Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Apparently, Democratic Presidential Candidate Barrack Obama may have taken this whole political honesty thing a bit too far.

Senator Obama told a crowd that U.S. Military Forces Staying in Iraq in order to prevent a violent outbreak throughout the country and even possible Genocide is not a good enough reason to stay.

But you have to give the guy credit he's basically admitting to what Republicans have been saying about Democrat's stance on Iraq all this time.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QGF5700&show_article=1&image=large

Is it just me or is all of this a bit hypocritical? I mean the entire reason that the war hasn't gone in our favor is because it is being run by politicians not military leaders. And now we have another politician trying to do the same thing.

I hate the Rebublicans 100%

obama is absolutely correct.



so neocons play the humanitarian card and say we're there to free iraq. what a load of bullshit. and you're eating it all up and saying 'yum yum seconds please'




who spoon fed you that talking point? the reason the war hasnt gone in OUR favor (good choice of words) is because they do not want us there, there is a civil war there, and the business of policing foriegn civil war is a failure. its about OIL, not the women and children that they pretend to care about.

Originally posted by Grimm22
Is it just me or is all of this a bit hypocritical?
Remember, you can't spell "hypocritical" without p-o-l-i-t-i-c.

Sounds like a twisting of words. We really should just pull out and let them deal with their civial war. If some foreign super power had stuck their nose in to the US civil war I think things would have gone very badly for all involved.

Though taking words out of context, and spinning them to attack the other person is standard politics. After all they did it to a republican presidential hopeful too didn't they?

"I can't imagine anything worse than polygamy."

Originally posted by Schecter
obama is absolutely correct.



so neocons play the humanitarian card and say we're there to free iraq. what a load of bullshit. and you're eating it all up and saying 'yum yum seconds please'




who spoon fed you that talking point? the reason the war hasnt gone in OUR favor (good choice of words) is because they do not want us there, there is a civil war there, and the business of policing foriegn civil war is a failure. its about OIL, not the women and children that they pretend to care about.

You're just as bad as Deano with all your theories.

I hate how polorized this conflict has become. There are very strict ideological lines drawn in the sand over the fact that America even went to war in the first place.

Honestly, why not try to have a discussion about what to do with Iraq as it is currently without needing to argue about why America went to war?

I honestly don't think genocide is the worst case scenario for the Americans. If something is not done to prevent the situation in Iraq from becomming the same as it was in Afghanistan post soviet invasion the implications for America are another failed state that harbors extremeist elements. Genocide probably wont kill Americans, another state run Taliban style could.

The "continue fighting" vs "Bring the troops home" is also just retarted. America won the war with Iraq and then lost the war with the Mujahadeen. Thus, war is over, mission successful, then subsequently unsuccessful. A totally new and redefined concept of how to deal with the middle east, and very specifically with an Iraq in a power vaccum, needs to be thought up. It will unfortunatly probably require troops to be on the ground performing some type of combat opperations. I say unfortunatly for two reasons, 1) Troops on the ground means people dying, which is always a bad thing and 2) Many NATO countries are unwilling to properly support mission into the middle east, meaning that even if we were able to use military power effectively against the muj, most nations wouldn't.

HEY, I know! that guy who is the new special envoy to the middle east will sure help in Iraq. I bet they will trust him to have the best interests of the Iraqis in mind. Its not like he was one of the catalysts for potentially the most destabalizing war the region has seen in decades.

Originally posted by Grimm22
Apparently, Democratic Presidential Candidate Barrack Obama may have taken this whole political honesty thing a bit too far.

Senator Obama told a crowd that U.S. Military Forces Staying in Iraq in order to prevent a violent outbreak throughout the country and even possible Genocide is not a good enough reason to stay.

But you have to give the guy credit he's basically admitting to what Republicans have been saying about Democrat's stance on Iraq all this time.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QGF5700&show_article=1&image=large

Is it just me or is all of this a bit hypocritical? I mean the entire reason that the war hasn't gone in our favor is because it is being run by politicians not military leaders. And now we have another politician trying to do the same thing.



Why do you think we should stay in Iraq? What is this war for ?

oh god i hate that question. you know the answer, and its not the answer they had 5 years ago. now they tell you that its all for iraqi freedom and love and babies and flowers and puppies. then in the same conversation you'll likely hear "we should just nuke all them sand n*****s".

makes me sick every time.

Originally posted by Schecter
oh god i hate that question. you know the answer, and its not the answer they had 5 years ago. now they tell you that its all for freedom and love and babies and flowers and puppies. then in the same conversation you'll likely hear "we should just nuke all them sand n*****s".

makes me sick every time.


