NationStates Jolt Archive

Before this War on Iraq started, many of America's traditional allies were concerned that America was going to attack Iraq without proper justification. There was an outcry around the world and record peace demonstrations, yet to no avail.

George Bush did his best to convince everyone that Iraq was an immediate threat to the people of the US. He tried to convince the UN Security Council to buy in but they would not and neither would many traditional allies.

George Bush delivered the following address on TV, the night the bombs were dropping on Iraq:

http://www.crtv.cm/actualite_det.php?code=790

Partial Quote:

"Our nation enters this conflict reluctantly, yet our purpose is sure. The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder.

"We will meet that threat now with our Army, Air Force, Navy, Coast Guard and Marines, so that we do not have to meet it later with armies of firefighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities.
Here he tries to convince the American public that Iraq possesses WMD and that Iraq was tied to terrorists that attacked America.

Here is the sad part:

"U.S. public perceptions about former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to al-Qaeda and stocks of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) continues to lag far behind the testimony of experts, boosting chances that President George W Bush will be re-elected, according to a survey and analysis released Thursday.

Despite statements by such officials as the Bush administration's former chief weapons inspector, David Kay; its former anti-terrorism chief, Richard Clarke; former chief United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix, as well as admissions by senior administration officials themselves, a majority of the public still believes Iraq was closely tied to the al-Qaeda terrorist group and had WMD stocks or programs before U.S. troops invaded the country 13 months ago.

''The public is not getting a clear message about what the experts are saying about Iraqi links to al-Qaeda and its WMD program'', said Steven Kull, director of the Program'' on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland, which conducted the survey."

http://www.crisispapers.org/topics/public-opinion.htm

The rest of the world was not buying what George Bush was selling. Why were Americans? Blind faith? Blind trust?

Do the American people still believe that Iraq was a REAL threat to the US?

for me the war was always about the Iraqi people, I don't care what Bush had to say to do it, he took out saddam, and though his credibility in my eyes has wavered a little bit, at the end of the day that's all that really matters.

americans have this odd problem where they consistently say in polls that politicians are not trustworthy and will say anything to get their way, and then we turn around and believe every damn word that comes out of their mouths - especially if they are in the party we like.

I still like the rationale that we knew Saddam has WMDs because he hadn't used all the ones we gave him back in the 80s.

america has always been brainwashed in one for or another, whether it be by politicians or the media or w/e. i dont know why our country is so perceptible to this stuff. its really pathetic actually.

Has American been brainwashed? In the sense that you're going for, yes, I think so. In fact, today at school I had a conversation about this whole Iraq business with a fellow classmen...basically his whole argument was "well, the Iraqi's desevered it." Pretty...sad (for a lack of better word), I think.

americans have this odd problem where they consistently say in polls that politicians are not trustworthy and will say anything to get their way, and then we turn around and believe every damn word that comes out of their mouths - especially if they are in the party we like.

we don't nessicarialy think thier telling the truth, or even they that will follow through on the promist they are making, we just look for what we belive will be the overall outcome and decide by that.

for me the war was always about the Iraqi people, I don't care what Bush had to say to do it, he took out saddam, and though his credibility in my eyes has wavered a little bit, at the end of the day that's all that really matters.

Its funny you would write this in a thread about Brainwashing.

I agree with Schrandtopia that this is "all about the Iraqi people" (I mean, who else?). Bush simply could not let go unanswered their (and Usama's) prayers for a clear shot at the infidels. I reckon the only complaint the Iraqis have at this time is that Dubya/Condi/Cheney/Rummi do not come visit more often :twisted:

Have you seen our media? You need not ask this question once you watch 24 hours of CNN

I still like the rationale that we knew Saddam has WMDs because he hadn't used all the ones we gave him back in the 80s.
The UN removed most of them during the 90's and was getting down to small amounts of Samoud rockets during the inspections of 2002-3.

Have you seen our media? You need not ask this question once you watch 24 hours of CNN

that's why we all watch the BBC, CNN is more like the local/human intrest section of the newspaper than our major news source

Has American been brainwashed? In the sense that you're going for, yes, I think so. In fact, today at school I had a conversation about this whole Iraq business with a fellow classmen...basically his whole argument was "well, the Iraqi's desevered it." Pretty...sad (for a lack of better word), I think.
True it does not equate to going to war and losing innocent lives on BOTH sides.

Brainwashing is such a vauge term. But they are being manipulated. Yes.

Has American been brainwashed? In the sense that you're going for, yes, I think so. In fact, today at school I had a conversation about this whole Iraq business with a fellow classmen...basically his whole argument was "well, the Iraqi's desevered it." Pretty...sad (for a lack of better word), I think.

at least they had an opinion. In 7th grade (when the war started, 3-03) we had a class discussion about it. A lot of people were going "well...I don't care really, because it doesn't affect me at all."

I agree with Schrandtopia that this is "all about the Iraqi people" (I mean, who else?). Bush simply could not let go unanswered their (and Usama's) prayers for a clear shot at the infidels. I reckon the only complaint the Iraqis have at this time is that Dubya/Condi/Cheney/Rummi do not come visit more often :twisted:
But do you truly believe that Iraq was a REAL threat to the US?

Brainwashing is such a vauge term. But they are being manipulated. Yes.
Manipulated is certainly a fair term to use.

http://www.mackwhite.com/tv.html

This will make you look at Live News in a new light.

So, CanuckHeaven, if one is an American who doesn't oppose the war in Iraq, one is a brainwashed fool, eh? Piss off.

But then People are always being manipulated.

for me the war was always about the Iraqi people, I don't care what Bush had to say to do it, he took out saddam,

Does it matter to you that most polls say that over half of all Iraqis want he occupation to end immediately?

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/GoodMorningAmerica/Iraq_anniversary_poll_040314.html

Presence of coalition forces:
Support 39%
Oppose 51%

Also As a national Leader more would prefer Jaques Chirac rather than Tony blair or Bush Jr.

they were never the wisest of the pack, but still we try

But did you all know that commercials are a form of brainwashing?

What's the motto for Nike?
What's the theme for McDonalds?
What's the mascot for Weinerschnitzel?


If you can answer these, than you have already been brainwashed

Trust me, turn on the TV, watch a few commercials. Mascots, mottos, logos, all are things used to get their opinions about what they're advertising in your head.

So, CanuckHeaven, if one is an American who doesn't oppose the war in Iraq, one is a brainwashed fool, eh? Piss off.

Why do you support the war?

Is it the same reason you had when at the beginning of the war?
If not, why did your reason change?

Are there any of claims this Administration made that you think were disingenious? If so, how do you excuse them?

they were never the wisest of the pack, but still we try

Yeah I guess because they disagree with you they arent wise. But you steal try to convert them With the Zeal of a Ninteenth Century Christian Missionary.

I agree with Schrandtopia that this is "all about the Iraqi people" (I mean, who else?). Bush simply could not let go unanswered their (and Usama's) prayers for a clear shot at the infidels. I reckon the only complaint the Iraqis have at this time is that Dubya/Condi/Cheney/Rummi do not come visit more often :twisted:
But do you truly believe that Iraq was a REAL threat to the US?
Methinks you misunderstood the intended message :wink:
Dubya painted a big bull's eye on the grunts' back and sent them off to the wastelands of Mesopotamia to fulfil the Cheney/Rumsfeld geopolitical wet dream.

The dream? -- A pro-American Middle East, created--easy as 1-2-3, they thought,--by the application of American bayonet to the "soft underbelly of Araby" (Iraq), and then to Syria and Iran.

I dont think they will occupy syria.

I betcha 50 Copper Peices

I agree with Schrandtopia that this is "all about the Iraqi people" (I mean, who else?). Bush simply could not let go unanswered their (and Usama's) prayers for a clear shot at the infidels. I reckon the only complaint the Iraqis have at this time is that Dubya/Condi/Cheney/Rummi do not come visit more often :twisted:
But do you truly believe that Iraq was a REAL threat to the US?
Methinks you misunderstood the intended message :wink:
Dubya painted a big bull's eye on the grunts' back and sent them off to the wastelands of Mesopotamia to fulfil the Cheney/Rumsfeld geopolitical wet dream.

The dream? -- A pro-American Middle East, created--easy as 1-2-3, they thought,--by the application of American bayonet to the "soft underbelly of Araby" (Iraq), and then to Syria and Iran.
Ahh but you see. I fully understood that this war was not about WMD or terrorism. The unfortunate reality is the fact that many more Americans are going to be walking around with bullseyes on their back. Just look at the recent shootings in Saudi Arabia. The US government is advising Americans to leave there. I do believe there is approximately 30,000 US citizens in Saudi Arabia?

Maybe Arabia will be next?

