Common Sense

Post-9/11 Era Forum

Something very simple just occurred to me.

On balance, who feels that the outcome of the war in Iraq was good? We have to look at it over time of course, but in general.

Consider Iraq where they were with Saddam, where they are right now, where they may be in 2 years, and in 5 and 10 years.

Considering the cost of war - human, material, etc., on both sides.

Forget the details - what is your GUT feeling. Are the Iraqi's, region, world going to be better off considering the costs, or worse off?

In general...

The terrorist threat is no better, and according to the British Commons foreign affairs committee sitting right now, it's worse.

UN already in a bad state is now worse.

America even more mistrusted around the world than they were.

Iraqi people? Some say it's better now, some say it's no different, and some say it's worse. Depends who you ask.

That Saddam is gone, few can dispute that this is anything but positive.

As for the region, well who knows what America is going to do with Iraq, and what they might do next in the region. The world can only wait.

Originally posted by DaveDom

In general...

The terrorist threat is no better, and according to the British Commons foreign affairs committee sitting right now, it's worse.

If the fact of overthrowing a dictator makes terrorist threat even worse... then i guess terrorists support this particular dictator. Also they may have ties with him and may want him in place.

UN already in a bad state is now worse.

Not sure about that one... Even if so, to me, situation UN is much less important than situation in real world.

America even more mistrusted around the world than they were.

Again: do i care?

Iraqi people? Some say it's better now, some say it's no different, and some say it's worse. Depends who you ask.

It may be worse now - because country is going thru rebuild process. In 2-3 years not even one iraqi will complain - that i am sure about.

That Saddam is gone, few can dispute that this is anything but positive.

At least you admit that.

As for the region, well who knows what America is going to do with Iraq, and what they might do next in the region. The world can only wait.

I know for sure what america is going to do with Iraq, and what is it going to do in the region. Guess what?

Originally posted by DaveDom

Stop kidding yourself that Saddam had anything to do with Al Quida. IT WAS A LIE TO ACHIEVE SUPPORT FOR THE INVASION.

You stop kidding yourself that there is only one terrorist group - Al Qaida. There are more terrorist groups in the world than you could ever imagine yourself, most of them being anti-american and anti-western. Saddam may or may not have had ties with 'Al Qaida' or any other terrorist group, like 'Hesbolla' or 'Islamic Jihad'. Even a slight chance of a dictator being supported by or supporting terrorists needs immediate interference. Terrorism is not something you can discuss in the UN, pass resolutions that ban it or perform endless and useless inspections. Terrorists are scavengers and have to be treated the way they deserve to be treated - hard, without compromises and thru fights or maybe wars.

Whatever state the UN is in it's still the best option for America in Iraq. They will eventually go into Iraq in some form or other, just depends how many casualties the US public and the Bush Junta is willing to put up with before they come a begging for help.

That's my whole point! US doesnt want to and is not able to control Iraq by itself. That's why members of UNSC should have joined the coalition from the beginning to ensure even lower death rates and better control of the situation.

Trust in American foreign policy is an important role in fighting terrorism. You should take it more seriously.

As for what the US is doing in the region - for you that's anything the Bush gang tells you.

Somehow White House with it's leader Bush is classified as 'gang', and all the pro-left and anti-war and pro-binladen sites are considered to be top-level trustworthy. Unlike you anti-war people who are brainwashed by massive anti-US propaganda, i am not brainwashed by anything.
Ofcourse if government needs nation's support for this war, they had to make up some strong arguement to just it. No matter what it is - WMD or human rights violations.

Originally posted by DaveDom

Thing is Saddam isn't and wasn't one of them.

Ofcourse he is not.

And I'm not interested in whether he supported Hesbolla because Israel is illigally occupying Palastinian land and if they did that to America they'd have been nuked by now.

Whether Israel is illegally occupying palestinian lands or no, it's another question. My point, terrorists are terrorists, no matter where they locate and whom they tend to strike. And terrorists have to be fought.

You say you're not brainwashed by anything. ??? So I guess you didn't believe any of the Bush and Blair bullsh!t used as an excuse to go to war.

Why are you so sure that Bush and Blair lied about WMDs and human rights violations? I think both of those arguments is true, and inability to find WMDs means NOTHING.

