A soldiers own words

[LowerCaseRepublican]

I think the is some media bias goin on defintly, and to say that this is not has important has other is just has bad has romans. just because it isnt the worst place in the world for people to live doesnt mean it shouldnt be fixed

I don't know if you read Defense Department documents from 1941 when they were discussing US involvement in World War II. I highly suggest you read them since they have been declassified. One that caught my eye was along the lines of "Many people will not support the increase of US spheres of influence in the world as a reason to engage in the war. The suffering of others MUST be shown. This will have the better propaganda effect." I think the same sort of reasoning is going on right now.

 

I want to see the families on the news that have lost lives because of the US bombings from the past 12 years. I wonder how thankful they are for having the US roll in and bomb the s*** out of them again.

 

If we are so intent on fixing human rights as well, then why so much aid to Colombia when we know of their human rights abuses? Wouldn't it be easier to fix that by shutting of the monetary faucet to them?

 

I'm not saying Saddam isn't evil...he is. I just don't think that the usage of military force this fast without exhausting diplomatic solutions was good reasoning. There were other ways but our President didn't want to waste his time. I guess it's easy for Bush to wage war when he's not the one fighting.

[Soxplosion]

Hey steff, I see you do have friends serving their country. I am sorry for what I said in that other thread. It is tough for us all as Americans and especially for those who know people over there. I pray that no more Americans will have to die in this and that they may all come home safely. I pray for Iraqi civilians who have had to put up with Saddam for so long. I do not pray however for Iraqi troops loyal to Saddam, for they are killing their own people and POWs and I wont pray for that.

 

As for the whole protesting thing, let em. Saying they can't is un-American. But I think that before the war protesting was logical. But not there is no point, we should just unite behind our troops. And if we stop without getting Saddam, hell kill those people who were celebrating. A lot of Arab peoples hate us because we betrayed them. We didnt really, but if we leave without Saddam, we will have truely betrayed them. So theres not any point in protesting and stopping the war now, for such would only lead to thousands more deaths. It will be easier on the world to just take this man out. But the protesters can protest all they want, such is their right. I just dont plan on joining them anytime soon...

[soxfan420]

I think the is some media bias goin on defintly, and to say that this is not has important has other is just has bad has romans. just because it isnt the worst place in the world for people to live doesnt mean it shouldnt be fixed

I don't know if you read Defense Department documents from 1941 when they were discussing US involvement in World War II. I highly suggest you read them since they have been declassified. One that caught my eye was along the lines of "Many people will not support the increase of US spheres of influence in the world as a reason to engage in the war. The suffering of others MUST be shown. This will have the better propaganda effect." I think the same sort of reasoning is going on right now.

 

I want to see the families on the news that have lost lives because of the US bombings from the past 12 years. I wonder how thankful they are for having the US roll in and bomb the s*** out of them again.

 

If we are so intent on fixing human rights as well, then why so much aid to Colombia when we know of their human rights abuses? Wouldn't it be easier to fix that by shutting of the monetary faucet to them?

 

I'm not saying Saddam isn't evil...he is. I just don't think that the usage of military force this fast without exhausting diplomatic solutions was good reasoning. There were other ways but our President didn't want to waste his time. I guess it's easy for Bush to wage war when he's not the one fighting.

other ways what ones, ive been trying to get you to give some but no luck thus far, the civilions we have killed is a tragedy, but it is far less than the ones we are helping in the long run.

 

has far has 12 years of bombing what are you talking about bombs have not been goin off over there for 12 straight years, there has been hunderds of attempts to get him out of there without war. without any luck. 12 years of killing your own people. i think that is enough to warrent a war to free them.

[LowerCaseRepublican]

other ways what ones, ive been trying to get you to give some but no luck thus far, the civilions we have killed is a tragedy, but it is far less than the ones we are helping in the long run.

 

has far has 12 years of bombing what are you talking about bombs have not been goin off over there for 12 straight years, there has been hunderds of attempts to get him out of there without war. without any luck. 12 years of killing your own people. i think that is enough to warrent a war to free them.

Actually we have been bombing Iraq every few days per week for the past 12 years. The UN knows about it. One of the previous leaders of the Committee on Humanitarianism actually resigned from the post in protest of the US/UK bombings for the past 12 years.

 

You should ask groups like Voices in the Wilderness who has been to Iraq. They'll tell you about how we've been bombing them for 12 years now.

 

Bush I may have been a f***, but at least he respected international law enough to know that he couldn't topple a government legally. I guess that lesson got lost on his son.

[soxfan420]

other ways what ones, ive been trying to get you to give some but no luck thus far, the civilions we have killed is a tragedy, but it is far less than the ones we are helping in the long run.

 

has far has 12 years of bombing what are you talking about bombs have not been goin off over there for 12 straight years, there has been hunderds of attempts to get him out of there without war. without any luck. 12 years of killing your own people. i think that is enough to warrent a war to free them.

Actually we have been bombing Iraq every few days per week for the past 12 years. The UN knows about it. One of the previous leaders of the Committee on Humanitarianism actually resigned from the post in protest of the US/UK bombings for the past 12 years.

 

You should ask groups like Voices in the Wilderness who has been to Iraq. They'll tell you about how we've been bombing them for 12 years now.

 

Bush I may have been a f***, but at least he respected international law enough to know that he couldn't topple a government legally. I guess that lesson got lost on his son.

so you say we should just let him get away with this stuff, it sounds like you back suddan to mean in a way, you agree he is a mad man. and then he needs to be removed. and you say there are ways to go about it peacefully but yet ive stated this several times what do you want us to do over there we have been trying for 12 years to get him out there without a war but no luck. do you want us to keep trying till he passes away of old age???

[cwsox]

un resolutions 677, 678 ,1441 says its legal

no, they do not authorise war. That is just spin. If 1441 was all sufficient the US and Britain would never have needed to offer a second resolution. 1441 was the first part of a proposed two-step process and it was understood when 1441 was passed that it did not allow for actual invasion.

[soxfan420]

Well when you have a dictator that is killing his own people, and there is a law that says you shouldnt attack a country. well i say break the law and save peoples lives. seriously if you have an answer to this war without war then im all ears. ive said that once but you never replyed with a dirrect answer just gave some more bulls*** that had nothing to do with what i asked you.

March 7, Hans Blix was quoted as saying that Iraq was disarming. Why not let the weapons inspectors do their work? Oh yeah, cuz Bush had a hard-on for war.

 

I ask again, if Saddam is so brutal, then why did we arm him? Waging this war is piss poor foreign policy. Saddam may be evil, but what about all the much worse governments that we continue to fund just because they are anti-Communist (i.e Colombia)....Colombia is a much worse human rights abuser than Saddam could ever have dreams about being. But Colombia is one of the top recipients of aid from the US and we also train their troops in the WHISC (#1 in amount of troops sent to the WHISC per year)

 

Why don't we go overthrow Uribe then? He's a much worse dictator than Saddam...or maybe you just don't have compassion for the Colombians that want to unionize, criticize their government or even grow food? (Uribe gasses the peoples' crops if they are against his paramilitary death squads)

 

I really don't understand how we got to be such a country that cares about human rights in the last year or two. Given our track record of getting into bed with bloodthirsty dictators, etc. I really have a hard time believing that this is about humanitarian purposes.

 

Or if we are going to wage war, then how about the President tell the world the truth? Or maybe then he couldn't justify the war if he told the truth.

it was disarming but how much does it cost to get a couple of thugs to kill you without weopons comeon, s*** i can have that done for me, and i dont even run a country. you think the civioions would be safe without WOMD you must be kidding yourself right? we need saddan out of there just not a suddan without WOMD