first of all, before i answer the question, i will say that the man speaking was extremely derogatory to the woman, and should go fuck himself. secondly, not getting rid of saddam will not promote peace and justice in iraq. but i pose this question: when was it our job to go regulate "peace and justice?" in other countries? The last time we fought a war without being directly attacked and without aiding a country who was being invaded (neither of which happened here) we lost. it was called vietnam. can we not learn from our mistakes? where are the weapons that iraq hasn’t destroyed? where is the fucking evidence? why did bush tell the people of iraq not to destroy the oil fields before he told them not to use chemical weapons against OUR soldiers who are putting their lives on the line in an unnecessary war? what is more important here? our brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, etc? or some fucking oil? shouldn’t we be more worried about hydrogen cells from being depleted since bush promised that? what the fuck? Instead, we continally starve the Iraqi people when we know that Saddam doesn’t care if his people starve and then pretend that sanctions put any pressure on him. God, fuck this shit. Point being that not getting rid of Saddam won’t promote peace and justice, but getting rid of him through military, bloody, disgusting methods will do nothing but put all of us (and especially those of you in C. Springs) at more risk for terrorist attack. Shit, even Canada doesn’t support us. Let’s burn all of our bridges to clear our president’s daddy’s name. FUCK. /rant

You say "not getting rid of saddam will not promote peace and justice in iraq." … So yes, war will mean people dying. If we go to war, there is still the large chance that not as many people will die (some will. a lot will). However, it is certainly less than if we leave Saddam in power, which will 100% guarantee a high number of civilian deaths. You also say that we "pretend that sanctions put any pressure on him". So, leaving Saddam in power will not promote peace and justice, and you have conceded that International diplomacy has not worked. Might I ask what some other alternatives are? I agree that removing Saddam will increase the likelihood of retalitory terrorism in the USA. No doubt about that. Should we maintain our nation’s founding isolationist ideology and let Iraq implode, or should we step in, despite the associated risk?

<rant> I just knew that someone would try to compare what we’re doing to Vietnam – and there is one big reason why thats wrong. The reason we didnt win the Vietnam because it was us fighting pretty much the whole damn country. In Iraq, there are a great many people who dont like Saddam but are afraid to say anything. They dont get much media coverage, but some of the biggest supporters of the war are ex-patriate Arabs, especially Iraqis who have fled the country. You ask when it became our job to go regulate "peace and justice". We’ve pretty much appointed ourselves to that position since WWII. And thats what we’re doing with this war. Herein lies a big flaw in the Bush Administration’s argumentation. They say that we’re doing this because Iraq is an imminent threat to American national security – which its not. Saddam is too smart to try and do something like that (I dont much believe in the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection). [B]If[/B] we were actually threatened, then we wouldnt need any damn permission from anyone. But we’re not, so this conflict is basically us being the world’s policeman. However, when youre playing the world’s policeman, its helpful to have the world supporting you. It’s true that getting rid of Saddam might not make things any better, but letting him stay in power is not promoting peace and justice in any way. If we really stay committed to Iraq, I have no doubt that we can help rebuild it into a prosperous nation – this country has done that before (hint, hint – Germany). The bottom line is this: we know Saddam has chemical weapons (hint hint – we gave them to him), we know he’s a brutal dictator, and we also know that he is not laying his arsenal on a lawn for the UN guys like the world community told him he should. The French want to play Daladier again, and give Saddam all the time in the world – more or less invalidating the authority of the UN. There is no way that any peaceful solution is going to get rid of Saddam and disarm Iraq as far as I can see – which is exactly what that guy was asking Laura, and if you listened, you would have heard that the girl wasnt giving a real answer (which is why he was getting mad). She was spouting a bunch of rhetoric that there were "other ways". What other ways? No one from the anti-war side has given a good alternative. The anti-war people also spout off a bunch of stuff about "peace". What about peace for the Iraqi people? Don’t they deserve it as much as we do? The peacenik’s arguments work against them. We’re trying to go over there and make peace (although, I will admit that those nice oil fields are probably a motivating factor too). The only ones who truly have a leg to stand on are the radical isolationist Americans – who keep saying that its none of our damn business. It is probably not the best use of our resources right now, but the upcoming conflict in Iraq is far from being unjustified. </rant>

