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 (1,495 Views)
RTW
Member Avatar
Vice Admiral
Admiralbill_gomec
Feb 1 2008, 01:28 PM
This is the first major war fought in 60 years. So, where are the signs at home? Are we growing victory gardens? Is the government spending MORE than 42% of GDP on the war? Where is the rationing? Where are the draft boards? Where are the bond drives? Put bluntly, where is the sacrifice?

You mean everyone isn't sending in their nylon stockings for the manufacture of parachutes this time around?

Uh, do you think I can get mine back? :doh:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ImpulseEngine
Admiral
RTW
Feb 1 2008, 03:41 PM
Admiralbill_gomec
Feb 1 2008, 01:28 PM
This is the first major war fought in 60 years. So, where are the signs at home? Are we growing victory gardens? Is the government spending MORE than 42% of GDP on the war? Where is the rationing? Where are the draft boards? Where are the bond drives? Put bluntly, where is the sacrifice?

You mean everyone isn't sending in their nylon stockings for the manufacture of parachutes this time around?

Uh, do you think I can get mine back? :doh:

RTW,

You forgot your picture with that post. :P
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
Isn't the lives of thousands of brave young men and women and 80 billion dollars sacrifice enough?

The fate of the world hung in the balance during WWII. This war was a mistake based on false information.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
RTW
Feb 1 2008, 04:07 AM
Quote:
 
Was Hussein gassing millions of people?

Posted Image
"Presponse" to complaints: :P

Posts a cartoon of a dead mother and her dead baby and laughs about it ..... :shrug: ..... words escape .... if that was rtw's idea of some kind of sick joke .... I am not amused in the least. :no:

I'll remind you all that had the Kurds who thought the USA (who incited them to rebell against Saddam's regime) recieved proper support , rather than being left to the mercy of Saddam's inforcers and abandoned , then the gasing of the Kurds would not have happened.
The USA has blood on it's hands over that autrocity too.

The autrocities against Kurds were not stated (even in passing) as a justification for going to war against Iraq. (you are of cause welcome to prove me wrong and give an appropriate pre-invasion quote and link if you can find one).
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
RTW
Feb 1 2008, 07:32 AM
Minuet
Jan 31 2008, 12:43 PM
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.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

My knees are too sore to hail anymore today.

Could the UN being anyMORE ineffective in this respect? Some sort of world organization should be set up for this purpose - a league of action prone freedom loving nations.

Or perhaps a league of Christian nations?
Posted Image

So would prefer one powerful militarist nation running the world and forcing everyone comply with what is beneficial for them exclusively , and being able to do essentially as they please (invade nations who are not cooperative or agreeable to them, and incite instability in those nations who are too strong to actually directly militarily attack.

If anything, the UN needs to greatly strengthened so they can impose sanctions of their own accord , even against powerful rogue nations and superpowers.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
8247
Member Avatar
Apparently we look like this now
^^^

Ok, how about countless violations of UN resolutions by saddam. We just enforced it.

Sure, President Bush should have said that at first, but he didn't. Oh well.

But, I guess some people think the Iraqis were better off with rape rooms, torture rooms, etc. And, I'd bet that most of those people are all for military action in Darfur to stop the same thing...But, what do I know? I'm just a blood hungry "neocon"

;)

EDIT: This post is a reply to Somerled's first of 2 posts above this one.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Fesarius
Member Avatar
Admiral
Quote:
 
So would prefer one powerful militarist nation running the world and forcing everyone comply with what is beneficial for them exclusively , and being able to do essentially as they please (invade nations who are not cooperative or agreeable to them, and incite instability in those nations who are too strong to actually directly militarily attack.

Earth, U.S.S.R., 1950-1989.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Dr. Noah
Feb 2 2008, 03:26 AM
Isn't the lives of thousands of brave young men and women and 80 billion dollars sacrifice enough?

The fate of the world hung in the balance during WWII. This war was a mistake based on false information.

Remind me of the sacrifices you've made?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
Fesarius
Feb 2 2008, 09:09 AM
Quote:
 
So would prefer one powerful militarist nation running the world and forcing everyone comply with what is beneficial for them exclusively , and being able to do essentially as they please (invade nations who are not cooperative or agreeable to them, and incite instability in those nations who are too strong to actually directly militarily attack.

Earth, U.S.S.R., 1950-1989.

Back in the USSR... (Well the Ukraine girls really knock me out, leave the west behind... and Moscow girls make me sing and shout, and Georgia's always on my m-m-m-m-m-m-miiiiind)!!!
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
somerled
Member Avatar
Admiral MacDonald RN
USA , 1945 - ... until China takes over.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Admiralbill_gomec
UberAdmiral
somerled
Feb 4 2008, 10:59 AM
USA , 1945 - ... until China takes over.

Whatever, dude...

They said the same thing about Japan in the 80s.

:rotfl:
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Sign-up Now
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus