Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Was the U.S. invasion of Iraq a mistake?
Topic Started: Jan 24 2008, 12:02 AM (1,498 Views)
captain_proton_au
Member Avatar
A Robot in Disguise

Anyway, haven't answered the poll yet :


In terms of the Global Economy, definitely not a mistake, we should have more wars, the US should invade an African country next, Zimbabwe would be nice (I'm starting to think thats the only way we are going to get Africa out of the doldrums)

In terms of Iraqis; I read in the paper today some British organization estimated that 1 Million Iraqis had died since the US invaded, I'm guessing thats the ceiling, so somewhere between 250K and 1 Million, poor blighters, I feel sorry for them. Too bad we didnt tell them that no one really has a clue on how to artificially create a democracy

In terms of the WMD thing: Well D'uh!
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Minuet
Jan 31 2008, 10:04 AM
Quote:
 
Was Hussein gassing millions of people?


I honestly cannot believe you asked this question Noah. No, Hussein didn't gas people. He threw them into woodchoppers instead.

He most definitely engaged in mass murder and the mass graves to prove it have been uncovered. I do think that the comparison to Hitler is apropos in this instance.

http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/legacyofterror.html

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/13/iraq.graves/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3738368.stm

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/05/world/mi...r=1&oref=slogin

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,102568,00.html

Do you need more proof?

I didn't check Min's links, but to respond to Noah, YES, Saddam gassed people. He used poison gas on the Kurds after the Gulf War and he used it on Iran during the Iran-Iraq war.

Saddam may not have been on a SCALE with Hitler (closer to Pol Pot), but he was every bit as verminous. Rape rooms, acid rooms, torture, throwing people off five story buildings (that act I actually watched a video of). The estimates of those murdered during his regime range between 300,000 and a million.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
Admiralbill_gomec
Jan 30 2008, 07:44 PM
ImpulseEngine
Jan 30 2008, 05:19 PM
Sorry guys, but that logic doesn't work.  If it did, then the President could deceive people tomorrow into thinking there was valid cause to invade Canada, and if by some minuscule chance, he actually succeeded and we invaded Canada, would you then cite FDR's move as evidence that the deception or aggressive approach was acceptable in that case?

It can be acceptable in one circumstance, but not another.

What's with all this moral relativism crapola?

"Moral relativism crapola"? You don't believe in moral relativism?

Well, in that case, since it's wrong to punch someone for no good reason, boxing and self defense must also be wrong. Right?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Quote:
 
Was Hussein gassing millions of people?

Posted Image
"Presponse" to complaints: :P
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Admiralbill_gomec
Jan 31 2008, 09:36 AM
The estimates of those murdered during his regime range between 300,000 and a million.

The Iraqi prosecutor in Saddam's trial put the number at 2,000,000.

2,000,000 would be 86,000/year, 238/day.

1,000,000 would be 43,000/year, 119/day.

300,000 would be 13,000/year, 36/day.

Perhaps one number includes death in wars with Iran and Kuwait and the other doesn't?

Would it not be fair to subtract these numbers from the number of deaths since?

Of the civilian deaths since, how many are due to infighting? "Death's due to violence" isn't a very specific.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
ImpulseEngine
Jan 31 2008, 10:42 AM
"Moral relativism crapola"? You don't believe in moral relativism?

Well, in that case, since it's wrong to punch someone for no good reason, boxing and self defense must also be wrong. Right?

:thud:

Self-defense = "no good reason"?

Boxing, where the point is for two WILLING participants to hit each other = "no good reason"?

Wow.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
RTW
Jan 31 2008, 01:07 PM
Quote:
 
Was Hussein gassing millions of people?

Posted Image
"Presponse" to complaints: :P

With regards to the smiley - do you find the cartoon amusing?

I don't. Truthful, but not in the least amusing. :no:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
RTW
Jan 31 2008, 01:28 PM
ImpulseEngine
Jan 31 2008, 10:42 AM
"Moral relativism crapola"?  You don't believe in moral relativism?

Well, in that case, since it's wrong to punch someone for no good reason, boxing and self defense must also be wrong.  Right?

:thud:

Self-defense = "no good reason"?

Boxing, where the point is for two WILLING participants to hit each other = "no good reason"?

Wow.

If two people cooperate on a suicide pact does that give thier deaths meaning or reason?

