Statue made in honor US Soldiers

[rklenseth]

I feel that I have started something that I was not intended in starting. I thought the statue was cool and nice. I probably shouldn't have posted the article though I thought some would like to read the story behind it.

Wuh duh ma huh ta duh fung-kwong duh wai-shung doh. Tee wuh duh pee-goo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[The Hunter]

Orion, you make yourself look just as closedminded as we look to you from the way I just saw you post. You are no better and you are no different.

Now read my post again... Very thoroughly please before you judge me...

Read it? Great. Now what's the close minded part? All meant to say is that this war had only losers. (lika most wars).
I tried to poinmt out that this war cost many lives, mainly civilians... So, why not commemorate them instead of soldiers who's job i t is to "kill and be killed"?

I don't want to discuss whether the war should have been started, not about whether there were wep's of mass distruction, whether i like americans or not, whether bush is an idiot or not. It's not an issue here. All I said was:

How about a statue for their victim's aswell? I'd rather see a monument for men, women and children who nevewr stood a chance

Now, tell me, am I narrowminded?

[quidit]

I thought it was a nice thing to post too. I enjoyed it.


I did take offense to Orions closedminded and prejudice insults at Americans though so I had to say something.

[quidit]

You are right and that was nice, but it was your othere statements like the one about Rkls house being destroyed and the like.

[The Hunter]

, but it was your othere statements like the one about Rkls house being destroyed and the like.

Well, it has happened to many, many people... So no one would notice if RKL was one of them... As he seems to be so very proud that the US won the war... By writing that I hoped he would see the other side of this war, any war.

Innocent people get killed. In most wars, more than soldiers. They're the victims. Lets put up a statue for them instead of for "profesional killers" (Soldiers). And if RKL were to be one of the victims, yes, in his honour too.

I just wish our "leaders" would think of fallen civilians (And even soldiers) as people, humans who's life has ended and the tragedy that brings, instead of as a statistic, where "a few" is slightly better then "a lot of", because hey, who cares, the war has been won.

[The Hunter]

I would like that anyone who reads this thread, this post, thinks, just for a minute, how they'd feel when it happened to them. a bomb fell in the middle of your block. You survived but lost both legs. Your family was killed, your neighbours were killed. Many people in the block were killed or maimed. Besides losing your family and many other loved ones, your furure is in shatters. forever will you live in poverty, your house has been destroyed, you will never get a job because of your handicap. That, dear RKL, all of you, that's the reality of war. Worst of all, it can happen to you, it could happen to me, it has happened to many throughout history...

Read it? OK. Now think...............

[Meh]

You mean something like this then

[rklenseth]

I should probably point this CNN article that came out today...

Poll: Iraqis say life better now
Tuesday, March 16, 2004 Posted: 6:21 AM EST (1121 GMT)

Iraqis say life is better now, but they are concerned about security, joblessness and local services.

LONDON, England -- A majority of Iraqis believe life is better now than it was under Saddam Hussein, according to a poll by broadcasting organizations released to coincide with the first anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion.

And almost half -- 49 percent -- of those questioned believe the invasion of their country by U.S. and British troops was right, compared with 39 percent who said it was wrong.

The poll -- the first nationwide poll in Iraq since the war -- was commissioned by ABC of the U.S., Britain's BBC, Germany's ARD and Japan's NHK.

Some 57 percent of respondents said life was better now than under Saddam, against 19 percent who said it was worse and 23 percent who said it was about the same.

Iraqi people appeared optimistic about the future, with 71 percent saying they expected things to be better in a years time, six percent predicting it will be worse and nine percent the same.

But Iraqis are concerned about conditions in their country, the poll shows.

They have considerable worries about joblessness, security and basic services like electricity.

"The positive attitudes and the high expectations and optimism are quite striking, with majorities telling us their lives are going well," ABC polling director Gary Langer told The Associated Press.

"Expectations carry risks, however. If these are unmet, there could be political consequences."

Seven in 10 say the availability of jobs is poor and nearly that many said the same about electricity. Almost three-fourths gave a positive rating to local schools, however.

