Statue made in honor US Soldiers

[Indio no.9]

The majority aren't allways right

If thats the case then you americans dont believe in democracy, the very thing you said you were bringing to the Iraqi people. Therefore this war shouldn't have happened.

[Meh]

*bows to Indio the most wise and lord of genralization*

[new.vogue.nightmare]

The majority aren't allways right

If thats the case then you americans dont believe in democracy, the very thing you said you were bringing to the Iraqi people. Therefore this war shouldn't have happened.

With an uneducated populace, pure democracy is impossible to maintain. That's why America isn't a democracy. It's a democratically elected republic. We elect people who have some clue what they're doing because most of us aren't qualified to run a country. Of course, there's always a problem because now, with fewer people in charge, there's more corruption. There's always a trade-off. In politics, or with any system dealing with people, often the best you can do is choose the least harmful system.

[west]

The majority aren't allways right

If thats the case then you americans dont believe in democracy, the very thing you said you were bringing to the Iraqi people. Therefore this war shouldn't have happened.

Because the personal opinion of one person is the same as the opinion of the other 280 million Americans, including those in office.

Uh-huh.

[quidit]

Oh boy..good thing we dont have guns or we would be in a war with ourselves right now....Anyway I think something had to be done, Vogue was right, saddam was tourturing his people. Those things he talked about a few post ago are true, or suppose to be, but there were many other reasons to go after him also and much of those were stated here as well...Now I do think bush went about it wrong and I whish he would have explored some other avenues first and for that I will try and vote him out of office. It just seemed to me he rushed in there with out much thought. Even after the war was started they rushed things along to fast.

I was watching a program on public broadcasting that was showing the war step by step and the actions we took and I was appauled at somethings that had happened. For one We new that saddam was in this one city block but we were not sure which house exactly so we had inteligence on the inside gave our leaders his best guess as to wich one it was and they said ok fire the missiles....ell he wasnt there and a family of like ten was.

They should have never made that call unless they had absolute proof 100% that he was there.

I somewhat agree with you Orion that many innocent lives were lost and that is a tragidy but I do not agree that we should have just stood by and let the things go on in Iraq that were happening...but..but ..I do think we could have done it in a different way. I mean we have all this technollogy now we could have taken him out someother way...and if there was no other way then I think we did the right thing going in there with war..but...and again but..I think we could have done it in a way that was more percise.

[quidit]

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/invasion/

Here is a link to the show I watched. There is some interesting personal accounts from both sides here.

[Pirog]

Meh>

Well, you are right about the poll question...but sadly it wasn't mentioned in the article.
But the Pew Research Center anually makes these polls to see how people around the world feel about the Americans, and since it is an American institute I don't think they would have any interest in forming the question to manipulate the answers...

quidit>

And you have to think about that if the war was justified, why did Bush and Blair have to make up lies about weapons of mass destruction to motivate their actions?

I don't think anyone mourns that Saddam is gone, but there is a reason for international laws making it illegal to wage war on other countries...and no other country than USA would get away with it, and your government knows that.
And it is just that arrogance that makes people dislike Americans in general, wich of course is sad.

[nitefyre]

quidit>
...and no other country than USA would get away with it, and your government knows that.
And it is just that arrogance that makes people dislike Americans in general, wich of course is sad.

International Law, or anyone's sane morals between right and wrong, would know that gasing thousands of Kurds, Iranians and executing Shiites, for his [Saddam's] own petty reasons, killing entire communities, is also wrong. A Civilian in dress not of war nor with a firearm, is to be treated as a non-combatant and should not be targetted.

The US DOD did a real good friggen job at that, though many could've died in war, no war is clean. The US went out of their way many a time, like with 3rd I.D rolling into West Baghdad, holding fire against those white pickups that suicide rammed the Abrams and held off till the last second. Of course the strike on Saddam with the B1-Bs was excessive and left some collateral damage, and the Marine's entry (hell they're marines) was a bit over-cautious, how much trouble the US went through to not hit civilians is pretty evident. 'War's hell, peacetime's worse.'

And today, terrorists struck and killed 24 innocent Iraqi/Western civilians, tell me this is not part of the War on Terror? Bah.

[kroner]

And today, terrorists struck and killed 24 innocent Iraqi/Western civilians, tell me this is not part of the War on Terror? Bah.

Umm... there is a bit of a distinction between a war on terror and a war that causes terrorism... Thank you.

[rklenseth]

"An appeaser is someone who feeds a crocodile, hoping that it will eat him last." -- Sir Winston Churchill

[new.vogue.nightmare]

*coughnevillechamberlaincough*

[Pirog]

NiTeFyRe>

Hey, I'm not questioning if Saddam was a horrible man that broke international law...but just as I as a person can't take the law into my hands and gun down a criminal on the streets, USA can't take the law into their own hands over a situation like this.

And yes, that does make an ethical problem, but the law is the law...and if countries start to put such laws aside to take the matters into their own hands all laws will in time become meaningless.

I'm not sure how much of such arguments get the attention of the media in USA, since you are involved in a war that of course generates a patriotic feeling in most Americans, but USA no longer cares about international laws.
For example:
Your government made up the term "illegal combatant" to hold the prisoners from the war in Afghanistan in concentration camps with no human rights. Now when people are slowly getting released from there reports of torture and degrading acts start to come in.

Do you really think a country like Sweden could get away with the same things?

And today, terrorists struck and killed 24 innocent Iraqi/Western civilians, tell me this is not part of the War on Terror? Bah.

No, that isn't part of the war on terror...that is a part of the war on Iraq, wich is far from over yet. But I wouldn't be surprised if many Americans today see the war on terror and the war against Iraq as the same thing.

[The Hunter]

When Russia was invaded, civilians defending their country weren called "Partisans" (or freedom fighters, the resistance, etc). The Germans thought of them as terrorists.
Now resistance fighters are seen as heroe's.
(Insert any war at any age and it's still correct).
Now, who's right?

The US can get away with not accepting the "war crimes court", even though nearly every other country in the world does... To make matters worse, the US gov't thinks it's OK to accept a low invding the country where this court resides. Which happens to be a NATO ally. (And my country).

[Meh]

Don't lump Partisans in with terrorists.

The Partisans were NOT in Germany attacking. They were in thier homeland.
The Partisans lived in thier homeland. Some porition of the terrorists are non local to Iraq.
Also the Germans intended permenant colonization.

These people cannot be called "freedom fighters".
How can Iraq be more free than not having a dictator?

How many of these "liberators" are merely up and coming dictators?

This is totally unlike the colonization and occupation of Ireland.

You think the USA is going to build a set of retirement communities there like Isreal did?

But yes every occupiying force calls non-armed forces locals who fight back terrorist or guerillas. And that is only the names that can be printed.

[The Hunter]

Yep... Everyone against the US is a terrorist... Period.