So, CanuckHeaven, if one is an American who doesn't oppose the war in Iraq, one is a brainwashed fool, eh? Piss off.
Do you support the war because of GW's claims of a Saddam/AlQaeda connection & WMD? Then you are a "brainwashed fool". Both of those were lies.

Do you support the war because you think it will bring peace to Iraq? Then you are a different sort of fool. Just look at them, religious factions jockeying for position to oppress each other. At least Saddam suppressed that particular sort of nonsense.

Do you have some other reason to support the War? Then let's hear it.

"MY country, Right or wrong"
"Surely you dont mean to sugget your country could ever be wrong, Do you?"

Sure, America is brainwashed. Oliver North did it with microchips in our brians. Just ask Texastanbul.

for me the war was always about the Iraqi people, I don't care what Bush had to say to do it, he took out saddam,

Does it matter to you that most polls say that over half of all Iraqis want he occupation to end immediately?

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/GoodMorningAmerica/Iraq_anniversary_poll_040314.html

Presence of coalition forces:
Support 39%
Oppose 51%

well who the hell wants tanks on their streets? Would you want that even if a war in your nation was ONE HUNDRED PERCENT justified?


People wanting/opposing occupation does not mean they do not think the war was justified

I dont think they will occupy syria.

I betcha 50 Copper Peices
The Cheney/Rummy plan would've been not necessarily to invade Iran/Syria right after Iraq but to use the anticipated prosperity/democracy in Iraq and military bases that the U.S. expected to establish in Iraq to undermine Syria and Iran ideologically ("look, life is much better if you're a friend of America") or even militarily (by providing succour to anti-government guerillas--sorta what Saddam tried with Mujaheddin Khalq).

This is not to say that Western-style democracy and free market economy are a bad thing--they are a good thing. But by acting like a coke-snorting buffalo in a china shop the U.S. undermines the very foreign policy goals it claims to embrace.

Oh yeah, no invasion of Syria, now that you can't handle Fallujah :wink:

You dont need Microchips to influence ones mind.

Have you seen our media? You need not ask this question once you watch 24 hours of CNN

that's why we all watch the BBC, CNN is more like the local/human intrest section of the newspaper than our major news source


What? We don't all watch the BBC, they are just as bad as any other news channel, DTA is my motto, DON'T TRUST ANYBODY!

Ahh but you see. I fully understood that this war was not about WMD or terrorism. The unfortunate reality is the fact that many more Americans are going to be walking around with bullseyes on their back. Just look at the recent shootings in Saudi Arabia. The US government is advising Americans to leave there. I do believe there is approximately 30,000 US citizens in Saudi Arabia?

Maybe Arabia will be next?

Oh, hell no. You see, Saudi Arabia is our best buddy. Just Ask GW. Why do you think him & Prince Bandar set on the porch smoking cigars? Why do you think that when air travel was shut down nationwide right after 9/11, GW arranged chartered flights for ALL of Bin Laden's (Saudi Arabian) relatives in the US to a gathering point & out of the country? Why do you think 14 of 19 of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis? Oh wait, that doesn't make them look so friendly, does it...

Oh well, GW said so... {/sarcasm}

I dont think they will occupy syria.

I betcha 50 Copper Peices
The Cheney/Rummy plan would've been not necessarily to invade Iran/Syria right after Iraq but to use the anticipated prosperity/democracy in Iraq and military bases that the U.S. expected to establish in Iraq to undermine Syria and Iran ideologically ("look, life is much better if you're a friend of America") or even militarily (by providing succour to anti-government guerillas--sorta what Saddam tried with Mujaheddin Khalq).

This is not to say that Western-style democracy and free market economy are a bad thing--they are a good thing. But by acting like a coke-snorting buffalo in a china shop the U.S. undermines the very foreign policy goals it claims to embrace.

Oh yeah, no invasion of Syria, now that you can't handle Fallujah :wink:

They may meddle a lot but they wont invade. They dont have a capability and they dont have any need. Isreal would probably do it for them.

But did you all know that commercials are a form of brainwashing?

What's the motto for Nike?
What's the theme for McDonalds?
What's the mascot for Weinerschnitzel?


If you can answer these, than you have already been brainwashed

Trust me, turn on the TV, watch a few commercials. Mascots, mottos, logos, all are things used to get their opinions about what they're advertising in your head.

There are commercials in EVERY country on earth, Then I guess the whole planet is brainwashed in one way or another.....wait a second, Thats true.

I can only answer 1, For Mcdonalds, I am not sure about the other two, I don't pay much attention to commercials.

I dont think they will occupy syria.

I betcha 50 Copper Peices
The Cheney/Rummy plan would've been not necessarily to invade Iran/Syria right after Iraq but to use the anticipated prosperity/democracy in Iraq and military bases that the U.S. expected to establish in Iraq to undermine Syria and Iran ideologically ("look, life is much better if you're a friend of America") or even militarily (by providing succour to anti-government guerillas--sorta what Saddam tried with Mujaheddin Khalq).

This is not to say that Western-style democracy and free market economy are a bad thing--they are a good thing. But by acting like a coke-snorting buffalo in a china shop the U.S. undermines the very foreign policy goals it claims to embrace.

Oh yeah, no invasion of Syria, now that you can't handle Fallujah :wink:

They may meddle a lot but they wont invade. They dont have a capability and they dont have any need. Isreal would probably do it for them.


Then France will invade Israel and we could have a good oldfashioned world war! COOL! [/sarcasm]

So, CanuckHeaven, if one is an American who doesn't oppose the war in Iraq, one is a brainwashed fool, eh? Piss off.
Do you support the war because of GW's claims of a Saddam/AlQaeda connection & WMD? Then you are a "brainwashed fool". Both of those were lies.
Circular logic.


Do you support the war because you think it will bring peace to Iraq? Then you are a different sort of fool. Just look at them, religious factions jockeying for position to oppress each other. At least Saddam suppressed that particular sort of nonsense.
Circular logic.

Do you have some other reason to support the War? Then let's hear it.
Yes, I do, in fact. I liked your subtle attempt to insinuate that Americans can't possibly have another reason to support the war in Iraq. Nice try. I have reasons to support the war. Who says that there has to be but one?

Saddam made us look weak, what with his constant insolence toward and defiance of the United States. He had to be taken out eventually so as to assure the world that America isn't simply a paper tiger. Furthermore, his defeat will assure that in the future enemy nations will become more amicable to America's perfectly reasonable requests. Look at Syria. Was that possibly a political gambit on Ghaddafi's part so as to increase his standing with the USA? Perhaps, or maybe he was afraid that his unacceptable attitute and behaviors would be forcibly fine tuned.

America must have a more reliable partner in the Middle East than Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, control of Iraqi oil will in the future allow the USA to stabilize oil prices and thereby alleviate some of the leverage that our enemies in the Middle East have on us.

Iraq can serve as a starting point to transforming the Middle East into something more in line with our purposes, such as a democratic consumerist society which can provide hundreds of millions of new customers for our goods.

There are other reasons as well, but I'm rather tired. Feel free to respond with something other than your characteristic ciruclar logic.

I agree with Schrandtopia that this is "all about the Iraqi people" (I mean, who else?). Bush simply could not let go unanswered their (and Usama's) prayers for a clear shot at the infidels. I reckon the only complaint the Iraqis have at this time is that Dubya/Condi/Cheney/Rummi do not come visit more often :twisted:
But do you truly believe that Iraq was a REAL threat to the US?
Methinks you misunderstood the intended message :wink:
Dubya painted a big bull's eye on the grunts' back and sent them off to the wastelands of Mesopotamia to fulfil the Cheney/Rumsfeld geopolitical wet dream.

The dream? -- A pro-American Middle East, created--easy as 1-2-3, they thought,--by the application of American bayonet to the "soft underbelly of Araby" (Iraq), and then to Syria and Iran.
Ahh but you see. I fully understood that this war was not about WMD or terrorism. The unfortunate reality is the fact that many more Americans are going to be walking around with bullseyes on their back. Just look at the recent shootings in Saudi Arabia. The US government is advising Americans to leave there. I do believe there is approximately 30,000 US citizens in Saudi Arabia?

Maybe Arabia will be next?
I very much doubt it. The invasion of Iraq must've appeared to Cheney/Rummy also as a brilliant way to disentangle the U.S. from Saudi: move bases and troops to a less religiously sensitive place (Iraq and Qatar), then use reduced reliance on Saudi (b/c Iraq would be providing home for bases and oil for the SUVs) to pressure the Saudi gov't to crack down on al-Qaeda, who, until recently didn't have any trouble raising funds and recruits in Saudi.--Applying such pressure through diplomatic channels is still a sensible thing to do, but, given the situation in Iraq, even Rummy and Cheney must understand that any further military adventurism would be disastrous.

I think the main problem is that no matter where we look, we have (almost) a very centralized media oligopoly in which individuals decide what news gets put where. This could have one of many different takes on news other than what actually happened. Do I personally think that we were justified in invading Iraq...Yes I do. But I dont think its a question of partisanship but rather a question of national security. And for all of you that try to throw out to lame fact that we are in Iraq for their oil...please!!! Only 7% of our oil comes from OPEC...and thats the entire Middle East, not just Iraq...Here's the kicker some of you may not know...47% of our oil...still comes from the good ole' US of A.

I wish there were forums when france invaded the continental europe, and then had to be taken care of by russia

I wish there were forums when Germany pretty much declared war on the world and caused the deaths of Millions, which was taken care of by the rest of the world

At least the US has the decentsy to take care of its own problems (Slavery). We went to war with our self to end the problems in our own country.

"MY country, Right or wrong"
"Surely you dont mean to sugget your country could ever be wrong, Do you?"
I am not suggesting that at all. I just believe that the US citizens were more susceptible to the message that was being delivered because of what happened 9-11.

"My fellow citizens, the dangers to our country and the world will be overcome. We will pass through this time of peril and carry on the work of peace. We will defend our freedom. We will bring freedom to others."

This appears to be telling Americans that the US actions were for the benefit of the world, and that by attacking Iraq, the US was protecting US citizens living thousands of miles away.

Iraq's long range missles that the UN inspectors were cutting up? A whole 120 miles in capability.

Most of the world outside of the US was suggesting that the UN inspectors be allowed to finish their job.

You cant dismiss everything As circular logic. And your wrong about the paper tiger. The U.S got TEN TIMES more respect under Clinton than Its getting under Bush.

The U.S lost no respect in my eyes When the news of those Troops abusing prisoners leaked out, I was not surprised. Because In my eyes they had no respect to loose.

US wasnt particullary worried about long range missles from Iraq, they were worried about saddam releasing some of his bio weapons in a US city that could kill thousands. And dont say he didnt have them because he used them on his own people he used them against Iran. Iraq had months to hide their weapons, and if you actually think of it, they could have took them and burried them in the middle of the desert, because they do know our satelite patterns and can move without detection

How the Hell can a Pisspoor Third world Country know U.S satelite "Patterns">?

They are not as easy to Spot as you might think. They usually are very far out. And If Iraq was as such a threat as the U.S said then There was no Excuse for it not being one of the most Heavilly surveiled countries in the world. They should know where the Weapons are.

Face it, they were destroyed in the Mid Ninties beause Iraq had no use for them and He it didnt want to Irk the ire of the U.N and U.S

You cant dismiss everything As circular logic. And your wrong about the paper tiger. The U.S got TEN TIMES more respect under Clinton than Its getting under Bush.

The U.S lost no respect in my eyes When the news of those Troops abusing prisoners leaked out, I was not surprised. Because In my eyes they had no respect to loose.


Clinton bombed an asprin factory, help an African nation get invaded and killed thousands of Afghans....respectable? NOT!

You know what the main complaint of the prisoners that were abused was... "they treated us like women" when i heard that i felt no compasion for them, because that shows that the worse thing that can be done to them is to be treated like women, which is strip them naked and make them bend over, then beat them... that sounds nice

Iraq is not a pisspoor country, at the start of the Gulf War they had the third largest military in the world, and saddam just kept it all to himself, Iraq was able to move division sizes of troops without our satelites seeing them, which is how we know they know the pattern, because our amazing undectable stealth planes that fly at mach 3 saw them

Iraq is not a pisspoor country, at the start of the Gulf War they had the third largest military in the world, and saddam just kept it all to himself, Iraq was able to move division sizes of troops without our satelites seeing them, which is how we know they know the pattern, because our amazing undectable stealth planes that fly at mach 3 saw them

Just a point of correction, 5th largest military in the world at the start of the first Gulf War.

You cant dismiss everything As circular logic. And your wrong about the paper tiger. The U.S got TEN TIMES more respect under Clinton than Its getting under Bush.

The U.S lost no respect in my eyes When the news of those Troops abusing prisoners leaked out, I was not surprised. Because In my eyes they had no respect to loose.


Clinton bombed an asprin factory, help an African nation get invaded and killed thousands of Afghans....respectable? NOT!

Also Kosovo. Im not Saying Clinton was the best president ever. I dont like him. But He got the U.S moe respect. Because the Actions he took were more Covert and Were justifyable in everyones eyes. As far as the entire world knew the Crimes in Kosovo were current. The Crimes in Iraq happened Years ago. Saddam was past him prime.

Well one report that probably wasnt released in most countries was that Saddams scientists were being ordered to develop weapons, and were being funded millions of dollars to do it but they just took the money for themselves (brave SoB's) making saddam believe that he had a massive bio and chem weapon arsenal

Clinton bombed the factory because that particular asprin company did not live up to their standard

You cant dismiss everything As circular logic. And your wrong about the paper tiger. The U.S got TEN TIMES more respect under Clinton than Its getting under Bush.

The U.S lost no respect in my eyes When the news of those Troops abusing prisoners leaked out, I was not surprised. Because In my eyes they had no respect to loose.


Clinton bombed an asprin factory, help an African nation get invaded and killed thousands of Afghans....respectable? NOT!

Also Kosovo. Im not Saying Clinton was the best president ever. I dont like him. But He got the U.S moe respect. Because the Actions he took were more Covert and Were justifyable in everyones eyes. As far as the entire world knew the Crimes in Kosovo were current. The Crimes in Iraq happened Years ago. Saddam was past him prime.


Every president we have ever had has been a criminal! I mean, Jimmy Carter directly enabled the murder of 2000 South Koreans. Would voting Libertarion really be a bad idea? I hate their immigration stance, But its pretty much the same as we have now.

Iraq is not a pisspoor country, at the start of the Gulf War they had the third largest military in the world, and saddam just kept it all to himself, Iraq was able to move division sizes of troops without our satelites seeing them, which is how we know they know the pattern, because our amazing undectable stealth planes that fly at mach 3 saw them


What the hell are you going on about. For a start Iraq had a large Army at the start of the Gulf war, not a technologically advanced one. At the end It was completely routed and was never again in a condition to defend the country from a full scale invasion. And I still dont see how They could find U.S Spy Satelittes. If you could just look and and see them they would be pretty useless. And there would be no way to dicern between them and regular Satelittes

Even Washington? :?


Oh yeah...he was a rebel

Clinton bombed the factory because that particular asprin company did not live up to their standard


I hope you are kidding.

Even Washington? :?


Oh yeah...he was a rebel


Some of our first leaders had slaves.

Well one report that probably wasnt released in most countries was that Saddams scientists were being ordered to develop weapons, and were being funded millions of dollars to do it but they just took the money for themselves (brave SoB's) making saddam believe that he had a massive bio and chem weapon arsenal

Dont waste my time with the Faulty intel Bullshit. Bush&co did not push so aggressivly and deliberately for war without knowing what they were doing.

Well one report that probably wasnt released in most countries was that Saddams scientists were being ordered to develop weapons, and were being funded millions of dollars to do it but they just took the money for themselves (brave SoB's) making saddam believe that he had a massive bio and chem weapon arsenal

Have Americans been brainwashed?

No more or less than any others.

Which is a disturbing sign of the American Empires Influence.
What americans Argue about is what All Westerners argue about.

Circular logic.
...
Circular logic.

Please explain how you think these are circular logic. Believing GW's blatant lies is evidence of brainwashing. Believing this war will bring peace is foolish. I see no circularity there.

Do you have some other reason to support the War? Then let's hear it.
Yes, I do, in fact. I liked your subtle attempt to insinuate that Americans can't possibly have another reason to support the war in Iraq. Nice try. I have reasons to support the war. Who says that there has to be but one?


Actually, I wasn't trying to claim there could be no other reason. Quite the opposite. I listed the most common excuses, then asked for yours.

Saddam made us look weak, what with his constant insolence toward and defiance of the United States. He had to be taken out eventually so as to assure the world that America isn't simply a paper tiger. Furthermore, his defeat will assure that in the future enemy nations will become more amicable to America's perfectly reasonable requests. Look at Syria. Was that possibly a political gambit on Ghaddafi's part so as to increase his standing with the USA? Perhaps, or maybe he was afraid that his unacceptable attitute and behaviors would be forcibly fine tuned.

Oh, we got a black eye, so we'll take care of that pipsqueak. How dare he act like the leader of a sovereign state to us...

America must have a more reliable partner in the Middle East than Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, control of Iraqi oil will in the future allow the USA to stabilize oil prices and thereby alleviate some of the leverage that our enemies in the Middle East have on us.

Stable oil prices? Not in this lifetime. Check out www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net

Iraq can serve as a starting point to transforming the Middle East into something more in line with our purposes, such as a democratic consumerist society which can provide hundreds of millions of new customers for our goods.

So, it's ok for us to turn the entire world into our little consumerist slaves? What arrogance. I guess that means that after we've dealt with the terrorists, we'll move on to "fine-tuning" Europe's socialist ideas. Force them to cut taxes & turn everything over to free enterprise. Especially American corporations, of course. Not that there'll be many that can call themselve "American", what with the mad rush to Bahamian incorporation to avoid what's left of US corporate taxes.

There are other reasons as well, but I'm rather tired. Feel free to respond with something other than your characteristic ciruclar logic.

Find me one modern government that hasn't lied to its people and I'll give you my credit card numbers. As far as I'm concerned, that offsets your little anti-American twist on things. So I'll join with what someone else said on page one... Piss off.

you live in america?

Cause for a couple weeks the hottest topic here was how much the CIA failed in the pre war. Which is a result from clinton because he banned the cooperation with any 'questionable' people, which happen to be the people that know what they're talking about. The CIA did what they could but failed (never has been to great). Ok if saddam didnt have bio weapons he was definantly trying to get them, and if he did get them what do you think he would have done? Sat there and just let them rot in some underground bunker. Honestly this man started a war his first year in power. He looks up to Josef Stalin... that should say enough

Who said it was a bad thing. He's just trying to get people to admit the truth.

And I'm pretty sure that the East-timorese governemnt Hasnt lied.

They havent been around long enough to have had the chance :D

I think the main problem is that no matter where we look, we have (almost) a very centralized media oligopoly in which individuals decide what news gets put where. This could have one of many different takes on news other than what actually happened. Do I personally think that we were justified in invading Iraq...Yes I do. But I dont think its a question of partisanship but rather a question of national security. And for all of you that try to throw out to lame fact that we are in Iraq for their oil...please!!! Only 7% of our oil comes from OPEC...and thats the entire Middle East, not just Iraq...Here's the kicker some of you may not know...47% of our oil...still comes from the good ole' US of A.
Many experts are suggesting that the national security of the US and its citizens abroad has been since the War on Iraq started:

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/News/2003/11/22/264836.html

2003-11-22

The U.S. government warned yesterday of an increased risk of terrorist attacks on Americans at home and overseas and stressed concerns the al-Qaida network could try to hijack cargo jets and crash them into targets.

Terrorist bombings overseas and an increased volume of threats against U.S. interests at home and in foreign countries led the Homeland Security Department and FBI to issue the public warning and an advisory to law-enforcement agencies, government officials and private-sector security personnel.

Also yesterday, the U.S. State Department issued a "worldwide caution" for Americans travelling abroad, urging that they "maintain a high level of vigilance" for possible terrorist attacks.

And more:

April 29 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. issued a new worldwide alert for its citizens, citing an increased threat of terrorist attacks against U.S, interests.

``The Department of State is deeply concerned about the heightened threat of terrorist attacks against U.S. citizens and interests abroad,'' the Department said in an e-mailed statement. There are indications the al-Qaeda network ``continues to prepare to strike U.S. interests abroad.''


The shootings in Saudi Arabia happened just a few days ago:

JIDDA, Saudi Arabia (CP) - Attackers sprayed gunfire inside a Saudi oil contractor's office Saturday, killing at least five westerners and wounding at least 25 others.

How long will Americans have to live in fear?

BTW, how much reserve oil does the US have?

Look it is obvious that Iraq still has WMDs, they must have just have been made invisble by Osama, because I saw him flying over the White House and and he looked at me funny...

This could easily be the next excerpt from a speech by, the wonderful leader of the US, (thank god I don't live there, I like to be able to think about politics and have a more worldly view) G W Bush.

Oh well so much for peace. On the up side war is really great for the economy, so what do a few hundred deaths matter when the govt. gets a bigger paycheck. They matter alot, but to everyone in Aus., US, UK and all the others who partook in the war, they atre just numbers, not real people.

Thank you for desensitising us world media.

you live in america?

Cause for a couple weeks the hottest topic here was how much the CIA failed in the pre war. Which is a result from clinton because he banned the cooperation with any 'questionable' people, which happen to be the people that know what they're talking about. The CIA did what they could but failed (never has been to great). Ok if saddam didnt have bio weapons he was definantly trying to get them, and if he did get them what do you think he would have done? Sat there and just let them rot in some underground bunker. Honestly this man started a war his first year in power. He looks up to Josef Stalin... that should say enough

Thats a laugh. The CIA ARE the questionable people. I dont care if its the hottest topic. Its a pathetic Retroactive Justification. Its not the truth because the Evidence doesnt point to it.

Have Americans been brainwashed?

No more or less than any others.
My country said no to the "coalition of the willing" because the UN inspectors were doing a credible job in Iraq. WHY did Bush kick them out?

Maybe they werent doing the job he wanted them to.

Revealing the truth is great. Expanding knowledge is wonderful. In my opinion, being a teacher is the highest calling - not doctor, not lawyer, not soldier.

But to use inflammatory speach... well that just doesn't fly. It won't fly with me, to be sure.

Saddam made us look weak, what with his constant insolence toward and defiance of the United States. He had to be taken out eventually so as to assure the world that America isn't simply a paper tiger.

What did Saddam do to defy the US, and why does it matter if a soverign nation doesn't adhear to the US? Why should it?

Furthermore, his defeat will assure that in the future enemy nations will become more amicable to America's perfectly reasonable requests.

Such as? Why should other nation's allow US business interest control their resource supply?

Look at Syria. Was that possibly a political gambit on Ghaddafi's part so as to increase his standing with the USA? Perhaps, or maybe he was afraid that his unacceptable attitute and behaviors would be forcibly fine tuned.

I'm confused, what is happening in Syria ~ do you mean Libya?

America must have a more reliable partner in the Middle East than Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, control of Iraqi oil will in the future allow the USA to stabilize oil prices and thereby alleviate some of the leverage that our enemies in the Middle East have on us.

Iraq can serve as a starting point to transforming the Middle East into something more in line with our purposes, such as a democratic consumerist society which can provide hundreds of millions of new customers for our goods.


So, then you agree that it is all about oil?

Even Washington? :?


Oh yeah...he was a rebel


Some of our first leaders had slaves.

not really a crime at the time.

Not real people? I can t believe you just said that. When i turn 18 my #1 option is to join the military so i can go fight for the country that has given me so much freedom, given me so many chances to become what i want to become. To many people take advantage of this here and i realized this at a young age. And someday i could become part of those statistics, just so many millions of people can live the same style of life i have lived.

I think the main problem is that no matter where we look, we have (almost) a very centralized media oligopoly in which individuals decide what news gets put where. This could have one of many different takes on news other than what actually happened. Do I personally think that we were justified in invading Iraq...Yes I do. But I dont think its a question of partisanship but rather a question of national security. And for all of you that try to throw out to lame fact that we are in Iraq for their oil...please!!! Only 7% of our oil comes from OPEC...and thats the entire Middle East, not just Iraq...Here's the kicker some of you may not know...47% of our oil...still comes from the good ole' US of A.
Many experts are suggesting that the national security of the US and its citizens abroad has been since the War on Iraq started:

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/News/2003/11/22/264836.html

2003-11-22

The U.S. government warned yesterday of an increased risk of terrorist attacks on Americans at home and overseas and stressed concerns the al-Qaida network could try to hijack cargo jets and crash them into targets.

Terrorist bombings overseas and an increased volume of threats against U.S. interests at home and in foreign countries led the Homeland Security Department and FBI to issue the public warning and an advisory to law-enforcement agencies, government officials and private-sector security personnel.

Also yesterday, the U.S. State Department issued a "worldwide caution" for Americans travelling abroad, urging that they "maintain a high level of vigilance" for possible terrorist attacks.

And more:

April 29 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. issued a new worldwide alert for its citizens, citing an increased threat of terrorist attacks against U.S, interests.

``The Department of State is deeply concerned about the heightened threat of terrorist attacks against U.S. citizens and interests abroad,'' the Department said in an e-mailed statement. There are indications the al-Qaeda network ``continues to prepare to strike U.S. interests abroad.''


The shootings in Saudi Arabia happened just a few days ago:

JIDDA, Saudi Arabia (CP) - Attackers sprayed gunfire inside a Saudi oil contractor's office Saturday, killing at least five westerners and wounding at least 25 others.

How long will Americans have to live in fear?

BTW, how much reserve oil does the US have?


22.45 Billion barrels in proven reserves, 12 largest in the world.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html#Econ

Here is the top 20.

1 Saudi Arabia 261,700,000,000
2 Iraq 113,800,000,000
3 Kuwait 97,680,000,000
4 Iran 94,390,000,000
5 United Arab Emirates 80,310,000,000
6 Venezuela 63,950,000,000
7 Russia 51,220,000,000
8 Libya 29,750,000,000
9 Nigeria 27,000,000,000
10 China 26,750,000,000
11 Mexico 25,030,000,000
12 United States 22,450,000,000
13 Qatar 14,510,000,000
14 Algeria 13,100,000,000
15 Norway 9,859,000,000
16 Brazil 8,507,000,000
17 Indonesia 7,083,000,000
18 Oman 5,703,000,000
19 Angola 5,691,000,000
20 Canada 5,112,000,000

And cherion you really should pay more attention to international sources. As I said What Americans Argue aout The entire western world does. Its news everywhere.

When i turn 18 my #1 option is to join the military so i can go fight for the country that has given me so much freedom, given me so many chances to become what i want to become. To many people take advantage of this here and i realized this at a young age. And someday i could become part of those statistics, just so many millions of people can live the same style of life i have lived.

How was Saddam a threat to your freedom?

If you really want to fight for freedom, you don't have to go to Iraq to do it ~ you can do it in the streets of America!

Well one report that probably wasnt released in most countries was that Saddams scientists were being ordered to develop weapons, and were being funded millions of dollars to do it but they just took the money for themselves (brave SoB's) making saddam believe that he had a massive bio and chem weapon arsenal

Dont waste my time with the Faulty intel Bullshit. Bush&co did not push so aggressivly and deliberately for war without knowing what they were doing.

But they didn't have a clue what they were doing.


Have you heard about Chalabi?

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/05/04/chalabi/index_np.html

Despite all the warnings they got from State Department and the CIA they put everything behind this snake oil salesman as their hand-picked "man for Iraq", now it turns out he's an Islamic fundamentalist who played them by preying on their complete ignorance of the region. They got sold ... if they knew what they were doing, this wouldn't have been possible.

As Joshua M Marshall wrote in his Talking Points blog:

"In the popular political imagination we're familiar with the neocons as conniving militarists, masters of intrigue and cabals, graspers for the oil supplies of the world, and all the rest. But here we have them in what I suspect is the truest light: as college kid rubes who head out for a weekend in Vegas, get scammed out of their money by a two-bit hustler on the first night and then get played for fools by a couple hookers who leave them naked and handcuffed to their hotel beds."

Not real people? I can t believe you just said that. When i turn 18 my #1 option is to join the military so i can go fight for the country that has given me so much freedom, given me so many chances to become what i want to become. To many people take advantage of this here and i realized this at a young age. And someday i could become part of those statistics, just so many millions of people can live the same style of life i have lived.

same here

Although I'm getting to the Air Force Academy

Not real people? I can t believe you just said that. When i turn 18 my #1 option is to join the military so i can go fight for the country that has given me so much freedom, given me so many chances to become what i want to become. To many people take advantage of this here and i realized this at a young age. And someday i could become part of those statistics, just so many millions of people can live the same style of life i have lived.

You know you really dont have an more freedom than anyone under a different style of government. I'n all governemnts if you step on thier toes you get arrested. No different in Iraq or the U.S.
I plan on joining the Army too. I'd like to learn more about the Politics of Conflict.

Have Americans been brainwashed?

No more or less than any others.
My country said no to the "coalition of the willing" because the UN inspectors were doing a credible job in Iraq. WHY did Bush kick them out?And your country, has, does, and will continue to lie to you as well.

This is a trait common to all countries, thus my statement still stands. No more or less than any others.

Have Americans been brainwashed?

No more or less than any others.
My country said no to the "coalition of the willing" because the UN inspectors were doing a credible job in Iraq. WHY did Bush kick them out?And your country, has, does, and will continue to lie to you as well.

This is a trait common to all countries, thus my statement still stands. No more or less than any others.
just that we stand out more because of our power

Find me one modern government that hasn't lied to its people and I'll give you my credit card numbers. As far as I'm concerned, that offsets your little anti-American twist on things. So I'll join with what someone else said on page one... Piss off.
What made you think that this was anti-American? Keep an open mind and perhaps you will understand that?

i get information from loads of international sources, im just getting sick of only hearing bad things the US does, and not hearing about the terrorist who attacked a pregnant lady and her 4 girls in a car, and killed them all, and shot the stomach of the lady to make sure that the child was dead....why isnt that all over the news?

But they didn't have a clue what they were doing.


Have you heard about Chalabi?

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/05/04/chalabi/index_np.html

Despite all the warnings they got from State Department and the CIA they put everything behind this snake oil salesman as their hand-picked "man for Iraq", now it turns out he's an Islamic fundamentalist who played them by preying on their complete ignorance of the region. They got sold ... if they knew what they were doing, this wouldn't have been possible.

As Joshua M Marshall wrote in his Talking Points blog:

"In the popular political imagination we're familiar with the neocons as conniving militarists, masters of intrigue and cabals, graspers for the oil supplies of the world, and all the rest. But here we have them in what I suspect is the truest light: as college kid rubes who head out for a weekend in Vegas, get scammed out of their money by a two-bit hustler on the first night and then get played for fools by a couple hookers who leave them naked and handcuffed to their hotel beds."

I suspect they knew exactly what they were doing. Chalabi aint a popular character in Iraq. They could surreptitiously assasinate him and few would suspect. I dont think they could have been wanting and planning for this war without knowing exactly what they were doing. Yet they have Scred up Every single Aspect. It must me purposeful.

But that begs the question, why do they want to keep everythinsg so unstable. As a cover for something greater to come?

i get information from loads of international sources, im just getting sick of only hearing bad things the US does, and not hearing about the terrorist who attacked a pregnant lady and her 4 girls in a car, and killed them all, and shot the stomach of the lady to make sure that the child was dead....why isnt that all over the news?

because the people do not want to hear things they do not want to hear
or the people only listen to the bad things AMerica does, better ratings

you live in america?

Cause for a couple weeks the hottest topic here was how much the CIA failed in the pre war. Which is a result from clinton because he banned the cooperation with any 'questionable' people, which happen to be the people that know what they're talking about. The CIA did what they could but failed (never has been to great). Ok if saddam didnt have bio weapons he was definantly trying to get them, and if he did get them what do you think he would have done? Sat there and just let them rot in some underground bunker. Honestly this man started a war his first year in power. He looks up to Josef Stalin... that should say enough

You're kidding, right? Clinton's people handed Bush's people reports showing that Al Qaeda was a problem, and that they were planning to hijack planes and use them as weapons. GW ignored it. He finally convened a committe about terrorist a few DAYS before 9/11. Then he tried to claim that what he had been told was being planned "couldn't have been foreseen".

As far as the "war his first year in power", how does Bush's war compare?

Have Americans been brainwashed?

No more or less than any others.
My country said no to the "coalition of the willing" because the UN inspectors were doing a credible job in Iraq. WHY did Bush kick them out?And your country, has, does, and will continue to lie to you as well.

This is a trait common to all countries, thus my statement still stands. No more or less than any others.
just that we stand out more because of our power
I'm not sure what you're refering to with this statement, so I'll attempt a response.
If you're refering to America, yes. We have a tendancy to put our scandals right out their for everyone to see. Add to that fact that we are the world's only remaining superpower and that many people have vested interest in the going ons of our government, and yes, we do recieve a disproportionate amount of attention.

i get information from loads of international sources, im just getting sick of only hearing bad things the US does, and not hearing about the terrorist who attacked a pregnant lady and her 4 girls in a car, and killed them all, and shot the stomach of the lady to make sure that the child was dead....why isnt that all over the news?

Because it is a single incident. Not some state military action. Plus its a bit too grizzly for people to want to hear about often.

The U.S gets talked about because they are the seat of power in the World, the centre everything revolves about it.

I dont remeber it exactly but A russian proverb that is vaugely relevant.
"The tallest poppy is the first to be cut"

Have Americans been brainwashed?

No more or less than any others.
My country said no to the "coalition of the willing" because the UN inspectors were doing a credible job in Iraq. WHY did Bush kick them out?And your country, has, does, and will continue to lie to you as well.

This is a trait common to all countries, thus my statement still stands. No more or less than any others.
just that we stand out more because of our power
I'm not sure what you're refering to with this statement, so I'll attempt a response.
If you're refering to America, yes. We have a tendancy to put our scandals right out their for everyone to see. Add to that fact that we are the world's only remaining superpower and that many people have vested interest in the going ons of our government, and yes, we do recieve a disproportionate amount of attention.
exactly

i get information from loads of international sources, im just getting sick of only hearing bad things the US does, and not hearing about the terrorist who attacked a pregnant lady and her 4 girls in a car, and killed them all, and shot the stomach of the lady to make sure that the child was dead....why isnt that all over the news?
Have you stopped and asked yourself why is there terrorism and how does one go about stopping it?

