Originally Posted by JustAyoungMC,Nov 16 2004, 02:23 PM

And, as always, america wins hands down in the "people wanting to move here" category so why even try to bring up this point?

Originally Posted by Gink5,Nov 16 2004, 03:02 PM

The reason for going to war was for the following reasons:

1. Saddam did not follow the guidelines put forth by the U.N. (not his first time)
2. EVERY country believed he had WMD(we were wrong but still a reason)


If it were for oil our gas price wouldn't be as high as they are today.

Our country did get bombed and a lot of Americans did die(family and friends). I would aslo have to argue that we did give france and germany those rights, because if hitler won, they wouldn't have them. In the current context, they are defending them.

Aslo, alot of innocent women and children aren't dieing. We have spent big bucks to make sure this didn't happen. If it were the case we didn't care, we would have been dropping some moabs.

The sad thing EVO is, our men and women are the ones over there giving their lives so an Iraqi doesn't doesn't have to live in the lifestyle you described. I'd be willing to bet you wouldn't have wanted to live under saddam.

You also dont hear about all the terrorist being thwarted by the men and women protecting us at home, which is part of the reason we don't live in fear.

Originally Posted by yogi,Nov 16 2004, 03:20 PM

You are making a generalization. I for one don't support the war. But I was there, I fought, I bled, etc. I was gung ho and motivated - but that doesn't mean I supported the war as a whole. You do what you have to out there, you can't run home and write to your local newspaper about the atrocities that are happening. You hold your ground and you fight.

I don't think anyone fails to realise that Iraq was not as great as a threat to the US as we were convinced of. I think saying "absolutely no threat" is a bit of a stretch, but certainly closer to the reality than "an absolute threat". We can't keep arguing about why the war was fought or what the Bush administration's real intentions were - we're already neck-deep in Iraq. I just wish that what happens now and in the future comes from honest, and open logic.

I also think by making strong statements about Iraq having NOTHING to do with America, there was ZERO threat, etc is almost as bad as saying that Iraq was the biggest threat to the US and there was a large scale attack planned in the very near future. As always, the truth isn't an extreme of one side or the other, it's usually in between somewhere.

The country living in fear thing is true though. I just don't get it. I was there and I'm not scared, why should you be? What I find funny is that all the states that are most likely to be attacked by a terrorist voted for Kerry. Ironic, eh? I'm tired of people saying they're scared of terrorism and it's one of their main concerns. Honestly, what are your chances of being killed by a terrorist? Compare that to being murderd, dying in an accident, being hit by a train, struck by lightining, etc. I don't have hard numbers (I know, then why bring it up), but I'm sure getting hit by a random act of terrorism is WAY low on that list of probabilities.

Originally Posted by Gink5,Nov 16 2004, 07:28 PM

I did forget the British, and i am sorry. They are playing a big role, but for the most part, the rest of the world doesn't come close to the particapation of the U.S.

I basically just get upset when people put down our soldiers, the men and women that defend their rights and freedom. The sad thing is most of those same people were the ones whos asses were saved in WWII.(french, germans cough cough)

Originally Posted by JustAyoungMC,Nov 16 2004, 03:40 PM

so you negate the assertion that the allies would have lost if it were not for the US?


saddam violated rules including those which prohibited various weapons, those weapons posed a threat to the rest of the world.

no valid expert has said the number is over 100,000 and it would be impossible for ANYONE to calculate how many people have died because of the COALITIONS removing saddam from power....but id rather take my chance with the bush than saddam : /

Going on you keep talking like iraq doesnt want the Coalitions help...they do, the majority of iraq is a relatively safe place with very little trouble; they are getting ready for elections everything is going smoothly except for about 2 cities.

Finally your last point is lacking in every aspect, it has no clear reasoning, no evidence, and no real assertion: not much to respond to.

finally the last statement is merely a logical fallacy and really has no bearing whatsoever.