Some thoughts on the war.

[Siddhartha]

I would to introduce a couple of obsevations\thoughts about the war I have heard recently:

I stopped by coworker's cube a couple of days ago to say hi and she said that for the US to not appear to be a big bully two things would have to happen:
1. The Iraqis would have to be dancing in the streets after the collapse of Saddam's regime.
2. Chemical and biological weapons have to be found.

Wednesday, April 9, 2003, the media showed two clips of Iraqis celebrating.

April 9, 2003, I was listening to NPR driving home and they were interviewing a number of people who were saying that US's invasion of Iraq would be "legitimized" when the details of Saddam's goverment's murderous brutality against its own people were released. Apparently the Iraqis are rigorous record keepers and that there exists detail evidence of Iraqi torture, gassing, murder of its citizens.

What do you think?

 

[HappyGamer2]

ya I am glad to see saddam on his way out, but it's far from over
as for torture, it's common in the middle east and other places. I don't think it's over in Iraq, unfortunately. but it is a new beginning for the Iraq people, who knows were it will go in the long run.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I would to introduce a couple of obsevations\thoughts about the war I have heard recently:

I stopped by coworker's cube a couple of days ago to say hi and she said that for the US to not appear to be a big bully two things would have to happen:
1. The Iraqis would have to be dancing in the streets after the collapse of Saddam's regime.
2. Chemical and biological weapons have to be found.

Wednesday, April 9, 2003, the media showed two clips of Iraqis celebrating.

April 9, 2003, I was listening to NPR driving home and they were interviewing a number of people who were saying that US's invasion of Iraq would be "legitimized" when the details of Saddam's goverment's murderous brutality against its own people were released. Apparently the Iraqis are rigorous record keepers and that there exists detail evidence of Iraqi torture, gassing, murder of its citizens.

What do you think?

I think if you interview prison inmates in the US, you will see how injust and brutal the US society and government is too. For every Iraqis dancing in the street, there may be another dying in the hospital bed, but who want to report those sad stories. I mean there are ways to manipulate the news and information to create a perception, it depends on who you talk to and which story you decide to report. But invading other country to free other people is never the job of American to begin with, and it's not what this war is about. No matter what the media reports or Bush Administration says.

 

[TheCorm]

It certainly was nice to see the Iraqi's celebrating...particularly when they were pulling down a huge statue of Saddam and smashing it!

But I am wondering if all of these Divisions of Saddams army have simply dissolved or whether something is a foot....

Iraqi Information ministry couple of days ago "The Americans will surrender or they will burn in their tanks". Because of this statement I vote it be renamed Iraqi Dreaming ministry.

Jamie

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: TheCorm[/i
But I am wondering if all of these Divisions of Saddams army have simply dissolved or whether something is a foot....

They've got about less than 20 tanks left in their army. That number is probably down to 5 by now. What do you think happened to them?

 

[Armoth]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I would to introduce a couple of obsevations\thoughts about the war I have heard recently:

I stopped by coworker's cube a couple of days ago to say hi and she said that for the US to not appear to be a big bully two things would have to happen:
1. The Iraqis would have to be dancing in the streets after the collapse of Saddam's regime.
2. Chemical and biological weapons have to be found.

Wednesday, April 9, 2003, the media showed two clips of Iraqis celebrating.

April 9, 2003, I was listening to NPR driving home and they were interviewing a number of people who were saying that US's invasion of Iraq would be "legitimized" when the details of Saddam's goverment's murderous brutality against its own people were released. Apparently the Iraqis are rigorous record keepers and that there exists detail evidence of Iraqi torture, gassing, murder of its citizens.

What do you think?

I think if you interview prison inmates in the US, you will see how injust and brutal the US society and government is too. For every Iraqis dancing in the street, there may be another dying in the hospital bed, but who want to report those sad stories. I mean there are ways to manipulate the news and information to create a perception, it depends on who you talk to and which story you decide to report. But invading other country to free other people is never the job of American to begin with, and it's not what this war is about. No matter what the media reports or Bush Administration says.

I beg to differ. This war is about right and wrong, good and evil. The reason that people have so much trouble with this war is that they do not understand the concept of a just war. All the justifications for the war like oppression from the regime, WMDs, ties to Al Qaeda, etc. aside, it comes down to the fact the Saddam is an evil person and has been ruthlessly violent towards his own people. I always hear the term equality. Who do you think you are (and all the other protesters) to say that the people of Iraq don't deserve the same basic human freedoms that the rest of the world does. America has the power to do something about the problems there, so we did something about it. Case closed.

Go President Bush! Go USA!

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Armoth

I beg to differ. This war is about right and wrong, good and evil. The reason that people have so much trouble with this war is that they do not understand the concept of a just war. All the justifications for the war like oppression from the regime, WMDs, ties to Al Qaeda, etc. aside, it comes down to the fact the Saddam is an evil person and has been ruthlessly violent towards his own people. I always hear the term equality. Who do you think you are (and all the other protesters) to say that the people of Iraq don't deserve the same basic human freedoms that the rest of the world does. America has the power to do something about the problems there, so we did something about it. Case closed.

Go President Bush! Go USA!

So then it's ok to go in and do some regime changes in North Korea, Cuba, China, and many others?

I feel this war was justified due to the 12 years of UN resolution violating that Saddam had done and the fact that Saddam was flaunting his achievements. I've no doubt in my mind that he was up to creating WMD for use either by himself against Israel (or other Arab countries) or to supply terrorists with materials.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I would to introduce a couple of obsevations\thoughts about the war I have heard recently:

I stopped by coworker's cube a couple of days ago to say hi and she said that for the US to not appear to be a big bully two things would have to happen:
1. The Iraqis would have to be dancing in the streets after the collapse of Saddam's regime.
2. Chemical and biological weapons have to be found.

Wednesday, April 9, 2003, the media showed two clips of Iraqis celebrating.

April 9, 2003, I was listening to NPR driving home and they were interviewing a number of people who were saying that US's invasion of Iraq would be "legitimized" when the details of Saddam's goverment's murderous brutality against its own people were released. Apparently the Iraqis are rigorous record keepers and that there exists detail evidence of Iraqi torture, gassing, murder of its citizens.

What do you think?

I think if you interview prison inmates in the US, you will see how injust and brutal the US society and government is too. For every Iraqis dancing in the street, there may be another dying in the hospital bed, but who want to report those sad stories. I mean there are ways to manipulate the news and information to create a perception, it depends on who you talk to and which story you decide to report. But invading other country to free other people is never the job of American to begin with, and it's not what this war is about. No matter what the media reports or Bush Administration says.

Unfortunately your opinin is not felt by the majority of Americans, now or historically. Most Americans would agree fighting for freedom and national safety are two of the best reasons to go to war. Our justice system, including our prisons is hardly copmparable to Iraq's. There are organizations which montior and report of prison conditions worldwide, perhaps you should consult them before you open your ignorant mouth. Please provide me with multiple detailed reliable accounts of systematic govt sponsored torture in the American prison system. Most of our inmates have better education opportunities than the average citizen in Iraqi and are SAFER than even "free" Iraqi's were on the street under Saddam. How many US prisioners STARVED last year asshat? How many innocent Iraqi's? You are right there are ways to manipulate anything. Who knows how many are in hospital beds, who's to say if they were not they wouldn't be dancing in the street with the rest of them? Face it, THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ ARE HAPPY WE DID THIS FOR THEM. The unbelievably low civilian casualty rate is unmatched in the history of warfare and their actions jusitfy ours. Their opinion makes yours irrelevant as well.

 

[TheCorm]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: TheCorm[/i
But I am wondering if all of these Divisions of Saddams army have simply dissolved or whether something is a foot....