I know, but I wanted to see what Mr. Grimm would say. Most people who support this war, don't even know why they do. It's just what thier party tells them to do.


You know that.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I know, but I wanted to see what Mr. Grimm would say. Most people who support this war, don't even know why they do. It's just what thier party tells them to do.


You know that.

if Grimm gives you the answer you know to be true, what relevance does that have on the current Iraqi problem?

Originally posted by inimalist
if Grimm gives you the answer you know to be true, what relevance does that have on the current Iraqi problem?


What current Iraqi problem ? We have no business there. They had nothing to do with 9/11. Bush, Cheney, and the other Republican liars just keep coming with more bullshit excuses as to why we should keep our troops there, and have our family's children come home with missing arms and legs.


Think about it...it's been SIX ****ing years, and we still haven't found Bin Ladin...why ? Because we're looking in Iraq, thinking we're gonna find him. We overthrew Sadam Hussien ...YEAH !!!!...okay, now where's the guy who destroyed the World Trade Center, I thought he was on priority.

neocon talking point machine: oh so you think the world would be better off with saddam in power?

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
What current Iraqi problem ? We have no business there. They had nothing to do with 9/11. Bush, Cheney, and the other Republican liars just keep coming with more bullshit excuses as to why we should keep our troops there, and have our family's children come home with missing arms and legs.


Think about it...it's been SIX ****ing years, and we still haven't found Bin Ladin...why ? Because we're looking in Iraq, thinking we're gonna find him. We overthrew Sadam Hussien ...YEAH !!!!...okay, now where's the guy who destroyed the World Trade Center, I thought he was on priority.

after the soviet invasion of afghanistan there was a power struggle within the country. Years of wars followed. The winner of this war was eventually a very hard line group known as the Taliban, and the rest was history. The reason the Taliban won, aside from some lucky victories against the former soviet enclaves where they were able to comendere some good technology, was their willingness to be the most ruthless and brutal. To impose rules that people will be unwilling to break out of fear. afaik, the Taliban are the only government to effectively curb the sale of marijuana from their country, by boiling those who smoked it alive or having them beat publicly.

America is directly responsable for creating a situation in Iraq where there is no longer any centralized authority. The institutions that provide a decent standard live for people are destroyed and all of those educated or wealthy enough to have left are already gone. Investment into the country is down, and investors are targets for the insurgents.

Many people, for some reason, think that as soon as Americans leave, people are going to go back to sipping tea in some market square and that the ethnic problems that required a genocidal tyrant to surpress prior will subside. However, we have a population of individuals who are now have no autonomy in their life, no direction, no ability to rise above the problems that they experience on a daily basis. While the American invasion may have caused those problems, it is almost irrelevant to the discussion now, unless you want to talk about who these disenfranchised youth will be angry at.

Afghanistan was never occupied by America prior to 9-11. Terrorism is not caused by American military involvement in the region.

Originally posted by Schecter
neocon talking point machine: oh so you think the world would be better off with saddam in power?

1) again, this is with regards to why America went to war in the first place and does not effectively paint a picture of the conflict as it now exists.

2) would it have been?

the fact is that iraq is a puppet democracy and iraqis have no sense of patriotism/nationalism. i feel that the only solution for iraq is to destroy it. not with weapons but with new boarders and new sovereign nations. this wont be allowed because it would naturally lead to a new cooperative shiite iranian neighbor, essentially an expansion of iran.

thats my take on it all: split it up.

similar proposals have been made by republicans but with the notion that they would all have a central body of government. this imho would be an utter flop

Originally posted by inimalist

1) again, this is with regards to why America went to war in the first place and does not effectively paint a picture of the conflict as it now exists.

neocon talking point machine: *sputters* *ticks* well, whats done is done and now we are committed. if we leave it will be allout chaos and al qaida will take control, leaving us with another afghanistan debacle.

Originally posted by inimalist
2) would it have been?

neocon talking point machine: ZOMG YOU SUPPORT A BRUTAL DICTATOR????222

Originally posted by Schecter
the fact is that iraq is a puppet democracy and iraqis have no sense of patriotism/nationalism. i feel that the only solution for iraq is to destroy it. not with weapons but with new boarders and new sovereign nations. this wont be allowed because it would naturally lead to a new cooperative shiite iranian neighbor, essentially an expansion of iran.

thats my take on it all: split it up.

similar proposals have been made by republicans but with the notion that they would all have a central body of government. this imho would be an utter flop

I agree with everything you say

however, what is to be done about the groups who hope to make Iraq a Sharia run Calliph? I don't think they would be happy living under secular rule in any of the 3 regions, and giving them their own state is as counter-productive as letting them take one (if less bloddy)

I honestly don't have any answers. The Mujahadeen seem like an almost unbeatable opponent... through classical military intervention that is.