actually, the rumors that saddam gasses his own people are not true. he gassed the kurds, not iraqi citizens. and, yeah, we’re not planning on helping iraq rebuild…i think the quote was something like "we’ll stay there as long as necessary, but get out as soon as possible." so, in other words, when next years budget comes out (assuming this war is over) there won’t be any aid to iraq just like there wasn’t any to afghanistan this year. anyway, iraq isn’t this huge threat that the media/bush administration sensationalizes it to be. we’re just hurting ourselves here, and we’re doing it without international support which is hideous. i mean, what happens when someone actually attacks us and we have no allies to help us fight back? what if we end up going after n. korea and then, inevitably, china and no one his helping us fight? i think it’s a slippery slope. that’s all. and i know none of y’all will agree with me, but whatever 🙂

Gassing or no gassing – we know he kills people indiscriminantly – he’s released video tapes of people being sent away just to scare the bejeezus out of his own fellow Iraqis. We’re going without international support because no other country has the balls to say "Iraq isnt getting disarmed with Saddam Hussein still in power". Even Tony Blair is catching fire in his own country for agreeing with the Bush Administration. Where was that quote from (we’ll stay here as long as necessary)? I would like to know. That should be a question the media is asking the Administration. Iraq isnt the big bad wolf the media/Bush is making it to be, but it doesnt mean we’re wrong in trying to get Saddam out of power.

We train killers everyday here in America- either in the fucking ghetto or the fascist military. We can go over, covert-operations style and take him, and all of his top assholes down. Laura- there is no reason to defend Saddam’s Regime (which isn’t what you are meaning to do, but it’s how you are coming off). I mean, what about the rape rooms and the torture chambers? Regardless of if he gassed his own people or not, his human rights record is a bit like a list of what NOT to do. The answer to the question, I believe I answered in the beg. of this message, but I still stand on the ground that war is always wrong. Any situation can be avoided. The thing is, Saddam Hussein was given very specific instructions on how to avoid not only his mortal demise, but his falling from a posistion of power, then again, we will have to see in about 20 minutes on that. What scares me is that there is a crazy North Korean who is DEMONSTRATING that he has weapons of Mass destruction, butwe are ignoring him. Why? Because North Korea’s biggest export is North Koreans and Korean food- not oil. No matter what you say, oil is playing a major role in all of this. Think about where Mr. the lights are off and the hampster is dead comes from. He wants to possess, in some way, those oil fields. And as to Jared’s comment about restoring countries that we devestate, we also restarted Japan, but the economy was in better shape back then. Which also raises another point- where is the rest of the world when it comes to aiding flailing countries? Yes, we cut our support to Afghanistan. Why don’t Canada, Australia, Switzerland, England, or Spain step in to help out a bit? Fuckers.

i don’t support saddam’s "regime" and i don’t support our regime cleverly disguised as a democratic government. if we get rid of saddam, bush has to be next.

Heh – I’ll drink to that.

me too … I think that John Mccain or Bill Frist would make better Presidents than Bush.

Good thing Saddam only gases the Kurds. I was worried there for a minute!

dice; shove it up your ass.

Yay…. WWIII….. w00t… can we sell bush off into prostitution in Asia?

Can we IP ban him now? He was entertaning for a day or two, but now he is no longer worth paying attention to.

Who? Bush or Ace?

I just thought it was ridiculous that someone begin an arguement saying that Saddam didn’t gas his own people, just Kurds. (who are Iraqi! they live in the damn country and are thus his own people!) That’s like saying that Bush gasing Mexican immigrants (which wasn’t too far from the truth in Texas) isn’t as bad as gasing your everyday American Citizen. Makes no sense to a sane person. Disco, were you suggesting I get baned? I have been out of control lately, huh? Those Kurds deserved to die, and I should have kept my mouth shut, huh?

