Let's Talk Politics

[Luther073082]

hm.. that sucks lol. so in our case we should probably stay over there.?

Well there are no good answers to this war.

However I think the least harmful answer is to hang in there.

BTW I made a post here yesterday and it acknowledged that I posted but the post never showed up.

 

[christinagart]

oh ya the forums has been messing up lately..
but ya i think thats a good idea too
i wish it could all just poof.. go away!

 

[Luther073082]

I've been here for a year and this is the first time I've seen the forums have difficulties for this long.

 

[Hillsong4u]

The biggest problem with the US @ the moment is it doesn't have much of a choice, IT MUST HANG IN THERE.

You guys have opened a can of worms bigger than your president wants to admit.

And Bushie is stiffening his neck even more day by day, not wanting to hear Iraq was a mistake from the start, because now all the tribes and religious groups ( Shi'ite and Sunni ) are murdering each other, where under Saddam they were kept under control.

THOSE GUYS NEEDED A DICTATOR TO CONTROL THEM! But the free, democratic post-911 Western mindset didn't add that to the equation b4 the war. Ho hum.

And your president is adiment that the world is now a safer place. What a bad, bad comeback and odd way of justifying a very difficult situation.

According to CNN, the majority of US citizens are now officially opposed to the war and many agree that the world has now become more dangerous for everyone who doesn't submit to the Will of Allah.

But for some odd reason, the US is the world's policeman. Self appointed. And they think they can just storm in, uninvited and just magically repair everything. What arrogance.

And as far as I know, Bushie and his bunch completely ignored UN recommendations against the invasion. The just stormed in, guns a blazin.

"YANKEES GO HOME" ring a bell? ( And please do not patronise me about the good that the US has done for the world. I don't disagree, but that doesn't change Iraq or make it better. )

 

[Luther073082]

Hillsong . . .

Hate to say this but we CAN just storm into any place we have the forces to fight. And we don't need to be invited by anyone. Thats the benefit of controling our own military.

Every nation can invade any other nation. . . they just better hope they don't lose. No one needs UN authorization to use their military.

On the other hand I agree with you that it seems the only stable government in the middle east is brutal dicatatorships and I also agree that invading Iraq was a stupid idea.

But use actual reasons as to why we shouldn't have invaded such as "being tied up in Afganistan", a total distraction, unnecessary violence, a Quagmire that we are now stuck in, the nation being impossible to stabilize.

Those all point to it being a stupid reason to invade.

But the whole reasoning of "illegal war" or "You can't do that without the UN approval." Is stupid because we don't need UN approval to use our military.

If the UN doesn't like how we use our military they should stop us. They should stop us with their army. . . Oh wait.

Not trying to look like a jerk or anything, I agree with you that invading Iraq definatly made things worse. But what I don't agree with is that we should do any sort of UN check as to how we use our military. Its ours, we pay for it, we supply it with troops etc.

 

[christinagart]

I've been here for a year and this is the first time I've seen the forums have difficulties for this long.

what do you mean? you mean the time thing? i havent been here long only about a month.


anyways as for the subject, my whole point in putting this thread here was to get feedback on war and how it should be ended and who had the best idea. I hope it doesnt end up causing any conflict, that was not my intention, but I love the knowledge I am retaining from these posts... I understand that while people outside the us might not agree with us, hell people here may not either, but remember we're not president lol. and probably any person out there will tell you this is the worst it's been since forever.. in my town people are practically giving away houses they are so cheap, because no one can afford to buy them anymore, i actually personally know atleast 10 people who have lost their jobs due to this economic fall.. I hope it ends soon, whoever becomes president, is really going to have to pull through.. hard.

 

[christinagart]

I've been here for a year and this is the first time I've seen the forums have difficulties for this long.

what do you mean? you mean the time thing? i havent been here long only about a month.


anyways as for the subject, my whole point in putting this thread here was to get feedback on war and how it should be ended and who had the best idea. I hope it doesnt end up causing any conflict, that was not my intention, but I love the knowledge I am retaining from these posts... I understand that while people outside the us might not agree with us, hell people here may not either, but remember we're not president lol. and probably any person out there will tell you this is the worst it's been since forever.. in my town people are practically giving away houses they are so cheap, because no one can afford to buy them anymore, i actually personally know atleast 10 people who have lost their jobs due to this economic fall.. I hope it ends soon, whoever becomes president, is really going to have to pull through.. hard.

 

[Boss_BlueAngels]

Oh, things have been worse... much worse. (Depression, Vietnam, etc.) Just a hiccup in the economy that will (hopefully!) pick up again.

And yes, this timestamp thing is really irritating. Especially with long threads like this.

 

[christinagart]

ya i know what ya mean, it has been a lot worse ive actually been catchin up on that in history, i guess what i meant is since i was alive lol.

 

[Hillsong4u]

OK Luther073082, I have to agree that what you said about you guys havin a strong military etc etc. It is true. But what irritates me the most about what you said is the ATTITUDE, my friend.

What I cannot understand is that the US has cows when Iran wants to develop nuclear technology, and your Condoleezza Rice runs all over the world lecturing everybody about democracy.