Why isn't America's no.1 priority to have 24/7 electricity in Baghdad?

Originally posted by Schecter
neocon talking point machine: *sputters* *ticks* well, whats done is done and now we are committed. if we leave it will be allout chaos and al qaida will take control, leaving us with another afghanistan debacle.


dude, if you can show me why Al Qaida or similarlly motivated groups wont take control in a post-withdrawl Iraq I would love to see it. I am certainly not ideologically attached to the war, I just see this as being a glaring issue that NOBODY is addressing

Originally posted by inimalist

dude, if you can show me why Al Qaida or similarlly motivated groups wont take control in a post-withdrawl Iraq I would love to see it. I am certainly not ideologically attached to the war, I just see this as being a glaring issue that NOBODY is addressing

im just expressing the great art of bullshiting and self exhoneration that the current administration puts forth.

my take: we have no control over the situation as long as we continue to try to push for a new iraq. irrationallity and hatred/despair brings about brutal dictators in this situation. the longer we stay there, the more irrational they become, it seems. al qaida and other terrorist organisations feed off of hatred sparked by u.s. occupations and misdealings. they publically acknowledge this. its an endless domino effect which leads to more and more recruits for every bomb we drop and every family we slaughter.

Originally posted by Schecter
the fact is that iraq is a puppet democracy and iraqis have no sense of patriotism/nationalism. i feel that the only solution for iraq is to destroy it. not with weapons but with new boarders and new sovereign nations. this wont be allowed because it would naturally lead to a new cooperative shiite iranian neighbor, essentially an expansion of iran.

thats my take on it all: split it up.

similar proposals have been made by republicans but with the notion that they would all have a central body of government. this imho would be an utter flop

Don't worry, America will be packing it's bags soon; then we'll have a huge civil war where with the Iran backed Shi'ites and the Saudi backed Sunnis will go head to head. Lose-lose for the Iraqi civilians, but in reality, as you noted, Democracy simply will not work in that region, they're not ready for it or simply do not want it; it was stupid to push it on them. Even the "purple thumb" voting thing was a joke, the people voted for whomever their Mullahs told them to vote for.

Not sure about your consensus of "it was for the oil" as the solereason. We're there, we could have control of the oil fields if we wished; gas dropping $75.00+ a gallon would help Bush's/his cabinets ratings.

Originally posted by Schecter
im just expressing the great art of bullshiting and self exhoneration that the current administration puts forth.

my take: we have no control over the situation as long as we continue to try to push for a new iraq. irrationallity and hatred/despair brings about brutal dictators in this situation. the longer we stay there, the more irrational they become, it seems. al qaida and other terrorist organisations feed off of hatred sparked by u.s. occupations and misdealings. they publically acknowledge this. its an endless domino effect which leads to more and more recruits for every bomb we drop and every family we slaughter.

the best part of the whole situation is, to me at least, that Bush Sr's military advisor is on record and shown in interviews to have known this would be the result of invading.

I don't know, I have no answers. Sure if America stays, the groups have more justification, but if they leave, stuff deteriorates, and they have more justification to hate America again. We should make the Muj wear uniforms, hahahahaha

Bah! On Osama...I mean Obama....That's a lot of "O"


...

Oh-Oh! (sorry I couldn't resist. )

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Bah! On Osama...I mean Obama....That's a lot of "O"


...

Oh-Oh! (sorry I couldn't resist. ) Oooookay. O_o

pfft you go in to a country and cause chaos then 5 years later because things dont go your way its fuk it lets go home lads. Pathetic. If America pulls out of Iraq any time soon its just evidence to how fuked up your leaders are. Wouldnt come as a surprise considering its been done once before but to pull out of a country in the middle of a civil war that they caused its just beyond words.

Then again, maybe a civil war will be better in the long run, depending how it turns out? Though wrong for (America) going in like it did, I love how people conveniently forget what kind of a dictator Saddam was. They were ****ed under Saddam, they're ****ed now and they'll probably be ****ed in the near future.

Oh, the U.K. government was behind America going in, so not sure it just our leaders...