Too bad that you idiocy before has overshadowed any message you were trying to give. Try apologizing to Tony, then we might listen to you.

i was wondering how long a serious and interesting debate about important matters in the state of the world could last on this site before it turned back into a petty debate about who has offended whom in this little e-clique. but for those of us who would are still thinking about the war (because it’s still happening), i thought this was good, so i thought i would post it. i’m as confused as the next person about whether this war is necessary, whether this war is inevitable, whether it’s important to support my government regardless of my own beliefs. but, beliefs about saddam aside, i think what this speech says about america’s attitude is worth considering. no matter what is right, no matter what is the truth, this is all really sad. anyway, the speech: US Senator Robert Byrd Speech delivered on the floor of the US Senate March 19, 2003 3:45pm I believe in this beautiful country. I have studied its roots and gloried in the wisdom of its magnificent Constitution. I have marveled at the wisdom of its founders and framers. Generation after generation of Americans has understood the lofty ideals that underlie our great Republic. I have been inspired by the story of their sacrifice and their strength. But, today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper. The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned. Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination. Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves. We proclaim a new doctrine of preemption which is understood by few and feared by many. We say that the United States has the right to turn its firepower on any corner of the globe which might be suspect in the war on terrorism. We assert that right without the sanction of any international body. As a result, the world has become a much more dangerous place. We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance. We treat UN Security Council members like ingrates who offend our princely dignity by lifting their heads from the carpet. Valuable alliances are split. After war has ended, the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America’s image around the globe. The case this Administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence. We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice. There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11. The twin towers fell because a world-wide terrorist group, Al Qaeda, with cells in over 60 nations, struck at our wealth and our influence by turning our own planes into missiles, one of which would likely have slammed into the dome of this beautiful Capitol except for the brave sacrifice of the passengers on board. The brutality seen on September 11th and in other terrorist attacks we have witnessed around the globe are the violent and desperate efforts by extremists to stop the daily encroachment of western values upon their cultures. That is what we fight. It is a force not confined to borders. It is a shadowy entity with many faces, many names, and many addresses. But, this Administration has directed all of the anger, fear, and grief which emerged from the ashes of the twin towers and the twisted metal of the Pentagon towards a tangible villain, one we can see and hate and attack. And villain he is. But, he is the wrong villain. And this is the wrong war. If we attack Saddam Hussein, we will probably drive him from power. But, the zeal of our friends to assist our global war on terrorism may have already taken flight. The general unease surrounding this war is not just due to "orange alert." There is a pervasive sense of rush and risk and too many questions unanswered. How long will we be in Iraq? What will be the cost? What is the ultimate mission? How great is the danger at home? A pall has fallen over the Senate Chamber. We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq. What is happening to this country? When did we become a nation which ignores and berates our friends? When did we decide to risk undermining international order by adopting a radical and doctrinaire approach to using our awesome military might? How can we abandon diplomatic efforts when the turmoil in the world cries out for diplomacy? Why can this President not seem to see that America’s true power lies not in its will to intimidate, but in its ability to inspire? War appears inevitable. But, I continue to hope that the cloud will lift. Perhaps Saddam will yet turn tail and run. Perhaps reason will somehow still prevail. I along with millions of Americans will pray for the safety of our troops, for the innocent civilians in Iraq, and for the security of our homeland. May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us.

Actually the nice girl, he came to this board to pick a fight (yes a RL fight) with Tony, so I am going to make him feel as unwelcome as possible. So please try to control yourself. kthxdrvthru

*irritation at disco* I thought I was closed minded. jeezus.

Sorry girl, that was a little bit harsher than I meant it to sound 🙂

I’m going to Canada. As a refugee. I am kidnapping my sister, as she speaks French and is a Native American (i.e., a citezen of North America, not just the U.S.), and fleeing to Canada. Not really. But if I could, I would.

