Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

One or Two Iraq Questions


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity >> One or Two Iraq Questions Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
One or Two Iraq Questions - 9/30/2005 7:24:45 PM   
FangsNfeet


Posts: 3758
Joined: 12/3/2004
Status: offline 		If you are against the war and think Iraq should have never been invaded, then do you agree that Saddam should be back in power? I'm curious how many anti War/Bush people would like to see Saddam back in power of Iraq. After all, if you're anti war, then dosen't make you a Saddam back in power supporter?

_____________________________

I'm Godzilla and you're Japan
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 9/30/2005 7:37:42 PM   
JohnWarren


Posts: 3807
Joined: 3/18/2005
From: Delray Beach, FL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FangsNfeet

If you are against the war and think Iraq should have never been invaded, then do you agree that Saddam should be back in power? I'm curious how many anti War/Bush people would like to see Saddam back in power of Iraq. After all, if you're anti war, then dosen't make you a Saddam back in power supporter?


Naturally, it is like if you opposed the communists you must be a Hitler-lover.

Binary thinking is so comforting

_____________________________

www.lovingdominant.org

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 9/30/2005 7:39:26 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		Suppose you decide to lie to your friend because you think it's easier to lie than to tell the truth. But because you lied to your friend, you manage to discover that he is really a serial killer. So you are glad that he is finally brought to justice.

Does that mean it was right to lie to your friend in the first place?

That's about all your logic adds up to. The fact that Saddam was a brutal dictator does not mean we were right to invade Iraq. We don't bring down every brutal dictator in the world; on the contrary, we support many, if not most, of them. And on top of all this, you can add the fact that Iraq is several times more dangerous now than it ever was under Saddam.

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 9/30/2005 8:01:04 PM   
DesertRat


Posts: 2774
Joined: 11/29/2004
From: NM/USA
Status: offline 		You're trying to make it sound a lot simpler than it really is. Being against the war does not mean one approved of Saddam's regime. I don't like the way North Korea is being run, but I don't think we should go to war with them. That doesn't mean I support the North Korean government.

Bob


(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 9/30/2005 8:39:38 PM   
MstrssPassion


Posts: 2444
Joined: 1/1/2004
From: West Palm Beach, FL
Status: offline 		Firstly, I am not anti-war... but I am no fan of Bush for many other reasons than the war.

I support the troops, the problem lays in the fact that they were sent over on false pretenses (weapons of mass destruction) & the American people were lied to repeatedly about this. When the truth began to creep out, stories quickly changed promoting a different reason for having troops there (democratization of Iraq).

Our troops are over there dying for democracy & what is happening is a formation of a nation following Islamic Law. Women will have no rights. Gays would be murdered. Hmmmm... that has a slight 'extreme right' ring to it, but I digress.

Saddam was a bad guy... we took him out, but he didn't have the means to set in motion a world war.

North Korean leader Kim Jong-II doesn't give me a warm fuzzy feeling. He has his weapons of mass destruction & the human suffering is simply horrible. Should we dash in & take him out as well?

We (America) are not the keepers of the world. Hell, we can't even do a fair job of protecting our own people from harm & suffering (resent events on the Gulf Coast)



(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 9/30/2005 8:40:24 PM   
LadyAngelika


Posts: 8070
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JohnWarren
Binary thinking is so comforting


And so popular! <insert eye roll>

- LA


_____________________________

Une main de fer dans un gant de velours ~ An iron hand in a velvet glove

(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 9/30/2005 9:07:36 PM   
onceburned


Posts: 2117
Joined: 1/4/2005
From: Iowa
Status: offline 		Fangs, you're a good guy. I'm wondering why you bring this topic up now?
(over two years after the invasion)

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/1/2005 4:35:02 AM   
gypsysoul


Posts: 70
Joined: 7/4/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FangsNfeet

If you are against the war and think Iraq should have never been invaded, then do you agree that Saddam should be back in power? I'm curious how many anti War/Bush people would like to see Saddam back in power of Iraq. After all, if you're anti war, then dosen't make you a Saddam back in power supporter?


