why are we wasting time in iraq - Page 6




 
--
Boots
 
May 12th, 2005  
Redneck
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xion
More ppl are getting killed in Iraq now during and after the war than saddam hussein might ever have killed.
You might want to check your figures again there.


http://www.gbn.com/ArticleDisplaySer...=2400&msp=1242

Quote:
Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power.
So there are over 600,000 executions that we KNOW about.

So why are we "wasting our time" there? Hell, my family's never been massacred by Saddam, why should I care?
May 12th, 2005  
7.62
 
 
Quote:
More ppl are getting killed in Iraq now during and after the war than saddam hussein might ever have killed
Oh, so we've killed over 550,000 people, And stabilization will come to Iraq, just as it did to Germany. After the Soviets took Berlin on 2 May, 1945, occasional shooting was heard until July of that year. Although the Soviets didn't experience many casualties then, imagine Berlin times, say, 1000. The Soviets are saoid to have lost about 100 troops during that time. now thats about 100,000 US casulaties. Now take into account our tanks, armoured vahicles, Body armor, and, super-accurate pilots, bombs, missles, and the like. The soviets just charged a buliding out in the open while we carefully capture it with few, if any casualties.


Please look at these pictures and you'll see some happy people who were HAPPY to be free of Saddam. http://www.geocities.com/hutchmil/Iraq.html
May 12th, 2005  
LIBERTY
 
 
Quote:
So why arewe "wasting our time" there? h**l, my family's never been massacred by Saddam, why should I care?
THANK YOU!!!!!!! Thats exactly right!!!!!!!!!!
--
Boots
May 13th, 2005  
Gunner13
 
 
OK, Xm 8, please square up the following statements for me:

I'm a American patriot and ready to serve.

So why are we "wasting our time" there? h**l, my family's never been massacred by Saddam, why should I care? THANK YOU!!!!!!! Thats exactly right!!!!!!!!!!

I don't get it.

BTW, have any of you noticed that by engaging and killing them in Iraq and Afghanistan that they can't direct their efforts against us here or at our allies?
May 13th, 2005  
Redneck
 
 
Sorry, Sir, I was trying to be funny and failed. I very much believe we are doing anything BUT wasting our time in Iraq and Afghanistan. As you said, we are forcing the terrorists to play ball in their own endzone, aside from removing tyranical and murderous regimes, which I believe it is our duty to do as the one true superpower in the world. I believe this is a moral obligation, and is something that sets us apart from those we fight, we care and sacrifice for those who are unable to defend themselves, and I do not believe that such efforts are in any way a "waste."
May 13th, 2005  
Xion
 
^^^ lmfao, one big pile of BS


Why didn't the US invade any African country where there's genocide going on. Go invade Congo, Sudan, Somalia etc. If you invaded every country that killed thousands of their own people u'd be invading half the world...or more

You kept saddam hussain in power while he killed ppl earlier during his regime, dont BS anyone here lol .The United States supported Sadam Hussain while he slaughtered his own people. Donald Rumsfeld himself shook hands with Saddam.

When there was the threat of the oil reserves in Alaska going empty and the opposition to saddam was strong enough in Iraq you very cunningly kicked him away.
May 13th, 2005  
Redneck
 
 
Xion, you should adjust fire on the "BS" accusations, they will not be tolerated. Disagree if you want, but by now you should know the proper and the improper way to do so.

I did not keep Saddam in power at any point, and past policy decisions were surprisingly enough made without my advice (odd enough considering I was in grade school at the time), and have absolutely nothing to do with my personal opinion or position on this or any other issue. ("I believe, I do not believe, etc. = personal opinion, reading comprehension, hooah)

That being said, as has been discussed several times on these boards, all too often it is necessary to back the lesser of two evils in these situations, and at the time it was considered that, between Saddam and Tehran, Saddam was the lesser, and that supporting him was more in the interests of the United States (it is after all the primary responsibility of a nation's government to look after the welfare of that nation's citizens). The fact that Rumsfeld "shook hands" with Saddam says absolutely jack about our past or current positions. You (you personally, as demonstrated on this forum) whine about the United States not using diplomatic measures instead of military force, but when diplomacy IS attempted, it means that we are supporting tyrants. Make up your mind.
May 13th, 2005  
CABAL
 
 
Quote:
That being said, as has been discussed several times on these boards, all too often it is necessary to back the lesser of two evils in these situations, and at the time it was considered that, between Saddam and Tehran, Saddam was the lesser, and that supporting him was more in the interests of the United States (it is after all the primary responsibility of a nation's government to look after the welfare of that nation's citizens). The fact that Rumsfeld "shook hands" with Saddam says absolutely jack about our past or current positions. You (you personally, as demonstrated on this forum) whine about the United States not using diplomatic measures instead of military force, but when diplomacy IS attempted, it means that we are supporting tyrants.

I certainly agree.
May 13th, 2005  
Xion
 
Quote:
. You (you personally, as demonstrated on this forum) whine about the United States not using diplomatic measures instead of military force, but when diplomacy IS attempted, it means that we are supporting tyrants. Make up your mind.
Seems that you did not get me. Don't include me in the whiners list nor the lovers list of the US. What united states does (diplomatically or militarily) is their own business, I never said the US should have handled the situation diplomatically, what i wanted to point out was how what you posted about the righteousness of united states in invading iraq (freeing all the ppl of the world and all that political propaganda) was not the case.

Quote:
Xion, you should adjust fire on the "BS" accusations, they will not be tolerated. Disagree if you want, but by now you should know the proper and the improper way to do so.
sorry, if i got out of control there, i was reacting to your "higspeeder" statement
May 13th, 2005  
Snauhi
 
Iraq became a place where all the terrorists have there playground, if you would be a father would you like to see your son die just because he was "saving" some Iraqis. The war there will never end you cant just defeat geurilla warfare+ all the international terrorists that arrive there.