Disco, everyone and their Mom knows that tony was the one who challenged me to a fight. I told you this before, but I guess you weren’t listening (or reading, whatever) Are you his girlfriend or something? You seem to be real offended by the fact that tony wants to (read this part) fight me. Make me feel unwelcome all you want. It suits you. As for Canada, I would move there not to escape from a morally shady (a mortal sin for Catholics to participate) war, but because Canada is a funny, liberal place. Ever seen Strange Brew? Bowling for Columbine? Canada is a cream dream!

bullshit that is all i have to say

<rant> WTF! Dice … SIMMA DAWWN NAH! SIMMMMA DAAWWN NAWH! I think you and Tony should A) fight and get it over with so this poo flinging can stop or B) Just stop posting. Why? You ask. Because your being lame and beating a dead horse. I visit this site to listen to liberals attack the conservatives. Not to see some dick swaggering jock who "thinks he’s all that" post about they same topic from four news posts ago. Your worse than G.W. Bush …scratch that, your worse than the French. Go fling poo on your site coppertop. </rant> BTW its almost April, can you believe that? WOW! Which means soon it’ll be EARRRTH DAAY 😉 Anyone wanna goto Folsom Field on ED? /me raises hand. Hey Laura why did you _not_ return my phone calls? I know, its cuz you hate me right. I think so.

Hmmm, yeah, I’m being a jock…over the internet. Whatever. I came on here to make a funny social comment, and suddenly I’m attacked and blamed for beating a dead horse. You guys think you are too cool for school. But I have news for you….you aren’t. By the way, I went to Tony and Co.’s house last night, but no one answered the door. The light was on, but no responce. Now, if you guys are so concerned with this serious issue, and resent me messing up this stunning debate you all had going, then why am I suddenly the topic of conversation? I didn’t start ANY of the stuff you are accusing me of. (Stress ANY, ANY in its most basic and pure form) Randall can block me if he feels like it, but otherwise I’ll continue to post from time to time and have one of you guys burst a colon and sporadically yell at me, and I’ll laugh and laugh. Be Seeing You!

Just to clear that up, they came by at ~9pm, and Matt and I were at the Perk … also, Tony’s out of town until Tuesday (?). And last but not least, I agree with Dice … you guys need to take a chill pill. Banning is not something I do; nobody should care enough about this piddly little board to warrant it.

ummm…. point numero uno– James brought up the whole ass kicking thing again as far as I care to think back, Point 2—- Randal’s right. /raspberries

I think everyone has some very valid points in this argument. However, the peaceniks don’t have any strong supporting facts to back up their arguments. all they do is run around and holler "no war for oil". this war is not for oil, which is why i do wish that bush and the media would refrain from making comments about our military doing a good job of defending the oil wells in iraq. it begins to make me wonder what we are really fighting for. i do understand why protecting the wells is important though, the iraqi’s will need a consumable product to sell to the world in order for a new economy to take hold in that country. the iraqi regime under hussein’s leadership does support and aid in the training of terrorists. there is no other explanation why a 747 fuselage would be in the middle of a desert. hussein and his sons are generally evil men, spraying people with acids to slowly eat the flesh off their bodies just because they didn’t say hello to you in an appropriate tone of voice is no reason to kill a person. having rape rooms in palaces for entertainment purposes is a abhorent idea. these are just a couple of reasons why the iraqi people should be freed from hussein’s regime. I do not think that the united states should be closely involved in the rebuilding of iraq, except for foreign aid and humanitarian aid, until their economy can allow the iraqi people to take care of themselves. as far as having support from the world in this war, we have more countries backing our decision than bush 41 had in the gulf war. bush 41 had the support of 34 countries, bush 43 now has the support of 45 countries publicly and several others that for safety reasons wish to remain anonymous. (this is where i get frustrated) as far as germany, france, and canada are concerned, we don’t really need their help in this war. france is blatantly trying to make the un seem unnecessary ( which they are) only to push for the advancement of the european union, germany is all for the european union as well, and canada is a suburb of france so i guess the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. if it wasn’t for the united states intervention in wwii the french would be speaking german right now along with many other european countries. so the french of all people should be behind us in this war, do they not want freedom for the iraqi people? it is a distinct possibility. france has made some under the table deals with iraq (against un resolutions) and i think they could stand to lose a lot when iraq’s regime is changed. all in all i think that war is bad. i hate it when people die unnecessarily, which is why we have to help iraq as quickly as possible. the sooner we free them, the sooner they can get on with their new found freedom and the quicker we can get our own troops home safely. ( then it’s on to north korea).

I actually have dropped the whole thing in the interest of keeping Randall sane.

test