All or nothing, eh?

If you were opposed to Monica Lewinsky fellating Bill Clinton, doesn't that make you a supporter of celibate Presidents? Or at least a supporter of laws against head?


(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/1/2005 6:39:25 AM   
Gauge


Posts: 5689
Joined: 6/17/2005
Status: offline
quote:

If you are against the war and think Iraq should have never been invaded, then do you agree that Saddam should be back in power? I'm curious how many anti War/Bush people would like to see Saddam back in power of Iraq. After all, if you're anti war, then dosen't make you a Saddam back in power supporter?


I don't support the war because we are there under the pretense that there were WMD and it wasn't true. I support the troops, period. They are over there dying for their country, right or wrong.

It's kind of like the Patriot Act, if you don't support it, are you unpatriotic?

_____________________________

"For there is no folly of the beast of the earth which is not infinitely outdone by the madness of men." Herman Melville - Moby Dick

I'm wearing my chicken suit and humming La Marseillaise.

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/1/2005 8:58:47 AM   
MoxyMaiden


Posts: 1
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline 		Hmmmm, so if I am against invading a soverign nation who did not attack us, that means I must be in favor of a despot? Remeber, fundementalism begins at home !

(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 9:53:14 AM   
FangsNfeet


Posts: 3758
Joined: 12/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

All or nothing, eh?

If you were opposed to Monica Lewinsky fellating Bill Clinton, doesn't that make you a supporter of celibate Presidents? Or at least a supporter of laws against head?


ROFLMAO!!!!!

I'm not opposed to that at all. For crying out loud, I use to think that being president was the most powerful position in the world. You can make or break countries, change lives for better or worse with the signiture of a pen, and pardon anyone with crimes against the US. Yet, the president dosen't have the power to get away with having a blow job with someone other than his wife. What kind of power is that when you can't even get a blow job without having to let the whole country know about it? FDR, Kennedy, Ben Franklin, and such didn't have a any problems with having affairs outside there marriage. What makes it such a big deal now? Is the president not the if not one of the most powerful person in the world? If the answer is yes, then wouldn't that mean that the president should be able to tell people to take a number and get in line for sucking his cock?

_____________________________

I'm Godzilla and you're Japan

(in reply to gypsysoul)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 9:59:33 AM   
MstrssPassion


Posts: 2444
Joined: 1/1/2004
From: West Palm Beach, FL
Status: offline 		Franklin was a freaky fellow, but he was never president

_____________________________

MstrssPassion


(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 3:21:44 PM   
domtimothy46176


Posts: 670
Joined: 12/25/2004
From: Dayton, Ohio area
Status: offline 		The OP posed an interesting question that I'll rephrase in the hope of getting serious answers. For those of you opposed to the invasion of Iraq, given the first-hand accounts of the atrocities of Saddam's regime, would you undo what we've done, had you the power? To wit, were it within your power to roll back the clock and return us to the point immediately preceding the invasion and then prevent it, would you?

(in reply to MstrssPassion)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 3:22:24 PM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline 		I am not sure I can summarize my feelings on this topic.

Blowjobs.............
If I was president of the United States and that presented opportunites for head, I would do my partriotic duty.

If I were a janitor, and opportunities for head presented themselves....

If I were a highwayman........

Saddass Hussien....

Yep, I would like to see him back in.

When he waltzed across the border to K-town we should have wiped him up with doughnut napkins. We didn't. Our loss.

When he sat there for 12 1/2 years and didn't do a goddamn thing, we should have left him...........We advertise that we have WMD and have the only history in the world that we will use them.

He cakked a few hundred thousand? So? Mengistu, Milosovich, Duvalier, Reza Pahvali, Ngueyn Kao Key, Joseph Stalin ad nauseum...........

