War on "Terror"

[shadow_alchemist92]

i never said that he didnt have the power nor right to declare war on iraq, just that it doesnt seem right for him to say that its justified because of terrorism. this war isnt about terrorism, its personal, and it was being planned since the 1980's, im guessing, when G. Bush Sr. supplied Saddam w/ weapons of mass destruction  

[Der Freischuetz]

shadow_alchemist92

i never said that he didnt have the power nor right to declare war on iraq, just that it doesnt seem right for him to say that its justified because of terrorism. this war isnt about terrorism, its personal, and it was being planned since the 1980's, im guessing, when G. Bush Sr. supplied Saddam w/ weapons of mass destruction

The Iran/Iraq War was a different time. It's no like we were good buddies with the Iraqis, it's that we didn't want to see a nation that was openly hostile to us win a war. You have to choose your allies for the time period. At that time, Iraq was the lesser of two evils. We figured he'd use the weapons provided, but we couldn't have realized that he'd use them against his own people.

But tell me, why should I believe that this is nothing more than a vendetta? What evidence is there that would prove that this is nothing but a personal battle? Otherwise I'll simply believe that this is just another simple conspiracy theory.  

[shadow_alchemist92]

as i mentioned before, the quotes from Bush Senior is the first bit of evidence. second, im assuming your old enough to remember or have heard of saddam trying to kill Bush. These definately provide the first step, motive. then there's the evidence of 9/11 not being done by terrorists, and instead by the government. this provides a way for bush to justify the war. and last, even though bush suuplied saddam w/ weapons for a "justifiable" reason, we cant really claim that were attacking iraq to get those weapons from him. if they were immoral to have, or dangerous to have, then why'd bush have them to begin with  

[Der Freischuetz]

shadow_alchemist92

as i mentioned before, the quotes from Bush Senior is the first bit of evidence. second, im assuming your old enough to remember or have heard of saddam trying to kill Bush. These definately provide the first step, motive. then there's the evidence of 9/11 not being done by terrorists, and instead by the government. this provides a way for bush to justify the war. and last, even though bush suuplied saddam w/ weapons for a "justifiable" reason, we cant really claim that were attacking iraq to get those weapons from him. if they were immoral to have, or dangerous to have, then why'd bush have them to begin with

Yes, I know Hussein attempted to kill Bush Sr. Sure, Bush Sr. said he hated Hussein. Really, how many people did hate Hussein? Is it really that big a deal?

And what "evidence," praytell, is there that terrorists did not attack the Twin Towers and the Pentagon? Don't just send me a link to Loose Change, give me proof that hasn't been disproven by Popular Mechanics. Popular Mechanics article. Or the National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST article.

You're just determined to believe that the evil gub'mint is lying to you, aren't you?  

[AliasL]

The whole war is most likely not going to end peacefully. How could it? If we suddenly declared peace, wouldn't they be angry or upset? The main reason we 'started' the war, was because we thought Iraq had hidden weapons, I think. However, now it's for oil. I think we need to resolve our problems vocally and admit that we were wrong. What we should be focusing our attention on now, should be finding other fuel sources. That might calm things down, but I'm not sure of the temper of our 'enemy'.  

[shadow_alchemist92]

Der Freischuetz

Yes, I know Hussein attempted to kill Bush Sr. Sure, Bush Sr. said he hated Hussein. Really, how many people did hate Hussein? Is it really that big a deal?

And what "evidence," praytell, is there that terrorists did not attack the Twin Towers and the Pentagon? Don't just send me a link to Loose Change, give me proof that hasn't been disproven by Popular Mechanics. Popular Mechanics article. Or the National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST article.

You're just determined to believe that the evil gub'mint is lying to you, aren't you?

ok, first off, bush saying he hated saddam was a big deal because he was in a position of power in the world's biggest military power. he knew that his saying that he hated saddam publically would greatly influence the people of America. second, sorry, but my computer isnt loading the NIST page, so i only saw the pop. mechanics page, but from what i saw there, i saw a few problems.

first, on the part about the pentagon and the plane not leaving holes where the wings would be, they did not explain the lack of any imprint of the wings. they explained why there are holes, but a plane would still leave at least a dent or mark on the wall where it crashed. second, they said nothing of the plane not leaving any mark on the lawn in front of the pentagon from where it touched ground. third, it also did not say anything about a plane keeping control and speed after hitting numerous light poles.  