Originally posted by Magee
pfft you go in to a country and cause chaos then 5 years later because things dont go your way its fuk it lets go home lads. Pathetic. If America pulls out of Iraq any time soon its just evidence to how fuked up your leaders are. Wouldnt come as a surprise considering its been done once before but to pull out of a country in the middle of a civil war that they caused its just beyond words. So what's your solution? Do you think their presence is helping things? Did you agree with your leaders pulling out?

Originally posted by The Grey Fox
I hate the Rebublicans 100%

and that has what to do with obama?

Way to twist words in an idiotic fashion, threadstarter.

Originally posted by inimalist
after the soviet invasion of afghanistan there was a power struggle within the country. Years of wars followed. The winner of this war was eventually a very hard line group known as the Taliban, and the rest was history. The reason the Taliban won, aside from some lucky victories against the former soviet enclaves where they were able to comendere some good technology, was their willingness to be the most ruthless and brutal. To impose rules that people will be unwilling to break out of fear. afaik, the Taliban are the only government to effectively curb the sale of marijuana from their country, by boiling those who smoked it alive or having them beat publicly.


What exactly is your point here ? I am not discussing Afghanistan, I am discussing Iraq. Our search for Bin Ladin in Afghanistan was justified, our invasion of Iraq, and the bombing of innocent civilians as well as the destruction of historical monuments was NOT.






Originally posted by inimalist
America is directly responsable for creating a situation in Iraq where there is no longer any centralized authority. The institutions that provide a decent standard live for people are destroyed and all of those educated or wealthy enough to have left are already gone. Investment into the country is down, and investors are targets for the insurgents.


Why were we in Iraq in the First Place ?


We overthrew an evil dictator..good, but there are plenty more evil dictators all over the world. Why did we never overthrow them?


China tortures thier own people, and animals as well. Why don't we overthrow the chinese government? What about Korea ? What about the African genocides that have been occuring for decades ?


Cuz they have no oil...that's basically what it comes down to. To help those people serves us in no way. To invade Iraq and Iran, and take away thier valued resources serves the government's financial agenda.

War is Business. It always has been. This is not a War for freedom. This was an invasion.






Originally posted by inimalist
Many people, for some reason, think that as soon as Americans leave, people are going to go back to sipping tea in some market square and that the ethnic problems that required a genocidal tyrant to surpress prior will subside. However, we have a population of individuals who are now have no autonomy in their life, no direction, no ability to rise above the problems that they experience on a daily basis. While the American invasion may have caused those problems, it is almost irrelevant to the discussion now, unless you want to talk about who these disenfranchised youth will be angry at.


What do you imagine we can possibly do for the Iraqi culture that would not take atleast 20 years ?


Do you honestly beleive that we can solve all thier problems in 5 years ? Be realistic...they have been living their lifestyles for centuries. They are not going to just "civilize" or "westernize" in a short period of time.


The agenda to create an American like society in Iraq and Iran may take a century if we are lucky.






Originally posted by inimalist
Afghanistan was never occupied by America prior to 9-11. Terrorism is not caused by American military involvement in the region.


What does this have to do with Iraq and Iran ?






Originally posted by inimalist
1) again, this is with regards to why America went to war in the first place and does not effectively paint a picture of the conflict as it now exists.



But why are we in Iraq ? Why is Iran next ?


Soon its gonna be Pakistan, India ...I can see it now ..." People of America..It's just been discovered that Pakistan and Bangladesh are harboring weapons of mass destruction, and have been providing safe havens for Terrorists. We must stop all nations who support terrorism"


Meanwhile, United States has been one of the greatest of terrorists to other nations. We have committed genocides as well, we have bombed many nations and people throughout history. We have supported Blood Diamond industries, as well as child labor.


WHAT THE **** makes US so much greater ????





Originally posted by inimalist
2) would it have been?



Would the world be better off without the Chinese, Korean, Russian, and African leaders as well ?

Originally posted by Goddess Kali



WHAT THE **** makes US so much greater ????



Because your bigger and have more weapons.

In the schoolyard of the word the US is the Hulking 15 year old in leathers with a flick-knife while Iraq is the stuttering nerd whom everyone knows is gonna snap and tear someones throat out with his teeth.

I suppose that makes the UK and Australia the class whores who gave it up to the US at 14...

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I suppose that makes the UK and Australia the class whores who gave it up to the US at 14...

Originally posted by Grimm22
Apparently, Democratic Presidential Candidate Barrack Obama may have taken this whole political honesty thing a bit too far.

