two long towers, name twin towers, and thousands of innocent people were murdered in them.
The war in Iraq is not helping the US gas prices have gone up alot since the war began, and the US has siezed the oil fields because terrorists have been trying to burn the oil and as you know oil is pretty much money. When reconstructing a country it makes sense to save the coutries main source of income. This war has cost way more than the value of all the oil in iraq.
Would you rather iraq have beautiful palaces and museums or a free and happy people.
_________________
[img:764bf48b96]http://penguinarmy.org/blueleetpengborder.gif[/img:764bf48b96] |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Destructer
Novice Poster
Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 28
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 23, 2006 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If you didnt know alot of huge american companies supply alot of jobs in india and we give them millions in federal aid each year alond with food and we've never done anything to you and not to say i agreee with everything that bush does but i dont think you should have a problem with wat we're doing |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
|
|
Forum FAQs 
Knowledge Base 
Memberlist 
Usergroups 
Hosting
Register
Donate 
Profile 
Log in 