The biggest overall concern nationally was regaining public security -- named as the top concern by almost two-thirds in the poll, 64 percent. That was far higher than any other priority.

About half said they oppose the presence of coalition forces, but few want those troops to leave now -- wanting soldiers to stay until the Iraqi government is in place or until security is restored.

Only 25 percent said they had confidence in coalition forces to deliver their needs. There were far higher levels of confidence in Iraqi religious leaders, 70 percent; local police, 68 percent; and the new Iraqi army, 56 percent.

Four of five said they want a unified country with a central government in Baghdad. Kurds, an ethnic minority in northern Iraq who make up about one-third of the total population in Iraq, were less likely to feel that way. By a 2-1 margin, Kurds favored the formation of regional states with a federal government. Kurds have been seeking autonomy in Iraq.

The number who think Iraq needs "a single strong Iraqi leader" in the next year increased from 27 percent in November, when the polling firm Oxford Research International last asked the question, to 47 percent now.

When asked what Iraq needs in five years, people were more likely to say an Iraqi democracy, 42 percent, followed by "a single strong leader," 35 percent.

The poll was conducted by the Oxford Research International of Oxford, England, for ABC News, the British Broadcasting Corp., the German broadcasting network ARD and the Japanese network NHK.

The poll of 2,737 face-to-face interviews was conducted in Iraq from Feb. 9-28 and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 2 percentage points.

ABC's Langer told AP the interviewers faced difficulties conducting the poll because of the security situation in Iraq.

The polling firm "reported a car wreck, interviewers detained by coalition forces, interviewers detained and questioned by Iraqi police, and some who had to detour around a bombing site," he said.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright 2004 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.

[The Hunter]

Yeah, kinda...

Or this...

[The Hunter]

RKL, still want to justify the war?

Pathetic.

[berserk9779]

that articles of yours is proper bullshit. I do not see how someone that gets bombed and shot by a foreingn country's army could find it good.
You don't have necessarly to believe something just because is written on a newspaper.

Is anyone that voted no still alive? Hard to believe.

"come on iraquis!! vote for our poll!! If you get the right answer you win a loaf of bread!!!!"

[rklenseth]

I would like that anyone who reads this thread, this post, thinks, just for a minute, how they'd feel when it happened to them. a bomb fell in the middle of your block. You survived but lost both legs. Your family was killed, your neighbours were killed. Many people in the block were killed or maimed. Besides losing your family and many other loved ones, your furure is in shatters. forever will you live in poverty, your house has been destroyed, you will never get a job because of your handicap. That, dear RKL, all of you, that's the reality of war. Worst of all, it can happen to you, it could happen to me, it has happened to many throughout history...

Read it? OK. Now think...............

It really depends on what they were fighting for and why they were invading. Sometimes you have to fight. Everyone but the most sickest and evil person is anti-war. There are some that are blinded by the fact that there is never a time to fight but there are times when one must fight.

This is the same blindness that made most of world believe that appeasing and or ignoring Hitler and his allies would save them.

Got a questions, you would rather be living under Hitler or his successors today instead the Allied Powers fighting back during World War II and eventually winning?

Saddam was a danger to the world. He showed it when he invaded Kuwait. He might not have had the power at the time but what if he did gain that power or down the line one of his sons or successors gained that power? Taking out Saddam also showed the rest of the world's dictators that the US was willing to fight. And connections were also made with Saddam and terrorist groups.

About Africa; I think it was pointed in another debate not long ago that America exports millions of tons of foodstuffs to Africa. Someone pointed out this was a just a conspiracy by US Corporations to make Africa dependent on American food. So it seems that when America does do good works there are always these conspiracies that America had another agenda.

Also, I believe when the US went into Solomania in the early 90's and moved to take out a warlord that was responsible for thousands if not millions of deaths, that resulted in a bloody firefight, Europe protested this as well.

Many Europeans protested the wars in Yugoslavia. A dictator there was slaughtering thousands of people and America and some NATO nations reacted to this by fighting back.

So it seems to me that no matter what we do, other people will always point out that we are wrong. They have their right to their opinion. But let me remind that 2/3rds of the world's population do not have their right to their opinion and are often arrested or even killed for voicing that opinion should they do so.

If I was to lose my legs or even die for my freedom and liberty then so be it. If I was to lose my house, I can rebuild. My freedom is worth more than my legs, my life, or a home. Because once you give away your freedom then you have nothing and you lose everything anyways.

Terrorists are cowardly attacking other people, mostly civilians, to get what they want. If you give them what they want after they attack you then they are going to see that it works and are going to do it again and again until you are under their finger. Hitler did the same thing that these terrorist did. He took over Austria and no one did anything. Then Hungary. Then the Rhineland. Then Poland finally made some Europeans realize that Hitler wasn't going to stop but by then it was too late for what was to come. Terrorists work in the same fashion.

So what I am getting is that you would rather be a slave to someone else if that means that their is no war, or fighting? You are willing to give up your liberty so that you won't have to suffer? But in the end you will suffer. I think it is easy for us Americans or Europeans to say these things but what of the people who have never known was liberty is. What it is to speak your mind and not have to worry about someone taking you away and later executing you. What it is pray to the God (or lack of one) you choose and not that of which someone else has chosen for you. What it is to make your choses in life and follow your dreams. All of this has been handed to us on a silver platter and all we can do is bitch and groan about conspiracy theories while most of the rest of world lives in poverty due to the dictators they live under, or have no dreams or hopes for a better future of their own choice because they aren't allowed to make those choices.

To call all soldiers killers as if they are murderers is wrong. There are many soldiers who fight for and defend liberty and freedom not only for themselves but for other people who either cannot or will not. They are the very reasons today that both of us can post our views on this board.

War is justifiable. Are you going to tell me that fighting Hitler wasn't justifiable? Or to fight for 2/3rds of the world that live under the iron grip of brutal dictators and regimes?

Think about it for a moment. And then remember that we never hear the opinion of 2/3rds of the world because they aren't allowed one.

[rklenseth]

that articles of yours is proper bullshit. I do not see how someone that gets bombed and shot by a foreingn country's army could find it good.
You don't have necessarly to believe something just because is written on a newspaper.

Is anyone that voted no still alive? Hard to believe.

"come on iraquis!! vote for our poll!! If you get the right answer you win a loaf of bread!!!!"

So you believe all the other proper bullshit that you hear that agrees with your opinion?

I am providing evidence to support my opinion.

So invading France during World War II was wrong and most French didn't want it to happen after it had come under NAZI rule? What a revelation!

[The Hunter]

I failed miserably in getting my point across... *sigh*

The issue here is not hitler, nazis, or whatever friggin' war in the last 6000 years... The point is: Why put up a memorial for killers instead of the victim who deserve it.

So you believe all the other proper bullshit that you hear that agrees with your opinion?

Well spoken, for one that has a site full of one sided propaganda. Everything is black and white,,right? War is good, if only the US wages it... We are wrong, but UR ALWAY's right... And all you do is come up with lousy excuses to justify a war, hell, all wars the US engaged in...

I got news for U mr... War is bad and should be avoided when possible... War killes people, ruins ppls lives. Luckily, it was far away right? While you were comfortably sitton on the couch, drinking beer or whatever, enjooying UR life, ppl get KILLED!!!. Still, all you can do is making miserable excuses... Why do you think WEurope is so anti war? that's because we had a few in the past century and there's people alive to tell about it's horrors... You could say that Europe has learned it's lesson. Got wiser...

Once again... Have you read my post ands thought deeply for a minute? Do so please, don't post the results, just think, damnit!

[Meh]

Q: Where did the chemicals for the gas used on the Kurds come from?
A: Europe

Q: Where were most of the missles use by Iraqi on Kuwat and Isreal made?
A: Europe

Q: Where were the majority of tanks and other arms built?
A: Europe

Is selling small amount of death and taking no resposiblity what you consider moral?

If you don't like the way we clean up your messes then clean them yourselves. Or better yet stop making them. The EU exports more weapons than foreign aid.