Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Are You For Or Against The War In Iraq?

page: 10
0
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by scorpionxx
I'm against this war because I see no reason to go to war with iraq other then to satisfy bush's dad's pride.


So Saddam being an evil murderous dictator wasnt a problem?

Mic




posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 04:22 PM
link   
Do i agree with the War? After much thought and some soul searching i would be lying to myself if i said i did.
Do i support the troops fighting the War? You bet your arse i do! Would i fight the War if i was re called to the Colours? Yes i would. Why? Well a long time ago i swore an oath to my Country that i would and that Oath, although incomprehensible to a lot of people on these boards, means a great deal to me.
Some of the best friends i have are serving in Iraq as we speak. And although i am no longer in the best of health i would gladly strap on my gear and stand by their side, just one last time.



posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Janus
Some of the best friends i have are serving in Iraq as we speak. And although i am no longer in the best of health i would gladly strap on my gear and stand by their side, just one last time.


Good on you mate!




posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by MickeyDee
So Saddam being an evil murderous dictator wasnt a problem?

Mic

A tomahawk or SAS sniper team could have solved him.



posted on Jun, 23 2005 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by MickeyDee

Im a plumber and and i hate it when my boss tells me to crawl around under floors laying pipework, but i dont say no and whack him do i!!!



But if you arrived at the scene and found that there seemed to be no problem with the pipework, would you start killing the folks that are attempting to prevent you from creating havoc while replacing the perfectly fine pipework?

It makes absolutely no sence to replace perfectly fine pipework while pipes are bursting elsewhere. I would question your bosses sanity.



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
A tomahawk or SAS sniper team could have solved him.


Then they would have to go after Uday and Qusay, then the next in line, and the next!

There were far too many people just as evil as Saddam waiting to take over.

The invasion was the only option!

Mic



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 07:40 AM
link   
I also have another question.....

If Bush/Blair Had Not Lied And Invaded Iraq Soley To Remove Saddam, Would You All Still Be Against The War?

Just curious as to wether most of you are against the war due to the lies we were told before the invasion!

Mic



posted on Jun, 24 2005 @ 07:49 AM
link   
this is an interesting very basic question.

1) Yes. I support the war effort
I am though not as avid a Bush supporter as at the start. But this does not negate the validity of the military effort.
2) The middle east is very much like 1930s european nations, whose individual avarice led to WWII

I would like to add however, that support of the war is not support of every aspect of it. I do not think it is being fought correctly, much as I feel that Korea was fought incorrectly in the 1950s.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by MickeyDee
I also have another question.....

If Bush/Blair Had Not Lied And Invaded Iraq Soley To Remove Saddam, Would You All Still Be Against The War?

Still leaves arguments 1 to 6 of my previous answer...



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by MickeyDee
Then they would have to go after Uday and Qusay, then the next in line, and the next!

No problem, the SAS has over 100 men under its command, thats 33 sniper teams.
Not counting SBS has the same number.


There were far too many people just as evil as Saddam waiting to take over.

No we had enough bullets.


The invasion was the only option!

No I dont think so.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp

Originally posted by MickeyDee
Then they would have to go after Uday and Qusay, then the next in line, and the next!

No problem, the SAS has over 100 men under its command, thats 33 sniper teams.
Not counting SBS has the same number.


There were far too many people just as evil as Saddam waiting to take over.

No we had enough bullets.


The invasion was the only option!

No I dont think so.



100 SAS men vs the whole Iraqi armed forces, including the republican guard.......

The SAS are good but not that good.....



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Identity_Unknown
100 SAS men vs the whole Iraqi armed forces, including the republican guard.......

The number was just an example ok?
The SAS and/or SBS wouldnt take on the iraqi armed forces , they would snipe the target and leave.



The SAS are good but not that good.....

Not good enough to sneak into enemy teritory and snipe a leader?
Thats one of the basic missions for the SAS and SBS sniper teams.



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   
The problem that the Iraqi republican guard had was that Saddam and Co, positioned the divisions like a 'set piece' in a game. Even if they had equal technology in terms of armored ground forces, it would have been no contest, because of the fact there was no air force to cover them.

Republican Guard
Special Republican Guard (SRG)
As for the republican guards who survived the opening salvo, i think some are involved in the insurgency. After all, who would know the tribal machinations better than someone who has prior intel' from the former Ba'athist party.

Sanc'.
edit:link

[edit on 25-6-2005 by sanctum]



posted on Jun, 25 2005 @ 11:43 PM
link   
.
At the time the war started i was ambivilent.

There seemed to be good reasons to go to war,

Saddam was a horrible bastard,
Of course the US was his ally and arms supplier when he was gassing 5000 Kurds in a village too, So obviously he hadn't changed.
And the world is loaded with any number of bastards and we never stop any of them unless our strategic interests are involved.

A strong reason not to go to war was the tri-faction make-up of Iraq looked very troubling to me, especially after the recent events in bosnia, serbia, croatia, chechnya and many other places where old societal divides rear their heads and dismember & destablize nations.

In retrospect of lies about aluminum rocket tubes being magically transformed by hawkish rhetoric into centrifuge tubes and the banning of DOE employees from speaking the truth to reporters, erodes the whole justification for the war on grounds of WMDs just makes anyone who listened feel like a fool.