Senator Obama told a crowd that U.S. Military Forces Staying in Iraq in order to prevent a violent outbreak throughout the country and even possible Genocide is not a good enough reason to stay.

But you have to give the guy credit he's basically admitting to what Republicans have been saying about Democrat's stance on Iraq all this time.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8QGF5700&show_article=1&image=large

Is it just me or is all of this a bit hypocritical? I mean the entire reason that the war hasn't gone in our favor is because it is being run by politicians not military leaders. And now we have another politician trying to do the same thing.

Well I guess that does it...he can kiss winning the election goodbye.










(Like he had a chance anyways...)

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I suppose that makes the UK and Australia the class whores who gave it up to the US at 14...

And Mexico is the creepy, drunk janitor.

Originally posted by Creshosk
So what's your solution? Do you think their presence is helping things? Did you agree with your leaders pulling out? I have no solution, its not my place to think of one. The bottom line is they started all of this regardless of what good they did they can't just pack up and leave the country to get on with a war they started. The UK shouldn't have been there in the first place so yea I do agree with it, this is Americas idiotic war its just Blair didn't have the balls to say no to Bush. The only thing that matters is that they threw Iraq in to chaos and now they are talking about leaving, them being there will do more good for the country than if they leave.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
(Like he had a chance anyways...)



Being a black guy, I doubt most of the United States was ready to elect him. That's how stupid most of us up here are.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Being a black guy, I doubt most of the United States was ready to elect him. That's how stupid most of us up here are.

imho obama is just another cookie cutter presidential candidate who really doesnt show the leadership characteristics we need. imho the only one fit for the job is edwards, but yes, people are stupid and the democrats likely wont want to nominate a white male....imagine that, huh?

Originally posted by BackFire
Way to twist words in an idiotic fashion, threadstarter.

I twisted words?!?

I'm just posting what OBAMA said. Don't blame me just because you don't want to believe it

Originally posted by Grimm22
I twisted words?!?

I'm just posting what OBAMA said. Don't blame me just because you don't want to believe it

he never even hinted to the idea that genocide is no big deal. you took a legit topic for discussion and dumbed it down to a level of idiocy hovering somewhere between foxnews and rush limbaugh

Originally posted by Schecter
he never even hinted to the idea that genocide is no big deal. you took a legit topic for discussion and dumbed it down to a level of idiocy hovering somewhere between foxnews and rush limbaugh

That essentially what he is saying in my opinion

If you ignore genocide that's basicly what you are saying.

So of course it pisses me off immensely that the UN and even the US have ignored genocide in the world (Especially Africa) as long as it has.

Originally posted by Grimm22
That essentially what he is saying in my opinion

your "opinion" is nothing more than libel.

Originally posted by Schecter
your "opinion" is nothing more than libel.

That's you're opinion on my opinion

Originally posted by Grimm22
That's you're opinion on my opinion

no, thats the fact regarding your opinion since he neither said that nor alluded to that. if you were a journalist you'd likely be fired (unless you were a fox 'journalist', in which case they would give you your own prime time segment)

Originally posted by Schecter
no, thats the fact regarding your opinion since he neither said that nor alluded to that. if you were a journalist you'd likely be fired (unless you were a fox 'journalist', in which case they would give you your own prime time segmant) or maybe beheaded by men in cool black masks?

Originally posted by Schecter
imho obama is just another cookie cutter presidential candidate who really doesnt show the leadership characteristics we need. imho the only one fit for the job is edwards, but yes, people are stupid and the democrats likely wont want to nominate a white male....imagine that, huh?



Hey, im not saying I want Obama either, he doesn't impress me much. I agree with a lot of what he says, but he impresses me no more than Hilary Clinton, Al Gore, John Edwards, or John McCain do.

Democrats in this case, seem to be rather bias trying to push for Hilary or Obama, for the sake of change, which yes is great, but not entirely relevant considering the current Iraqi crisis and the mistake this country made invading the Arab World.

Originally posted by Grimm22
That's you're opinion on my opinion


You do not know what you are talking about. If you truly beleive that Obama flat out said Genocide isn't a big deal, then you are blind.

Originally posted by Goddess Kali


Democrats in this case, seem to be rather bias trying to push for Hilary or Obama, for the sake of change, which yes is great, but not entirely relevant considering the current Iraqi crisis and the mistake this country made invading the Arab World.

Ummm, aren't they supposed to be pushing for "change" considering there is not a Democrat in the White House?

I'm trying to see how the thesis to that sentence but it is not coming to me.