I don't disagree that self defense is a good reason. But there is no good reason for boxing. It is a violent and bloodthirsty "sport".
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
RTW
Jan 31 2008, 01:28 PM
ImpulseEngine
Jan 31 2008, 10:42 AM
"Moral relativism crapola"?  You don't believe in moral relativism?

Well, in that case, since it's wrong to punch someone for no good reason, boxing and self defense must also be wrong.  Right?

:thud:

Self-defense = "no good reason"?

Boxing, where the point is for two WILLING participants to hit each other = "no good reason"?

Wow.

RTW,

You missed the point.

Action: Punching someone.
Contexts:
1) No good reason
2) Self defense
3) Boxing

Does that clarify?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Minuet
Jan 31 2008, 11:39 AM
But there is no good reason for boxing. It is a violent and bloodthirsty "sport".

While we agree, it's a value judgement. Some people, of potentially questionable sanity (another judgement ;) ) may actually like participating in one on one "combat".

If one is good, there's a lot of money in it. Boxing on the "undercard" in "small time" local events can pay $500-$1000 per fight, and participating in the main event can earn a boxer as much as $10,000.

Then there's the million dollar paydays of nationally ranked boxers. Mike Tyson earned $75,000,000 in 1996. Yeah, he still ended up in prison, but theorectically, boxing kept the number of his unwilling victims down, and he did pay a lot of income tax in the process. It's not like he was on the fast track to becoming a doctor or rocket-scientist before choosing boxing as a career.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
ImpulseEngine
Jan 31 2008, 11:56 AM
RTW,

You missed the point.

Action: Punching someone.
Contexts:
1) No good reason
2) Self defense
3) Boxing

Does that clarify?

No.

Sorry. :shrug:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
RTW
Jan 31 2008, 02:04 PM
Minuet
Jan 31 2008, 11:39 AM
But there is no good reason for boxing. It is a violent and bloodthirsty "sport".

While we agree, it's a value judgement. Some people, of potentially questionable sanity (another judgement ;) ) may actually like participating in one on one "combat".

If one is good, there's a lot of money in it. Boxing on the "undercard" in "small time" local events can pay $500-$1000 per fight, and participating in the main event can earn a boxer as much as $10,000.

Then there's the million dollar paydays of nationally ranked boxers. Mike Tyson earned $75,000,000 in 1996. Yeah, he still ended up in prison, but theorectically, boxing kept the number of his unwilling victims down, and he did pay a lot of income tax in the process. It's not like he was on the fast track to becoming a doctor or rocket-scientist before choosing boxing as a career.

Or theoretically boxing taught him that violence is "norma"l. Boxing fed into his ego and made him think he was invincible.

It is arguable that without boxing Tyson could have ended up normal and learned how to respect women.

And you failed to respond on my suicide pact example - two people willingly conspiring together - but does that make it all right?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Minuet
Member Avatar
Fleet Admiral Assistant wRench, Chief Supper Officer
I think we may be letting this tangent get us too far away from the topic. Moral relativism aside -was it right or wrong for the US to invade Iraq.

In my mind, due to the humanitarian issues, I think it was right. I also think action could have and should have been taken much faster against Hitler back in the 30's.

I see nothing wrong with deposing cruel dictators and the only reason we are having this moral relativism debate is because we are too ambiguous in our morals. We need to stand up strong for what is right. If Bush lied (and I am not saying he did) maybe he did so to convince those who worry more about thier own selfish interests then they do about doing the right moral thing.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dandandat
Member Avatar
Time to put something here
Minuet
Jan 31 2008, 02:43 PM
I see nothing wrong with deposing cruel dictators and the only reason we are having this moral relativism debate is because we are too ambiguous in our morals. We need to stand up strong for what is right. If Bush lied (and I am not saying he did) maybe he did so to convince those who worry more about thier own selfish interests then they do about doing the right moral thing.

Now that is a thought.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Minuet
Jan 31 2008, 12:36 PM
Or theoretically boxing taught him that violence is "normal". Boxing fed into his ego and made him think he was invincible.
Sure. :shrug:

Minuet
Jan 31 2008, 12:36 PM
It is arguable that without boxing Tyson could have ended up normal...
Assuming he was normal before boxing... ;)

Minuet
Jan 31 2008, 12:36 PM
...and learned how to respect women.
Not sure of the connection. I don't think he was disrespectful because of boxing.

Minuet
Jan 31 2008, 12:36 PM
And you failed to respond on my suicide pact example - two people willingly conspiring together - but does that make it all right?
:shrug: I don't know.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus