U.S. seeks multinational Iraq force (Finally)

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Six Month Revival Plan

Washington Post - Clip:
(I want to emphasize the cost here - $ !00 Billion over 5 years - see text)

Tha terrorists who destroyed the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad last week not only blew up the most important symbol of international involvement in rebuilding Iraq. They also fueled growing doubts among the American people about the Bush administration's contention that Iraq is already on the way to recovery. In truth, Iraq is staggering ahead, at best, and the administration has yet to show that it has a realistic plan to produce tangible progress over the next six months.

It will take more than White House vows to stay the course. What is needed is a detailed plan for restoring Iraq's security and economic viability, backed by the resources that are required to achieve it. This has to be accompanied by credible steps toward self-government, carried out in close coordination with the U.N. The patience and good will of most Iraqis have not yet been exhausted, but they won't last forever.

The starting point must be greatly improved security for the Iraqi people, the international-aid workers and the United States occupation forces. More American troops would help, in particular intelligence specialists, special forces, civic action units, engineers and military police. Soldiers from other countries, including Muslim countries, are also needed. Currently, more than 90 percent of international troops inside Iraq come from either the United States or Britain.

Equally important is a larger police presence to control violent street crime. Iraqis who see their possessions pillaged, their sons threatened with armed robbery and their daughters fearful of rape will not look kindly on the American occupation. International police forces need to be recruited, ideally from Arab countries like Jordan and Morocco, while more Iraqi police are being trained. At least 5,000 international police officers will have to be urgently recruited.

Economic revival must begin with reliable supplies of water and electricity, without which neither normal life nor business activity can proceed. It will take $16 billion over the next four years to ensure safe and sustained water supplies. Another $13 billion will be required over a comparable period to rebuild Iraq's patchwork electric-power network. Hospitals and health care are near collapse and will take billions to revive. Six out of 10 Iraqi workers are without jobs, and six million live in chronic poverty.

According to the best estimates, rebuilding Iraq is likely to cost some $20 billion a year for the next five years. It will be some time before the Iraqi oil industry is back to full strength. And other large donors have been reluctant to contribute until agreement has been reached on a strengthened U.N. role. So most of that money will have to come from the United States. That's a lot to ask from American taxpayers, but far less than the cost of stationing large numbers of American combat troops in Iraq indefinitely.

Broader international support will not materialize until Washington changes its Lone Ranger approach. Last week's decision to seek a new U.N. resolution is encouraging. But unless Washington is willing to accept a much larger U.N. role in developing independent Iraqi political institutions, other countries will continue to hold back. It is appropriate for America and Britain to remain in command of international military and police forces.

Without a stronger U.N. political presence, however, the Governing Council recently appointed by Washington risks being perceived as America's puppet. America has not yet lost the peace in Iraq, but it could in the next six months if the Iraqi people do not see concrete benefits from the American occupation

 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
if I remember correctly the max range Iraq was allowed to reach was 150km, these missles were designed for something from 150-200km but they were limited to 145-155km by using a different propolsion system
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
Originally posted by: povertystruck
and also the fact that North Korea has: WMD plus maybe nuclear
Long range missles that can hit the U.S. (iraq had the range for Israel
They have the facilities for Nuclear weapon production
They were discovered just before war with Iraq selling scuds to Yemen

This non-action against NK just shows how hypocritical Bush really is; or how much of a scaredy-cat he is to take on someone who hasn't been castrated with economic/military sanctions for the past decade.
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
BOBDN it's futile to argue with CkG... he's obviously conveniently using statesments when it fits his purpose (to rebuff those who don't agree with everything he says), and he mocks you (see the little trade him and I did above in our posts). I really don't give a damn about what he (or someone as messed up as him) says. I state reality and facts, and he will find a way to refute them by matters of convenience. 4am is not worth losing sleep to this bush-predator.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,400
6,077
126
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
BOBDN it's futile to argue with CkG... he's obviously conveniently using statesments when it fits his purpose (to rebuff those who don't agree with everything he says), and he mocks you (see the little trade him and I did above in our posts). I really don't give a damn about what he (or someone as messed up as him) says. I state reality and facts, and he will find a way to refute them by matters of convenience. 4am is not worth losing sleep to this bush-predator.

No, you are a fool and will continue to be one with your little tirades. Maybe my mocking of them has woken you up, no? You can't just go around making accusations in mini-rants without backing them up. You and BOBDN are 2 of the worst "haters" with your daily spew. BOBDN hates Bush so much so that he doesn't even recognize him as his President. YOU hate him so much as to say he should start a war or "do something" with NK. What good would provoking NK do? There are negotiations in process - things need to run their course there first. And YES NK is a different situation from Iraq - you can't pretend it isn't.

Moonbeam, did you wake up and see the faces of the living children of Iraq who had their parents tortured and murdered by Saddam's regime? Please keep your projections to yourself. Being "right" isn't always more important than life, but there are times that WAR is necessary, and Iraq was one such time.

CkG

 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
No, you are a fool and will continue to be one with your little tirades. Maybe my mocking of them has woken you up, no? You can't just go around making accusations in mini-rants without backing them up. You and BOBDN are 2 of the worst "haters" with your daily spew. BOBDN hates Bush so much so that he doesn't even recognize him as his President. YOU hate him so much as to say he should start a war or "do something" with NK. What good would provoking NK do? There are negotiations in process - things need to run their course there first. And YES NK is a different situation from Iraq - you can't pretend it isn't.
CkG
NK is the same situation, they have banned weapons (according to the international nuclear organization)...why doesn't Bush go in after them like he did Iraq? Because Bush is a hypocrite and a weenie to start a war with someone who actually has something they could shove up Bush's ass and make a bang! They are very similiar situations, you Bush apologists try to make everyone think that Bush isn't committing a double-standard. And that's what makes YOU hypocrites too.

Everything I say is based upon fact or common knowledge; you just don't like believing certain things or facing reality. I back up what I say with a link whenever possible, and I've provided many of them over the course of my 500+ posts. YOU go on a tirade all the time, all hours of the day bcuz you obviously have so much time and energy devoted to defending your weenie loser two-faced President, and you still can't come up with any original comebacks to what we make you measure up to.

You must have a sad life to sit there all the time futily defending your dictator.
 

povertystruck

Member
Aug 19, 2003
154
0
0
There are differences between Iraq and North Korea, Nk. has nukes, a humongous army, Seoul held hostage by a massive artillery force, complete security(electric fences run along the beaches against U.S. frogmen).


However the "stated" reasoning behind going to war with Iraq works for going to war with NK.


I have a question for you shrubs. Was bringing democracy to Iraq also a reason for war with Iraq?
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
CLINTON ON SIGNING THE "IRAQ LIBERATION ACT OF 1998"

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
October 31, 1998

STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998." This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are:

The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.

The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable due to Iraq's history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis deserve and desire freedom like everyone else.

The United States looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.

My Administration has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The evidence is overwhelming that such changes will not happen under the current Iraq leadership.

In the meantime, while the United States continues to look to the Security Council's efforts to keep the current regime's behavior in check, we look forward to new leadership in Iraq that has the support of the Iraqi people. The United States is providing support to opposition groups from all sectors of the Iraqi community that could lead to a popularly supported government.

On October 21, 1998, I signed into law the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, which made $8 million available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition. This assistance is intended to help the democratic opposition unify, work together more effectively, and articulate the aspirations of the Iraqi people for a pluralistic, participa--tory political system that will include all of Iraq's diverse ethnic and religious groups. As required by the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY 1998 (Public Law 105-174), the Department of State submitted a report to the Congress on plans to establish a program to support the democratic opposition. My Administration, as required by that statute, has also begun to implement a program to compile information regarding allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes by Iraq's current leaders as a step towards bringing to justice those directly responsible for such acts.