"...not relevant considering the current Iraqi crisis and the mistake this country made invading the Arab World." - guess I just don't quite follow the point of this part

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
What exactly is your point here ? I am not discussing Afghanistan, I am discussing Iraq. Our search for Bin Ladin in Afghanistan was justified, our invasion of Iraq, and the bombing of innocent civilians as well as the destruction of historical monuments was NOT.

You have to remember that in my first post of this thread I said arguing about the reasons for war is useless and a waste of time. Further, I was and am still against the invasion of Iraq.

The reason I was discussing Afghanistan was to illustrate a situation that was in fact quite similar to Iraq. A major superpower destroyed whatever government and institutions existed and were eventually forced to retreat due to an asymmetrical war of attrition fought by the international Mujahadeen. From there, the most radical and fundamentalists group was able to take power through enforcing the most restrictive regime possible, which demoralized any opposition to them with fear.

Another potent example may be the Iranian Revolution of 1979. It started as a socialist movement against what was seen as an oppressive government that was too friendly to the West and was hogging oil revenue from the people. After the government fell, there was a struggle, and the rest is recent history. Now Iran is a theocratic oppressive regime that supports terror and wants a nuclear bomb.

How is this relevant to Iraq then? Well, for instance, Iraq is now in a power vacuum with no centralized authority. Extremist groups are fighting each other to impose their own style of Sharia law.

Do you really not see the connection?

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Why were we in Iraq in the First Place ?


We overthrew an evil dictator..good, but there are plenty more evil dictators all over the world. Why did we never overthrow them?


China tortures thier own people, and animals as well. Why don't we overthrow the chinese government? What about Korea ? What about the African genocides that have been occuring for decades ?


Cuz they have no oil...that's basically what it comes down to. To help those people serves us in no way. To invade Iraq and Iran, and take away thier valued resources serves the government's financial agenda.

War is Business. It always has been. This is not a War for freedom. This was an invasion.

You are right, get over it


Originally posted by Goddess Kali
What do you imagine we can possibly do for the Iraqi culture that would not take atleast 20 years ?


Do you honestly beleive that we can solve all thier problems in 5 years ? Be realistic...they have been living their lifestyles for centuries. They are not going to just "civilize" or "westernize" in a short period of time.


The agenda to create an American like society in Iraq and Iran may take a century if we are lucky.

Totally off topic. 1) You assume I support the idea of toppling dictators to establish democracies 2) American democracies at that (when I am not even American ) 3) and that I wanted it done in Iraq.

However. A situation that your or my dislike for couldn't prevent from occuring occured, and since time travel is not yet a possible solution, we need to deal with reality as it is now, not how we wanted it to be years ago.

To tell you the honest truth, I don't care too much personally about what happens to Iraq. The problem is, in other situations where the most extreme elements of radical Islam have been able to take over a government, it has become a dangerous situation for the World.


Originally posted by Goddess Kali

What does this have to do with Iraq and Iran ?

A common argument to mine is to say that the only reason we need to be afraid of extreme Islam is because we are over there fighting wars, and that to pull out of Iraq would end the animosity towards Americans felt by those who live there.

There may be some truth to this, and in Canada even more so, however, it wasn't an argument you made, so... I guess it has nothing to do with what we are talking about

Originally posted by Goddess Kali

But why are we in Iraq ? Why is Iran next ?

We both know the answer to this

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Soon its gonna be Pakistan, India ...I can see it now ..." People of America..It's just been discovered that Pakistan and Bangladesh are harboring weapons of mass destruction, and have been providing safe havens for Terrorists. We must stop all nations who support terrorism"



Conspiracy Forum

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Meanwhile, United States has been one of the greatest of terrorists to other nations. We have committed genocides as well, we have bombed many nations and people throughout history. We have supported Blood Diamond industries, as well as child labor.


WHAT THE **** makes US so much greater ????

Not even close to what I was arguing, but sure, what makes the US greater is that you can freely access the internet and speak your opinion on such corrupt actions without the secret police coming to your door and making you disappear. Man, leftists don't seem to appreciate the real core of western values. Like freedom... /sigh

Originally posted by Goddess Kali
Would the world be better off without the Chinese, Korean, Russian, and African leaders as well ?

Would it?