In 20/20 hindsight absolutely we should have not gone into this totally pointless war.

We are now ham-strung in Iraq and not capable of presenting a real and present threat to Iran and North Korea, who ARE truly real and present dangers to us and the rest of the world.

We have spent 1/5th of a TRILLION dollars SO FAR for not a single identifiable accomplishment.
We haven't created a stable democracy in Iraq. It is a quagmire and a mess. It very well could become what Afghanistan was before we invaded there. A lawless chaotic mess where terrorists will find safe-havens in and among the warlords.

Since Bush has not even bothered to spend a billion dollars to secure our southern border it is obvious he doesn't give a damn about this nation's territorial integrity.

I would also not be surprised if Bush and the NeoCons in a few short years become a foul and dispised pariah, spoken of in soft tones of seething hatetred.
Whether or not their money and political power saves them from being set on fire and their charred corpses left hanging from a bridge like those security guys in Iraq, remains to be seen.
.



posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aelita
I'm totally against the war, as it was patently started on false premises. Nobody gave Bush the mandate to go and fix the crooked dictator. Intel data was manipulated into a manufactured WMD story. That's disgusting.

In addition, this war is one of the main reasons our country is experiencing a great fiscal crisis and the govt debt is unprecedentedly high. I feel angry thinking about how my country was sabotaged by self-centered megalomaniacs.


good god, you stated it perfectly.

i agree that Hussein was in violation of cease fire laws, but that is not nearly enough to justify a war.
This war has caused so many people to lose their life and for what? what is anyone really gaining from this in the long run?

plus the fact that iraq never wanted our "help" in the first place. if they wanted us there, they would have asked us. GWB is just too stupid to see that (you told me to take is somewhere else Mic, well here it is)

eh, our hearts are in the right place though(well, some of us at least). so, dont be too hard.



posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   
to make it very simple i am against the war. this war was started under false accusations to cover up gw's own agenda. this country is spending billions of dollars and thousands ov American lives to "spread democracy".
i just don't buy it. it stinks too much.

of course, this is just one guys opinion



posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
I support the war, and for several reasons.

First, I believe there were, in fact, weapons of mass destruction. While how to handle Iraq was still on the UN table, everyone was in agreement that Saddam had and was producing WMDs. France, Germany, and Russia all had intel pointing to this, as well as the US. Russia had more intel on these WMDs than we did. Yet, when invasion became the word of the day, suddenly these three countries forgot about their intel. They forgot about what they had been saying, and started saying it was unilateral US CIA intel talking about the WMDs. Besides that, both parties in the US, the democrats and republicans were both on board with making Saddam give up his WMDs. Kerry himself made a comment to this effect. Yet, that turned to politics when Bush decided to go a head with Iraqi Freedom. Suddenly all the democrats forgot about the statements they had said and started making the exact opposite. Oh, and, of course, the media let them get away with it.

Second, freedom for the people of Iraq. The US has the ability to liberate people being oppressed, and I believe it is our responsability to use this ability. I think we should be a lot more active in this regard. Saddam was a horrible, horrible man; Iraq and the world are better off without him being in power. He tortured his people and idolized Hitler. We liberated Iraq from this monster, and now are trying to stabilize a country that hasn't had any semblance of freedom for over 20 years.

Finally, the liberation of Iraq will serve as an alternative to the peoples of the middle east. They're going to see first hand the differences between a totalitarian government and a representative democracy. Then, the people will get to choose. It may not be a clean transition, but revolutions rarely are. Yet, we have given the little people, the pleebes, the nobodies in these middle eastern nations hope, a light, if you will. Granted, the dictators in the individual nations won't be too keen on losing total control, and will express that via the "people" through state run news agencies. However, due to the United States' liberation of Iraq, a young girl born in a middle eastern country no longer has to accept life as less than a slave.

Those are three of the principle reasons I am for the war in Iraq. There are several others, too, but there are the prime reasons.



Hmmm, 3 years later you still didn't find "weapons of mass destruction"!! You just stirred the big pot of angry Arabs.



posted on Jun, 26 2005 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boondock78
to make it very simple i am against the war. this war was started under false accusations to cover up gw's own agenda. this country is spending billions of dollars and thousands ov American lives to "spread democracy".
i just don't buy it. it stinks too much.

of course, this is just one guys opinion


Two!



posted on Jun, 27 2005 @ 06:34 AM
link   
Its like war is life so like dont be a wuss and accept it.
People so used to nerding on the computer all day that they would cower if people came to their house with guns or even just people with no guns. America is the greatest country with the weakest minded people.

No offense to anyone

You people actually believe bush has an agenda.....when the Agencies and Bush Sr. and Cheney and Rumsfeld have been around and make decisions behind curtains.

[edit on 27-6-2005 by Wisdumb]



posted on Jun, 27 2005 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wisdumb
Its like war is life so like dont be a wuss and accept it.

War is not inbuilt so why do we love it so much?



People so used to nerding on the computer all day that they would cower if people came to their house with guns or even just people with no guns. America is the greatest country with the weakest minded people.

Nice opinion.





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join