And if you are sick about hearing bad things? Turn off the TV and don't read the newspapers. :shock:

You cant dismiss everything As circular logic. And your wrong about the paper tiger. The U.S got TEN TIMES more respect under Clinton than Its getting under Bush.
Probably because Clinton kissed up to everyone else and was more amicable to your anti-American agendas. I dismissed your circular logic because it wasn't relevant at all to our discussion. Notwithstanding that simply stating "If you believe that the USA invaded because of WMDs you're a brainwashed fool." IS circular logic. Do you even know what a paper tiger is? It's a nation/whatever that is simply powerful in theory/on paper, not in reality. You may have lost respect for the USA, but you now know that the USA can project and effectively use force.


The U.S lost no respect in my eyes When the news of those Troops abusing prisoners leaked out, I was not surprised. Because In my eyes they had no respect to loose.
That's nice.

How the Hell can a Pisspoor Third world Country know U.S satelite "Patterns">?

They are not as easy to Spot as you might think. They usually are very far out. And If Iraq was as such a threat as the U.S said then There was no Excuse for it not being one of the most Heavilly surveiled countries in the world. They should know where the Weapons are.
Quite easily. The low-Earth orbits into which they're put are quite easy to calculate when they're launched. Spy satellites are not put into high orbits. DoD launches are probably fairly obvious, anyhow. Who says that the Iraqis deduced the orbits? They could have easily been fed the data on the orbits by enemies such as Russia, China, France, or Germany. They're easy to calculate..

If you dont know what im talking about, that was a Palestinian attacking an Israeli lady, and after that happened all you heard about was how Israel building the wall wasnt right, and that they shouldnt be seperating the city.

Its to gruesome? Just the other night there was video of a hockey goalie getting is throat slit by a skate and blood gushing out all over the ice... on national tv... so dont tell me its to gruesome to talk about... its just that the media doesnt want to report that the other side is doing bad things too, they want it to appear that the US is committing all the attrocities. but what they consider a attrocity is stripping a man naked bending him over and beating him, while on the other hand the terrorist have been known to tie a man to a fan, and grab on to his legs so that his arms and upper body twists while his legs are still, but i had to watch the history channel to find that out

i get information from loads of international sources, im just getting sick of only hearing bad things the US does, and not hearing about the terrorist who attacked a pregnant lady and her 4 girls in a car, and killed them all, and shot the stomach of the lady to make sure that the child was dead....why isnt that all over the news?
Have you stopped and asked yourself why is there terrorism and how does one go about stopping it?

And if you are sick about hearing bad things? Turn off the TV and don't read the newspapers. :shock:
Nice way to misquote someone, jackass. Reread it. It says "im just getting sick of only hearing about bad things the US does, and not hearing about the terrorist...", who are you, Michael Moore?

Yes there is only one way to stop terrorism, and thats by them all being dead...

You cant sit and negotiate with a man taht is willing to blowhimself up just so he can kill you. They are driven on hate alone. How else will you defeat a person like that. Give them a flower and ask them "cant we all just get a long?" Thats a good way to get yourself killed fast

Not real people? I can t believe you just said that. When i turn 18 my #1 option is to join the military so i can go fight for the country that has given me so much freedom, given me so many chances to become what i want to become. To many people take advantage of this here and i realized this at a young age. And someday i could become part of those statistics, just so many millions of people can live the same style of life i have lived.

Actually, it may not be your choice by then. Look up some info on Bush's effort to reactivate the Draft...

i get information from loads of international sources, im just getting sick of only hearing bad things the US does, and not hearing about the terrorist who attacked a pregnant lady and her 4 girls in a car, and killed them all, and shot the stomach of the lady to make sure that the child was dead....why isnt that all over the news?
Have you stopped and asked yourself why is there terrorism and how does one go about stopping it?

And if you are sick about hearing bad things? Turn off the TV and don't read the newspapers. :shock:
Nice way to misquote someone, jackass. Reread it. It says "im just getting sick of only hearing about bad things the US does, and not hearing about the terrorist...", who are you, Michael Moore?
I read quite well thanks and understand fully what the person was detailing and I offered a suggestion. Perhaps if we all had a better understanding why terrorism exists then we (people of the world) can work on resolving these issues rather than bombing the piss out of our dissenters.

No my name is NOT Michael Moore, although a kid growing up in my old neighbourhood had that name. Does that help?

Actually, it may not be your choice by then. Look up some info on Bush's effort to reactivate the Draft...

Please, please provide a source showing where Bush is trying to reactivate the draft. Please note the difference between "Bush" and "American Politician."

~The Great Thesisme

I know all about bush thinking about bringing the draft back, i think it would be a good thing, our country is getting to soft, and a good portion of our youth could benefit from some military service.

ooh yes. Its all the french's fault isnt it? There are still spy planes, And I think that the Surveilance would have been too heavy to hide from.

And Clinton DID project force, thats exactly the point. You may think I and all other people who dont agree with you are slaves to circular logic, but its pretty obvious you have selective Hearing. Or reading anyway.

I know all about bush thinking about bringing the draft back, i think it would be a good thing, our country is getting to soft, and a good portion of our youth could benefit from some military service.

Isnt it their Democratic Right to be soft if they so choose.

Yes there is only one way to stop terrorism, and thats by them all being dead...

You cant sit and negotiate with a man taht is willing to blowhimself up just so he can kill you. They are driven on hate alone. How else will you defeat a person like that. Give them a flower and ask them "cant we all just get a long?" Thats a good way to get yourself killed fast
Well then you will always be at war, and you will continue to read the same stories over and over.

Your solutions are anti people.

Its just my opinion, sure they can be soft if they want to. But if they are gonna live in the country and get the benefits they should be called to give something back from time, time. A lot of people just suck up the countries money while being on welfare

isnt killing someone that is trying to kill you considered self defense? and how is it anti people? Just a little bit ago a person was saying these arent real people just statistics. The US thrives on the belief that you can worship what you want, and many muslims live happily in the country, and are treated equally. But the terrorist hate us because were modern, immoral, and considered christian.

Its just my opinion, sure they can be soft if they want to. But if they are gonna live in the country and get the benefits they should be called to give something back from time, time. A lot of people just suck up the countries money while being on welfare

Uh, most of us already do give back to the country. Ever hear of taxes? Over here in the real world, we got to pay them. Every year. To our towns, our states, and our nation. I give back a good portion of my paycheck to my country; I think I'm entitled to some benefits.

At times the country needs more then just your money

Yes there is only one way to stop terrorism, and thats by them all being dead...

You cant sit and negotiate with a man taht is willing to blowhimself up just so he can kill you. They are driven on hate alone. How else will you defeat a person like that. Give them a flower and ask them "cant we all just get a long?" Thats a good way to get yourself killed fast

You think terrorist are driven by hate alone? How naive. Where do you think that hate comes from? It comes from the treatment the US has given them. We overthrow their sovereignty, install dictators more to our liking (Saddam was OUR man in the 80's), try to wipe out their culture & replace it with ours...

THAT's why that hate us so.

Its just my opinion, sure they can be soft if they want to. But if they are gonna live in the country and get the benefits they should be called to give something back from time, time. A lot of people just suck up the countries money while being on welfare

Uh, most of us already do give back to the country. Ever hear of taxes? Over here in the real world, we got to pay them. Every year. To our towns, our states, and our nation. I give back a good portion of my paycheck to my country; I think I'm entitled to some benefits.

You need to make a distinction between Country and Community. Governement and country. You've been listening to too much Cold war rhetoric. I like the land, But I dont see whats so great about the politicians that run the government.

At times the country needs more then just your money

If you feel that way, then by all means join the military. I have every bit of respect for the men and women in uniform. My brother's in the Army. Just don't say that I owe my country military service. I give them what I owe them.

Actually, it may not be your choice by then. Look up some info on Bush's effort to reactivate the Draft...

Please, please provide a source showing where Bush is trying to reactivate the draft. Please note the difference between "Bush" and "American Politician."

Try the fact that HIS budget draft called for doubling the budget of the Selective Service. The fact that (briefly) the Selective Service advertised for people to fill the Draft Boards that have been empty for decades. That disappeared off their website rapidly when somebody in the media actually paid attention to it.

I know all about bush thinking about bringing the draft back, i think it would be a good thing, our country is getting to soft, and a good portion of our youth could benefit from some military service.

Amazing ~ that was Hitler's pitch!

isnt killing someone that is trying to kill you considered self defense? and how is it anti people? Just a little bit ago a person was saying these arent real people just statistics. The US thrives on the belief that you can worship what you want, and many muslims live happily in the country, and are treated equally. But the terrorist hate us because were modern, immoral, and considered christian.
Were Iraqis trying to kill Americans before this war started?

It is anti-people because you state the only way to stop terrorism is to kill them all. The more you kill the more you create and this war on Iraq is a perfect example. Americans are less safe today than they were a year ago.

Please, please provide a source showing where Bush is trying to reactivate the draft. Please note the difference between "Bush" and "American Politician."

Try the fact that HIS budget draft called for doubling the budget of the Selective Service. The fact that (briefly) the Selective Service advertised for people to fill the Draft Boards that have been empty for decades. That disappeared off their website rapidly when somebody in the media actually paid attention to it.

Not to mention that his original plan for the Homland Security Dept. was for every one (after a certain age) to submit for a year!

Its just my opinion, sure they can be soft if they want to. But if they are gonna live in the country and get the benefits they should be called to give something back from time, time. A lot of people just suck up the countries money while being on welfare

Uh, most of us already do give back to the country. Ever hear of taxes? Over here in the real world, we got to pay them. Every year. To our towns, our states, and our nation. I give back a good portion of my paycheck to my country; I think I'm entitled to some benefits.

You need to make a distinction between Country and Community. Governement and country. You've been listening to too much Cold war rhetoric. I like the land, But I dont see whats so great about the politicians that run the government.

I'm confused. What Cold War rhetoric did I use?

Not you Sid, Cherion. There is a misconcpetion that Country equals government because politicans said it. It makes their job a lot easier.

US wasnt particullary worried about long range missles from Iraq, they were worried about saddam releasing some of his bio weapons in a US city that could kill thousands. And dont say he didnt have them because he used them on his own people he used them against Iran. Iraq had months to hide their weapons, and if you actually think of it, they could have took them and burried them in the middle of the desert, because they do know our satelite patterns and can move without detection
This is exactly what I was talking about when I started this thread!!


they were worried about saddam releasing some of his bio weapons in a US city that could kill thousands

Do you really believe THIS?


And dont say he didnt have them because he used them on his own people he used them against Iran
The UN inspectors were in Iraq for years after the Gulf war destroying these very chemicals, that were supplied by the US by the way.

There are good web sites that support the good work done by the UN in disarming Iraq:

http://www.comw.org/pda/0304bm27.html

Don't let everyone give you the answers. Look for the truths?

Quite easily. The low-Earth orbits into which they're put are quite easy to calculate when they're launched. Spy satellites are not put into high orbits. DoD launches are probably fairly obvious, anyhow. Who says that the Iraqis deduced the orbits? They could have easily been fed the data on the orbits by enemies such as Russia, China, France, or Germany. They're easy to calculate...

Uh, you're not saying you consider Russia, China, France and Germany as enemies of the USA? I hope you meant enemies of Iraq... And why would _they_ give that info to Iraq anymore that USA would?

In fact, satellite orbits aren't that easy to calculate, unless we're talking about geostationary satellites (the ones that seem to stay at one point in the sky at all times), because of lots of things, some of them natural (such as the tidal forces by the Moon) and some of them deliberate (such as changing the satellite's orbit with its own thrusters after launch).

Why do the people in Socialist countries trust their governments with almost total control of the economy, as well as their healthcare and many other aspects of their lives?

Blind Faith?

Blind Trust?

You don't like Bush, we get it. You don't like the idea of the U.S. controlling you/the world, we get it. There is nothing you can do about it. Anyone here who disagrees with you is not going to have their mind changed, they've heard better arguements with better research and stuck to their guns. If this thread was just so you could listen to a bunch of political liberals agree with you, then I guess you accomplished your goal. If it was to bring a valid issue to the attention of people who matter, well, sorry, this isn't valid, and no one who matters is paying attention.

Why do you think that because you live in a Capitalist society you are immune from manipulation?

Why do the people in Socialist countries trust their governments with almost total control of the economy, as well as their healthcare and many other aspects of their lives?

Blind Faith?

Blind Trust?

You don't like Bush, we get it. You don't like the idea of the U.S. controlling you/the world, we get it. There is nothing you can do about it. Anyone here who disagrees with you is not going to have their mind changed, they've heard better arguements with better research and stuck to their guns. If this thread was just so you could listen to a bunch of political liberals agree with you, then I guess you accomplished your goal. If it was to bring a valid issue to the attention of people who matter, well, sorry, this isn't valid, and no one who matters is paying attention.
It is this type of rhetoric that eats away at the very roots of your democratic foundation. You undermine your country's very existence as a bastion of democracy. Dignity and honour engenders respect and admiration. Wanton hate and disregard breeds contempt.

"The destruction of your enemies is the destruction of yourself."

~~~~~~The Dalai Lama~~~~~~

Why do the people in Socialist countries trust their governments with almost total control of the economy, as well as their healthcare and many other aspects of their lives?
If we don't like what they are doing, we vote them out of office.

Anyone here who disagrees with you is not going to have their mind changed, they've heard better arguements with better research and stuck to their guns.
Are you the spokesperson for the "other" people you refer to, or do they have a mind of their own?

If it was to bring a valid issue to the attention of people who matter, well, sorry, this isn't valid, and no one who matters is paying attention.
You are entitled to YOUR opinion. Are you suggesting that others who are paying attention, and disaree with you do not "matter"?

I have posted this a few times before, perhaps some have missed it.. The reason for the war fits in with the PNAC doctrine. It's fairly obvious if you know said doctrine. Let me re-post this again. Think about it. Tell me if it doesn't sound just about right.

The Project for the New American Century, or PNAC, is a Washington-based think tank created in 1997. Above all else, PNAC desires and demands one thing: The establishment of a global American empire to bend the will of all nations. They chafe at the idea that the United States, the last remaining superpower, does not do more by way of economic and military force to bring the rest of the world under the umbrella of a new socio-economic Pax Americana.

The fundamental essence of PNAC's ideology can be found in a White Paper produced in September of 2000 entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century." In it, PNAC outlines what is required of America to create the global empire they envision. According to PNAC, America must:

* Reposition permanently based forces to Southern Europe, Southeast Asia and the Middle East;
* Modernize U.S. forces, including enhancing our fighter aircraft, submarine and surface fleet capabilities;
* Develop and deploy a global missile defense system, and develop a strategic dominance of space;
* Control the "International Commons" of cyberspace;
* Increase defense spending to a minimum of 3.8 percent of gross domestic product, up from the 3 percent currently spent.


Most ominously, this PNAC document described four "Core Missions" for the American military. The two central requirements are for American forces to "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars," and to "perform the 'constabulary' duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions." Note well that PNAC does not want America to be prepared to fight simultaneous major wars. That is old school. In order to bring this plan to fruition, the military must fight these warsone way or the other to establish American dominance for all to see.

Why is this important? After all, wacky think tanks are a cottage industry in Washington, DC. They are a dime a dozen. In what way does PNAC stand above the other groups that would set American foreign policy if they could?

Two events brought PNAC into the mainstream of American government: the disputed election of George W. Bush, and the attacks of September 11th. When Bush assumed the Presidency, the men who created and nurtured the imperial dreams of PNAC became the men who run the Pentagon, the Defense Department and the White House. When the Towers came down, these men saw, at long last, their chance to turn their White Papers into substantive policy.

Vice President Dick Cheney is a founding member of PNAC, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is the ideological father of the group. Bruce Jackson, a PNAC director, served as a Pentagon official for Ronald Reagan before leaving government service to take a leading position with the weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin.


PNAC is staffed by men who previously served with groups like Friends of the Democratic Center in Central America, which supported America's bloody gamesmanship in Nicaragua and El Salvador, and with groups like The Committee for the Present Danger, which spent years advocating that a nuclear war with the Soviet Union was "winnable."


PNAC has recently given birth to a new group, The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which met with National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice in order to formulate a plan to "educate" the American populace about the need for war in Iraq. CLI has funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to support the Iraqi National Congress and the Iraqi heir presumptive, Ahmed Chalabi. Chalabi was sentenced in absentia by a Jordanian court in 1992 to 22 years in prison for bank fraud after the collapse of Petra Bank, which he founded in 1977. Chalabi has not set foot in Iraq since 1956, but his Enron-like business credentials apparently make him a good match for the Bush administration's plans.


PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" report is the institutionalization of plans and ideologies that have been formulated for decades by the men currently running American government. The PNAC Statement of Principles is signed by Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld, as well as by Eliot Abrams, Jeb Bush, Bush's special envoy to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad, and many others. William Kristol, famed conservative writer for the Weekly Standard, is also a co-founder of the group. The Weekly Standard is owned by Ruppert Murdoch, who also owns international media giant Fox News.


The desire for these freshly empowered PNAC men to extend American hegemony by force of arms across the globe has been there since day one of the Bush administration, and is in no small part a central reason for the Florida electoral battle in 2000. Note that while many have said that Gore and Bush are ideologically identical, Mr. Gore had no ties whatsoever to the fellows at PNAC. George W. Bush had to win that election by any means necessary, and PNAC signatory Jeb Bush was in the perfect position to ensure the rise to prominence of his fellow imperialists. Desire for such action, however, is by no means translatable into workable policy. Americans enjoy their comforts, but don't cotton to the idea of being some sort of Neo-Rome.

On September 11th, the fellows from PNAC saw a door of opportunity open wide before them, and stormed right through it.

Bush released on September 20th 2001 the "National Security Strategy of the United States of America." It is an ideological match to PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" report issued a year earlier. In many places, it uses exactly the same language to describe America's new place in the world.

Recall that PNAC demanded an increase in defense spending to at least 3.8% of GDP. Bush's proposed budget for next year asks for $379 billion in defense spending, almost exactly 3.8% of GDP.


In August of 2002, Defense Policy Board chairman and PNAC member Richard Perle heard a policy briefing from a think tank associated with the Rand Corporation. According to the Washington Post and The Nation, the final slide of this presentation described "Iraq as the tactical pivot, Saudi Arabia as the strategic pivot, and Egypt as the prize" in a war that would purportedly be about ridding the world of Saddam Hussein's weapons. Bush has deployed massive forces into the Mideast region, while simultaneously engaging American forces in the Philippines and playing nuclear chicken with North Korea. Somewhere in all this lurks at least one of the "major-theater wars" desired by the September 2000 PNAC report.


Iraq is but the beginning, a pretense for a wider conflict. Donald Kagan, a central member of PNAC, sees America establishing permanent military bases in Iraq after the war. This is purportedly a measure to defend the peace in the Middle East, and to make sure the oil flows. The nations in that region, however, will see this for what it is: a jump-off point for American forces to invade any nation in that region they choose to. The American people, anxiously awaiting some sort of exit plan after America defeats Iraq, will see too late that no exit is planned.


All of the horses are traveling together at speed here. The defense contractors who sup on American tax revenue will be handsomely paid for arming this new American empire. The corporations that own the news media will sell this eternal war at a profit, as viewership goes through the stratosphere when there is combat to be shown. Those within the administration who believe that the defense of Israel is contingent upon laying waste to every possible aggressor in the region will have their dreams fulfilled. The PNAC men who wish for a global Pax Americana at gunpoint will see their plans unfold. Through it all, the bankrollers from the WTO and the IMF will be able to dictate financial terms to the entire planet. This last aspect of the plan is pivotal, and is best described in the newly revised version of Greg Palast's masterpiece, "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy."


There will be adverse side effects. The siege mentality average Americans are suffering as they smother behind yards of plastic sheeting and duct tape will increase by orders of magnitude as aggressions bring forth new terrorist attacks against the U.S.A. These attacks will require the implementation of the newly drafted Patriot Act II, an augmentation of the previous Act that has profoundly sharper teeth. The sun will set on the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The American economy will be ravaged by the need for increased defense spending, and by the aforementioned "constabulary" duties in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. Former allies will turn on the Americans. Germany, France and the other nations resisting this Iraq war are fully aware of this game plan. They are not acting out of cowardice or because they love Saddam Hussein, but because they mean to resist this rising American empire, lest they face economic and military serfdom at the hands of George W. Bush. Richard Perle has already stated that France is no longer an American ally.

As the eagle spreads its wings, American rhetoric and their resistance will become more agitated and dangerous.


Many people, of course, will die. They will die from war and from want, from famine and disease. In America, the social fabric will be torn in ways that make the Reagan nightmares of crack addiction, homelessness and AIDS seem tame by comparison.


This is the price to be paid for empire, and the men of PNAC who now control the fate and future of America are more than willing to pay it. For them, the benefits far outweigh the liabilities.


The plan was running smoothly until those two icebergs collided. Millions and millions of ordinary people are making it very difficult for Bush's international allies to keep to the script. PNAC may have designs for the control of the "International Commons" of the Internet, but for now it is the staging ground for a movement that would see empire take a back seat to a wise peace, human rights, equal protection under the law, and the preponderance of a justice that will, if properly applied, do away forever with the anger and hatred that gives birth to terrorism in the first place. Tommaso Palladini of Milan perhaps said it best as he marched with his countrymen in Rome. "You fight terrorism," he said, "by creating more justice in the world."


"The People versus the Powerful is the oldest story in human history. At no point in history have the Powerful wielded so much control. At no point in history has the active and informed involvement of the People, all of them, been more absolutely required. The tide can be stopped, and the men who desire empire by the sword can be thwarted. It has already begun, but it must not cease. These are men of will, and they do not intend to fail."

Americans certainly are brainwashed. They love capitalism.

-------------------------
Free your mind!

Of course America has been brainwashed, we elected Bush remember!

Americans certainly are brainwashed. They love capitalism.

-------------------------
Free your mind!

I don't love capitalism. That's just what I told it to get it into bed.

Or Did you?

Of course America has been brainwashed, we elected Bush remember!

no we didn't, we elected Gore

Oh, so that's why they shrunk. :D

Sorry, now I've got that out of my system:

No, not everyone who supports the war is brainwashed. Similarly, some who oppose it are. Brainwashed is too strong a word on either side, but we're using it as soundbite shorthand for manipulated by government/other propaganda to the point of refusing to acknowledge 'ungoodfact'. You're right though, that anyone who has been brainwashed into supporting the war is stupid, because even those who are pro-war ought to acknowledge that the pro-war arguments put forward by Fox and their pet Bush are specious, illogical, and downright idiotic.
Some people may genuinely support this "War on Terror" for reasons they have personally worked out, followed through, and comprehensively understood. They may or may not be stupid, but aren't necessarily brainwashed. It's a sad state of affairs, though, that most of the pro-war camp are those whipped up into a frenzy by the cynical PNAC manipulation of post 11th September 2001 shock in the US, and pointed at a group of pre-existing political enemies with the instruction "Hate that."
Sorry, but it's time to wake up now, and stop stumbling around hitting things because you're in a bad mood.

Has America Been Brainwashed?

Not at all. The government and media would never do a thing like that to the fine, upgiveusyourmoneystanding citizens of of our great country. The establishtrustauthorityment is your friend.

Of course America has been brainwashed, we elected Bush remember!

no we didn't, we elected Gore

Remind me again when we changed off the electoral college?

Of course America has been brainwashed, we elected Bush remember!

no we didn't, we elected Gore

Remind me again when we changed off the electoral college?

We didn't although the idea of "democratic elections" (as it began in Athens in the 5th and 6th centruies BCE) means that whomever recieved a simple majority of votes was granted the post they were running for. The electoral college however uses a system of per capita representation (electorates) that supposedly represent the wants and desires of the country's population. Gore won one and Bush one the other.

Of course America has been brainwashed, we elected Bush remember!

no we didn't, we elected Gore

Remind me again when we changed off the electoral college?

We didn't although the idea of "democratic elections" (as it began in Athens in the 5th and 6th centruies BCE) means that whomever recieved a simple majority of votes was granted the post they were running for. The electoral college however uses a system of per capita representation (electorates) that supposedly represent the wants and desires of the country's population. Gore won one and Bush one the other.
Actually...

The point of the electoral college was to limit the power of large states with large populations. You see, unlike Europeans, U.S. Citizens have, and always have had, a large degree of loyalty to their state, not just to their country. The States of the Union are largely independent Republics, and their populations act accordingly most of the time. This is the mode of thinking that was on the founding father's minds when they designed the electoral college. Each state would receive a limited number of electoral votes, which limited their influence on the election. If 90% of the people in a large state like California voted for one candidate, that would be a huge and almost impossible to overwhelm advantage for the candidate and party who garnered such a majority in that area. So, by limiting the influence large states have on elections, we ensure that smaller states have a say-so in the running of the government, as is their right, being equal partners in the union.

People don't really believe this, they just say they do because they support the Republicans for the sake of the hidden race and class agenda. Even now, they can't open;ly admit that, so they have to pretend to swallow the terrorist and WMD hogwash.

Has America Been Brainwashed?

Not at all. The government and media would never do a thing like that to the fine, upgiveusyourmoneystanding citizens of of our great country. The establishtrustauthorityment is your friend.
LOL I love your new words!! :lol: