-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
A question aimed at the anti-war crowd
Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Im stating facts. If you dont like them you can always make a time machine and go back to the past.
The Iranian President is just as intelligent as Bush. What does that tell you?
So since you dont have anything of substance to add to your posts, I guess u agree that the U.S has done more brutal things than Iran thus making the U.S a terrorist if Iran is one.
toolboxolio
Senior member
I've always been anti-war. Not in the hippie he-b!tch, whining way... but against mass murdering in general. I love the WWII genre and can't get enough of the History Channel on WWII tech and so forth. I love guns and gore for entertainment via games and fiction books.
However, I am not for non-fiction violence. I know where to draw the line. Unless it is 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999% the only way to solve an international conflict, I am against war. The Iraq war is an insult to even the most loose definition of the word, "war." It is more of a "gotta relieve blue balls" for our rusting war machine so we don't end up like Russia. That and our leadership (insult to that word's definition as well) consists of inexperienced paper pushers who are on a power trip.
However, I am not for non-fiction violence. I know where to draw the line. Unless it is 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999% the only way to solve an international conflict, I am against war. The Iraq war is an insult to even the most loose definition of the word, "war." It is more of a "gotta relieve blue balls" for our rusting war machine so we don't end up like Russia. That and our leadership (insult to that word's definition as well) consists of inexperienced paper pushers who are on a power trip.
TallBill
Lifer
Maybe I didn't explain well enough. I've seen before on the news soldiers bitching about being here or coming here, or spending the year here. It had a spin that was trying to show that the soldier didn't like the mission, when in reality he just didn't like the living conditions.
umbrella39
Lifer
TallBill,
I was opposed to the war on 9/11/2001 when I knew we would attack Iraq because of what happened that day. Fast forward a few months and Bush proved me right. Ending terrorism is a noble cause, but it is not accomplished by fighting them "there" so we don't have to fight them "here" BS line. How fvcking arrogant is it of us to presume we should be allowed to say in what country this blood bath will take place. Especially in light of the fact that there is no country call Terrorania we can invade and stop terrorism. So we needed a land with sand and brown people to carry it out in. I won't bore you on all the lies and bs this administration peddled to sell this "war". We can't just plop down in some remote location and tell terrorists of the world to bring it on. Please see sig to sum up how most of the thinking people left on the planet view this "war" in the year 2007.
I was opposed to the war on 9/11/2001 when I knew we would attack Iraq because of what happened that day. Fast forward a few months and Bush proved me right. Ending terrorism is a noble cause, but it is not accomplished by fighting them "there" so we don't have to fight them "here" BS line. How fvcking arrogant is it of us to presume we should be allowed to say in what country this blood bath will take place. Especially in light of the fact that there is no country call Terrorania we can invade and stop terrorism. So we needed a land with sand and brown people to carry it out in. I won't bore you on all the lies and bs this administration peddled to sell this "war". We can't just plop down in some remote location and tell terrorists of the world to bring it on. Please see sig to sum up how most of the thinking people left on the planet view this "war" in the year 2007.
ProfJohn
Lifer
The problem with this idea Tom is that the rest of the world would be very hard pressed to come up with that many men.
During Gulf War 1 the world put forth maybe 250,000 troops total, and most of them did nothing when the action started.
It would be great to see the rest of the world become more involved, but I don?t see that happening, no matter who is President. The UN had a hard time finding people to offer troops for the Lebanon peace deal. What makes you think anyone is going to want to be involved in this mess in Iraq?
ProfJohn
Lifer
I think the reason the support for the war had been dropping like crazy is the fact that Americans are growing tired of it and just want it to go away.
The constant negative news out of Iraq just adds fuel to the fire.
If Americans thought there was a light at the end of the tunnel I think they would be more willing to stay and ?put up with? the war.
But Bush is a total failure when it comes to selling the reasons for us to stay in Iraq.
Meanwhile we have half the Democratic Party and all the anti-war people telling us why we should leave.
Like during Vietnam the ?pro-war? forces are losing the PR battle against the ?anti-war? forces.
If we haven?t turned things around or made serious progress in the next six months it will most likely be time to pull the plug and give up.
Question for everyone: Do we have a moral obligation to stay in Iraq and try to fix it, or do we just say ?sorry, we tried to give you freedom and democracy, but you screwed it up??
The constant negative news out of Iraq just adds fuel to the fire.
If Americans thought there was a light at the end of the tunnel I think they would be more willing to stay and ?put up with? the war.
But Bush is a total failure when it comes to selling the reasons for us to stay in Iraq.
Meanwhile we have half the Democratic Party and all the anti-war people telling us why we should leave.
Like during Vietnam the ?pro-war? forces are losing the PR battle against the ?anti-war? forces.
If we haven?t turned things around or made serious progress in the next six months it will most likely be time to pull the plug and give up.
Question for everyone: Do we have a moral obligation to stay in Iraq and try to fix it, or do we just say ?sorry, we tried to give you freedom and democracy, but you screwed it up??
We've tried. I don't believe any moral obligation demands we stay there forever.
Is there a certain length of time this obligation requires us to be there? Does 4 years meet this requirement? How about 10? How about 20? What's the rule?
PJ- why 6 more months? Does that meet the moral obligation time limit? Why 4.5 years and not 4?
PrinceofWands
Lifer
Didn't support it from day one. Figured Bushco would try something like it because they're neocons, so it was only a matter of time. The attempts to tie Iraq in to 9/11 were pitiable. The wmd ploy was see-through from day one. Pre-emption is absolutely and totally wrong. Unilateral action (or anything approaching it) is usually uncalled for.
Now I don't support it because exactly what everyone said would happen has happened, and I don't see any possible solution, nor have I read of anyone who has developed a reasonable strategy that offers any hope at all. I regret that, because having caused such a mess I'd like to stay and fix it, but there is NO FIXING IT, and staying will only make it worse for the entire world and everyone in it.
I agree completely with your portrayel of most of the politicians and the majority of the media. I disagree with your comparison to other war casualties because with a few exceptions most other wars have had some merit, and also because you only count US military casualties.
Good luck over there, stay cool, keep your head down, come back safe!
Now I don't support it because exactly what everyone said would happen has happened, and I don't see any possible solution, nor have I read of anyone who has developed a reasonable strategy that offers any hope at all. I regret that, because having caused such a mess I'd like to stay and fix it, but there is NO FIXING IT, and staying will only make it worse for the entire world and everyone in it.
I agree completely with your portrayel of most of the politicians and the majority of the media. I disagree with your comparison to other war casualties because with a few exceptions most other wars have had some merit, and also because you only count US military casualties.
Good luck over there, stay cool, keep your head down, come back safe!
DealMonkey
Lifer
Maybe we should be questioning the basis for those wars and the idiot "leaders" who dragged us into them? War is serious business and not to be entered on a whim. IMO, the war in Afghanistan was last morally-clear military action in the past 50+ years. Al Qaeda launched an attack against U.S. civilians on our soil and it was beyond obvious that they had set up shop in Afghanistan along with the Taliban who was harboring them. It doesn't get any more straight-forward than that.
Ever wonder why you don't see even the most ardent liberal complaining about our military action in Afghanistan?
That goes both ways. Tell me, would you be just as happy if the United States had gone to war with Russia and you were there helping with the occupation (as you are in Iraq right now) under any and all pretenses? How about Germany? Great Britain? China? India?
For you, this is your life? No war, no life?
The war in Iraq never seemed quite right. I never felt the invasion was sufficiently justified. It felt like we were charging in because it would be the "cool" thing to do. And I felt then what seems true now; that it would become a long, drawn out, unpopular endeavor leading to unending conflict in the region -- difficult to extricate from -- costing lots of money and resources with no clear benefit. If we would have stayed out of it, Iraq would probably be no worse off than it is now, and we would certainly be much better off. The only real benefit I see is the experience being gained by the enlisted, but I don't think that's worth it.
Another reason for my lack of support is a lack of information on what we are doing and how it's a good thing. I'm sure you'd agree the media isn't helping. But why isn't there some other means for the government to let it's people know what we are doing periodically and how it's supposed to be improving things. All we get are vague details of questionable value. No information on what kinds of operations are going on month to month. No information on the current state of Iraqi energy, transportation, etc. Can the government not have a website, or regular public briefings, or something? I'm talking real facts and information, not the current popular opinion of the right or the left.
Now, I'm not of the mind that we should be pulling out immediately. I may not have supported the war, but we are in it now for better or worse. I think we are up the creek without a paddle, and it's going to be a long rough ride regardless of what we do. Be it stay the course, go in in force a-la McCain, or start pulling out now... I really don't know what would be best, and I don't think the administration knows either.
In summary, I think the war was a bad idea, and we, the public, don't have sufficient information on what's really going on over there. Don't just blame the media. The government is the government, and they could let us know if they wanted to. Do I support the troops? Of course I do. Most people against the war do. In fact, I think they need more support for all the hard and dangerous work they do. We should each sacrifice through higher taxes or other means in order to provide them more support. But the administration would rather have us go shopping for ourselves instead. Maybe I'll go pick me up one of those support the troops magnets and a new big screen TV with all my saved tax dollars. And if the troops really need another humvee or some armor, I guess we can always further slash funding for veterans and education.
Another reason for my lack of support is a lack of information on what we are doing and how it's a good thing. I'm sure you'd agree the media isn't helping. But why isn't there some other means for the government to let it's people know what we are doing periodically and how it's supposed to be improving things. All we get are vague details of questionable value. No information on what kinds of operations are going on month to month. No information on the current state of Iraqi energy, transportation, etc. Can the government not have a website, or regular public briefings, or something? I'm talking real facts and information, not the current popular opinion of the right or the left.
Now, I'm not of the mind that we should be pulling out immediately. I may not have supported the war, but we are in it now for better or worse. I think we are up the creek without a paddle, and it's going to be a long rough ride regardless of what we do. Be it stay the course, go in in force a-la McCain, or start pulling out now... I really don't know what would be best, and I don't think the administration knows either.
In summary, I think the war was a bad idea, and we, the public, don't have sufficient information on what's really going on over there. Don't just blame the media. The government is the government, and they could let us know if they wanted to. Do I support the troops? Of course I do. Most people against the war do. In fact, I think they need more support for all the hard and dangerous work they do. We should each sacrifice through higher taxes or other means in order to provide them more support. But the administration would rather have us go shopping for ourselves instead. Maybe I'll go pick me up one of those support the troops magnets and a new big screen TV with all my saved tax dollars. And if the troops really need another humvee or some armor, I guess we can always further slash funding for veterans and education.
ProfJohn
Lifer
Isn?t ironic that 70% of the country supported the invasion of Iraq, and yet it seems like no one on this board did.
Even more amazing is how everyone on here KNEW how things would turn out and what a mess Iraq would be.
Maybe the people on P&N should be running the country since they obviously knew what would happen better than all the people in Washington. :roll:
Even more amazing is how everyone on here KNEW how things would turn out and what a mess Iraq would be.
Maybe the people on P&N should be running the country since they obviously knew what would happen better than all the people in Washington. :roll:
DealMonkey
Lifer
Go back and read the posts if you don't believe it, smart ass.
What's ironic about it?
It's called a "Forum Search". Search the archives. I repeatedly said no WMDs would be found, from the day the first bombs were dropped in 2003 to now.
I know it sucks to constantly be on the losing end of an argument Proffie.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Whats-Left-Liberals-Lost-Their/dp/0007229690
What's Left?: How Liberals Lost Their Way (Paperback)
by Nick Cohen (Author)
What's Left?: How Liberals Lost Their Way (Paperback)
by Nick Cohen (Author)
IronWing
No Lifer
I guess you must have had a flag wrapped so tightly around your head you missed the millions of Americans marching to demand no war back before Bush committed this crime? You must have missed the many folks fairly accurately predicting that this was going to be a total screw-up. The folks in Washington were lying and millions of Americans knew that the pro-war folks were lying and said so at the time. Your pathetic attempt to rewrite history is noted.
I think that it is too bad that all the politicians have got thier hand in the pot. If we wanted to win this we would give the military the means to do it. Kind of like McArthur during and after WWII. But instead, we have battled this fight at home and in Iraq.
This vote today is another example of too many hands in the pot. My dad once said that we could have won the war in Vietnam because we had the means to turn that country into a parking lot. The same is true here. Our troops are over there fighting, trying to stablize the country and we are here saying that we are going to cut the funding.
We should do one of two things. Either get out now, or stop the infighting and let them do thier job over thier. This slow aproach to defunding is only going to make things worse over there, possibly ending the same way that other war ended.
This vote today is another example of too many hands in the pot. My dad once said that we could have won the war in Vietnam because we had the means to turn that country into a parking lot. The same is true here. Our troops are over there fighting, trying to stablize the country and we are here saying that we are going to cut the funding.
We should do one of two things. Either get out now, or stop the infighting and let them do thier job over thier. This slow aproach to defunding is only going to make things worse over there, possibly ending the same way that other war ended.
dmcowen674
No Lifer
That was when under the lie of WMD.
Where is the WMD???
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