Originally posted by Schecter
the fact is that iraq is a puppet democracy and iraqis have no sense of patriotism/nationalism. i feel that the only solution for iraq is to destroy it. not with weapons but with new boarders and new sovereign nations. this wont be allowed because it would naturally lead to a new cooperative shiite iranian neighbor, essentially an expansion of iran.

thats my take on it all: split it up.

similar proposals have been made by republicans but with the notion that they would all have a central body of government. this imho would be an utter flop

correct outlook but i think for different reasons...even if all external influences such as Iran were taken out of the equation...the reason the break up of Iraq would never work is that all the resources that matter ( oil and that's about it) are in what would become Shia and kurdish controlled areas leaving the sunni's with absolutely nothing...except a desire to gain those resources

Originally posted by Schecter
imho obama is just another cookie cutter presidential candidate who really doesnt show the leadership characteristics we need. imho the only one fit for the job is edwards, but yes, people are stupid and the democrats likely wont want to nominate a white male....imagine that, huh?

Yep. Black aside, he lacks savvy.

Originally posted by jaden101
correct outlook but i think for different reasons...even if all external influences such as Iran were taken out of the equation...the reason the break up of Iraq would never work is that all the resources that matter ( oil and that's about it) are in what would become Shia and kurdish controlled areas leaving the sunni's with absolutely nothing...except a desire to gain those resources

well i think the trick is division of those resources, giving each their share. yeah, im well aware of the years of bitchery this would bring about, but far less than just leaving the sunis with nothing more than a sandpit. well....what other option is there really *shrug*

Originally posted by jaden101
correct outlook but i think for different reasons...even if all external influences such as Iran were taken out of the equation...the reason the break up of Iraq would never work is that all the resources that matter ( oil and that's about it) are in what would become Shia and kurdish controlled areas leaving the sunni's with absolutely nothing...except a desire to gain those resources

Even if you could come over the natural resources problem, you would still have nations that nobody wants. Turkey will not accept a Kurdish state. Saudi Arabia does not want a state loyal to Iran and Iran surely does not want another state like Saddam around. But Iran it's opinion is least relevant.

The only thing that can happen here is civil war, and we best pray that somebody secular stands up and takes over and forces it's people to comply, although it seems unlikely. Religion gives you a lot of followers. The only thing the US can realistically do is find somebody in Iraq who is cruel and does not hate the US, then give that guy all the support he needs to create a state like the one Saddam had created.

If Muslims want to dwell in their 1000 year old state of brutal sectarian hate. Let them!

Stacking heads on street corners, blowing up mosques with other Muslims in them, raping women who hold down jobs, blowing up kids in market places is their choice they made after Saddam fell.

Saddam routinely killed and tortured fellow Muslims and none of this so called worldwide Muslim Brotherhood (LMAO) gave a damn. I must have missed the Brit Muslims going over to Baghdad to blow themselves up becuase they cared so much!!

Without the coalition ousting Saddam the lousy Shi'ites would still be having their ears cut off by Saddam (ears being regrafted by british doctors I might add) instead of being the majority in the Government!!! And for this they dare to attack British troops! Scum.

So if they want to butcher each other now that they are off Saddam's leash..let them! It seems Saddam knew why he kept his fellow Muslims on a lead because he knew they had not evolved away from the dark ages. As has been proven once they choose to use their freedom to brutally butcher each other!

They had a choice post Saddam and they chose to butcher their neighbours with the barbarity and hate their religion thrives on.

Leave them to it.

Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
If Muslims want to dwell in their 1000 year old state of brutal sectarian hate. Let them!

Stacking heads on street corners, blowing up mosques with other Muslims in them, raping women who hold down jobs, blowing up kids in market places is their choice they made after Saddam fell.

Saddam routinely killed and tortured fellow Muslims and none of this so called worldwide Muslim Brotherhood (LMAO) gave a damn. I must have missed the Brit Muslims going over to Baghdad to blow themselves up becuase they cared so much!!

Without the coalition ousting Saddam the lousy Shi'ites would still be having their ears cut off by Saddam (ears being regrafted by british doctors I might add) instead of being the majority in the Government!!! And for this they dare to attack British troops! Scum.

So if they want to butcher each other now that they are off Saddam's leash..let them! It seems Saddam knew why he kept his fellow Muslims on a lead because he knew they had not evolved away from the dark ages. As has been proven once they choose to use their freedom to brutally butcher each other!

They had a choice post Saddam and they chose to butcher their neighbours with the barbarity and hate their religion thrives on.

Leave them to it.

Look up the term Mujahadeen.

The vast majority of muslims, whether in Iraq or not, do not support violence (even if they are on the side of resisting American control of Iraq).

