This makes me ill! (100,000 Excess Iraqi Deaths Since War) - Page 3

littleFella · 10-29-2004, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Yes. It's like those New Yorkers would don't like to get involved so they just walk on by as some innocent girl gets raped and murderer. It's called cowardice.

I think the argument is a little inconsistent with prior comments about N.Korea and China's possible involvment. Would all Americans (not just New Yorkers) be cowards then?

Dark_Matter · 10-29-2004, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Saddam wasn't an aggressor? You might want to tell the Kuwaitis and the Kurds that, and all families of the people who were killed just for not agreeing with him.

come on now, of course saddam was an agressor. He was most likely financing terrorism, but probably not al quaeda. He wasn't killing any Kurds at the time we invaded, they were killed during the gulf war when we asked them to rise up against him (which they did) and we (bushs dad) left them there to die. Those deaths are partially US responsibility. We created the situation that killed those people. Now we've created another.

It's interesting how all the bleeding hearts seem to be on the conservative side these days. It's easy to chastise someone who is opposing a war to bring "democracy" and "freedom", even when the war is creating more suffering than it cures. And I don't remember hearing any "compassionate conservatives" saying anything about the Kurdish slaughter for the last 10 years, until 9/11 happened. I dont beleive compassion is the reason Bush sent our troops into Iraq.

TGR · 10-29-2004, 10:53 AM

Wow, John! Not liking war makes you a coward? I've never heard that before.

I'll tell you what a coward is; loving war and supporting war but being too much of a puss-bag to actually go fight in one. Yep- that's a coward!

John Scott · 10-29-2004, 10:57 AM

Yes, they would.

When something wrong is happening, do you consider the possibility for injury, or do you do whatever you can to make it right?

Previous generations didn't refrain from doing the right thing just because there would be millions of deaths. Today's generations would simply surrender in a heartbeat if there were a major war. Think about it - World War II. Did we need to go into that against Germany? No. We could have just gone against Japan, and called it a day. Or the Civil War. In that war, we could have simly allowed the South to secede from the Union. But instead we went to war. More Americans died in the Civil War than than all other wars to date. Why? If that were to happen today, the cowards would just allow the South to secede and slavery would still exist.

John Scott · 10-29-2004, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TGR

Wow, John! Not liking war makes you a coward? I've never heard that before.

I'll tell you what a coward is; loving war and supporting war but being too much of a puss-bag to actually go fight in one. Yep- that's a coward!

Nobody in there right mind loves war. But being against it when it's the right thing to do is cowardice.

littleFella · 10-29-2004, 10:59 AM

oh, I don't intend to dispute numbers here. As your post proves, they are debatable. I mean the final result. Did the US win that war? Would it win now? And all while being stretched thin by involvement in Iraq, by Iranian situation, Darfur, just to name a few. Not to mention the poor US economy sliding down or huge immigration problem, just to name a few. Things are not looking good at all fo the US.

And don't take me wrong. I am not happy with that. I want to see the US strong (don't confuse bullying with strength) and healthy as it was before. I really hate to see the US becoming another USSR.

btw. the damn US Dollar now only buys $1.21 CDN. I want the US dollar where it was during Clinton years, between $1.50 and $1.60. For chrissake, in a week or two I will have to shop for grocerries in Buffalo, NY cuz it will be cheaper over there.

littleFella · 10-29-2004, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnScott

More Americans died in the Civil War than than all other wars to date. Why? If that were to happen today, the cowards would just allow the South to secede and slavery would still exist.

You don't honestly believe that the Civil War was about slavery, do you? The US was a country of apartheid untill late 1960's, and then one of very few countries who had full diplomatic relations with an apartheid South Africa.

I yet have to find a war in history of mankind, that was really fought for the ideals claimed by the aggressor. In that respect I think only the Germans during WW2 were honest. Yes, it's ironic, but at least they didn't bullcrap in regards to their reasons. They wanted to send Jews to Madagaskar, reduce Polish population from some 34 million to between 3 and 5 mill, occupy the European part of the USSR, and they admitted that it was all just to make their (German) lives easier and more spacious (Lebensraum).

evilregis · 10-29-2004, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Nobody in there right mind loves war. But being against it when it's the right thing to do is cowardice.

Exactly. Which is why so many ARE against it.

How many people filled the streets to protest the US declaring war on Japan after Pearl Harbour? Because it was right. You were attacked by Japan. The connection is easy to make.

Did you have millions of people across the world protesting the US to not engage Afghanistan and go after bin Laden? Did anyone go to Afghanistan to be a human shield? No. Why? That's right... al Qaeda attacked the US.

And Iraq attacked the US when? With what? Right. It was pre-emptive to remove Saddam so that terrorists couldn't get their hands on his weapons. Ooops.

It is a sham of a war that is making Bush, Bush's dad and his cronies exceedling rich at the expense of taxpayers who struggle paycheck to paycheck.

TGR · 10-29-2004, 11:14 AM

Quote:

But being against it when it's the right thing to do is cowardice.

I agree with that. "WHEN IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO!"

Dark_Matter · 10-29-2004, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Bull****. You say that now, but the first time a Korean kid dies, you'd be calling the President a murderer.

Well I guess you know me pretty well.

I'd prefer it if you actually attacked my argument, instead of me, since you dont know me and it makes for poor debate.

Pre-emptive strategies are justifiable under certain conditions. Clear evidence of capability and intent would do it for me, and I'd guess most people. Unfortunately, we didnt have either of those before we went to Iraq.

Releiving the suffering of the Kurds is a legitimate reason for fighting, but entering a war that can never be won is the act of a fool. I see you are prepared so sacrifice other people's lives to satisfy your sense of morality (no one will call you a coward).

Ferre · 10-29-2004, 11:39 AM

If the US would care about the Kurds it would have invaded Turkey a long time ago, Turkey has killed about the same amount of Kurds as Saddam did, but hey, turkey and the US are big friends so it's all ok.

littleFella · 10-29-2004, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ferre

If the US would care about the Kurds it would have invaded Turkey a long time ago, Turkey has killed about the same amount of Kurds as Saddam did, but hey, turkey and the US are big friends so it's all ok.

Actually, thousands of Kurds were poiseoned by none other than WMD after Desert Storm, and I think the US administration carries a significcant portion of the blame. They talked the Kurds into an uprising against Saddam, and promised help. When the uprising took place Bush didn't move one finger. If he did, it must have been the middle one.

TGR · 10-29-2004, 11:46 AM

Fusion · 10-29-2004, 11:48 AM

Just kick all their asses, we dont need no mullahs and we dont need no commis, end of. A lot of these third world dickheads strip their own country's bare and often leave themselves in the dark ages its 2005 nearly not 1850. Im pretty sure America didnt want to kill civilians but its going to happen. All America needs to do now is pan those fanatics who blow themselves up; these dick heads are evil. Find that mullah and his cronnies pan'em and Iraq can start to build. It used to be richer than Portugal.

**G10** · 10-29-2004, 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by littleFella

Actually, thousands of Kurds were poiseoned by none other than WMD after Desert Storm, and I think the US administration carries a significcant portion of the blame. They talked the Kurds into an uprising against Saddam, and promised help. When the uprising took place Bush didn't move one finger. If he did, it must have been the middle one.

Totally agree dude.

Sometimes you can't help but feel that with America's huge military budget, they need wars to survive and justify the budget.

That was just pure evil. Talk them into uprising and then leave them on their a$$. American officials new what it was doing when they made this decision, they are not stupid.

It is almost like a game to them. Coax people into fighting and then sit back and watch what happens. - Quite a few lives lost there for no reason other than to satisfy the administration. - Well that's what it looked like.

ferret77 · 10-29-2004, 12:00 PM

"Nobody in there right mind loves war. But being against it when it's the right thing to do is cowardice."

What does being for it when its the wrong thing to do, make someone?

Fusion · 10-29-2004, 12:01 PM

Another 10 page politics thread on V7n woot!

bytech · 10-29-2004, 12:29 PM

I think in all this there is a valid comparison of the Iraq war and WWII:

The agressor is USA today, in WWII it was Germany.

Hitler did a "preemptive strike" against the world before the world "took on Germany". Wipped it off the map. Hitler didn't want to fight on his soil, so he made sure he took the war to the world before it brough it home to the Father Land. Yup, yup, yup.

Of course, the Administration learned a few things from Hitler, and rather than making it an issue of "we're scared, we should take out the 'enemy'", some spin doctor decided that instead it should be referred to as liberating the other side. You know, not a selfish reason anymore, now "we're helping others and not just ourselves... And if those poor idiots had the chance to think for themselves, they'd see it our way. Because our way is the only way to go".

Bush is a disgrace to the USA. He is the Ronald McDonald in the world politics: an ugly face behind a mask. Deceit is the game, and profit and power are the prize.

I mean, lets look at the top of the command chain in supervising voting in the USA: the lady at the top of that chain was campaigning for Bush. WTF? That is M A D. I don't know of any other first world country where this would be allowed to happen. Where is the democracy when the people that are supposed to be impartial and supervise the electorial process are clearly in support of a party? In Canada you're not even allowed to belong to a political party when applying for a public service position. In the US you can campaign for a party and then be left with the job of making sure the results of the election are unbiased? M A D I tell ya.

US politics are a mess and Bush is at the helm. Get rid of him when you have a chance! If you don't like Kerry, fine: go and vote OUT Bush so the good US folks can stop wearing Canadian flags on their backpacks when traveling around the world.