What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

A man-made tsunami

Because the Indonesian people didn't bomb us
smile_h_32.gif


The taliban did. I guess they ruined their reputation for their country and people

confused.gif
 
the iraqi people never bombed us. They didn't even have bombs that could!
 
I think we have our evolution thread successor.
smile.gif
 
I meant with the planes. Oh well, my mistake. Sorry. Continue with the controversial discussion that will end up being several dozen pages long!
smile_n_32.gif
 
again, the iraqi people had nothing to do with the world trade center being hit by planes.
 
um... the Iraqi people never attacked us with planes.
 
Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9-11? Wow I bet you also believe that Stalin had nothing to do with Hitler.
 
  • #10
yeah, Saddam and Osama are two completely different people. If I'm not mistaken Osama encouraged the Iraqi people to overthrow Saddam.
 
  • #11
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Wow I bet you also believe that Stalin had nothing to do with Hitler


Stalin and hitler were bitter enemies in WWII and stalin fought on the allied side against hitler
 
  • #12
kahnli is correct. Saddam was a secular dictator. And evil man, but not the religious zealot that OBL is. OBL hated Saddam for not creating a rigid Islamist country.

The false linking of Iraq to the struggle against terrorists is one of the greatest frauds of our time.

Capslock
 
  • #13
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Capslock @ Jan. 11 2005,1:43)]The false linking of Iraq to the struggle against terrorists is one of the greatest frauds of our time.
well said.
 
  • #14
Along that line of thinking we never should have attacted Germany after we finished with Japan, in WWII for Germany wasn't the actual country that bombed us. I never said that Iraq was the country that bombed us, but that has been much proof that shows that Iraq knowingly aided and abedded terrorist groups.
 
  • #15
Germany declared war against us, and was attacking our allies. We had every reason to go after them. They were an imminent threat. Iraq was simply not.

Capslock
 
  • #16
Ok lets say that you are completly right on this one that Iraq was no threat to us at all, that then didnt have any WMD or we should say no more WMD because we no that he used them on his own people and the Kurds. Then all we did was remove a dictator that killed his own people in mass numbers, killed the Kurds in mass numbers, allowed his sons to operate 'rape rooms', thwarted the UN weapons inspectors attempts to do there job-& did not allow fly overs of his country (because he had nothing to hide).
 
  • #17
Wolf, no one is denying (at least I don't think anyone is) that Sadam is an evil, evil man who had a terrible regime.

The issue is that, because of the obvious inconsistencies in the reasons put forth to the American people for going war, we wonder what the REAL reasons were. Maybe the ends were good, but was the reason truly just, or was it simply easy to prey on American culture's perceptions of "evil?"

Getting rid of Saddam, in my oppinion, was not a bad thing. I might not have lost my support for the war if Bush simply said "We don't like what he does to his people, we think he distablizes the region, and, well, we want his oil."

I have this terrible fear (maybe not justified, but it's there) that the real reason bush wanted to go to war was oil and religion. I could be wrong, but since I was lied to at the outset, I will never be completly certain of anything else they tell me. Call me jaded.
 
  • #18
If being evil and cruel and corrupt is reason enough, why aren't we spending billions of dollars (each) to attack and unseat every leader out there who fits the description?
 
  • #19
[b said:
Quote[/b] (endparenthesis @ Jan. 11 2005,5:46)]If being evil and cruel and corrupt is reason enough, why aren't we spending billions of dollars (each) to attack and unseat every leader out there who fits the description?
Knock out the king of the hill. Get rid of the head honcho. When you do that everyone else isn't a priority. The united states wasn't on a specific mission.
 
  • #20
[b said:
Quote[/b] (wolf9striker @ Jan. 11 2005,3:08)]Along that line of thinking we never should have attacted Germany after we finished with Japan, in WWII for Germany wasn't the actual country that bombed us.  
So we should have let the holocaust continue and let more Jewish people and other "ethnic inferior" people get murdered?
 
Back
Top