What's the percentage of Americans that still think Saddam carried out the 9/11 attack? Over 50%?

I dont know the percentage of americans that still think Saddam carried out the 9/11 attack, i know he didnt and i know Bush never said he did. What Bush DID say, is that Saddam MAY have ties with terrorists, including OBL and Al Qaida network.

You'll believe anything Bush says.

Not at all. Politicians lie to achieve their goals, they always lied and will always lie. Bush is no exception. At least he tries to improve the world we live in - by taking out tyrantic regimes.

Your government has utter contempt for the American people.

I am not american, neither i live in america. How many times can i say that.

Wofewitch is even now saying - so we made it up, so what, it was the only thing everyone would agree on to go to war. He no longer gives a sh!t that he lied.

Lie for better of people is sometimes acceptable. Ofcourse he could go into describing iraq's ties with various terrorist-harbouring governments, WMD black market, and so on. But why should public listen to all the details? Also why should Bush disclose secret information?

[QUOTE]Originally posted by MrJukoVette


Why are you so sure that Bush and Blair lied about WMDs and human rights violations? I think both of those arguments is true, and inability to find WMDs means NOTHING.

What about the fact that Blair recently said that they may never find them, this coming less than a month after saying they have the evidence and will find them. The inability to find them is a huge problemk in the UK that was the sole basis for war.
Blair dragged us in to a war on pure and simple lies so h could bost his ego and I hope he burns slowly for it.

MrJukoVette
My point, terrorists are terrorists, no matter where they locate and whom they tend to strike. And terrorists have to be fought.

Utterly ridiculous and simplistic. Terrosist is just a word. The fact that states use helicopters and tanks and jets to kill people does not make it any less terrifying and the only reason we don't label it terrorism is that they are on "our side". America was found guilty in the International Criminal Court of "terrorism" for laying mines in harbors in Nicargua. But America being America ignored the ruling. Just so you understand - mines work pretty much like any terrorist bomb by blowing up ships and killing people indiscriminately.

MrJukoVette
Politicians lie to achieve their goals, they always lied and will always lie. Bush is no exception. At least he tries to improve the world we live in - by taking out tyrantic regimes.

Wolfy, Cheyne, and Rummie have helped into power far more tyrants than they've "taken out". These all American guys once supported some of the worst butchers and tortures and tryrants the world has ever seen. Either they've all converted to the great god of goodness or they are lying to you.

MrJukoVette
Lie for better of people is sometimes acceptable. Ofcourse he could go into describing iraq's ties with various terrorist-harbouring governments, WMD black market, and so on. But why should public listen to all the details? Also why should Bush disclose secret information

At least you agree that they lie. You have no respect for the public. You'd make a great politician.

Originally posted by DaveDom

My point, terrorists are terrorists, no matter where they locate and whom they tend to strike. And terrorists have to be fought.

Utterly ridiculous and simplistic. Terrosist is just a word.

Oh i see now... You support terrorists dont you? You like to see people diing dont you? Ofcourse terrorist is just a word, nothing else.

The fact that states use helicopters and tanks and jets to kill people does not make it any less terrifying and the only reason we don't label it terrorism is that they are on "our side".

US uses tanks and helicopters to overthrow somebody who killed, kills and would kill in case US left him in place. That's well known and does not need proof. Only the fact of Saddam's crimes against humans justifies this war. What do you think? Oh screw the iraqis, i need proof for WMD!

America was found guilty in the International Criminal Court of "terrorism" for laying mines in harbors in Nicargua. But America being America ignored the ruling.

When did that happen? Just that i've never heard about country being guilty in court... Usually they sue politicians for their crimes, not countries.

Wolfy, Cheyne, and Rummie have helped into power far more tyrants than they've "taken out".

Who? When have Wolfy, Cheyne or Rummie helped tyrants?

These all American guys once supported some of the worst butchers and tortures and tryrants the world has ever seen.

Whatever you say buddy... I cant remember one...

Either they've all converted to the great god of goodness or they are lying to you.

... no comments...

At least you agree that they lie. You have no respect for the public. You'd make a great politician.

If i was a politician i would respect public not more than the importance of international issues. What is public? All the mass media and crowd of pseudo-protesters and actual pro left-wingers who care more about public opinion and paper proof of facts rather than actual problems of humanity around the globe.

