Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-02-19 at 18:03:25
QUOTE(TheDaddy0420 @ Feb 19 2006, 10:37 AM)
You ever been to Aphganistan? Nope, you probably have not. The terrian there is something called rediculous. Any one could hide out for long periods of time. We didn't forget about Osoma, if we did we wouldn't srill have troops there.
[right][snapback]430460[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]430460[/snapback][/right]
We're not actually trying hard to look for him. We abandoned the search for bin Laden to go invade Iraq.
"I don't know where [bin Laden] is. I truly am not that concerned about him,"
--George W. Bush
March 13, 2002
QUOTE
We know that country supports terrorism and funds it.
So? That's not "why" we went into Iraq. We supposedly went in after some weapons of mass destruction that weren't found.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by olaboy- on 2006-02-19 at 18:09:08
We also went in to stop Sudam Hussien who over TEN years broke over FORTY United Nations laws and wouldn't listen to the UN telling him to stop! He tortered his OWN people with chemical weapons just because they didn't believe his stupid concepts. Would you rather have someone who killed his country men and not have gone to Iraq or let him break more laws and ruin his country?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Hofodomo on 2006-02-19 at 18:22:38
he he battlekruser. you quoted bush 
Report, edit, etc...Posted by warhammer40000 on 2006-02-19 at 18:24:05
Gogogo captain obvious!!
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Hofodomo on 2006-02-19 at 18:28:07
just personally, i dont find bushes quotes "evidence material". oh well, the pres is still pretty cool.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-19 at 18:32:49
QUOTE(DT_Battlekruser @ Feb 19 2006, 03:03 PM)
We're not actually trying hard to look for him. We abandoned the search for bin Laden to go invade Iraq.
"I don't know where [bin Laden] is. I truly am not that concerned about him,"
--George W. Bush
March 13, 2002
So? That's not "why" we went into Iraq. We supposedly went in after some weapons of mass destruction that weren't found.
[right][snapback]430700[/snapback][/right]
"I don't know where [bin Laden] is. I truly am not that concerned about him,"
--George W. Bush
March 13, 2002
So? That's not "why" we went into Iraq. We supposedly went in after some weapons of mass destruction that weren't found.
[right][snapback]430700[/snapback][/right]
Burden of proof, even lies. Brad Jenison, my army ranger who lives next door to me, went to Aphganistan during the war in Iraq, for operations in Northern aphganistan (note thats where Bin Ladon is). Now mmm why would we still be deploying rangers (elite foot soldiers) if we weren't looking hard for Osoma? Why use Elites when grunts could do that job?
Oh yeah did you see those 12 hours of tapes we recently found? Saddam hid his weapons from inspecters all through out the 1990's, and showed how he was trying to set up nuclear programs.... Yeah I geuss I was right all along. Be right, its the right thing to do.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-02-19 at 18:33:03
QUOTE(olaboy- @ Feb 19 2006, 03:09 PM)
We also went in to stop Sudam Hussien who over TEN years broke over FORTY United Nations laws and wouldn't listen to the UN telling him to stop! He tortered his OWN people with chemical weapons just because they didn't believe his stupid concepts. Would you rather have someone who killed his country men and not have gone to Iraq or let him break more laws and ruin his country?
[right][snapback]430703[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]430703[/snapback][/right]
It is the job of the United Nations to enforce the laws and sanctions of the United Nations, had it been the UN in Iraq, I would not be opposed. This, however, was not the case. The UN voted not to take military action against Iraq but we went in anyway. It's not our place to rule the world and make it a "better place". America itself is hardy perfect.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by olaboy- on 2006-02-19 at 18:36:10
The coalition IS in Iraq, not just us.
No country is perfect, but the US is best. Can you think of any country better than us?
No country is perfect, but the US is best. Can you think of any country better than us?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-19 at 18:37:50
I see he ignored my post, shame really I thought it was nice....
Report, edit, etc...Posted by olaboy- on 2006-02-19 at 18:42:24
QUOTE
Oh yeah did you see those 12 hours of tapes we recently found? Saddam hid his weapons from inspecters all through out the 1990's, and showed how he was trying to set up nuclear programs.... Yeah I geuss I was right all along. Be right, its the right thing to do.
Hmm, I must have missed those. I better go research them.
And by the way it's spelled: afghanistan.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Deathawk on 2006-02-19 at 18:43:12
First, guys it's not APHganistan and OsOma.
I don't see what's wrong with invading a country with an unstable government and try to restore structure to it. Sure, we could be in there for oil, I don't know why we're exactly in there, but it's not only why we're in there, it's what we've done there.
I don't see what's wrong with invading a country with an unstable government and try to restore structure to it. Sure, we could be in there for oil, I don't know why we're exactly in there, but it's not only why we're in there, it's what we've done there.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by olaboy- on 2006-02-19 at 18:50:09
Very nicely put. We've really improved their life by removing that dictator and it's possible we haven't found any nuclear weapons because they hid them in their desert of a country.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by MillenniumArmy on 2006-02-19 at 22:40:41
QUOTE(olaboy- @ Feb 19 2006, 05:36 PM)
No country is perfect, but the US is best. Can you think of any country better than us?
[right][snapback]430753[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]430753[/snapback][/right]
As of right now.... nope.
A few years or more from now? Maybe...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-02-20 at 12:06:51
QUOTE(TheDaddy0420 @ Feb 17 2006, 01:03 AM)
Nope, wrong. Try again.
I state this again. I love my coutnry, but I dissagree with it sometimes. You can love many of the people and land of your country, as I do.
[right][snapback]428760[/snapback][/right]
I state this again. I love my coutnry, but I dissagree with it sometimes. You can love many of the people and land of your country, as I do.
[right][snapback]428760[/snapback][/right]
That has nothing to do with the post I was getting at - your stereotyping of the people of my country is what annoyed me. British women are of the same ethnicity and general appearance as their American counterparts - a representative sample would find that there are roughly the same proportion of attractive and unattractive women in the USA and UK. The only difference which I could think of is cultural - our women might dress differently and wear different styles of makeup, and have a different attitude which some men might find unattractive (I know I find the attitude of certain women unattractive).
National stereotypes are just attempts to rationalise the world easily through generalisation - they're not meant to be accurate... Mexicans aren't generally lazy, Germans aren't robotic and British people don't generally have bad teeth (although our dental services are poor because they're partially nationalised).
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-02-20 at 18:16:18
QUOTE(olaboy- @ Feb 19 2006, 03:36 PM)
No country is perfect, but the US is best. Can you think of any country better than us?
[right][snapback]430753[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]430753[/snapback][/right]
Japan. South Korea. Depending where you live, you might think otherwise.
QUOTE(olaboy- @ Feb 19 2006, 03:50 PM)
Very nicely put. We've really improved their life by removing that dictator and it's possible we haven't found any nuclear weapons because they hid them in their desert of a country.
[right][snapback]430777[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]430777[/snapback][/right]
It is not our place, not our duty, and not our prividge to go around the world overthrowing governments and replacing them with a government that we deem to be morally right.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-20 at 19:12:44
QUOTE(DT_Battlekruser @ Feb 20 2006, 03:16 PM)
Japan. South Korea. Depending where you live, you might think otherwise.
It is not our place, not our duty, and not our prividge to go around the world overthrowing governments and replacing them with a government that we deem to be morally right.
[right][snapback]431552[/snapback][/right]
It is not our place, not our duty, and not our prividge to go around the world overthrowing governments and replacing them with a government that we deem to be morally right.
[right][snapback]431552[/snapback][/right]
Says you?
Who decides if it is our place our not? The corrupt UN???
Report, edit, etc...Posted by DT_Battlekruser on 2006-02-21 at 03:13:34
We're the United States of America, not the United States of the World. What goes on in Iraq shouldn't be our concern if it doesn't affect us.
Saddam's cruel treatment of Iraqi citizens did not affect us, so why have over 2200 of our soldiers died fighting for them?
Saddam's cruel treatment of Iraqi citizens did not affect us, so why have over 2200 of our soldiers died fighting for them?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-21 at 14:41:46
QUOTE(DT_Battlekruser @ Feb 21 2006, 12:13 AM)
We're the United States of America, not the United States of the World. What goes on in Iraq shouldn't be our concern if it doesn't affect us.
Saddam's cruel treatment of Iraqi citizens did not affect us, so why have over 2200 of our soldiers died fighting for them?
[right][snapback]431914[/snapback][/right]
Saddam's cruel treatment of Iraqi citizens did not affect us, so why have over 2200 of our soldiers died fighting for them?
[right][snapback]431914[/snapback][/right]
Because its PEOPLE, gosh
Plus with your logic (sorry for bringing this up) We shouldn't close Gitmo cause its not affecting me or you.
Also, research about the new 12 hours of tapes we found, Saddam did have WMDs from at least 1993-2002, he talks to his government officials on how they hid them from UN weapons inspecters.
Ok that was getting off topic.
Basically you should care about other humans, not just about yourself...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-02-21 at 15:01:02
Seeing as America has fingers in various pies all over the world, it's inevitable that someone somewhere is going to threaten one of America's 'pies,' which results in a response from the USA to remove that threat. I can understand this - every world power has tried to remove threats to its security or prestige. In the 1850s and 60s under Lord Palmerston, Britain practised gunboat diplomacy, and even went as far as shelling the harbour of Athens in Greece, Piraeus, because the Greeks refused to compensate a British citizen whose house had been burned down by an anti-Semitic mob.
