The war

[Melissa_W]

I didn't see it get very off track due to insults. I saw it get off track because we were talking about a movie and chit chatting in between. which is fine with me

Anyway how can you say that they aren't acheiving freedom over there? They just had a real election a REAL vote. It may not mean much to you but it sure means a heck of a lot to them. We take freedom for granted because it is all we have ever known. Something as simple as voting and having free elections may not seem like much to us. It is something we have always had the right to do. They didn't have that right. Freedom does not happen over night and I think they have done a HELL of a job getting saddam out of power and getting them on the right track to democracy. I say congratulations to the troops over there fighting so hard for someone else. I have friends over there and I REFUSE to sit here and believe that they are over there in vain. They believe in what they are fighting for and I do to.

Sorry, but I'm not willing to let a single American die for another country's freedom. I feel bad for them, but it's their problem. That wasn't even the reason for the war anyway. We were TOLD that there were WMD. When they couldn't find any, they backpeddled and started this whole "freedom" thing.

 

[chazhound]

Sorry, but I'm not willing to let a single American die for another country's freedom.

Really? The United States has kept war and direct attacks from coming to the mainland United States by helping freedom grow around the world. The two biggest wars in history were about the U.S. fighting for another country's freedom.

Chazhound

 

[Melissa_W]

The Nazis would have eventually taken us over too if we hadn't done anything. So really, it was to protect ourselves as well. If there is a threat to our country, I will pick up a gun and fight. But I feel that Iraq was one of the last countries that we should have been concerned about. What about North Korea? They are actually testing nuclear weapons. But Bush doesn't seem to be too concerned... hmmmm.... I wonder why... Not that I think we should haul off and attack them either. But if we did, it would make a lot more sense.

Personally, I think our meddling has made us more of a target. You don't see people clamoring to attack Canada or Sweden, do you? I definitely don't buy into the whole "they hate us because we are free" thing... what a load of crap that is. They have reasons.

I have a meeting I have to get too, so I won't be able to respond until later tonight.

 

[AndrewF]

Really? The United States has kept war and direct attacks from coming to the mainland United States by helping freedom grow around the world. The two biggest wars in history were about the U.S. fighting for another country's freedom.

Chazhound

The two biggest wars in history were about allied forces - not just the US fighting to preserve freedom all around the world.....not just a couple of countries.

 

[blue]

Sorry, but I'm not willing to let a single American die for another country's freedom. I feel bad for them, but it's their problem. That wasn't even the reason for the war anyway. We were TOLD that there were WMD. When they couldn't find any, they backpeddled and started this whole "freedom" thing.

The French helped the US become independent. Freedom will spread on its own if given that chance, and we are giving the Middle East that chance with Iraq.

The UN is proving how ineffective it is with Iran and North Korea by allowwing them to develope nuclear programs.

 

[chazhound]

The Nazis would have eventually taken us over too if we hadn't done anything. So really, it was to protect ourselves as well. If there is a threat to our country, I will pick up a gun and fight. But I feel that Iraq was one of the last countries that we should have been concerned about. What about North Korea? They are actually testing nuclear weapons. But Bush doesn't seem to be too concerned... hmmmm.... I wonder why... Not that I think we should haul off and attack them either. But if we did, it would make a lot more sense.

Personally, I think our meddling has made us more of a target. You don't see people clamoring to attack Canada or Sweden, do you? I definitely don't buy into the whole "they hate us because we are free" thing... what a load of crap that is. They have reasons.

I have a meeting I have to get too, so I won't be able to respond until later tonight.

No doubt there was other issues at hand, like our own survival in the two big wars

North Korea is a complex one and because of the size of it's army any action would have to be a clear group effort and desire on the part of many countries, especially China, Russia, and S. Korea. History again has shown this is how that dictator rules, he bluffs his way into deals for his country. North Korea is a very poor country and not like Iraq.