Yet when some other nation does EXACTLY what the US has done in Iraq (storm in using their weapons as they choose and invading who they want to ), the US places pressure on everybody to sanction that country.

So then it again comes down to the whole ATTITUDE with which you guys approach every issue:
We HAVE the money, we ARE rich and the most powerful nation on earth, so get out of our way!

In other words, the US can bully anybody and defend their actions by calling it "fighting for democracy" or whatever cheap lame excuse they can think of.

So in conclusion, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the unreasonable attitude of telling others how to do things, and then turn around and do exactly the opposite, and then it's OK to do so because you are powerful - what part of this sick picture can you not understand?.

No wonder some people on this planet spit on this thing you call ''Freedom'', because the US has a pretty funny way of showing it!!!

In fact, the US has the monopoly and copyright on ''Freedom''. They are kinda the franchise owners: The brochure goes something like this:
''Dear Recipient Nation. THIS is Freedom, it's now also yours, mazel tov. You do it this and this way. You play by our rules, we define the term Freedom and everything contained within''.

I mean, what is Freedom? Is freedom the ability to FREE-ly develope nuclear technology as a sovereign nation? I think it is, but not according to the US. Ask Iran.

So like in the case of Iran, the Texan in the White House has another paranoia attack and tightens the grip on Freedom, because you are the most powerful nation on earth and you make the rules. Remember?

I think you guys are two faced and your president should be put on trial for war crimes. Oh sorry, yeah, he's the leader of the Free World, I forgot. That makes him untouchable.

 

[ryanb6]

What I cannot understand is that the US has cows when Iran wants to develop nuclear technology

you really don't know what they would do with this?

 

[Luther073082]

OK Luther073082, I have to agree that what you said about you guys havin a strong military etc etc. It is true. But what irritates me the most about what you said is the ATTITUDE, my friend.

What I cannot understand is that the US has cows when Iran wants to develop nuclear technology, and your Condoleezza Rice runs all over the world lecturing everybody about democracy.

Yet when some other nation does EXACTLY what the US has done in Iraq (storm in using their weapons as they choose and invading who they want to ), the US places pressure on everybody to sanction that country.

So then it again comes down to the whole ATTITUDE with which you guys approach every issue:
We HAVE the money, we ARE rich and the most powerful nation on earth, so get out of our way!

In other words, the US can bully anybody and defend their actions by calling it "fighting for democracy" or whatever cheap lame excuse they can think of.

So in conclusion, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the unreasonable attitude of telling others how to do things, and then turn around and do exactly the opposite, and then it's OK to do so because you are powerful - what part of this sick picture can you not understand?.

No wonder some people on this planet spit on this thing you call ''Freedom'', because the US has a pretty funny way of showing it!!!

In fact, the US has the monopoly and copyright on ''Freedom''. They are kinda the franchise owners: The brochure goes something like this:
''Dear Recipient Nation. THIS is Freedom, it's now also yours, mazel tov. You do it this and this way. You play by our rules, we define the term Freedom and everything contained within''.

I mean, what is Freedom? Is freedom the ability to FREE-ly develope nuclear technology as a sovereign nation? I think it is, but not according to the US. Ask Iran.

So like in the case of Iran, the Texan in the White House has another paranoia attack and tightens the grip on Freedom, because you are the most powerful nation on earth and you make the rules. Remember?

I think you guys are two faced and your president should be put on trial for war crimes. Oh sorry, yeah, he's the leader of the Free World, I forgot. That makes him untouchable.

But hey, that's my opinion.

Well first of all your nuts because Bush has committed no war crimes. Cause there is no international law. You can write it down on paper, but its all just words and paper, nothing to back it up.

Second of all you tell me what nation being the richest and most powerful has ever NOT chosen to try to influence the world the way it wants.

Every other nation used their power to influence the world the way they wanted to. But when the US uses its power, we're suddenly evil for it.

 

[HannahBanana]

OK Luther073082, I have to agree that what you said about you guys havin a strong military etc etc. It is true. But what irritates me the most about what you said is the ATTITUDE, my friend.

What I cannot understand is that the US has cows when Iran wants to develop nuclear technology, and your Condoleezza Rice runs all over the world lecturing everybody about democracy.

Yet when some other nation does EXACTLY what the US has done in Iraq (storm in using their weapons as they choose and invading who they want to ), the US places pressure on everybody to sanction that country.

So then it again comes down to the whole ATTITUDE with which you guys approach every issue:
We HAVE the money, we ARE rich and the most powerful nation on earth, so get out of our way!

In other words, the US can bully anybody and defend their actions by calling it "fighting for democracy" or whatever cheap lame excuse they can think of.

So in conclusion, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the unreasonable attitude of telling others how to do things, and then turn around and do exactly the opposite, and then it's OK to do so because you are powerful - what part of this sick picture can you not understand?.

No wonder some people on this planet spit on this thing you call ''Freedom'', because the US has a pretty funny way of showing it!!!

In fact, the US has the monopoly and copyright on ''Freedom''. They are kinda the franchise owners: The brochure goes something like this:
''Dear Recipient Nation. THIS is Freedom, it's now also yours, mazel tov. You do it this and this way. You play by our rules, we define the term Freedom and everything contained within''.

I mean, what is Freedom? Is freedom the ability to FREE-ly develope nuclear technology as a sovereign nation? I think it is, but not according to the US. Ask Iran.

So like in the case of Iran, the Texan in the White House has another paranoia attack and tightens the grip on Freedom, because you are the most powerful nation on earth and you make the rules. Remember?

I think you guys are two faced and your president should be put on trial for war crimes. Oh sorry, yeah, he's the leader of the Free World, I forgot. That makes him untouchable.

But hey, that's my opinion.

A-freaking-men! You stated that so beautifully and effectively and I hate the fact that, even though you put it so well, many people will end up ignoring this message of yours, since they're too stubborn and ignorant to be able to "think outside of the box," so to speak.

 

[HannahBanana]

Well first of all your nuts because Bush has committed no war crimes. Cause there is no international law. You can write it down on paper, but its all just words and paper, nothing to back it up.

Second of all you tell me what nation being the richest and most powerful has ever NOT chosen to try to influence the world the way it wants.

Every other nation used their power to influence the world the way they wanted to. But when the US uses its power, we're suddenly evil for it.

Heck, I think that any nation that has bullied other nations as much as the US has is a bad nation.

And so what if we're rich and powerful? That doesn't mean that we have to bully other nations.

As for the "Bush hasn't committed any war crimes" claim, what about the fact that he violated the Geneva Convention in the way that he let prisoners be treated at Guatanamo Bay? What about the fact that he started the war illegally, without getting the UN's approval for doing so? Seriously, are you going to sit here and try to tell me that those things aren't actually crimes? Just because they aren't crimes in other countries doesn't mean that they aren't crimes here in the US.

 

[ryanb6]

What about the fact that he started the war illegally, without getting the UN's approval for doing so?

it was not illegal. we do not need UN approval. whether people like it or not doesn't make it illegal. the UN is a threat to our national sovereignty and always has been.

 

[HannahBanana]

it was not illegal. we do not need UN approval. whether people like it or not doesn't make it illegal. the UN is a threat to our national sovereignty and always has been.

So you think that an organization that was started to keep peace between the US and other nations is a threat to us? What...the...heck...? Seriously, how is the UN not a good organization?

And just because you don't think that it was illegal doesn't mean that it actually wasn't illegal. Your opinion is not fact.

 

[ryanb6]

So you think that an organization that was started to keep peace between the US and other nations is a threat to us?

does the UN keep peace? you realize nations like Iran are in there right? i said a threat to our sovereignty, and to watch the Iran president give speached to the UN about how the holocaust not happening and the US basically lies about everything, then i would say there are threats there. i watched this live on tv by the way.

Seriously, how is the UN not a good organization?

if it is truly good then we should be able to talk about it's good accomplishments, so let's start.

And just because you don't think that it was illegal doesn't mean that it actually wasn't illegal

haha, while this is a true statement, i wasn't voicing my opinion. i was stating a fact. the war wasn't illegal.

 

[HannahBanana]

does the UN keep peace? you realize nations like Iran are in there right? i said a threat to our sovereignty, and to watch the Iran president give speached to the UN about how the holocaust not happening and the US basically lies about everything, then i would say there are threats there. i watched this live on tv by the way.


if it is truly good then we should be able to talk about it's good accomplishments, so let's start.


haha, while this is a true statement, i wasn't voicing my opinion. i was stating a fact. the war wasn't illegal.

Just because the UN doesn't keep total peace doesn't mean that it doesn't keep peace at all. Not everything is "black and white." Some things (like the UN's peacekeeping skills) do have shades of gray.

Here's a list of the UN's accomplishments: http://www.una-usadanecounty.org/about/index.php?category_id=1550. Is that enough for you?

How was the war not illegal when Bush violated the UN charter by starting it?

 

[Crusading_Ostrich]

does the UN keep peace? you realize nations like Iran are in there right? i said a threat to our sovereignty, and to watch the Iran president give speached to the UN about how the holocaust not happening and the US basically lies about everything, then i would say there are threats there. i watched this live on tv by the way.


if it is truly good then we should be able to talk about it's good accomplishments, so let's start.


haha, while this is a true statement, i wasn't voicing my opinion. i was stating a fact. the war wasn't illegal.

Let's see...the Korean War - yeah, that was a pretty good thing. Helped save at least part of Korea ~ from the US or China take your pick!
The Suez Crisis, the Cuban Missile Crisis...shall we continue? Or are two events that could have resulted in nuclear war not good enough?
Perhaps the UN is now somewhat out of date...more of a "Give us money to give to Africa because they have been oppressed foundation" ~ something I don't really agree with. But in the past, they did serve a purpose. The purpose now though...well, since the Cold War ended there haven't been too many formal wars or problems to settle ~ with formal states and all.

 

[ryanb6]

How was the war not illegal when Bush violated the UN charter by starting it?

the war wasn't illegal