I can understand the USA invading Iraq if it was seen as a threat... but was it? The WMDs, the only possible threat to national security, were never found and possibly never existed. The September Dossier (a British report suggesting that Iraq could launch WMDs at 45 minutes notice and was trying to buy uranium from Niger) was found to have been full of dubious claims and panic-mongering wording.
So if there are no WMDs then why was Iraq invaded? I agree with DTBK that the removal of a dictatorship is a poor excuse. Even if Saddam Hussein was the Hitler of the Middle-East, then what right does America have to effect 'regime change' in a sovereign nation?
Edit:
I'm pretty sure there are US and UK citizens languishing in Guantanamo Bay - it probably does affect you.
Also, the main reason for pressure against Guantanamo Bay is that it displays blatant hypocrisy in a supposedly democratic state. People held without charge or trial - confessions extracted through torture? What is this? I thought that everybody in a democracy had a right to a trial - and the right not to be held indefinitely without charge, and the right not to be tortured in order to trump up a charge against them?
One more thing - The US Army needs to sort out the corruption pervading its ranks. Why was it that only the grunts at the bottom of the military ladder were hauled up for torturing Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib? It wouldn't take much to admit that there are some bad apples higher up in the Army who let all this crap happen. Discipline in the ranks is not just important - it's essential in an already inflamed situation like Iraq. Good commanding officers are needed, not corrupt ones.
I can understand the USA invading Iraq if it was seen as a threat... but was it? The WMDs, the only possible threat to national security, were never found and possibly never existed. The September Dossier (a British report suggesting that Iraq could launch WMDs at 45 minutes notice and was trying to buy uranium from Niger) was found to have been full of dubious claims and panic-mongering wording.
So if there are no WMDs then why was Iraq invaded? I agree with DTBK that the removal of a dictatorship is a poor excuse. Even if Saddam Hussein was the Hitler of the Middle-East, then what right does America have to effect 'regime change' in a sovereign nation?
Edit:
I'm pretty sure there are US and UK citizens languishing in Guantanamo Bay - it probably does affect you.
Also, the main reason for pressure against Guantanamo Bay is that it displays blatant hypocrisy in a supposedly democratic state. People held without charge or trial - confessions extracted through torture? What is this? I thought that everybody in a democracy had a right to a trial - and the right not to be held indefinitely without charge, and the right not to be tortured in order to trump up a charge against them?
One more thing - The US Army needs to sort out the corruption pervading its ranks. Why was it that only the grunts at the bottom of the military ladder were hauled up for torturing Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib? It wouldn't take much to admit that there are some bad apples higher up in the Army who let all this crap happen. Discipline in the ranks is not just important - it's essential in an already inflamed situation like Iraq. Good commanding officers are needed, not corrupt ones.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-21 at 15:24:13
QUOTE(CaptainWill @ Feb 21 2006, 12:01 PM)
Seeing as America has fingers in various pies all over the world, it's inevitable that someone somewhere is going to threaten one of America's 'pies,' which results in a response from the USA to remove that threat. I can understand this - every world power has tried to remove threats to its security or prestige. In the 1850s and 60s under Lord Palmerston, Britain practised gunboat diplomacy, and even went as far as shelling the harbour of Athens in Greece, Piraeus, because the Greeks refused to compensate a British citizen whose house had been burned down by an anti-Semitic mob.
I can understand the USA invading Iraq if it was seen as a threat... but was it? The WMDs, the only possible threat to national security, were never found and possibly never existed. The September Dossier (a British report suggesting that Iraq could launch WMDs at 45 minutes notice and was trying to buy uranium from Niger) was found to have been full of dubious claims and panic-mongering wording.
So if there are no WMDs then why was Iraq invaded? I agree with DTBK that the removal of a dictatorship is a poor excuse. Even if Saddam Hussein was the Hitler of the Middle-East, then what right does America have to effect 'regime change' in a sovereign nation?
Edit:
I'm pretty sure there are US and UK citizens languishing in Guantanamo Bay - it probably does affect you.
Also, the main reason for pressure against Guantanamo Bay is that it displays blatant hypocrisy in a supposedly democratic state. People held without charge or trial - confessions extracted through torture? What is this? I thought that everybody in a democracy had a right to a trial - and the right not to be held indefinitely without charge, and the right not to be tortured in order to trump up a charge against them?
One more thing - The US Army needs to sort out the corruption pervading its ranks. Why was it that only the grunts at the bottom of the military ladder were hauled up for torturing Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib? It wouldn't take much to admit that there are some bad apples higher up in the Army who let all this crap happen. Discipline in the ranks is not just important - it's essential in an already inflamed situation like Iraq. Good commanding officers are needed, not corrupt ones.
[right][snapback]432061[/snapback][/right]
I can understand the USA invading Iraq if it was seen as a threat... but was it? The WMDs, the only possible threat to national security, were never found and possibly never existed. The September Dossier (a British report suggesting that Iraq could launch WMDs at 45 minutes notice and was trying to buy uranium from Niger) was found to have been full of dubious claims and panic-mongering wording.
So if there are no WMDs then why was Iraq invaded? I agree with DTBK that the removal of a dictatorship is a poor excuse. Even if Saddam Hussein was the Hitler of the Middle-East, then what right does America have to effect 'regime change' in a sovereign nation?
Edit:
I'm pretty sure there are US and UK citizens languishing in Guantanamo Bay - it probably does affect you.
Also, the main reason for pressure against Guantanamo Bay is that it displays blatant hypocrisy in a supposedly democratic state. People held without charge or trial - confessions extracted through torture? What is this? I thought that everybody in a democracy had a right to a trial - and the right not to be held indefinitely without charge, and the right not to be tortured in order to trump up a charge against them?
One more thing - The US Army needs to sort out the corruption pervading its ranks. Why was it that only the grunts at the bottom of the military ladder were hauled up for torturing Iraqi prisoners in Abu Ghraib? It wouldn't take much to admit that there are some bad apples higher up in the Army who let all this crap happen. Discipline in the ranks is not just important - it's essential in an already inflamed situation like Iraq. Good commanding officers are needed, not corrupt ones.
[right][snapback]432061[/snapback][/right]
QUOTE(TheDaddy0420)
Also, research about the new 12 hours of tapes we found, Saddam did have WMDs from at least 1993-2002, he talks to his government officials on how they hid them from UN weapons inspecters.
Captian, about Gitmo, its like Navy Seal training. Through these "tortures" if you could even call them that, we are breaking the terrorists down, mentally. They were told by their trainers that we would treat them nicely and to start rumors in order to be freed by pressure from the press.
-cited "They Just Don't Get it" - David Hunt
We give them a rude awakening, plus they are treated better then most local American prisons.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by CaptainWill on 2006-02-21 at 15:30:22
I believe Navy Seals volunteer - the people in Guantanamo did not.
Besides, you haven't answered my question - isn't it illegal to hold a person indefinitely without charge or trial?
Besides, you haven't answered my question - isn't it illegal to hold a person indefinitely without charge or trial?
Report, edit, etc...Posted by Chef on 2006-02-21 at 16:19:52
QUOTE
No country is perfect, but the US is best. Can you think of any country better than us?
... =DQUOTE
The UN Human Development Index (HDI) is a comparative measure of poverty, literacy, education, life expectancy, childbirth, and other factors for countries worldwide. It is a standard means of measuring well-being, especially child welfare.
QUOTE
Top thirty countries
1. Norway (=)
2. Iceland (↑ 5)
3. Australia (=)
4. Luxembourg (↑ 11)
5. Canada (↓ 1)
6. Sweden (↓ 4)
7. Switzerland (↑ 4)
8. Ireland (↑ 2)
9. Belgium (↓ 3)
10. United States (↓ 2)
1. Norway (=)
2. Iceland (↑ 5)
3. Australia (=)
4. Luxembourg (↑ 11)
5. Canada (↓ 1)
6. Sweden (↓ 4)
7. Switzerland (↑ 4)
8. Ireland (↑ 2)
9. Belgium (↓ 3)
10. United States (↓ 2)
On topic: I'll say one thing, American 'pride' makes people from the United States the worst tourists.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-21 at 18:53:47
Yes but how many of these countries have equal or greater populations then America.
Report, edit, etc...Posted by (DI)Yulla on 2006-02-21 at 19:16:01
QUOTE(DT_Battlekruser @ Feb 20 2006, 06:16 PM)
Japan. South Korea. Depending where you live, you might think otherwise.
[right][snapback]431552[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]431552[/snapback][/right]
WooT! South Koreans!
Anyways.... getting back on topic....
I agree with CaptainWill's comment that once people threaten America's "pies", they get pissed off about how they are inconsiderate when all Americans are doing is being imperialistic around the world from South America (Cuba, Benezuela, Mexico) to Asia (Both Koreas, China, Vietnam).
Good thing you picked out the idea about corrupt commanding officers. I thought about it a little and was going to post the idea, but you took my word from my mouth...
Report, edit, etc...Posted by TheDaddy0420 on 2006-02-21 at 21:19:59
Please name these commanding officers. All people involved with the scandal were put through trial. Please tell me these officers and who they are.