Iraq on the other hand, had over a decade of warnings and clear direction of action. Sadam just didn't do what the international community wanted (U.N). With oil, Iraq had wealth. They were much more able to carry out their threats if he wanted. Sooner or later you have to follow through or be useless as a governing body.
I am more watching for our Congress being concerned than President Bush. He won't be there for much longer, the congress will. They have the power to act too. Why does anyone blame one man for these issues?
They did Clinton the same way.

I also agree that we meddle too much where other powers could help better than us. Sometimes it is essential to meddle if stopping a danger before it come to us. (like WWI), but sometimes it is frustrating to see where we are and what we are doing.

Thanks for bringing up good points.
Chazhound

 

[oriondw]

The Nazis would have eventually taken us over too if we hadn't done anything.

Wrong on many levels. Is that what they teach you in school?

 

[Zoom]

Actually yes. That is what they teach us in school, that Germany was orchestrating a deal with Mexico to allow Nazi forces to use the country as a land route to the US. It would have been a stupid idea, since the Axis forces would have been repelled within weeks, but the main idea behind allowing the political talks was to regain Texas and part of California through the ensuing negotiations after the fact. To the public though, it did look as if the Nazis were setting their sights on America.

And here's one for the libs vs. conservatives in respect to WWII, the paragon of US military might and enduring freedom. The conservatives were all for staying here in our isolationist policies of the time and letting Europe take care of it's own problems. At the time as well, there were ill sentiments towards most of the Jewish population and since it was "only" the Jews being targeted, why did it have to concern the rest of the (mainly) Protestant US? The liberals were the ones who were pushing for the US to get involved, to add our military might to the flagging Allied Forces so that we could stop the spread of the Nazi army and influences. We were already sending enormous amounts of resources through the Lend-Lease program (helped Britian) and other programs that provided the Soviet Union and China with the raw materials and technologies needed to repulse the Axis forces invading the Soviet Union and the Japanese forces invading China.

It wasn't until Pearl Harbor that the majority of the United States voiced its support to send US troops overseas and into actual battle. All of our efforts prior to that attack were aimed at giving aid to the Allies without actually getting involved ourselves (The Neutrality Acts).

 

[chazhound]

Nice post Zoom!

Chazhound

 

[oriondw]

Actually yes. That is what they teach us in school, that Germany was orchestrating a deal with Mexico to allow Nazi forces to use the country as a land route to the US. It would have been a stupid idea, since the Axis forces would have been repelled within weeks, but the main idea behind allowing the political talks was to regain Texas and part of California through the ensuing negotiations after the fact. To the public though, it did look as if the Nazis were setting their sights on America.

And here's one for the libs vs. conservatives in respect to WWII, the paragon of US military might and enduring freedom. The conservatives were all for staying here in our isolationist policies of the time and letting Europe take care of it's own problems. At the time as well, there were ill sentiments towards most of the Jewish population and since it was "only" the Jews being targeted, why did it have to concern the rest of the (mainly) Protestant US? The liberals were the ones who were pushing for the US to get involved, to add our military might to the flagging Allied Forces so that we could stop the spread of the Nazi army and influences. We were already sending enormous amounts of resources through the Lend-Lease program (helped Britian) and other programs that provided the Soviet Union and China with the raw materials and technologies needed to repulse the Axis forces invading the Soviet Union and the Japanese forces invading China.

It wasn't until Pearl Harbor that the majority of the United States voiced its support to send US troops overseas and into actual battle. All of our efforts prior to that attack were aimed at giving aid to the Allies without actually getting involved ourselves (The Neutrality Acts).

Thats not entirely what I meant, and I do agree with what you wrote


But seriously, there was NO way for nazi's to even transport their troops to mexico. And by the time America made D-Day landing the war was already lost by Germany.

 

[Zoom]

Nice post Zoom!

Chazhound

Thanks! and thanks to Orion as well!

