• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

war in Iraq ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
#201
Perhaps Snopes.com has more credibility with you

Oh, and precisely which part of the story is horse puckey? The Kuwaiti incubutor stuff, right? I hope so, because it's been thoroughly debunked.

From that link

Nayirah's testimony came at a time when Americans were wondering how to respond to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on August 2. Her story was cited frequently in the congressional debate over war authority, which was approved by only five votes in the Senate. President Bush mentioned it often as a reason for taking firm action. It was a major factor in building public backing for war.
Click to expand...

This seems to fly in the face of you assertion:

American public support for our troops was high from the beginning, I know - I was there to see it first hand.
Click to expand...

I get what you mean, you saw the public support at the departures and rightfully so, but then again how else would the public react to the departures?
 
#202
Originally posted by Phil Smith
[B
Oh, and precisely which part of the story is horse puckey? The Kuwaiti incubutor stuff, right? I hope so, because it's been thoroughly debunked.
[/B]
Click to expand...

It would seem that since we had troops on the ground by August 7th, that a story that came out on October 10th would not exactly be responsible for "getting us involved".
 
#203
Originally posted by Chris Brodowski

This nation is one of huge and cruel corporations who will take every chance they get to spueeze the American and foreign worker out of every possible bit of money.
Click to expand...

Good point. Ever wonder why the economy sucks? Maybe it has something to do with practically every factory in America laying off it's workers and shipping to Mexico.

I guess that's the greatness of NAFTA in effect.

p.s. no offense to any Mexicans on the board. It's just disheartening when corporations sell out on their own people for cheap labor.
 
#204
I think because of the U.S government approach to the war in Iraq, millions of people from europe and the other east countries, have wrong opinions and thoughts about the U.S as a whole. I've clearly seen that the U.S government approach doesn't reflect the situation well there. I wanna say that there are many people who think more logical and smarter than the U.S government. Actually, everyone is against the teror and It's normal that people have different ideas abuot this situation.
 
#207
Originally posted by kafka
I think because of the U.S government approach to the war in Iraq, millions of people from europe and the other east countries, have wrong opinions and thoughts about the U.S as a whole. I've clearly seen that the U.S government approach doesn't reflect the situation well there. I wanna say that there are many people who think more logical and smarter than the U.S government. Actually, everyone is against the teror and It's normal that people have different ideas abuot this situation.
Click to expand...

Well, put simply, we generally don't like or trust Bush. Personally he's continually proving himself to be the idiot I always knew he was.
And don't even get me on started on Tony Blair...what a wanker. :rolleyes:
 
#213
Originally posted by Brad Johnson


Cool. To recap, the choices were:

1. Ousting Saddam and start a war
2. Sit back and do nothing and let a tyrant do what he wants.


IMO there are other options. The more clairvoyant among us feel that trying the weapons inspection route again will fail. I still consider this an option so that would be number...

3. (no specific order). Granted this may be considered by some the same as number 2. Then again, anything short of a war would be considered number 2 by some;)

4. Economic sanctions.

5. Get a true UN accord and act on it.

I'm not saying any of these is the way to do things, I just don't agree that it's an either/or situation. There are more than two options, I'm sure there's more than I just mentioned.
Click to expand...



Well Brad, after listing your options, I still believe choice 1 is the best. Regardless if we get UN on Bush's side, don't you think the Iraqi's will be one step ahead of in trying to hide the weapons? They got home field advantage here.
 
#214
Originally posted by jrthebassguy




Well Brad, after listing your options, I still believe choice 1 is the best. Regardless if we get UN on Bush's side, don't you think the Iraqi's will be one step ahead of in trying to hide the weapons? They got home field advantage here.
Click to expand...

No, I can't honestly say that I think starting a war is the best thing.

Once we defeat the "Axis of Evil" (that would make even Stan Lee blush;)) will the world be a safe place or as one article stated will it spread terrorism in a shotgun fashion... all over the world?

Anyway, my point was that there were more than two either/or choices.
 
#216
only just saw the thread, so i'l just give my opinion as i cant be bothered to read all 214 posts!!!!

I dont support war in any instance, but i do think that saddam hussein is a danger. i'm just glad the decision isn't mine to make, because i couldn't!
 
#219
I'd prefer the UN actually put in place a resolution that they'd stick to.

However, as far as I'm concerned, active engagement in Iraq ended with the US withdrawal contingent upon inspections (among other items nobody has enforced). Since Iraq has violated so much of the cease-fire agreement, I guess the cease-fire is no longer valid.

Seems to me that just because the UN has had no backbone (along with previous US administration), it doesn't mean we should continue down the road of appeasement.
However, it would make more sense to me to see the UN get inspectors back in with unrestricted access and actively enforce economic sanctions with serious penalties to countries who circumvent the sanctions.

Only after these means prove ineffective should we take matters upon ourselves.

There's no problem with the existing resolution, except nobody enforces it. I am of the opinion that if the US came to the UN asking to merely implement the existing resolution, the UN would have pared it down to less. By going for a tougher policy, the UN is going for the original agreement...go figure.

Diplomacy...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back