[Der Freischuetz]

My Deep Sadness

The whole war is most likely not going to end peacefully. How could it? If we suddenly declared peace, wouldn't they be angry or upset? The main reason we 'started' the war, was because we thought Iraq had hidden weapons, I think. However, now it's for oil. I think we need to resolve our problems vocally and admit that we were wrong. What we should be focusing our attention on now, should be finding other fuel sources. That might calm things down, but I'm not sure of the temper of our 'enemy'.

WMD's weren't the only reason we went to Iraq. Another reason we went is because of Hussein's crimes against humanity. Heck, land and resources would've been reason enough to go there. We'll probably get some oil out of this, so it works out quite well for us. I would've supported this war if it was for land and resources, because that is the reason that most wars are fought, but that wasn't the reason we went to war with Iraq in the first place.

shadow_alchemist92

ok, first off, bush saying he hated saddam was a big deal because he was in a position of power in the world's biggest military power. he knew that his saying that he hated saddam publically would greatly influence the people of America. second, sorry, but my computer isnt loading the NIST page, so i only saw the pop. mechanics page, but from what i saw there, i saw a few problems.

first, on the part about the pentagon and the plane not leaving holes where the wings would be, they did not explain the lack of any imprint of the wings. they explained why there are holes, but a plane would still leave at least a dent or mark on the wall where it crashed. second, they said nothing of the plane not leaving any mark on the lawn in front of the pentagon from where it touched ground. third, it also did not say anything about a plane keeping control and speed after hitting numerous light poles.

(I can't get the NIST page to load, either. It loaded when I first posted this, but it isn't working now.) The Pentagon is an armored building. The wings of Flight 77 were probably sheered off when it hit the building. Also, fuel is stored in the wings of the aircraft, so the burning fuel disintegrated the wings. At the speed the plane was travelling, which was about 530 miles per hour, hitting a light pole wouldn't have done a whole lot to the aircraft. Plus, all light poles have bases that detach from the ground if something runs into them, usually a car, for safety reasons.

In the mean time, chew on this.

However, I'm convinced that you won't believe a word of this because of your age. You are highly impressionable, and have already been impressioned. You have the right to your opinion, even if it's wrong.  

[shadow_alchemist92]

Der Freischuetz

My Deep Sadness

The whole war is most likely not going to end peacefully. How could it? If we suddenly declared peace, wouldn't they be angry or upset? The main reason we 'started' the war, was because we thought Iraq had hidden weapons, I think. However, now it's for oil. I think we need to resolve our problems vocally and admit that we were wrong. What we should be focusing our attention on now, should be finding other fuel sources. That might calm things down, but I'm not sure of the temper of our 'enemy'.

WMD's weren't the only reason we went to Iraq. Another reason we went is because of Hussein's crimes against humanity. Heck, land and resources would've been reason enough to go there. We'll probably get some oil out of this, so it works out quite well for us. I would've supported this war if it was for land and resources, because that is the reason that most wars are fought, but that wasn't the reason we went to war with Iraq in the first place.

shadow_alchemist92

ok, first off, bush saying he hated saddam was a big deal because he was in a position of power in the world's biggest military power. he knew that his saying that he hated saddam publically would greatly influence the people of America. second, sorry, but my computer isnt loading the NIST page, so i only saw the pop. mechanics page, but from what i saw there, i saw a few problems.

first, on the part about the pentagon and the plane not leaving holes where the wings would be, they did not explain the lack of any imprint of the wings. they explained why there are holes, but a plane would still leave at least a dent or mark on the wall where it crashed. second, they said nothing of the plane not leaving any mark on the lawn in front of the pentagon from where it touched ground. third, it also did not say anything about a plane keeping control and speed after hitting numerous light poles.

(I can't get the NIST page to load, either. It loaded when I first posted this, but it isn't working now.) The Pentagon is an armored building. The wings of Flight 77 were probably sheered off when it hit the building. Also, fuel is stored in the wings of the aircraft, so the burning fuel disintegrated the wings. At the speed the plane was travelling, which was about 530 miles per hour, hitting a light pole wouldn't have done a whole lot to the aircraft. Plus, all light poles have bases that detach from the ground if something runs into them, usually a car, for safety reasons.

In the mean time, chew on this.

