gamerhang.myfreeforum.org Forum Index gamerhang.myfreeforum.org
A place where like-minded individuals who are into all types of mediums, and not just video games, can come to communicate and create!
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Join! (free) Join! (free)
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

First Political Discussion Thread: Iraq War
Page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    gamerhang.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Off-Topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Should America pull out of Iraq?
Yes, immediately!
20%
 20%  [ 1 ]
Yes, slowly but surely.
60%
 60%  [ 3 ]
No, they should wait until the fighting stops to keep the peace, then leave.
20%
 20%  [ 1 ]
No, they should have permanent occupancy in Iraq to make sure nothing bad happens again.
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
Total Votes : 5

Author Message
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertising.






Posted:     Post subject:

Back to top
firemastrr
Celebrated Gamer
Celebrated Gamer


Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 152


Location: Mars

PostPosted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:31 pm    Post subject: First Political Discussion Thread: Iraq War  Reply with quote

So, what do you all think of the war in Iraq? Do you hate it, love it, or whatever?

Personally, I think that it was the thing to do. I mean, yes, many have died, and it's very slow progress. Still, America has been a world leader and liberator for the past century. It was the lesser of two evils to enter, the second evil being to just sit here and watch as the people suffer under Hussein's rule.
Also, we must stay there and can't pull out until stability is reached. If we just up and leave, it will be complete and total chaos there, with it being like a huge gang war. We must finish what we started. That's why I'm awaiting the 2008 elections with great anticipation. What will happen in Iraq with the new President?
_________________
Computer problems? PM or E-Mail me and I'll see what I can do!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Chocolate Ninja
Chocolate Gamer
Chocolate Gamer


Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 217



PostPosted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Uhh...

...hate to break it to you, but America is not the rock upon which the world was built. <_< We only just started to become something of a world power after WWI, and solidified it with the end of the Cold War. Even now, we may not hold that title of "Most Dominant World Superpower" for very long.

So, I don't think the war in Iraq was quite justified. To this day, I don't know what the real reason behind us going in was (Politicians doing things out of the goodness of their own heart?), but I suspect there was a bit more to it than we'd like to think. For instance, even if we're shepherds of the world, why not intervene in Saudi Arabia? Or Israel? Or Cuba? Because we have a political alliance with them, that's why.

Now that we're in there, I guess that we have a duty to stay, though I can't see any way that we could make things better now. Things were bad in Iraq, but you have to admit that there were other countries that we've conveniently overlooked. But I guess that the U.S. is doing slightly better thus far than Britain was when it was a superpower.
_________________
<Alriik> *changes the channel*
<ChocolateNinja> <Elfheart> My body may be the heart of an elf, milady, but my inner heart is a human's.
<ChocolateNinja> <PrincessZinthia> Oh Elfheart! *they embrace*
<Alriik> ...
<Alriik> *changes the channel*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Konoko
Capstone Gamer
Capstone Gamer


Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 273



PostPosted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wasn't Saddam around for a good long time, even getting some support from america...? And by some I mean one of the largest displays of financial support they've ever done, in the tone of over 40 billion dollers on credit on top of a long term series of loans as well?
That whole, it was the lesser of 2 evils, our solomn duty to protect the world from his evil, our only option for our safety and all the various other things that have been heard coming from that side of the pond....yeah, thats the general gist I've been getting over here and it doesn't seem to be sounding quite right.

Its just political, far as I see. And in political stuff, the morality of something is really only used to sway support, not the motivation for the decision.

Quote:
But I guess that the U.S. is doing slightly better thus far than Britain was when it was a superpower.

Bah! I take offence at that! I'm busy having a drink, but I shall send my manservent off to give your army a jolly good seeing to, right after he's finished lunch.
But yeah....world war 1 left us depleted and financially unstable, then all the dominions decided to jump ship. I blame Canada. Damn them, being the first ones to ease the governer out of contact with administrive stuff...its the little things like that that started the slippery slope towards them ALL deciding they wanted to be independant. That and World War 2 didn't help much, depleting us till the outlyers were more supporting us and the US looked all promising and military, what with its nukes and all....

Could have been worse though.
_________________
Ortus Denicalis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
firemastrr
Celebrated Gamer
Celebrated Gamer


Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 152


Location: Mars

PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Woah. We invaded Iraq to stop Hussein. Saying we shouldn't have tried to stop him is like saying we shouldn't have entered WWII to get Hitler. Hussein was a butcher. He had to be put down sometime, the sooner the better. How many people were happy when they found out he was dead? The problem is, it's turning into a desert Vietnam with all the insurgents. So if we leave now, we are basically condemning the Iraqis to one huge gang war.

Now, about the reason for invasion, I believe it was to stop Hussein. Maybe Bush lied about the WMDs, maybe he genuinely believed what he said. I don't know. And maybe we never will. But thee is almost always more, and you are probably correct.

Oh, and about America as a superpower, WWI was the war that showed the world what we could do. That was when we emerged as a superpower. It was solidified after WWII. When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, they damned themselves and the other Axis Powers. If it weren't for the U. S., WWII is lost. Now, you can't say that we were "just emerging" at the end when we played such a huge role through the whole thing.
_________________
Computer problems? PM or E-Mail me and I'll see what I can do!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Konoko
Capstone Gamer
Capstone Gamer


Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 273



PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 11:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
He had to be put down sometime, the sooner the better.

If that was true, why all the support to him?

Part of me just wants to consider all the huge number of wars, rebellions and invasions and...well, generally they just happen and there isn't much reason for outside forces to get involved. Except that Americas administration had their own motives and goals. Sure, Saddam was bad. But I'm pretty sure thats not why the war happened, thats just how the war was rationalized to the public.

And for WW2...the Germans turning on Russia was also pretty damn pivotal, to say the least. Far as what I'm seeing in the history books, America did not play a huge role for the whole thing. o.o Embargoing (along with UK and others) over Japans attempts to unify Asia via invasion, till Pearl Harbour.
_________________
Ortus Denicalis
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Chocolate Ninja
Chocolate Gamer
Chocolate Gamer


Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 217



PostPosted: Wed Sep 12, 2007 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You didn't read the rest of what I said, firemastrr. What about Saudi Arabia? What about Cuba? What about Israel and Palestine? I'm not saying Iraq wasn't a problem, though as Konoko pointed out, we were once alarmingly indifferent to the problems there. And if by showing the world what we could do means that we showed the world a weapon that we even didn't know the consequences of, then yes, we did show the world what we can do. We showed off the first catastrophic WMD.

Do you truly think that politicians don't act out of self-interest? They do. We all do. But there's a difference in scale. When most people are self-interested, they do things like take money from wallets dropped on the ground and then returning them to their owners for a cash reward. When politicians are self-interested, they do things that actually have a sizeable impact on the rest of the world.
_________________
<Alriik> *changes the channel*
<ChocolateNinja> <Elfheart> My body may be the heart of an elf, milady, but my inner heart is a human's.
<ChocolateNinja> <PrincessZinthia> Oh Elfheart! *they embrace*
<Alriik> ...
<Alriik> *changes the channel*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
firemastrr
Celebrated Gamer
Celebrated Gamer


Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 152


Location: Mars

PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 2:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Konoko wrote:
Quote:
He had to be put down sometime, the sooner the better.

If that was true, why all the support to him?


By the U.S.? He was a strong ruler, what the country needed. We didn't do our homework. BIG mistake.
By Iraqis? All those who didn't "support" him were dead.

Chocolate Ninja wrote:
Do you truly think that politicians don't act out of self-interest?


I didn't say that. Of course they acty out of self-intrest. Like you said, everyone does. But what would Bush get out of Iraq war? Some private company who has a vendetta against Iraq that will pay him a billion dollars to destroy Iraq? Unlikely. The same goes for Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Israel, and Palestine. I think he was finishing what his dad started.

Chocolate Ninja wrote:
And if by showing the world what we could do means that we showed the world a weapon that we even didn't know the consequences of, then yes, we did show the world what we can do. We showed off the first catastrophic WMD.


Well, someone had to. I agree that it was unnecessary. The war was, by all practical standards, over. But its consequenses could not be forseen. It's one of those things that you just have to try. Does that justify it? No.

What I mean by showing the world what we could do:

Okay, 1941. France: Captured. Soviet Union: About to fall.

Britain was the only thing standing between the Axis and victory. They were doomed. Then, December 7. In order to expand, the Japanese deside that they should give the U.S. a warning blow to keep us away. Pearl Harbor.

Now, the U.S., after formally declaring war on December 8, send thousands of troops over both oceans to combat the Axis. After more defeats than victories, it's looking grim, but Allied luck and Axis stupidity give the Allies one chance, the biggest invasion ever waged: D-Day. British, American, and Canadian troops land on the shores of Normandy Beach across a 10-mile stretch. After pushing inland for several months, Berlin fell. V-E Day.

In the Pacific, the we are island-hopping, slowly liberating one tiny isle after another. The Japanese do not believe in surrender; they fight to the death. Finally, the Manhattan Project is coming to a close. We try out the new weapons. Hiroshima and Nagisaki.

Weeks later, aboard the U.S.S. Missouri, the Japanese leaders formally surrender. V-J Day.

That's what we could do.
_________________
Computer problems? PM or E-Mail me and I'll see what I can do!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Chocolate Ninja
Chocolate Gamer
Chocolate Gamer


Joined: 09 Aug 2007
Posts: 217



PostPosted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 3:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmm, WWII-wise, you do have a compelling point. Albeit the war could have been won without using such weapons by then, but hindsight is always 20-20. We most likely would have ended up using it later on anyways.

However, in the case of the Iraq War, just because an alterior motive isn't immediately apparent doesn't mean there isn't one. In fact, it wouldn't be very alterior if it was readily apparent. <_< A private company may not have a vendetta against Iraq, but several parties may have something to gain from the invasion of Iraq. I don't know enough to say, but it's not entirely implausible that since we can't exactly out and invade Saudi Arabia right now, we try for another oil hotspot. It sounds like a stretch for the cause of a war, but our oil supplies here are stretched a little thin right now. One of the oldest and time-honored reasons for war is for territory or resources.

Then again, it's difficult to tell. We don't exactly know the full extent of what's going on there, and CNN seems more concerned with reality tv shows and puppies that can walk on their hind legs. Also, you would think that if we were secretly drilling oil wells over there we'd catch on by now. So "no blood for oil" may be a statement with faulty backing at best.

Nevertheless, I'm impressed. Razz When I was your age I was completely apathetic towards politics and history.
_________________
<Alriik> *changes the channel*
<ChocolateNinja> <Elfheart> My body may be the heart of an elf, milady, but my inner heart is a human's.
<ChocolateNinja> <PrincessZinthia> Oh Elfheart! *they embrace*
<Alriik> ...
<Alriik> *changes the channel*
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
firemastrr
Celebrated Gamer
Celebrated Gamer


Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 152


Location: Mars

PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 1:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Chocolate Ninja wrote:
However, in the case of the Iraq War, just because an alterior motive isn't immediately apparent doesn't mean there isn't one. In fact, it wouldn't be very alterior if it was readily apparent. <_< A private company may not have a vendetta against Iraq, but several parties may have something to gain from the invasion of Iraq. I don't know enough to say, but it's not entirely implausible that since we can't exactly out and invade Saudi Arabia right now, we try for another oil hotspot. It sounds like a stretch for the cause of a war, but our oil supplies here are stretched a little thin right now. One of the oldest and time-honored reasons for war is for territory or resources.

Then again, it's difficult to tell. We don't exactly know the full extent of what's going on there, and CNN seems more concerned with reality tv shows and puppies that can walk on their hind legs. Also, you would think that if we were secretly drilling oil wells over there we'd catch on by now. So "no blood for oil" may be a statement with faulty backing at best.


Nicely put. Ultimately, what goes on in the President's head, stays in his head. We were told it was because it was because of WMDs. There were none there. But we had nothing else to believe. What could we do? We can't be totally untrusting, but we shouldn't believe everything unconditionally either. We just have to take everything with a grain of salt. Again, we may never know the real reason. That's how life works.

Chocolate Ninja wrote:
Nevertheless, I'm impressed. Razz When I was your age I was completely apathetic towards politics and history.


Politics are good to know so you can debate with people. Those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. Besides, it's really interesting. WWII is probably the war I know most about. Interesting story:

Hitler's troops were pressing forward toward Moscow. They were almost 10 miles away. Nothing stood between them and the capital. Noting, that is, but bitter, bitter cold. Their progress was so slow that they went barely a mile every day. Finally, they had to turn back and return to Germany. They could go no further. Nature had saved Russia. That and stupidity. The Germans were so overconfident that they marched into Russia in their summer uniforms. They had none blanket for ever 10 people.

If Hitler had read his history books, that would never have happened.

Napoleon Bonaparte did the exact same thing: summer uniforms, dead of winter, froze to death miles from Moscow, had to turn back.

That could have been the difference in WWII.

Case in point.
_________________
Computer problems? PM or E-Mail me and I'll see what I can do!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Anomaly
Capstone Gamer
Capstone Gamer


Joined: 19 Aug 2007
Posts: 295



PostPosted: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is a reason why the first rule of war is "know your enemy".
Before anyone chews me out for making such a short and irrelevant post, it's because I frankly know nothing about what's being spoken about here. I'm no good at history, and I've not really been keeping up with the Iraq war or W's reasoning for it. I'd say it's better to wait until the story's over before trying to read it.
I'd also say that this thread would be much better off if not subjected by my uninformed opinions about the issues presented.


_________________

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    gamerhang.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Off-Topic All times are GMT
Page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Card File  Gallery  Forum Archive
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum