It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bush says leaving Iraq would send 'terrible signal'

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 01:03 AM
link   
.
TC,
you sound like G. Gordon Liddy who put his arm on a hot barbeque grill to prove how tough he was.

Rocks are tough, but I really don't pay alot of attention to them, because they have no apparent intelligence.

Standing around stabbing yourself to prove how tough you are may make you entertaining, but it does nothing to acomplishing any useful goals.

You are saying we should stay in Iraq just to prove how 'tough' we are?

Is it possible in any way that perhaps we are just proving how stupid we are and that we have nothing better to do with our time and rescources?

If we do decide to leave it will prove we have more than an itty bitty single thought that occupies our minds.

In case you were unaware of it defunct economies can not support a military apparatus for very long. Spending another 1/5th of a trillion dollars, American and Iraqi lives just to prove we are tough, may only suceed in proving we are stupid and incapable of reassessing a situation based on experience.

The NeoCons have proven themselves incapable of delivering a democracy or a stable government in Iraq. They have however proven themselves capable of crushing a stable government, fostering absolute chaos, funding terrorism with 9 billion dollars of embezzled money, distributing arms to any rogue element that wanted them and with their arrogance and abominations at Abu Graib created a morale booster and recruiting poster for Al Qaeda.

NeoCons:
Good at breaking things
Bad at fixing things.*

*other than elections and corrupt legislation
.




posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 01:34 AM
link   
NOTHING productive has been accomplished in Iraq??

Does the fact that ALOT of the women there are now liberated from the oppression that they used to face before the US went in there?

They dont have to walk around with a veil over their face if they dont want to, they can go to school just like males, there is even a cartoon female super hero on tv over there.

They dont have to live under men any more and the majority are enjoying what they have now.

The tradition and culture in that area has put women under the submisssion of men.

If they walked around showing skin like American women they could and probably would be killed. Previously, they could not go to school because they were not considered equal........

One thing productive out of Iraq is the liberation that we have helped women in Iraq obtain......

And leaving Iraq would send a horrible message to the world. We are America........we do not back down to anybody, anywhere, period........especially insurgent terrorists trying to cause chaos and prevent the majority of a nation from being open to endless possibilities and a over all better life through democracy.

Most of the soldiers over there are on a mission to liberate the Iraqis......ask one of them one of these days......

Do you realize how lucky we are to be in a free country??

That is something most people in third world countries can only dream about.



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 01:53 AM
link   
WOW, soo all those people dead.. the lack of WATER sewage, and electricity was worth women now having the ability to vote?
how many of those women have losts tehre sons?
Fathers?
Husbands?

Well lets look at the US side of it.
how many mothers sisters, friends or what EVER have lots fathers, boyfriends or brothers in IRAQ?

Yeah I can see this was worth it.

Its not worth putting those TRILLIONS into your FAILING health systems? public school systems?
what about people beign MURDERED in other parts of the world.
NO NO NO.. Iraq was not threatening anyone, causing any MASSCRES or anything, but HELL...... it was definaetly worth invading this country.. espcially on a fraudulent leader, telling us lie after lie?

Please........

Wake up and smell the coffee.
Your country STUFFED up.. sorry your LEADER stuffed up.
Why follow him to his death?



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 02:21 AM
link   
Yeah it would, but why the hell did you go there in the first place...



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 02:50 AM
link   
As much as the United states DIDNT like saddam he ran that country better than any USA coalition puppet government could.

he might of murdered his own citizens.. but name one country that doesnt?

He might of toyed with WMD's many many yrs ago.. but isnt it the USA that has a bigger stock pile?

The USA messed up the fragil balance in the area..
and for the life of me i cant see anyway this situation wil get good... especially before it gets a hell of a lot worse.



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 07:05 AM
link   
Yeah just leaving iraq in the middle of a civil war isnt the solution either. The UN needs to draw a line sunnis on one site Shiite on the other.

Sad that a country needs to be divided liek thta but untill the dust settles its the best option IMO.


Having sad that.. the fact that the place would break out in civil war must have been known to the US, and must have be part of the excuse to stay there indefinately.

[edit on 12/8/2005 by Corinthas]



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheEmpiricalIdeal
Does the fact that ALOT of the women there are now liberated from the oppression that they used to face before the US went in there?

They dont have to walk around with a veil over their face if they dont want to, they can go to school just like males, there is even a cartoon female super hero on tv over there.

If they walked around showing skin like American women they could and probably would be killed. Previously, they could not go to school because they were not considered equal........

One thing productive out of Iraq is the liberation that we have helped women in Iraq obtain......


That is totally wrong. Women in Iraq under Saddams secular rule could wear whatever they wanted. Women went to University and held good jobs. The oppression of women using islamic rules only began after Saddam was deposed. Things are actually worse for women now.

Womens rights in the new Iraq

I'm not saying this is the fault of the occupying forces, it is clearly the fault of the conservative religious groups there.



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   
.
TheEmpiricalIdeal,

Nothing productive, to America, has been acomplished in Iraq.

If You or Bush have Humanitarian aims i suggest you become members of the UN and stay out of the US government thank you very much.

There was no uprising in Iraq at the time of the invasion.
There was no clear call from the population there that they wanted us to invade.
No one in the international community was begging us to invade.

To try and pass it off as some humanitarian effort at this stage strikes me as more than a little disingenuous.

The choice to go in was unilaterally made in the Whitehouse and the Pentagon.

It was done to satisfy the psycho corporate low-lifes that run Washington.

An apathetic American public may have caved into Bush and the burr up his backside to invade, but the media moguls did the work to lull Americans to sleep.

If the current American government is a result of this democracy,
then i am beginning to think we would be vastly better served by a scientifically based dictatorship.
One that actually cared about all living people but with the resolve to make the tough choices when needed on an informed and intelligent basis.

America is crazy.
Run by delusional and/or evil madmen.
Don Quixote imagining he is conquering some powerful enemy instead of seeing a broken nation for what it is.

Invading Iraq that was no threat,
turning it into terrorist heaven,
and emboldening Iran, North Korea and Pakistan who are genuine problems.

America is crazy.
.



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 01:49 PM
link   
Slank,

The initial choice to invade Iraq was not a humanitarian effort, it was because of global alarm....

American Intelligence had WMD's in Iraq, that was why we went in there. Obviously, that was either a lie to get the apathetic american public to back Bush up, or Sadaam really did have WMD's and in that whole ordeal when he chose to not let the U.N. inspectors do their job he could have gotten rid of them.

Both are plausible but bottom line is that there were no WMD's.....

Someone could have made a mistake with the intelligence, just like some advisor made a mistake in the estimation about how long we would be over in Iraq.

Whoever it was, they are human, human's are prone to screw up from time to time. (Including the President) But no one should point their finger and put the blame solely on the President .

Putting screw up's aside, we still have to finish what we started......


Nobody is trying to pass this off as a humanitarian effort, this whole Iraq ordeal is to protect the security of this country.

If you throw in the towel the terrorists will have beaten us and will think that they can beat us again and bring the terrorism to our turf.....

Everything is gonna go to hell if that happens (cause the terrorists are crazy), and nobody wants that...even Jane Fonda and her anti-war advocate groupies.

America isnt crazy they just dont want terrorism to come to US soil and have more 9/11's thats all. This government actually does care about its citizens and their lives...thats why we are still over in Iraq, so we can lay down in peace when we go to sleep at night.....



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SOCIAL_TAKEOVER
I will try and expain this one more time then its off to the pub for with me mates. I could observe you...but if it is what you want me to observe and not actually how you would be then I know nothing of your perspective. Only an imaginary routine that I have observed. Even if it is really your everyday actions...still not your persepective, but how I percieve you to be. Hope that is clear.


So in doing horrible mistakes ... I would 'perceive' Bush to be...what?...a monkey?



posted on Aug, 12 2005 @ 07:22 PM
link   
.
The Bush Whitehouse lied about aluminum rocket tubes being used magically in centrifuges.
It was explicit they knew because they banned DOE employees from telling the truth of the story to reporters.

Make no mistake the Whitehouse used the fear of WMDs to sell this war to an otherwise skeptical American public.

CBS New reported tonight (Aug 12, 2005) that the level of domestic violence against Iraqi women is rising alarmingly. Honor killings under Saddam happened but were rare, now they are, due to radical islam rearing its ugly head are becoming common.

In one case a women was Chopped Up, by her own male family members.

Bush and his actions and policies support violence against women. Whether by intent or accident that is the net result of Bush's invasion of Iraq.
.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by slank
CBS New reported tonight (Aug 12, 2005) that the level of domestic violence against Iraqi women is rising alarmingly. Honor killings under Saddam happened but were rare, now they are, due to radical islam rearing its ugly head are becoming common.


Not to belabor this point and get off topic but exactly how many polls/reports did CBS News do in Iraq about this topic while Saddam was in power? Since CBS is so well known for for researching and accuracy in their reporting I'm sure that they had plenty of specials back in Saddam's reign. Makes me pine for the good old days when Saddam was in power and his Sons would rape a new bride on her wedding day. Go do some research.



posted on Aug, 13 2005 @ 10:19 PM
link   
.
Do the math Pavil,

Saddam had exactly two sons,

On the other hand there are millions of Iraqi right wing muslims.