So Adolph Hitler set up a scenario, claiming that the Polish were attacking the borders of Autreich-Deutchesreich and started a war.....history books say that this was the beginning of WW2 (it was not, the american public didn't give a fuck how many jews got fried up.) but this unprovoked aggression was considered illegal in the world.........

I don't get it.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to MstrssPassion)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 4:45:14 PM   
pantera


Posts: 210
Joined: 1/7/2005
Status: offline

WMDs HAVE been found-

connections between Hussein and Al Qaeda HAVE been made-

but, of course...let's not wait for the media to make a big deal out of it...they are too busy making a big deal out of other things...like Abu Graib (spelling please)

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 5:06:57 PM   
gypsysoul


Posts: 70
Joined: 7/4/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: FangsNfeet

quote:

All or nothing, eh?

If you were opposed to Monica Lewinsky fellating Bill Clinton, doesn't that make you a supporter of celibate Presidents? Or at least a supporter of laws against head?


ROFLMAO!!!!!

I'm not opposed to that at all. For crying out loud, I use to think that being president was the most powerful position in the world. You can make or break countries, change lives for better or worse with the signiture of a pen, and pardon anyone with crimes against the US. Yet, the president dosen't have the power to get away with having a blow job with someone other than his wife. What kind of power is that when you can't even get a blow job without having to let the whole country know about it? FDR, Kennedy, Ben Franklin, and such didn't have a any problems with having affairs outside there marriage. What makes it such a big deal now? Is the president not the if not one of the most powerful person in the world? If the answer is yes, then wouldn't that mean that the president should be able to tell people to take a number and get in line for sucking his cock?


The original question was worded in such a fashion that anyone who opposed the invasion of Iraq is automatically presumed to WANT Saddam Hussein back in power. It's all or nothing. If you were and are opposed to the renegade manner in which Bush invaded Iraq, you must have preferred the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. It's a desperate attempt by Bush supporters to distract the American people from the fact that the Bush administration lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Didn't "not know" or "relied on bad intelligence", but lied.

And to now announce that any President should pass out numbers for getting his dick sucked, after the original post of this thread....what kind of crack are you smoking? Watch your face; pretzel choking can be ugly.

Clinton was not impeached for actually getting head in the oval office; he was impeached because he lied about it. Lying about extramarital sexual activities was such a serious character flaw that the moralistic Republicans were able to sell it as a risk to national security -- at least sell it enough to put a sitting President on trial for it.

So Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction. Or didn't have the information to not lie about them (as Clinton didn't have the legal definition of sex down pat). It's all fine and dandy even if thousands of American troops (and US contractors, and Iraqi civilians) have been killed or injured as a result of Bush's lies. Anyone who thinks that Bush's lies were as bad as Clinton's lies is unpatriotic and prefers that middle eastern nations be run by religious zealots and oppressive dictators.

That is the gist of your original question, and your subsequent response.

To now laugh off the Clinton impeachment while posing the question :"After all, if you're anti war, then dosen't [sic] make you a Saddam back in power supporter?" seems pretty flippy-floppy to me.

My answer is this: Yes, I'd rather turn back time and erase the US invasion of Iraq. I doubt the majority of the Iraqi people are better off now than with Saddam in power. I don't see where the US is any safer.


(in reply to FangsNfeet)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 5:54:13 PM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

Naturally, it is like if you opposed the communists you must be a Hitler-lover.


Using the same binary logic.

Hitler never attacked or invaded the US when we declared war on Germany. For that matter neither did Japan. Japan attacked a US military base located on a US possession taken from the indigenous island population. Japan can be perceived as a "liberating" army akin to the US liberating army in Iraq. The US had no right to join in the war in Europe nor the war in the Pacific.

Saddam should be back in power. The people who brought down the buildings in NYC all died in the attempt so no retribution is necessary there either. Unless or until a WMD is used their existence not be believed. Besides how can it be possible to hide a "suitcase nuke" or a few gallons of Anthrax by burying it somewhere in a area the size of Iraq - It's just NOT possible. There are NO WMD in Iraq or any of the Arab States. And while we're in the neighborhood; Israel doesn't have nuclear capability either.