However, I'm convinced that you won't believe a word of this because of your age. You are highly impressionable, and have already been impressioned. You have the right to your opinion, even if it's wrong.

well, i can see that at least most of the facts brought up in loose chage have an explanation. im not saying that youve completely made me believe that this was definately, without-a-doubt the work of terrorists, but you have answered many of the questions i had, so thank you. i started this topic to get answers to those questions i had and to the questions brought up in loose change, i wasnt just saying it was the government. (and by the way, just because im still young and in high school, that doesnt mean im any more impressionable than anyone else)  

[Saeunn]

Do you think the war is being fought for hidden precedent?
You know, I have ABSOLUTLY know idea what the war is about? I mean I over hear people now and agian, but its not like its from Bushes mouth.

Do you believe we should "cut and run" or remain there for awhile longer?

"cut and run" is a rather lame term for Quit. But than agian no one really likes the term Quit, it makes them sound unmanly. But I defenetly think they should "cut and run".

Why?

Why? Cause VIOLENCE doesn't solve anything? Yea sure you get your point across.. but people end up having more wars (and sometimes on the stupidest things) and they end up hurting alote more people than intended.
Its like fighting over a damn Cookie, except the cookie represents a state of mind which these two persons can't just realise they can split the damn thing in half and copramise instead of hitting one another and or breaking something of someone elses or of thier own. To regular people they would find this fight completly rediculious in the first place, yet read the paper and say " FINALLY, those son of a (instert swear word) lost!"

How would you solve the situation or one of the problems in Iraq?

Well first id probably find out what the war really is about, than I would figure out a genious plan to figure out how to solve the situation. :]

No I wouldn't do that, but I would figure out waht the damn war is about anyways before I could have an idea of how to solve anything.  

[Der Freischuetz]

Saeunn

Do you think the war is being fought for hidden precedent?
You know, I have ABSOLUTLY know idea what the war is about? I mean I over hear people now and agian, but its not like its from Bushes mouth.

Do you believe we should "cut and run" or remain there for awhile longer?

"cut and run" is a rather lame term for Quit. But than agian no one really likes the term Quit, it makes them sound unmanly. But I defenetly think they should "cut and run".

Why?

Why? Cause VIOLENCE doesn't solve anything? Yea sure you get your point across.. but people end up having more wars (and sometimes on the stupidest things) and they end up hurting alote more people than intended.
Its like fighting over a damn Cookie, except the cookie represents a state of mind which these two persons can't just realise they can split the damn thing in half and copramise instead of hitting one another and or breaking something of someone elses or of thier own. To regular people they would find this fight completly rediculious in the first place, yet read the paper and say " FINALLY, those son of a (instert swear word) lost!"

How would you solve the situation or one of the problems in Iraq?

Well first id probably find out what the war really is about, than I would figure out a genious plan to figure out how to solve the situation. :]

No I wouldn't do that, but I would figure out waht the damn war is about anyways before I could have an idea of how to solve anything.

Doesn't "War on Terror" define itself? It's a war of conflicting ideals. They openly oppose our ideals, and resort to violence to solve them, so there is no other choice than for us to retaliate. It's the typical "us or them" situation. I don't see any compramise for this, at least not a huge compramise. They want out total destruction so that Islam will be the predominant relgion and way of life. Therefore, we are fighting that so that that deson't become the case. Plus, if we can get some resources out of this, it'll be awesome.  

[animenintendo516]

2 words.

Barack Obama.

Wait, 2 more words.

Hillary Clinton.  

[NOCTVRNVS]

Der Freischuetz

Saeunn

Do you think the war is being fought for hidden precedent?
You know, I have ABSOLUTLY know idea what the war is about? I mean I over hear people now and agian, but its not like its from Bushes mouth.

Do you believe we should "cut and run" or remain there for awhile longer?

"cut and run" is a rather lame term for Quit. But than agian no one really likes the term Quit, it makes them sound unmanly. But I defenetly think they should "cut and run".

Why?

Why? Cause VIOLENCE doesn't solve anything? Yea sure you get your point across.. but people end up having more wars (and sometimes on the stupidest things) and they end up hurting alote more people than intended.
Its like fighting over a damn Cookie, except the cookie represents a state of mind which these two persons can't just realise they can split the damn thing in half and copramise instead of hitting one another and or breaking something of someone elses or of thier own. To regular people they would find this fight completly rediculious in the first place, yet read the paper and say " FINALLY, those son of a (instert swear word) lost!"

How would you solve the situation or one of the problems in Iraq?

Well first id probably find out what the war really is about, than I would figure out a genious plan to figure out how to solve the situation. :]

No I wouldn't do that, but I would figure out waht the damn war is about anyways before I could have an idea of how to solve anything.

Doesn't "War on Terror" define itself? It's a war of conflicting ideals. They openly oppose our ideals, and resort to violence to solve them, so there is no other choice than for us to retaliate. It's the typical "us or them" situation. I don't see any compramise for this, at least not a huge compramise. They want out total destruction so that Islam will be the predominant relgion and way of life. Therefore, we are fighting that so that that deson't become the case. Plus, if we can get some resources out of this, it'll be awesome.

Well exactly. It's so disappointing to know that we're living in a nation of kids educated by asinine liberal media such as Loose Change (a laughable documentary about a presidential conspiracy) and The Casualties. These are the main sources of [mis]information for the youth in today's America it seems.

Everyone thinks they know what's good for themselves and for the rest of America. Well, that's why we have leaders in the first place -- because you have no clue what's going on in or OUT of the US. We think we are fighting some "righteous crusade" against President Bush when really the Administration is fighting for OUR safety, so we don't have to worry day to day about getting our homes bombarded by rabid muslim terrorists who think Allah wants them to destroy us. You know what video games kids play in Iraq right? Think Counter-Strike, only with no CTs.

You know that there are weapons out there capable of destroying North America? And yes, they ARE real despite what you and the Liberal media wants to think.

Yet most of the US seems to think if we just "brought our boys on home" right now life would carry on as normal.

Yeah right! In 2001 the United States was like the big handicapped rich kid peacefully building a big giant awesome free sandcastle on the beach, when suddenly on the 11th of September a big stinky bully came and kicked it down, and then ran away and went "hahahahaaaa".
But now the big handicapped kid was so mad he finally got his cajones loose and stood up and tripped that bully so bad he fell flat on his face. 6 years pass and that bully is still on the ground with sand in his eye but the handicapped kid is standing over him considering punching him in his big fat towel-wearing head, in front of all the hot girls, and being powerful and free until the next bully came along.

Do you wanna just cry it out and walk back to the ruined sand-castle and start building it up again like a fat retarded IDIOT, only to have it kicked down again as soon as you fix it? Or do you wanna finish this here and now, how ever long that bully might resist that titty-twister, sooner or later he's gonna yell uncle and next time he sees you on the street that sucker's gonna cross to the other side.



On a side note I'd like to honour my old old mate Tim who's over there as we speak with the boys in the US army.  

[Snowmaiden616]

This "War on Terror" is a peice of S*&$ and Bush can go to H*$$ for all I care. He is killing inocent soldiers for no reason. And now that it is calming down he is kieeping them there for longer periods of time and giving them less time at home to be with their families. What I want is to see Bush go over to Iraq and fight his F*$&ing "War of Terror" himself! All he is doing is probably what "Daddy" told him to do, finish what his dad started!

God I hate Bush!!!

 

[NOCTVRNVS]

Snowmaiden616

This "War on Terror" is a peice of S*&$ and Bush can go to H*$$ for all I care. He is killing inocent soldiers for no reason. And now that it is calming down he is kieeping them there for longer periods of time and giving them less time at home to be with their families. What I want is to see Bush go over to Iraq and fight his F*$&ing "War of Terror" himself! All he is doing is probably what "Daddy" told him to do, finish what his dad started!

God I hate Bush!!!

Please read the thread.

And to be accurate Bush HAS been there, but it's okay, just keep on compiling lines from a bunch of punk-rock songs to form your political education  

[Snowmaiden616]

NOCTVRNVS

Snowmaiden616

This "War on Terror" is a peice of S*&$ and Bush can go to H*$$ for all I care. He is killing inocent soldiers for no reason. And now that it is calming down he is kieeping them there for longer periods of time and giving them less time at home to be with their families. What I want is to see Bush go over to Iraq and fight his F*$&ing "War of Terror" himself! All he is doing is probably what "Daddy" told him to do, finish what his dad started!

God I hate Bush!!!

Please read the thread.

And to be accurate Bush HAS been there, but it's okay, just keep on compiling lines from a bunch of punk-rock songs to form your political education

I will not be insulted and sure he has been there. Bush Has been there to give them longer stays in Iraq. He Has been there keeping them there and when they do come home giving them nothing.
And what do you care about MY polotical education. I am going off Moral Education.
And lets all agree that this "War" is pointless.