They've got about less than 20 tanks left in their army. That number is probably down to 5 by now. What do you think happened to them?

Was thinking more about the troops....

 

[Gaard]

<<I feel this war was justified due to the 12 years of UN resolution violating that Saddam had done and the fact that Saddam was flaunting his achievements.>>

Although I may have certain reservations with the first part of your sentence, I can understand your position. The second part of your sentence, however, is baffling. What do you mean by flaunting? Surely, you don't mean to justify a war because someone sticks their tongue out at you?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Gaard
<<I feel this war was justified due to the 12 years of UN resolution violating that Saddam had done and the fact that Saddam was flaunting his achievements.>>

Although I may have certain reservations with the first part of your sentence, I can understand your position. The second part of your sentence, however, is baffling. What do you mean by flaunting? Surely, you don't mean to justify a war because someone sticks their tongue out at you?

Well...yeah.

No, what I meant was that Saddam didn't care about the resolutions. He didn't even care about the sanctions as he was able to spin that around and blame the UN for causing suffering among the Iraqi people. Saddam had no intention of ever complying with the resolutions because he knew it would be difficult to garner support to forcibly remove him. If the coalition didn't do it in 1991 when he had actually invaded Kuwait, why would they remove him from power if his fat arse was just sitting on his throne, presumably minding his own business?

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I would to introduce a couple of obsevations\thoughts about the war I have heard recently:

I stopped by coworker's cube a couple of days ago to say hi and she said that for the US to not appear to be a big bully two things would have to happen:
1. The Iraqis would have to be dancing in the streets after the collapse of Saddam's regime.
2. Chemical and biological weapons have to be found.

Wednesday, April 9, 2003, the media showed two clips of Iraqis celebrating.

April 9, 2003, I was listening to NPR driving home and they were interviewing a number of people who were saying that US's invasion of Iraq would be "legitimized" when the details of Saddam's goverment's murderous brutality against its own people were released. Apparently the Iraqis are rigorous record keepers and that there exists detail evidence of Iraqi torture, gassing, murder of its citizens.

What do you think?

I think if you interview prison inmates in the US, you will see how injust and brutal the US society and government is too. For every Iraqis dancing in the street, there may be another dying in the hospital bed, but who want to report those sad stories. I mean there are ways to manipulate the news and information to create a perception, it depends on who you talk to and which story you decide to report. But invading other country to free other people is never the job of American to begin with, and it's not what this war is about. No matter what the media reports or Bush Administration says.

Tell that to the Jews in WW2 Germany.

I haven't heard too many stories about U.S. prison inmates being beaten and tortured for years for stealing a loaf of bread when they are starving. Have you?
How about having body parts cut off and being forced to watch the rape and murder of their entire families for verbally expressing disagreement with your president?
Didnt' think so.

We have a duty to protect people from evil and free them from tyranny wherever we can. The sad part is that we so often do nothing until we have some excuse like 9/11. I know we do not have the resources to police the entire world. But we should do what we can. Contrary to some people's beliefs, there IS good and evil in this world. Not everything is subjective.

If your neighbor was being stabbed to death in his backyard, would you sit and watch and say "oh well, none of my business, it's not my house" or "well, i don't really know why he's being stabbed, maybe he deserves it"

It is people like you that made it possible for millions of innocent Jews to be gassed to death.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: conjur
So then it's ok to go in and do some regime changes in North Korea, Cuba, China, and many others?

Yes, it would be ideal to do that.

I think Iran, Syria, Jordan and Libya are first though. And maybe France. We should be able to get all those mostly done in roughly 2 months. We can skip the tax cuts for a year or two to pay the 300 billion it will cost.

But seriously,
all the rest are much more complicated than Iraq.
I'm not an expert on any of those countries so I don't know if their leaders are as tyrannical and evil as Saddam.
N.K. and China have nukes, so military action against them would be very very scary.
And there are still many other options for dealing diplomatically with those countries.