 

[blue]

Its a good post Zoom and I do agree there has been a huge swing on the liberals and conservatives.

That does not change the fact soldiers from other countries help the US gain it freedom. How many countries on Earth would be ruled under oppression without outside influence and blood from soldiers from foriegn land?

The UN has failed the world, they were to be a part of "Never Again" and they have been a party to bringing it again.

 

[Dizzy]

Sorry, I am trying to catch up on what has been said, whilst attempting to do work as well

I have noticed a few comments stating "is that what they teach you in school?" and the following comment along the line of "actually yes"...

Is this the same country where smoe school are not even allowed to teach Darwin's theory of evolution????! How can you trust what you are being told, if they can pick and choose what they tell you?

Propaganda occurs over here too, not just in those far off countries you see on the news.

How many people here have seen the realities of war? The actual human suffering? Forget the politics - fat cats struggling for money/power/land, look at the innocent people killed. Is it ok because it is happening 'over there'?

How would you feel if it was on your doorstep??? America was disgusted at the attacks on them, imagine if that was your everyday life! I still cannot see how that can be the 'right thing to do'.

 

[Puckstop31]

The UN has failed the world, they were to be a part of "Never Again" and they have been a party to bringing it again.

+1, mainly through their inability or unwillingness to ACT and not just talk.

 

[yuckaduck]

The UN has failed the world, they were to be a part of "Never Again" and they have been a party to bringing it again.

It would not have failed had the UN been listened too. When countries just barge in and do not adhere to the rules how can anything work.

 

[Puckstop31]

Is this the same country where smoe school are not even allowed to teach Darwin's theory of evolution????! How can you trust what you are being told, if they can pick and choose what they tell you?

Evolution is taught in ALL public schools. A private school can choose not to teach it, IIRC. I do not know where you got this information, but me thinks you should listen to your own 2nd sentence.

FWIW, there is a big fight right now in a local court over if ID (Intelligent Design) should be offered in the public schools.

Propaganda occurs over here too, not just in those far off countries you see on the news.

Of course, you need only tune into the news, especially during an election cycle.

How many people here have seen the realities of war? The actual human suffering?

I have, more than I care to remember. I had to have some therapy to get past memories of it.

Forget the politics - fat cats struggling for money/power/land, look at the innocent people killed. Is it ok because it is happening 'over there'?

Alot of those "innocent" people are not that innocent. Also, know that MOST of those innocents are killed by the insurgents, just so they can get THIS very reaction out of us. I saw that FIRST hand in Somalia. There are just some people in the world, no not people, SAVAGES that know nothing else and deserve the same in return.

How would you feel if it was on your doorstep??? America was disgusted at the attacks on them, imagine if that was your everyday life! I still cannot see how that can be the 'right thing to do'.

We fight, partially, to help theses people move past that kind of life. Rarely are things like this quick or easy. Democracy/Peace takes time. But, I guess I should not expect any patience out of today's "microwave" society.


**** Sorry, I just cannot stay away from this thread. It is like a train wreck. LOL

 

[Dizzy]

The cost of War:

 

[Puckstop31]

It would not have failed had the UN been listened too. When countries just barge in and do not adhere to the rules how can anything work.

Please... You are smarter than this. Are you forgetting to account for human nature? The UN, TIME and TIME again has had opportunities to make a difference in the world. They CONSTANTLY and CONSISTENTLY FAIL. I have seen it, more than once in Bosnia and then in Somalia, real life evidence of their utter lack of willingness to act.

Why are we not talking about Dafur? The loss of life there is FAR AND AWAY MUCH greater than in Iraq. How about your precious UN now?

Faith that the UN is a good organization is both insane and foolish.

 

[Puckstop31]

The cost of War:

Which is it Dizzy? The human cost or the dollar cost that bothers you most?

Besides, is that all you have in retort?

 

[Dizzy]

I am making my point.

And I think the both go hand in hand.