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 provides additional, discretionary authorities
under which my Administration can act to further the objectives I outlined above. There are, of course, other important elements of U.S. policy. These include the maintenance of U.N. Security Council support efforts to eliminate Iraq's prohibited weapons and missile programs and economic sanctions that continue to deny the regime the means to reconstitute those threats to international peace and security. United States support for the Iraqi opposition will be carried out consistent with those policy objectives as well.

Similarly, U.S. support must be attuned to what the opposition can effectively make use of as it develops over time. With those observations, I sign H.R. 4655 into law.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON

THE WHITE HOUSE,

October 31, 1998.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
No, you are a fool and will continue to be one with your little tirades. Maybe my mocking of them has woken you up, no? You can't just go around making accusations in mini-rants without backing them up. You and BOBDN are 2 of the worst "haters" with your daily spew. BOBDN hates Bush so much so that he doesn't even recognize him as his President. YOU hate him so much as to say he should start a war or "do something" with NK. What good would provoking NK do? There are negotiations in process - things need to run their course there first. And YES NK is a different situation from Iraq - you can't pretend it isn't.
CkG
NK is the same situation, they have banned weapons (according to the international nuclear organization)...why doesn't Bush go in after them like he did Iraq? Because Bush is a hypocrite and a weenie to start a war with someone who actually has something they could shove up Bush's ass and make a bang! They are very similiar situations, you Bush apologists try to make everyone think that Bush isn't committing a double-standard. And that's what makes YOU hypocrites too.

Everything I say is based upon fact or common knowledge; you just don't like believing certain things or facing reality. I back up what I say with a link whenever possible, and I've provided many of them over the course of my 500+ posts. YOU go on a tirade all the time, all hours of the day bcuz you obviously have so much time and energy devoted to defending your weenie loser two-faced President, and you still can't come up with any original comebacks to what we make you measure up to.

You must have a sad life to sit there all the time futily defending your dictator.

NK isn't the same - we've been over this.

The rest of your post is your usual tripe. If you have something to say that has some meaning instead of throwing wild accusations and insults - then maybe someday it'll be worth debating you on some issues...until that time, I don't give a rats ass what you post - you've proven your ignorance and hatred - neither of which are worth my time.

CkG
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: phillyTIM
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
No, you are a fool and will continue to be one with your little tirades. Maybe my mocking of them has woken you up, no? You can't just go around making accusations in mini-rants without backing them up. You and BOBDN are 2 of the worst "haters" with your daily spew. BOBDN hates Bush so much so that he doesn't even recognize him as his President. YOU hate him so much as to say he should start a war or "do something" with NK. What good would provoking NK do? There are negotiations in process - things need to run their course there first. And YES NK is a different situation from Iraq - you can't pretend it isn't.
CkG
NK is the same situation, they have banned weapons (according to the international nuclear organization)...why doesn't Bush go in after them like he did Iraq? Because Bush is a hypocrite and a weenie to start a war with someone who actually has something they could shove up Bush's ass and make a bang! They are very similiar situations, you Bush apologists try to make everyone think that Bush isn't committing a double-standard. And that's what makes YOU hypocrites too.

Everything I say is based upon fact or common knowledge; you just don't like believing certain things or facing reality. I back up what I say with a link whenever possible, and I've provided many of them over the course of my 500+ posts. YOU go on a tirade all the time, all hours of the day bcuz you obviously have so much time and energy devoted to defending your weenie loser two-faced President, and you still can't come up with any original comebacks to what we make you measure up to.

You must have a sad life to sit there all the time futily defending your dictator.

NK isn't the same - we've been over this.

The rest of your post is your usual tripe. If you have something to say that has some meaning instead of throwing wild accusations and insults - then maybe someday it'll be worth debating you on some issues...until that time, I don't give a rats ass what you post - you've proven your ignorance and hatred - neither of which are worth my time.

CkG

NK isn't the same because NK will shove a nuke up Bush's A$$ if he tries the Bushsh!t on them he pulled in Iraq.