The bottom line, the US military should not only be withdrawn from Iraq but every place they are deployed, and then disbanded. We "won" the war against the USSR, there is nobody looking to hurt us. China? No - they're just a hard working people and a good source for cheap goods to be sold at Wal-Mart. Korea? No, those people dying in the camps are no more important then the people who died in Iraq. It's the perfect argument - If Korea had oil - Bush would invade and attack. The US would care and should want to get involved. They don't have oil - so let the citizens die. And the new US philosophy for foreign involvement should be that if Koreans kill Koreans, Sudanese kill Sudanese, Rwandans are just killing Rwandans, or if the Italians start killing other Italians for that matter - don't look to the US or it's citizens to care. It's just not our job.

If the US only left everyone else alone, disarmed; the world would be Eden-like.

Bush should be brought up on war crimes, impeached, and jailed. He wasn't smart enough to analyze the information provided and decided to believe something that was, to date, not proven. He compounded his failure by passing on the information an acting upon it.

So, just to recap...

...Saddam back in power. Also he should be allowed to sue for false imprisonment - I think a $2-3 Billion settlement appropriate; lawyers would have no problem representing him. All the people who were killed or mangled were just not thinking politically correct for the greater good of Iraq. That $2-3 Billion will go a long way to the rebuilding of the palaces as well as the prisons and torture dungeons - you never can have enough of them. Perhaps next year beth and I will visit one of those instead of going to Amsterdam.

...Bush arrested.

...Military disbanded.

Then all would be right in the world. The US would be a "nice" country. While we're at it let's also open the borders. Then finally we'd all be safe.

I think that one of the parties should adopt this as their platform for the next presidential election to give everyone the opportunity to support this obvious solution to world peace.

(in reply to JohnWarren)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 6:24:16 PM   
Lordandmaster


Posts: 10943
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline 		Even the President conceded that these statements are both false.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pantera

WMDs HAVE been found-

connections between Hussein and Al Qaeda HAVE been made-


(in reply to pantera)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 6:28:13 PM   
JohnWarren


Posts: 3807
Joined: 3/18/2005
From: Delray Beach, FL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth

quote:

Naturally, it is like if you opposed the communists you must be a Hitler-lover.


Using the same binary logic.

Hitler never attacked or invaded the US when we declared war on Germany. For that matter neither did Japan. Japan attacked a US military base located on a US possession taken from the indigenous island population. Japan can be perceived as a "liberating" army akin to the US liberating army in Iraq. The US had no right to join in the war in Europe nor the war in the Pacific.


However he did declare war on us two days after the Japanese attack. Those two days were very nervous times for England because if he hadn't the US would not have become involved in Europe.

Why he did is one of the great unanswered questions of the war

_____________________________

www.lovingdominant.org

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: One or Two Iraq Questions - 10/2/2005 6:43:01 PM   
onceburned


Posts: 2117
Joined: 1/4/2005
From: Iowa
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: domtimothy46176
For those of you opposed to the invasion of Iraq, given the first-hand accounts of the atrocities of Saddam's regime, would you undo what we've done, had you the power? To wit, were it within your power to roll back the clock and return us to the point immediately preceding the invasion and then prevent it, would you?


I think getting Saddam out of power was a good thing. The way we did it was wrong.

If I could turn back the clock, I would have made a serious attempt to reach a plan that Europe agreed with (instead of Bush's "We are going to do this, with you or without you")

Most importantly, I would have made serious plans for establishing peace in Iraq. This seems to have been the greatest weakness of the American strategy. We had the military for winning the war, but we didn't give enough thought to how we would establish peace in a post-Saddam Iraq.

(in reply to domtimothy46176)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity >> One or Two Iraq Questions Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.113