Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I ask the question, why would that be true? Have you wondered the same? Personally I think we have attempted to handle this conflict in the best possible way. Are we hated because we fight for the freedom of others as well as our own? Are we hated because we removed an evil dictator? Are we hated because we support Isreal?
|
We are hated for a shitload of stuff going back for generations. Basically, we are hated for mass murder and colonialism, but it's a lot more complicated in reality. It should be made clear, though, that we are not now, nor have we ever fought for the freedom of the Iraqi civilians. We are not there to help them. I hope that was made clear as Bagdad burned in the bullshit "Shock and Awe campaign", as civilian's homes were broken into night after night with no warrant, as the civilians in Falujah were burned alive with illegal white phospherous.
We, actually meaning the US government and military, are hated because we have never been anything but an enemy to these people. We make promises of freedom and help them fight their wars, while all along using them and not actually helping them at all. As we supplied Iraq and Iran with weapons and intel to be used against each other, we ewre simply using them for our own ends, to the detriment of stability in the ME and the loss of so many lives.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Just for the record. No one wants to be involved in a war. However, those of us who support the war in Iraq see it as somthing that needs to be done. In my view we will fight the war 1,000 times if we pretend we are not at war, or we will fight it once. We failed in the first Gulf War because we did not finish the fight, I hope we don't make the same mistake again.
|
That's not actually true. The PNAC were planning a war of aggression years ahead of time, and had every intention of starting that war despite what the intelligence community was ACTUALLY saying at the time. When you handpick evidence and trust untrustworthy sources to start a war, it's clear that you actually WANT a war.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
There can be only one commander-in-chief. Again, a man or woman away from home, family and friends, if asked, would obviously want to come home. Again, I bet the way the question is asked would determine the tone of the response.
|
Actually, we'd function a lot better without the office of president. Yes, it's important to have a figurehead, but giving one man that much power is a foolish thing to do. That any one man can declair war is madness. I don't recognise Bush as president, anyway, as I've seen enough evidence to be certian that the 200 election was stolen. Unfortunately, Inconvenient Al was not hungry enough and we've all suffered.