Can you believe what an Unbelievable Quagmire that would be?

 
Jan 12, 2003
3,498
0
0
Originally posted by: BOBDN
NK isn't the same because NK will shove a nuke up Bush's A$$ if he tries the Bushsh!t on them he pulled in Iraq.

Can you believe what an Unbelievable Quagmire that would be?


Is "quagmire" the word-of-the-day in your "English Made Easy" book? It seems that way, given the number of times youhave used this phrase in other posts today. I bet if I did a search of the NY Times Sunday paper, someone else used it before you...like your quotes you use 70-80 times a day.


Why "Unbelievable Quagmire" and not 'undelievable quagmire'? I am guessing you sut and pasted this from a title, correct? In any event, keep up the phrase-of-day posts, sir; we all love to read the same tired lines over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over





















...and over and over...




 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
Originally posted by: BOBDN
NK isn't the same because NK will shove a nuke up Bush's A$$ if he tries the Bushsh!t on them he pulled in Iraq.

Can you believe what an Unbelievable Quagmire that would be?


Is "quagmire" the word-of-the-day in your "English Made Easy" book? It seems that way, given the number of times youhave used this phrase in other posts today. I bet if I did a search of the NY Times Sunday paper, someone else used it before you...like your quotes you use 70-80 times a day.


Why "Unbelievable Quagmire" and not 'undelievable quagmire'? I am guessing you sut and pasted this from a title, correct? In any event, keep up the phrase-of-day posts, sir; we all love to read the same tired lines over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over





















...and over and over...


WTF are you wasting everyone's time for?

PS

I keep repeating the truth in the hope some Bushsh!t artist will wake up and recognize it. Remain hopeful.
It could even be you.
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx

I bet if I did a search of the NY Times Sunday paper, someone else used it before you...like your quotes you use 70-80 times a day.

That's right galt. Someone used it before me. Just like "Fair and Balanced." :D
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,400
6,077
126
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.


 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.

But see? That's been Bush's idea all along: 1) We have to violate UN authority in order to enforce UN resolution, 2) We have to have war in order to have peace, 3) We have to kill in order for people to live, 4) We have to spend more money than we have, so later we will have more money to spend. He's a mastermind of dichotomy. Or raw stupidity. I can never remember which.

We got a kinder, gentler, machine gun hand.
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.

No moonie, you would rather blather away because of your hate of any sort of authority and bury your head in the sand. You would rather condemn this generation and who knows how many in the future to living under a regime that would torture children.

It's sad what your father did, but your hate consumes you and you would have it affect others.

Get some help.

 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,400
6,077
126
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.

No moonie, you would rather blather away because of your hate of any sort of authority and bury your head in the sand. You would rather condemn this generation and who knows how many in the future to living under a regime that would torture children.

It's sad what your father did, but your hate consumes you and you would have it affect others.

Get some help.
You didn't answer the conundrum, etech. Why do you kill children to save them?

 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.

No moonie, you would rather blather away because of your hate of any sort of authority and bury your head in the sand. You would rather condemn this generation and who knows how many in the future to living under a regime that would torture children.

It's sad what your father did, but your hate consumes you and you would have it affect others.

Get some help.
You didn't answer the conundrum, etech. Why do you kill children to save them?

No child was intentionally killed by the US or it?s allies.

Can you say the same about Saddam?

 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.

No moonie, you would rather blather away because of your hate of any sort of authority and bury your head in the sand. You would rather condemn this generation and who knows how many in the future to living under a regime that would torture children.

It's sad what your father did, but your hate consumes you and you would have it affect others.

Get some help.
You didn't answer the conundrum, etech. Why do you kill children to save them?

Why do you allow torture/murder of innocent to possibly save them from us?

It goes both ways moonbeam - to say one side "cares" less is not only unfair but dishonest.

CkG
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.

No moonie, you would rather blather away because of your hate of any sort of authority and bury your head in the sand. You would rather condemn this generation and who knows how many in the future to living under a regime that would torture children.

It's sad what your father did, but your hate consumes you and you would have it affect others.

Get some help.
You didn't answer the conundrum, etech. Why do you kill children to save them?

Why do you allow torture/murder of innocent to possibly save them from us?

It goes both ways moonbeam - to say one side "cares" less is not only unfair but dishonest.

CkG
Do you guys really care about the Iraqi's? Personally I don't. I only care about our interests, our Allies interests and the American and Ally citizenry.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.

No moonie, you would rather blather away because of your hate of any sort of authority and bury your head in the sand. You would rather condemn this generation and who knows how many in the future to living under a regime that would torture children.

It's sad what your father did, but your hate consumes you and you would have it affect others.

Get some help.
You didn't answer the conundrum, etech. Why do you kill children to save them?

Why do you allow torture/murder of innocent to possibly save them from us?

It goes both ways moonbeam - to say one side "cares" less is not only unfair but dishonest.

CkG
Do you guys really care about the Iraqi's? Personally I don't. I only care about our interests, our Allies interests and the American and Ally citizenry.

To a point - yes. And that's why to play the "I care more/you care less" high-horse game is relatively silly as we all have our own motives and use them as pawns in our political games.

CkG
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.

No moonie, you would rather blather away because of your hate of any sort of authority and bury your head in the sand. You would rather condemn this generation and who knows how many in the future to living under a regime that would torture children.

It's sad what your father did, but your hate consumes you and you would have it affect others.

Get some help.
You didn't answer the conundrum, etech. Why do you kill children to save them?

Why do you allow torture/murder of innocent to possibly save them from us?

It goes both ways moonbeam - to say one side "cares" less is not only unfair but dishonest.

CkG
Do you guys really care about the Iraqi's? Personally I don't. I only care about our interests, our Allies interests and the American and Ally citizenry.

To a point - yes. And that's why to play the "I care more/you care less" high-horse game is relatively silly as we all have our own motives and use them as pawns in our political games.

CkG
Well I don't see us winning over the hearts of the Iraqi People as long as we remain the sole Occupying force. I really believe that the UN should take over. Will they do the job? Probably not but I don't think we will either and with the UN there at least we won't bare the whole brunt of the cost both Monetarily and in American Soldiers lives.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: etech
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
If Caddy wakes up he will see the faces of dead children asking him why he couldn't live with his fear; they will want to know why he's so sure, why being right is more important than life.

Moonie, are you talking about the faces of children such as Anna ?


No, I guess you aren't, you don't care about them.

My problem, I guess, is that I haven't reached your advanced state of psychosis where I kill children to save them.

No moonie, you would rather blather away because of your hate of any sort of authority and bury your head in the sand. You would rather condemn this generation and who knows how many in the future to living under a regime that would torture children.

It's sad what your father did, but your hate consumes you and you would have it affect others.

Get some help.
You didn't answer the conundrum, etech. Why do you kill children to save them?

Why do you allow torture/murder of innocent to possibly save them from us?

It goes both ways moonbeam - to say one side "cares" less is not only unfair but dishonest.

CkG
Do you guys really care about the Iraqi's? Personally I don't. I only care about our interests, our Allies interests and the American and Ally citizenry.

To a point - yes. And that's why to play the "I care more/you care less" high-horse game is relatively silly as we all have our own motives and use them as pawns in our political games.

CkG
Well I don't see us winning over the hearts of the Iraqi People as long as we remain the sole Occupying force. I really believe that the UN should take over. Will they do the job? Probably not but I don't think we will either and with the UN there at least we won't bare the whole brunt of the cost both Monetarily and in American Soldiers lives.

Winning them over? maybe not, but I do think that theit "mis-trust" can and is being lessened (an indication of such)
Even if the UN took over, we'd still bear the brunt of the troop burden and also the monetary brunt of it - only our boys would be wearing Blue hats.

CkG