you like sarcasm? Terry Jones tadam!

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Azoryn
Explain? How could the situation have been handled better?

I'm not trying to be negative. I'm truly interested in what you would say.

I hate that Saddam had to be removed by force. I hate that thousands of innocent Iraqi's have died, their homeland ravaged by war.

There has been a bloody, terrible price for the success that has been achieved in Iraq.

However, until someone presents a viable, working solution to achieve the success that this war has had, I will continue to be in favor of the actions taken.

---

It could just have been planned better. Less innocent lives being taken, and more honesty between the politicians and the general public.
The war seems to have been necessary to solve the problem, that doesn't mean it justifys that much lose off life (imo). But then, if there wasn't the loss of those lives, then the people there at the moment might still be in the hands of a dictator, which is just as bad? Worse for most of the general population at least.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by kiania

It is good that Saddam was taken out of power. Very good. But the way it was done, by killing far too many innocent people was not.

---

How should it have been done then? You still have never provided a real answer to this.

That's the problem with your statement. You really have no idea how to accomplish such an incredibly daring goal. As I already noted, the United States is the only country to do this, and once again, I implore you to look to Germany and Japan as examples of prior successes. In both cases, it was very difficult, very messy, and very time consuming. How did things turn out for them?

Quote:

---

It could just have been planned better. Less innocent lives being taken, and more honesty between the politicians and the general public.

---

Once again, that is not an answer. That is utterly vague and meaningless. Here's a little clue: people who SUPPORT the action also wish less innocents had died. That wish does not make the action itself wrong.

You do realize, don't you, that the number of people who have died as a result of the invasion is a fraction of those Saddam Hussein murdered for kicks.

Quote:

---

But then, if there wasn't the loss of those lives, then the people there at the moment might still be in the hands of a dictator, which is just as bad? Worse for most of the general population at least.

---

Exactly. Notice as you explore the issue more deeply, through your own thought and analysis, these kinds of revelations become clear?

Lastly, when you speak of "dishonesty between the politicians and the general public" you are just falling prey to extreme left, anti-American rhetoric. There was no lying involved, so claiming there was dishonesty is nonsense. The failure to seize more WMDs before they were hidden outside the country does not constitute a lie. That constitutes a failure. As I said before, the failure can most significantly attributed to Turkey's last second attempt at extortion which made it impossible to immediately surround Iraq.

I don't know whether to pity you or utterly destroy you for your ignorance. Your posts are nothing more than opinionated rhetoric based on your personal beliefs against war, the United States, Great Britain, Bush, Blair and the global war on terrorism.

Where to start . . .

Accusing British and American troops of (what you seem to alleged to be) widespread rape is utterly irresponsible. Where do you get this stuff? You deny listening to left-wing-socialist professors and cite large amounts of media coverage about it. Where? What media coverage? Several biased articles in left-wing communist papers or news websites are not trustworthy media to report such "rapes". Further, Ari is completely right - not only are there Threshers in the middle east fighting the war on terrorism, but I have close family members there or who serve in the U.S. army. Your baseless opinion is despicable and reveals your anti-democracy rhetoric and views for what they are: anti-US and Britain opinions meant to defame, harass and slander these countries regardless of facts or truth. Thank you again for showing the true nature of liberalism. (On a side note, the -ONLY- wide spread media articles have been about Abu Grahib, which, if you had bothered to actually read anything, the United States has prosecuted and court martialed nearly everyone on of the officers and enlistees engaged in the abuses).

Second, it could have been planned better by taking less innocent lives.... Wow, thats a great thought. Do you know how many people have -actually- been killed in Iraq from US military attacks versus how many have been killed by bombings? Do some research, honey, from some -serious- media sources, not some anti-US/British communist group. The taking of innocent life anywhere is horrible, who disagrees with that.

Next, you only get your opinions second hand? Heh, This statement made be laugh. So, they're not even your own opinions- someone else is giving them to you. Way to be an independent thinker and exercise the mental abilities that God gave you. Try engaging them for yourself.