Originally posted by DaveDom

Well except for those Brit soldiers who were caught torturing Iraqis just a month ago,

??? Torturing iraqis? Brit soldiers? Something new....

and of course driving your family around Baghdad is pretty much a hoot right now just as long as you don't go down the wrong street and get your heads blown off.

And who do you think starts the shootings?

I think you forget one minor point:

The US/UK wanted the UN's help from the beginning. I don't think we rejected any offers for help.

You seem to forget that the UN wanted no part in this. For better or worse, we would have welcomed UN participation.

What is a a p**s up in a brewery ???

That shows how UN acts the way left-winged EU leaders want it to act. If it was truly an international union that cared about humanity and terrorist threats around the world, it would support this war with no doubt.

When the coalition went to war they said that the UNs help / assistance would not be required and they would take control of rebuilding Iraq ( I think the UN offred assistance with the rebuilding program, education and establishment of government etc etc) but the coalition practically told them to butt out, the UN never ever offred peacekeepers or troops but that is what the coalition asked for or was thinking of asking for.

the piss up in a brewery thing right brewery is wher they make beer and a piss up means getting drunk, get it

Oh Charles Typical of most of the pro war lets blame the french, remember that China and Russia used thier veto as well. France was entitled to use thier veto after all how many times has the US used thier veto and claimed they were perfectly entitled to do it (particuarly on Israel) and not everyone balked Australia, Spain and some African countries voted under the promise of financial aid.
The UN is helping out mainly with humanatarian aid i.e. food, medicine and dealing with displaces Iraqis) they have also offred to help but good ol Dubya said no even though G7 said it was good economically if the UN helped.
Actually instead of getting drunk we ae helping out lookat this war Scots Dragoons played a major role in securing Basra plus other regiments were involved, then you had RAF tornadoes from Lossiemouth involved in thebombing in the first few days, lets not forget Afganastan when the US asked for 38 commando of Arbroath to take care of the cave clearing apparently the US forces werent up to it. And the US good at handling big operations does this include the mess youve made in Iraq

Yeah all of Scotland is to take the blame we all take the blamr for Penicillian, anastehtic, telephones, televisions, tarmac, radar, the first cloned animal what where we thinking.
Who would go marching like that people with real courage thats who.

why you outta what?

You guys are hilarious!

Really!

Listen americaah, obviously you have never seen braveheart. Scots are the ass kickiest, dirtiest, whiskey swillin, log throwin, dress wearing, face paintin, horn blowin, knife in your sock folks out there. Honest to god.

What are we talkin about here?

But seriously, I love and respect the scots.

yes & better

Common sense tells me that by doing nothing I can do no wrong.
It also tells me that doing nothing solves no problem.
Those with the do nothing attitude prior to the Iraq war are the ones still complaining today and in their eyes have done no wrong.
Those who did are ridiculed and scrutinized.

Dave,
It's over, we're there and that's that. I am absolutly positive this will happen again regardless of who the president is at the time.
As Americans, it's or destiny and it's what we live for. It's part of the global plan and doctrine to take over the world and hold everyone to our standard of lawlessness. We only want to conquer and rape each land of it's resources like locusts. Kill every man woman and child that resists.
No wait, that's Islam.
Get a shovel Dave....

lodgebo,
There is an article today in the UK papers about the Muslim Cleric in the UK who desribes Jihad. You should find it and read it.
THis will clerify thing for into what we see from their so-call religious leaders. It's pretty clear to me who the enemy is.

Thank you.

Yeah but wjat USA 1 wrote was pretty stupid maybe even racist all this crap about rthe rape of land and natural resources and killl every man women and child that gets in the way, thats just spouting hatred towards muslims daft you keep doing that your gonna have a Birmingham and Oldham situation on your hands before you know it

Do you know what facetious is?
I know this isn't a rational solution. I just wanted to see what YOU really think.
You don't know me but, I am the most unpredudiced person.
The problem I have with this forum is that everyon *****es and nobody supplies solutions to anything. The solution I gave was unrealistic and intended to spark solutions from the posters but, I sse that nobody really has one of their own, other than cut/paste from some national report.
Like I said in another post. "If you do nothing, you can do no wrong". Amercia will not sit by and do nothing. Period.

Alright but you are talking about finding a solution, but look your governmnets solutions invade, kill and destroy, and you do these things for the greater good but the greater good for who look at afghananstan and Iraq you have got two evil men out of dirct power and now hiding underground planning god knows what. m Afghanastan nearly two years on is still a mess and terrorist attacks/threats are increasing in the western world.
You are right about us not having a solution but that doesnt mesn we shouldnt voice our opposition to US actions especially if it makes us a target. But if you want a solution how about this one fix up afghnanstan get a government in order and make life better for people there, do that before moving on to Iraq I mean economically alone the two wars and the rebuiliding of two countries is gona be crippling an already weak US economy.
If america wont wait and bide her time then that could be costly to soldiers, civilians and dare I say it your beloved presidents popularity. Look at Iraq.

How shallow.
If the U.S. said to the world, "We can;t get involved because we would lose too much money!", then you would be all over the US for being selfish and only looking out for our own interests.
Unfortunatly, you are looking at this with blinders on. Your thoughts are that everything is going wrong and no good has or will come from either war.
How wrong you are.
The U.S. will continue this fight for years, with or without the acceptance of the UN or the EU, there is no doubt and we know that we are commited for the long haul. It's not about money or oil or anything as shallow as that. Many on this board will continue to believe that and spew their biased visions of what America is doing through the eyes of the biased media.

ickle,
I think you're right. With the growing rate of Hispanic Americans in the U.S. (Largest minoirty) that the chances for a hispanic president will be more likely than a black.
The black community hasn't put forth any real candidate yet. Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton aren't exactly presidential caliber.
I would have taken a good look at Collin Powell had he ever ran.

You know what americant why dont you naswer back with facts? the rest of us are doing it and it makes the debate a whole lot more intresting. Your own viewpoints count for nothing in less you can back it up.
What I put up ther is the truth as it stands to day I got it from papers, the net TV and a person who was in afgfnastan.
Like I keep sayin the truth must hurt.
America will get the credit when she finishes both jobs as promised.

Americant just be glad I dont tell you what I think of people like you.

Ickle within a week and I was mainly talking about Afghanastan remember that place? But thanks for the unemployment thing it works diffrent over here.

Charles I am not ridiculing but you cant expect to run abput saying we liberated Iraq when the countey is in the mess it is in your governmnet made promises to the people and when you have compted those promises then you will get the credit that you deserve put it in a smaller scale scenario if you take your car to get repaired and you come back three days later and all the mechanic has done has taken the engine apart to find the problem would you say to him job well done in short you cant praise anybody when you onlt do half the job like in afghnastan.
and as for we should all work together the US made it clear that only the coalition were to be involved

First off americant you would care of you reall knew.
Now to reply to the inteligent people
Charles I admit it's a bad analogy I just ahve a problem with my car and the mechanic cant fix it. But the actual point is that what you are doing is hard in Iraq I agree, but I only put Iraq in there as a refrence to the promises that have not been kept things like electricity should at least be running in some places. My main problem though was Afghanastan after what my friend told me I was disgusted surely rebuilding Afghanastan is a top priority when the US knocked most of it down because if you leaver it in a mess there will be a lot more hate from Afghans and they will believe that you have forgotten about them. There has been progrees in aghanastan but nowhere near enough considering the war ende more than two years ago.

Jus check outta this. Its hilarious!!
http://pub14.ezboard.com/fdesivoice...opicID=82.topic

The Blair government?
I thought he was a puppet of the Queen. How did he get put in that position of government? The people? Obviously the people are now embarrassed and are looking for a scape goat.
I wouldn't compare Bush and Blair that way. BUsh will most likely get re-elected for anothe 4 years.
Other countries may help in the rebuilding of Iraq and Afganastan but, the Iraqis will not let France have their proposed oil contracts back because of their supprt for Saddam. So, how is that America's fault? Show me another country that has the man power and company to do this work under these circumstances.
Both Afganastan and Iraq are and will be better off in the future and the people know this. They already realize this and want the that outcome. It is the greedy warlords and fundamentalist that can't stand to see things change by putting the power back in the hands of the people.