Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Politics
 Was Invading Iraq A Good Idea?
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 6

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 11/07/2004 :  04:58:09   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message
Ok, here comes a bomb!

Joe, would you please format your longer posts? Run-on paragraphs are hard on everybody's eyes, especally my tired, old ones. Thanks.

I can't add much to what Dave has written, but I can ask a question or two: As you are on the ground over there and have a better perception of the local situation than we (and Bush), do you think that we can win it without leveling the country? Further, do you think that there'll be elections as promised in January and that they'll be at least semi-honest?

My biggest bitch about Iraq is that it unessarily diverted attention away from Al Quada, who actually did attack us. And Osama is alive and looking like he just got back from vacation, if the latest tape is anything to go by. Iraq should have been put on hold until the main job was done. Hell, by then, the UN might have had the situation resolved.

You be careful, Joe. Come home soon.


"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

Gorgo
SFN Die Hard

USA
5310 Posts

Posted - 11/07/2004 :  05:26:57   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Gorgo a Private Message
Joe, you don't go to war because you think someone had weapons of mass destruction, which no one thought they had that knew anything about them. What you heard were rumors from con men like Chalabi, when you should have been listening to people like weapons inspectors and U.N. officials who were saying that they didn't exist.

You don't kill (by sanctions or bombs) thousands of a dictator's subjects because the dictator is a nasty guy. You work to protect those people from the dictator as much as possible.

To make this a legal war you would only be able to remove an imminent threat, then take the matter to the UNSC.

This is an illegal war:
http://electroniciraq.net/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/6/265


I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter



Go to Top of Page

Siberia
SFN Addict

Brazil
2322 Posts

Posted - 11/07/2004 :  07:29:50   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Siberia's Homepage  Send Siberia an AOL message  Send Siberia a Yahoo! Message Send Siberia a Private Message
quote:
To rid the world of a tinpot dictator? Ok perhaps, but not good enough. Saddam was contained and no threat to anyone beyond his borders. And why that tinpot dictator instead of a myriad of others? Oh right. The others have no natural resources to exploit.

Hah! Filthy touches a great point here. Why, exactly, Saddam? Just because he's the most popular dictator? Why not, oh, Castro? Why not, let's see, Saudi Arabia's governor? Oh, yeah, that's right: his country's coincidently loaded with oil.

I've read, I guess in a history book, that US supported Saddam when he took the power, even being fully aware of the kind of man he was.

Oh, no doubt, he was a terrible dictator, a cruel man, but why, specificially, him?

"Why are you afraid of something you're not even sure exists?"
- The Kovenant, Via Negativa

"People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs."
-- unknown
Go to Top of Page

Gorgo
SFN Die Hard

USA
5310 Posts

Posted - 11/07/2004 :  08:29:19   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Gorgo a Private Message
The U.S. made sure that Iraq and Iran did not have popular governments. The U.S. has never made democracy any kind of priority when it has overthrown governments and propped up dictators, it is not a priority now.

I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter



Go to Top of Page

beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard

USA
3834 Posts

Posted - 11/07/2004 :  12:19:00   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send beskeptigal a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Gorgo

The U.S. made sure that Iraq and Iran did not have popular governments. The U.S. has never made democracy any kind of priority when it has overthrown governments and propped up dictators, it is not a priority now.

And for the details of the above, I bumped my OP on mideast history.
Go to Top of Page

chaloobi
SFN Regular

1620 Posts

Posted - 11/09/2004 :  07:41:13   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send chaloobi a Yahoo! Message Send chaloobi a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by joedesmarais

You all sound like a bunch of ping pong players bouncing the same ball back at eachother. I would attempt trying to explain logical reasons for this war, but I'm quite sure that it wouldn't make sense to many of you. You are so convinced and pleased with your own 'philosophical' explanations, you are now your own sounding board. I'm only glad that on Nov 2nd, the majority of Americans were not so easily fooled. Cheers!

On the contrary, it was the adminstration's lies that carried the day on Nov 2. Apparently they carried the day with you as well. I'd love to hear your logical reasons for invading Iraq. I'm most interested in seeing if they contain the administration's lies.

EDIT - Adding some stuff . . . .

1. Iraq was not - and had virtually no potential to be - a threat to the US or any of it's neighbors.

2. Iraq's 'relationship' to AQ consisted of AQ's message offering to work together and Saddam's govt's declining to respond. Yes, that's a relationship all right, but certainly no reason for an invasion. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Syria, Sudan and Egypt all have relationships at least at that level. Shall we invade and occupy them all? Nothing short of supplying WMDs or training camps in Iraq would justify an invasion, and that was clearly not happening even according to our flawed WMD intelligence.

3. Even if WMDs, or substantial programs to create them, or AQ training camps, did exist the US should not have invaded until the UN Security Council was on board. In GW1, when the threat was real, they didn't hesitate to get on board - even the Soviets (were they still Soviets then?) supported US action. The reason they were NOT on board this time is because no real evidence for these things existed and/or they recognized there were alternatives to dealing with the problem well short of invasion.

And they further opposed the US headlong jump into war because they recognized it for what it was - a power grab. If the US invasion had gone as planned, we would now hold substantial power in the Middle-east and more power in the world as a whole. While I am not opposed to the US being powerful, I am opposed to ill-concieved wars for bad reasons and arrogant leadership by morons like GW's Administration whose reckless actions threaten world peace & cooperation and the freedom of US citizens at home.

-Chaloobi

Edited by - chaloobi on 11/09/2004 08:12:32
Go to Top of Page

Doomar
SFN Regular

USA
714 Posts

Posted - 11/09/2004 :  20:37:07   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Doomar's Homepage Send Doomar a Private Message
chaloobi, some very poignant thoughts. Much appreciated.

Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”

www.pastorsb.com.htm
Go to Top of Page

joedesmarais
New Member

Iraq
18 Posts

Posted - 11/10/2004 :  00:01:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send joedesmarais a Private Message
Some quick points.
Tawid and Jihad, the Zarqawi network here in Iraq has a new name, "Al Queda in Iraq". Knowing Zarqawi's connections to Sadaam (however loose they may be), this should tell you something.
Second, the UN was a joke from the beginning. If you have been paying attention to the Oil for Food scandal you would be seeing the level of corruption is rising higher and higher, in countries like France and Russia, to opponents to the war in Iraq.
Third, the UN does not have what it takes, one bombing at their HQ and how did they respond? With resolve? with might? Nope, they tucked tail and left. This is not the kind of organization I would want on my team.
Fourth, think about the UN, and what it is. The UN is nothing without the US and Britian, a mere shell of an organization. The fact that John Kerry and liberals continue to see it as the savior of America and Iraq is silly.
And yes, some of my ideas and conclusions come from the Republican government, but they are simply part of my information, not all. Have you read what you write though? Do you actually believe you are coming up with original thoughts? Of course you aren't, but that doesn't make ones argument any less authentic.
Go to Top of Page

Gorgo
SFN Die Hard

USA
5310 Posts

Posted - 11/10/2004 :  04:55:53   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send Gorgo a Private Message
So, the UN is a joke, and it wouldn't be without the U.S. and Great Britain, right?

I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter



Go to Top of Page

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 11/10/2004 :  05:49:47   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message
The oil for food scandle can be laid at the feet of various corporations, some (most?) with American ties. The governments involved, including ours, and the UN, are guilty only of incompetence in overseeing it.

The UN is indeed impotent but through no fault of it's own. It's impotent because we want it that way -- always have. Look at our veto record, there.

The world has become too small to not have a place to talk. And as for them cutting and running, the UN presence in Iraq was not a combat force. If I have it right, they were merely observers.

If you read history, UN peacekeepers have served and are still serving well. The problem is that we expect them to serve us, and that is not the UN's purpose.


"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

Go to Top of Page

chaloobi
SFN Regular

1620 Posts

Posted - 11/10/2004 :  06:09:52   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send chaloobi a Yahoo! Message Send chaloobi a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by joedesmarais

Some quick points.
Tawid and Jihad, the Zarqawi network here in Iraq has a new name, "Al Queda in Iraq". Knowing Zarqawi's connections to Sadaam (however loose they may be), this should tell you something.
It tells nothing. They weren't in Iraq before we invaded and plunged the country into chaos.

quote:

Second, the UN was a joke from the beginning. If you have been paying attention to the Oil for Food scandal you would be seeing the level of corruption is rising higher and higher, in countries like France and Russia, to opponents to the war in Iraq.
One program makes the entire history and breadth of it's operations a joke? Please. The corruption in the UN is no worse than in our own government.

quote:

Third, the UN does not have what it takes, one bombing at their HQ and how did they respond? With resolve? with might? Nope, they tucked tail and left. This is not the kind of organization I would want on my team.
The UN was not there as a military force - they were there to help the US's nation building effort. It was the US's responsibility to ensure the UN personnel's security and guess what, we botched it big time. In light of the fact that they were targets, had no military presence of their own, and the US was incapable of protecting them, what choice did they have but to leave???

quote:

Fourth, think about the UN, and what it is. The UN is nothing without the US and Britian, a mere shell of an organization. The fact that John Kerry and liberals continue to see it as the savior of America and Iraq is silly.
The UN is merely a forum for nations around the world to come together in cooperation. But for it to work, the worlds greatest military and economic power has to use it in good faith. If the UN is a mere shell (an opinion I don't happen to share), it's because we made it that way - the responsibility for that is with us.

quote:

And yes, some of my ideas and conclusions come from the Republican government, but they are simply part of my information, not all. Have you read what you write though? Do you actually believe you are coming up with original thoughts? Of course you aren't, but that doesn't make ones argument any less authentic.

My position on the war is my own. There is no major political organization that I know of that shares it here in the US. If there is one, they haven't made it public enough for me to hear about it.

-Chaloobi

Edited by - chaloobi on 11/10/2004 06:12:31
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26022 Posts

Posted - 11/10/2004 :  06:47:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
Gorgo wrote:
quote:
So, the UN is a joke, and it wouldn't be without the U.S. and Great Britain, right?
No, joedesmarais appears to be saying that...
U.N. with U.S. and U.K. = "joke"
U.N. without U.S. and U.K. = "nothing" and/or "mere shell of an organization"
In other words, with or without the U.S. and U.K., he seems to think that the U.N. is completely worthless.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9688 Posts

Posted - 11/10/2004 :  08:44:29   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by joedesmarais
Tawid and Jihad, the Zarqawi network here in Iraq has a new name, "Al Queda in Iraq".
Who exactly calls them by that name?
American soldiers? The average Iraqi Joe? The Iraqi freedom-fighters-against-American-oppression?
If I name someone an ignorant twit, does my calling make him so? Of course not!

quote:
Knowing Zarqawi's connections to Sadaam (however loose they may be), this should tell you something.
It tells me that he's pissed off at the Americans for their illegal invasion of their sovereign nation.
I would be too, if the Americans came to Sweden by force. Hell, I'm already pissed off because America is not respecting International law. If it is kept unchecked who can really know when Sweden is next?

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

chaloobi
SFN Regular

1620 Posts

Posted - 11/10/2004 :  09:07:11   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send chaloobi a Yahoo! Message Send chaloobi a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse

quote:
Originally posted by joedesmarais
Tawid and Jihad, the Zarqawi network here in Iraq has a new name, "Al Queda in Iraq".
Who exactly calls them by that name?
American soldiers? The average Iraqi Joe? The Iraqi freedom-fighters-against-American-oppression?
If I name someone an ignorant twit, does my calling make him so? Of course not!

quote:
Knowing Zarqawi's connections to Sadaam (however loose they may be), this should tell you something.
It tells me that he's pissed off at the Americans for their illegal invasion of their sovereign nation.
I would be too, if the Americans came to Sweden by force. Hell, I'm already pissed off because America is not respecting International law. If it is kept unchecked who can really know when Sweden is next?


You should be more afraid of the mid-Atlantic current shutting down. There was an article all about it in this month's Scientific American. If/when the current does stop, you folks in Sweden are going to get quite a bit colder . . . . Oh, and incidentally, the complete absence of action by the US on any kind of solution - despite our responsibility as the worlds largest polluter - is also a Bush policy. Sorry.

Ironically, the two issues - war in Iraq and global warming - are intricately related. If we were doing something serious about CO2 emissions, we likely wouldn't be so interested in Middle-East oil and likely not investing in our 'project' in Iraq. The US, and the West in general, needs an alternative to oil, that is plain to see. But greed keeps us from seriously seeking that alternative.

-Chaloobi

Go to Top of Page

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9688 Posts

Posted - 11/10/2004 :  10:36:49   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by chaloobi
You should be more afraid of the mid-Atlantic current shutting down. There was an article all about it in this month's Scientific American. If/when the current does stop, you folks in Sweden are going to get quite a bit colder . . . . Oh, and incidentally, the complete absence of action by the US on any kind of solution - despite our responsibility as the worlds largest polluter - is also a Bush policy. Sorry.

That is a concern to us.

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 6 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.16 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000