 

[Armoth]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Armoth

I beg to differ. This war is about right and wrong, good and evil. The reason that people have so much trouble with this war is that they do not understand the concept of a just war. All the justifications for the war like oppression from the regime, WMDs, ties to Al Qaeda, etc. aside, it comes down to the fact the Saddam is an evil person and has been ruthlessly violent towards his own people. I always hear the term equality. Who do you think you are (and all the other protesters) to say that the people of Iraq don't deserve the same basic human freedoms that the rest of the world does. America has the power to do something about the problems there, so we did something about it. Case closed.

Go President Bush! Go USA!

So then it's ok to go in and do some regime changes in North Korea, Cuba, China, and many others?

I feel this war was justified due to the 12 years of UN resolution violating that Saddam had done and the fact that Saddam was flaunting his achievements. I've no doubt in my mind that he was up to creating WMD for use either by himself against Israel (or other Arab countries) or to supply terrorists with materials.

We should kick anyone's a** who's evil. If we don't fight for what is good, then everything will suck even more and be even more evil and corrupted.

 

[rchiu]

I don't know if the following logic is going to go through bunch of 12 year olds...., but I am going to try anyway.

It is great to fight for everyone's freedom in the world, but in reality, it is not that easy, and this is why.

1. How do you determine if the people in a country is oppressed? Freedom and oppression is not exactly black and white. You see people dancing on the street of Bagdad and say, hey they must be happy because we freed them. That's great but that's after the fact. How do we determine if the people is oppressed BEFORE we go in? Should we just go in anytime and way until to end to see if people dancing on the street to declare a success? We execute prisoners in our country, but in some people's view, that is a huge violation of human right, do we change our system and our value because what other people think? By the same token, should we expect every other country to follow our system and value? China executes prisoners by the thousands. Many Asian countries sees political dissidents as people who commit treason, and treat them with most serious punishment. Are you going to judge if people are oppressed based one that?

2. How do you know you are soloving the problem by invading the country. There are conflicts between Shiites and Baath and the Kurds in Iraq, you take down the Baath in power now and put the Shiites in power, is the country going to be free of oppression? Racial/relegion conflicts are caused by hundred and thousands years of bad blood. Do you want our troops to be in the region forever to make sure the conflicts end?

3. Who has the final say of which country is oppressed? We? Who gave us the power and the right? What qualifies us? In our judicial system, the supreme court judges are appointed by President who is elected by people. Let's make the world a court and deciding which country is oppressed a court case. How can one country, without the endorsement from other members of the world go around and say they have the power and the wisdom to determine the fate of people in another country thousands of miles away?

4. I am sorry to bring this up. But going to war involves huge cost to us American people, and we DO NOT have unlimited resources, especially now when economy is bad. Let's just say we are doing the right thing freeing the people and providing a long term solution to make sure they keep their freedom. But how does all those benefit us? Me who pays 35% and more to the government? My kids? Should the government keeps on taking money away from my social security, reduce money going to health care, take money out out of already crappy public school system just so people from other part of the world can be freed?

Why can't we let people fight for themselves? Why not let UN takes care of other instances when genocide/crime against humanity is commited? Why can't we let UN, in a court where all member of the world can voice their voice determine who we should help and how? Why do we, instead of UN, have to get into regional conflicts, which brings unneccessary dangers to our society?

The current administration got lots of smart people, I am sure they know all the problems I mentioned. Why are they still feeding us the "feel good" story and theory about freeing Iraqi people, while hiding all the cost to us? Who does the war really benefit? Hint Hint, the guy with rock high approval rating. Sorry that you can't see through all that BS.

 

[DT4K]

Rchiu,
You do make some good points.
It is not simple.

I'm not saying we should invade every country we disagree with. But you can't always just say it's none of our business. I mean I guess you could, but that would be like my example of letting your neighbor get stabbed to death because you don't think it's up to you to decide if it is wrong or right.

At some point, decent and good people must make a decision that certain evils cannot be allowed to continue.

Deciding when that point has been reached is the really hard part.

Yes, we execute people in this country. But whether or not you agree with the death penalty, you must understand that it is completely different from the executions that take place in places like Iraq, where one person is judge, jury, executioner, and lawmaker. There are no rules enforced about when and why people can be executed.

In the U.S., we have an entire system designed to ensure that everyone has certain rights. We have laws that determine what crimes are punishable by death. These laws are written by legislators that are elected by the people. Everyone has a right to a trial by jury. Everyone has the right to appeal the jury's decision and have it reviewed by another court. Everyone has the right to have a lawyer defending them. This whole system of checks and balances is designed to make sure we don't punish people without proving that they are guilty.

You can't possibly compare this with the situation where you say you don't like the president, so you are taken and forced to watch the rape of your wife and children, then their murders, then you are shot in the head.

We gave the U.N. a chance to do something. They wouldn't. The U.N. has failed miserably at any kind of military action in the past. There are times when you have to stand up and stop evil when other's (France, Germany, Russia) are sitting by and watching. Whether anybody else likes it, it was the right thing to do.

Your financial argument is a little ridiculous. 85 billion is a drop in the bucket. There are so many other things the government could cut besides schools and social security.

 

[DT4K]

One other small point.

You mentioned the problem of who gets to decide if people are oppressed.
But there is almost universal agreement, even among many Arab countries and others who didn't support war, that Saddam Hussein is a dictator who has oppressed his people. So almost everyone agreed, it is not that we were the only ones who thought this. It is just that many of them didn't want to do anything about it. I never understood those people who said "we agree that Saddam is evil, but war is not the answer".

And one more point on the financial argument:
All the social services and welfare that our government provides are a bonus. At least for the people who use them.
The primary purpose of our government is national defense. And Saddam's clear desire to obtain nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, along with his ties to terrorist organizations (we've already destroyed training camps in the North) posed a very real future threat to our national security. So yes, it was our governments job to remove him from power.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I would to introduce a couple of obsevations\thoughts about the war I have heard recently:

I stopped by coworker's cube a couple of days ago to say hi and she said that for the US to not appear to be a big bully two things would have to happen:
1. The Iraqis would have to be dancing in the streets after the collapse of Saddam's regime.
2. Chemical and biological weapons have to be found.

Wednesday, April 9, 2003, the media showed two clips of Iraqis celebrating.

April 9, 2003, I was listening to NPR driving home and they were interviewing a number of people who were saying that US's invasion of Iraq would be "legitimized" when the details of Saddam's goverment's murderous brutality against its own people were released. Apparently the Iraqis are rigorous record keepers and that there exists detail evidence of Iraqi torture, gassing, murder of its citizens.

What do you think?

Another question:
Do you think Bush's claim of the existence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will be forgotten when the fighting stops?

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Shanti
One other small point.

You mentioned the problem of who gets to decide if people are oppressed.
But there is almost universal agreement, even among many Arab countries and others who didn't support war, that Saddam Hussein is a dictator who has oppressed his people. So almost everyone agreed, it is not that we were the only ones who thought this. It is just that many of them didn't want to do anything about it. I never understood those people who said "we agree that Saddam is evil, but war is not the answer".

And one more point on the financial argument:
All the social services and welfare that our government provides are a bonus. At least for the people who use them.
The primary purpose of our government is national defense. And Saddam's clear desire to obtain nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons, along with his ties to terrorist organizations (we've already destroyed training camps in the North) posed a very real future threat to our national security. So yes, it was our governments job to remove him from power.

Elaborating on my arguements, we have implemented in our own judicial system to make sure the judges and jury are independent, arguments from both side can be heard, and the evidence presented are evaluated and certified. How much of those are done in this war? How much of those can be done by having one country, that's us, judging if the rest of the world following our own definition of freedom?

All your argument on how Iraqi government execute people, rape their wife are all based on media report and hearsay. You should know by now, after going through the war with media coverage, of how much crap was reported as the truth in the beginning and later turned out to be just rumor. I am not saying that what you've argued is not true, but we never went through a formal process of certifying all that was reported. We never went through a formal process to hear story/evidence from both side. We never went through a formal process of having an unbaised jury to decide if this war is justified. The war involved huge cost to us, and thousands of death of Iraqi people. Why is it we spent so much effort to safeguard the rights of AMERICAN in our judicial system, but when it came to the right of thousands of Iraqis who are killed in this war, we do not do anything to ensure what we are doing is right?

If Iraq posts real threat to our national security, of course I don't have any problem the government spending tax money to deal with it. But if the purpose of the war is to liberate Iraqi people, which number one hard to determine, number two hard to accomplish, and number three have no impact on our society, I feel it is a big waste of money that can otherwise be used for the good of American society.

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth

Originally posted by: Dr Smooth
I would to introduce a couple of obsevations\thoughts about the war I have heard recently:

I stopped by coworker's cube a couple of days ago to say hi and she said that for the US to not appear to be a big bully two things would have to happen:
1. The Iraqis would have to be dancing in the streets after the collapse of Saddam's regime.
2. Chemical and biological weapons have to be found.

Wednesday, April 9, 2003, the media showed two clips of Iraqis celebrating.

April 9, 2003, I was listening to NPR driving home and they were interviewing a number of people who were saying that US's invasion of Iraq would be "legitimized" when the details of Saddam's goverment's murderous brutality against its own people were released. Apparently the Iraqis are rigorous record keepers and that there exists detail evidence of Iraqi torture, gassing, murder of its citizens.

What do you think?

Another question:
Do you think Bush's claim of the existence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will be forgotten when the fighting stops?

Apparently lots of people in this forum has forgotten about that after the government and media foucs on those feel good stories of how joyful and thankful Iraqi people are now that we liberated them.

 

[aznparty]

This war was just something convenient for Bushy, to get his support ratings up. He didn't care for the Iraqi people, if he did, he could of done this soon after he was in office, why wait till now? Its not like Saddam just started killing his own people in the past few months. As many of you have pointed out, he was disobeying UN resolutions for 12 years. And does Bushy really care about the Iraqi people? We can all see by the looting and lawlessness thats going on right now that they dont. As the occupying force, US has a responsibility to protect the citizen and bring order to the cities as stated in the 4th Geneva Convention. Yet Rummy is saying "its alright, they have freedom now" and they are refusing to interfere. I think he is confusing freedom with anarchy. Freedom isn't doing whatever you damn feel like. The US should really take the responsibility of stablizing Iraq if it wants to convince to people that they are doing this for the people. And if you attack everyone that you think is a threat to you, then where do you stop? Saddam is a clear target but what after that? NK but US is too chicken to go there. Iran? No other countires seems want to do a regime change. Syria? The British certainly don't think the US should go in so do you? France cause they didn't agree with the US? Germany? Russia? China? What if a country have strong anti-US feelings and don't like the US? Attack them as well?

 

[CaptnKirk]

You want to help liberate an oppressed people ? Why no help here?
READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE ! - Before you make a lame reply.

What don't they have that Iraq has ? could it be OIL and the 'Revenge for Daddy ?'

 

[MooseKnuckle]

My thoughts on the war...we're the most benevolent country on the face of the Earth and the only SUPERPOWER.

 

[Gaard]

Dr Smooth - <<Another question:
Do you think Bush's claim of the existence of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will be forgotten when the fighting stops?>>

I hope not. Bush claims 'solid' evidence

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
You want to help liberate an oppressed people ? Why no help here?
READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE ! - Before you make a lame reply.

What don't they have that Iraq has ? could it be OIL and the 'Revenge for Daddy ?'

It seems from the article that the UN is handling the situation with their usual competance.