You're not anti-military, you're just anti-war...Come on! If you are against war, by default you must be inherently against military as well. I'm sure you try to justify this in your mind by saying something like "well, i support the troops, I just dont beleive war is ever right". Then why the hell even have any military? Simple reason - Bad people exist in the world and they will use force, threat, intimidation, fear, war, violence, terrorism, etc to acheive their aberannt goals. The ONLY way ultimately to prevent or combat these things is through *gasp* force that is GREATER than the Bad people's might. And YES, that means both a military and war are needed. If you're so anti-war, considering I think you're in England, I assume you're rather be saluting a swastika and speaking German under a totalitarian dictatorship. Of course, if that was the case, you wouldn't even possess the freedom to say that you don't like war. Ironic that war, and hundreds of thousands of US and British (not including other Europeans) deaths was necessary to protect that freedom you have.

Gods, I could go on. To try and conclude quicker, I simple tire of left-wing rhetoric that you have spewed here. You don't have to like everything the US does (hell, i'm a conservative Republican and disagree alot right now), but spreading lies, half truths or simply making things up (citing unnamed random media reports) is irresponsible, immature, slander and immoral.

Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotle

In the last 100 years the United States is responsible for creating three of the most vibrant and successful nations in the history of the world. Itself, Germany, and Japan. Ask the latter two if they are happy with the result.
[/B]

---

Don't forget South Korea too. 3rd most powerful nation in NE Asia and the 11th largest economy in the world. Not too bad since the nation's destruction was more than a decade after Germany's and Japan's.

Of course it was a military dictatorship propped up by the US for a few decades. But still, it's a democracy now! (though not perfect still.. they just passed a law to levy tax on bribes accepted by lawmakers. One can't help but think they should disallow bribes instead..)

-tharun

Thanks for adding that excellent example Tharun.

Quote:

---

by Aristotle
Wouldn't it be cool if you actually studied up on the issue and formed your own opinions, independent of what your :violin professors :violin and friends tell you to think? I think that would be just smashing.

---

Quote:

---

by Aristotle
You would do well to educate yourself about the reality of the situation instead of regurgitating the freedom hating spew of freakishly left wing college :violin professors :violin and liberty hating, pinko students.

---

Quote:

---

by Kiana
Of course, I only get my opinions second hand, but not from Uni :violin professors :violin or other students, but by watching the news and reading newspaper articles.

---

Quote:

---

by Zimri
you deny listening to left-wing-socialist :violin professors :violin and cite large amounts of media coverage about it.

---

Can you hear any tune in these quotations? I can't believe that you guys are trying to discredit such qualified professionals. Does anybody know how a person becomes a professor? Well apart from a large amount of study, a great amount of hard work in their field, and probably a broken marriage, they need to be well liked by the powerful (like in the Vatican). So to become a professor, an academic should be very very good at his work + should not be hated by many . This means that a very extremist academic, would have problems to get a professor position, even if he/she is very good in his/her field, as likely he/she would have made more enemies than necessary (I met a few of these).

So if we do not listen to qualified professors, who do we listen to? the CNNNN? or the CIA?

Do you realised that most of our arguments come from "facts" which are usually articles in the paper of our choice. Don't these papers publish people's opinions? I think so, because the same news sound differently when it comes from different sources. It is all subjective.

By the way, I was talking to a professor from the Nortwestern University in Chicago last week. To put his alignment in perspective: he believed that the war on Iraq could be good for the area, even he thought it might help the Palestine-Israel conflict, and he is Jewish. I wouldn't consider him either socialist or pinko. Plus he was well-read and well-informed. I asked him about the Turkey's scan that Aristotle posted here, see below:

Quote:

---

Turkey's last second, craven attempt at extortion (which made it impossible to immediately surround and contain Iraq) is most likely what allowed the majority of them (refering to WMD) to be carted off and hidden outside of Iraq.

---

He said that was an argument that only a few far right used but wasn't widely extended. Personally, I haven't read such story, neither in the European nor in the Australian media (sorry, I don't read the CNNNN). You guys must have got this information from some far right, extremist, neo-nazi professor or something then ;)

Ah! and Turkey is one of your best allies.

Salimar

Wow, I think this thread just took a nose dive into the realm of foolishness, immaturity and ignorance.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Salimar

This means that a very extremist academic, would have problems to get a professor position, even if he/she is very good in his/her field, as likely he/she would have made more enemies than necessary (I met a few of these).

---

I can completely disprove your argument with two words: Ward Churchill.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Salimar

He said that was an argument that only a few far right used but wasn't widely extended. Personally, I haven't read such story, neither in the European nor in the Australian media (sorry, I don't read the CNNNN). You guys must have got this information from some far right, extremist, neo-nazi professor or something then ;)

---

Uh.....

Try keeping up with current events, Salimar. You really embarassed yourself here.

If you don't know what Turkey did in the final days leading up before the invasion, then I'm not going to waste my time being your personal tutor.

Read some news, seriously. This is a basic, widely reported story.

ABC, CBS, ABC, CNN, Fox, The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, all the way down to the Jerkwater Local News reported about what Turkey did and the deleterious impact it had on the invasion. It was the difference between a one front war and completely surrounding the country.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Salimar

Ah! and Turkey is one of your best allies.

---

I see you haven't followed the news much since high school world history. Well, please don't use these forums as your means of catching up. It ruins otherwise good discussions amongst people who DO follow the news.

Quote:

---

I can completely disprove your argument with two words: Ward Churchill.

---

Ward Church does nothing to disprove Salimar’s point. He was an extremist academic (though from what I’ve read his more serious faults were his plagiarism and bullying) who made a lot of enemies and was sacked within a few weeks of being attacked. Ward Churchill is not “most” academics.

Quote:

---

… what Turkey did and the deleterious impact it had on the invasion. It was the difference between a one front war and completely surrounding the country.

---

I’ll elaborate more on this when I have time, however I have three quick points to make:

1. The vast majority (in the 90%’s) of the Turkish population were opposed to staging a front from Turkey. Regardless whether you believe the Turkish governments attempt to get money for allowing the use of their country in the invasion was corrupt, or whatever you think it was, when 90+% of a population is opposed to something, and the government acts in a way that backs that 90% of the population, then that’s just too bad. Sometimes democracies work that way.

2. The Invasion occurred on two fronts, the west and the south.

3. If it was so critical that Turkey be used as a front, then the American’s should not have gone ahead with the invasion till they could compensate for the unavailability of Turkey. The coalition effectively controlled the north of Iraq through the no fly zones, and had allies in the Kurds so while it might have been tough, it was probably not impossible. The bottom line though is the Invasion went ahead when the Coalition KNEW they didn’t have Turkey.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Malacasta
Ward Church does nothing to disprove Salimar’s point. He was an extremist academic (though from what I’ve read his more serious faults were his plagiarism and bullying) who made a lot of enemies and was sacked within a few weeks of being attacked. Ward Churchill is not “most” academics.

---

He was an extremist for over a decade. He only got sacked when he finally went so absolutely crazy that it could no longer be tolerated even by the freakishly left academia.

Your attempt to dimish how long he got away with being a nut is laughable.

His example disproves Salimar's point because he is just one example of tons of EXTREME left wing professors just like him. Anyone who followed his story was treated to hundreds of similar examples in colleges all over the United States. Trying to deny this fact about academia would be like denying that Rush Limbaugh is conservative.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Malacasta

1. The vast majority (in the 90%’s) of the Turkish population were opposed to staging a front from Turkey. Regardless whether you believe the Turkish governments attempt to get money for allowing the use of their country in the invasion was corrupt, or whatever you think it was, when 90+% of a population is opposed to something, and the government acts in a way that backs that 90% of the population, then that’s just too bad. Sometimes democracies work that way.

---

And sometimes you know who your allies are when they leave you to twist in the wind when you need them.

Furthermore, it is indeed a fact that not having Turkey was a major factor in the inability to completely surround Iraq instantly and prevent WMDs from being shipped out.

Remember that a lot of WMDs *were* found, just not as much as originally hoped. Also remember that it was discovered once in Iraq that Saddam's own scientists were lying to him about the status of their own weapons programs.

The point about Turkey is simple: as an ally, they screwed us. The fact that they were only willing to help if we paid them a huge bribe was disgusting.

If they were truly against the invasion for moral, philosophical, or geopolitical reasons, then fine. That's their choice. But their extortion is indicative of completely different motives.

Regardless, their last minute change of heart and extortion are proof that they are not, as Salimar stated, one of our "best allies." Far from it.