Bush is no friend of women,
He is a friend of Haliburton and the rest of corporate ex-patriot America.

Bush would like to take a women's right to make a very personal and private choice in pregnancy and have the state stomp in and dictate her decision.

He is a great personal friend of many Saudi Arabian princes.
How many American women want to deal the the brutal & degrading treatment of women they have there?
.

[edit on 13-8-2005 by slank]



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 10:55 AM
link   
Allright slank I'll bite.

Just exactly what would you propose we do now Long term and Short term in the Middle East and Persian Gulf Region?
Like it or not we are tied to that region for the foreseeable future.

Your stated goal of leaving Iraq now and letting them "sort it out" is a reicipe for chaos.

Since almost all M.E./P.G. nations have been under autocratic rule for decades if not forever how would you go about trying to effect positive changes for the citizens in those countries and at the same time try to maintain stability while helping those changes take place?



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 01:02 PM
link   
.
First of all i would dump all the Humanitarian BS.

This nation's government was not elected to try and force any government on anyone anywhere else in the world.

Where democracy is ripe to happen because people are genuinely struggling to achieve it, we can lend a hand.

But don't pass that off as what happened in Iraq.

Iraq is a totally artificial construct based on British occupied territory after WWII.

First we make sure Saddam is dead. Either through a trial and execution or we just cap him.

Then we let all interested parties in Iraq know we are leaving in short order, do they have any requests.
If the Kurds want us to help them till they can achieve autonomous self defense i don't have a problem as long as we continue to see progress while we remain.
The same for the Shiites, if they want some assistance until they have indigenous forces ready we will stay as long as we see progress and until they are ready.

You would have to be an idiot to think the same American leadership that hasn't done any better than this at achieving stability there is somehow suddenly going to be able to do it.

We either work with Iraqis or quit wasting American time, lives and money.

The Bush Whitehouse seem directionless in the matter.
They don't know what they are doing beyond funnelling money to Haliburton. That is their chief goal that obviously has completely occupied there minds, to the point of being totally ineffective on the ground in Iraq.

The Whitehouse just puts out vague goals with bogus propaganda about progress.

Put up or
shut up and get the hell out.
.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by slank

Where democracy is ripe to happen because people are genuinely struggling to achieve it, we can lend a hand.

.


Here's something to think about, is this genuine enought for you?

Newsweek article

Is Afganistan worth helping it looks like they are struggling to achieve a form of democratic representation?
Afgan Vote






We either work with Iraqis or quit wasting American time, lives and money.


Explain to me how we are not doing that?

And a seperate point: While I am not defending all of their actions, Halliburton made tons of money during the Clinton Years, BushI, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ and JFK years as well. Does that make all of those admininstrations evil as well. Hell they helped build the Johnson Space Center. Quite frankly even with the overcharges and no bid contracts Halliburton excells at this one thing : they have took on jobs that no one could and have had the track record and experience to back it up.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Look if we leave Iraq right now. We are showing to the insurgents, terrorists etc. That we are weak and that we are not ready to face them.

So for me it would be pointless to leave Iraq without us finishing the job. I know the USA Government made alot of mistakes but They just have to finish the job and fullfill the promise of "Spreading Democracies" to other nations.



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:20 PM
link   
I have a question for those of you who think the troops should stay until the job is finished. Is there a limit as to how many lives should be sacrificed, how much money should be spent and how many years it will take to finish the job?

If the death toll rises to 5,000 in a couple of years and the insurgency is still as strong, will you still think they should stay until the job is done?

[edit on 14-8-2005 by AceOfBase]



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaVirus
Look if we leave Iraq right now. We are showing to the insurgents, terrorists etc. That we are weak and that we are not ready to face them.

They just have to finish the job and fullfill the promise of "Spreading Democracies" to other nations.



What are you talking about? The US has killed a handful of terrorists, killed/murdered an est. 100,000 Iraqi civilians, have close to 2,000 US deaths, 14,000 US injured, and $9,000,000,000 (billon) in Iraqi funds Missing/Stolen…. yeah good job you guys are doing. Stop stealing Iraq’s money, hire and train people faster and let them solve their owns problems and the problems you have started. Your Idea of "Spreading Democracies" will eventually lead to other countries "Spreading Democracies" to your home in the next 20-30 years.



[edit on 14-8-2005 by Darth Tinku]



posted on Aug, 14 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   
[edit on 14-8-2005 by Darth Tinku]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join