Many Iraqi civilians, especially the women, do actually want US troops there (its more complex than that of course, seeing as many of them also would be strong Iraqi nationalists). However, people in the west are never exposed to these voices through our media. This is not sufficent justification for the war or the continued occupation imho, but to uniformly claim that the citizens of Iraq are not happy to be done with Saddam is ignorant to such a degree that, were I not a more mature individual, I would say it bordered on "racial" prejudice (not that I think Islam is a race, but statistically speaking there are more black than arab muslums, and my assumption is that you are speaking of the Arabs and not the blacks).

LinkTV offers an english translation of news programs from the Middle East. It is EXACTLY the same as ours, and when they do interview the common man, be it in Gaza, Terhan or Jerusalem, they have the same concerns and priorities that we do. It is very easy to look at the world the TV shows us and just assume that all muslums are crazy psychopaths, but it is really not the case.

The normal people who live in Iraq, not the fundamentalist religious nuts, want electricity, running water, schools and employment. They do not want to be blown up or to fight their brothers.

The comparison you are making would be like me saying that all Christians are violent and evil because of the actions of those associated with the Army of God (who is still to this day responsible for much more terrorism in the US than Al Qaeda could ever hope for in their greatest wet dream).

OH, and to be frank, the Muslim Brotherhood was not a supporter of Saddam Hussein. While they both are Sunnis, Saddam was not interested in harboring groups that would compete with him for power in the country, and extremeist Islamic groups would have certainly seen Iraq as being quite Western. Remember, these are the same people who now say that Hamas has sold out to Western powers by not brutally murdering more people in the Gaza strip.

I never said THE Muslim Brotherhood. i meant this supposed Muslim Brotherhood that exists whenever any Muslim anywhere in the world is wronged (well, wronged by any non_Muslims that is).

And you only have to read the most basic and common of reports from Iraq to see that it is literally next dorr neighbour killing next door neighbour.
Mobs ripping apart their own.

Not 'militants' or Mujahadeen or so called fighters against occupation. But ordinary Muslims.
Butchering each other because they are the wrong Muslim.

American trrops were told to be careful of mosques 9despite them being used as firing points) out of respect. Muslims on all sides then routinely blew them up with other Muslim in them!

More muslims are killed, tortured and oppressed by other Muslims than anyone else.
Muslims in The West have more freedoms and safety not only than most Muslims in Muslim countries but also compared to any non-Muslims in Muslim countries.

This pandering to the world's most barbaric, enevolved religion and it's creeping power throughout the entire Western world has to stop. This self blame and self hate has to stop Or all you bleaters will wake up in a country that will have you crying for what once was. Bush and all.

Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
I never said THE Muslim Brotherhood. i meant this supposed Muslim Brotherhood that exists whenever any Muslim anywhere in the world is wronged (well, wronged by any non_Muslims that is).

ya, THE Islamic Brotherhood is an Egyptian organization started by Said Qutb. What you are talking about is either "Jihad" or the Mujahadeen.

Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
And you only have to read the most basic and common of reports from Iraq to see that it is literally next dorr neighbour killing next door neighbour.
Mobs ripping apart their own.

1) Shia is not Sunni.

2) this is just statistically false. There are more people in Iraq who are not killing eachother than are.

3) Yes, there is violence, nobody is saying that there is not

4) What point is this trying to make...

Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
Not 'militants' or Mujahadeen or so called fighters against occupation. But ordinary Muslims.
Butchering each other because they are the wrong Muslim.

/sigh

point?

Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
American trrops were told to be careful of mosques 9despite them being used as firing points) out of respect. Muslims on all sides then routinely blew them up with other Muslim in them!

what I read here is: They are unwilling to be civilized so we shouldn't be. which is attrocious

Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
More muslims are killed, tortured and oppressed by other Muslims than anyone else.
Muslims in The West have more freedoms and safety not only than most Muslims in Muslim countries but also compared to any non-Muslims in Muslim countries.

yes, and?

Originally posted by 42ndStreetFreak
This pandering to the world's most barbaric, enevolved religion and it's creeping power throughout the entire Western world has to stop. This self blame and self hate has to stop Or all you bleaters will wake up in a country that will have you crying for what once was. Bush and all.

I think you should try speaking to a normal person from the middle east.

Do you assume that because the army of God kills abortion doctors that all Christians want to kill abortion doctors?

but, all in all, you are REALLY ignorant of this part of the world. Your use of the term Muslim Brotherhood is a glaring example of this. Learn something, figure out what your point is, and then we can have a mature discussion