Can you live with our future,& legacy left over an unjust war???(Updated)

Originally posted by Karl der Grosse
The USA is responsible for its people. I agree. But in signing this agreemen between nations the US accepted the responsibillity to keep its people out of the areas the compatants were fighting in and to keep those who wanted to profit out of it, not protect them or help them make a profit. IF GB couln't protect these ships it is not the USA's respondibillity or right to do it. Hmmm... it sound to me lik your defend the USA' right to to interfere in the rest ok the worlds proplems jus to make a monitery profits.

NOT EVEN CLOSE............The US can and will defend any citizen or company of US national citizenship, but whats the point in bringing up and debating 60 year old politics anyway , the simple fact is the US entered into war with Iraq with the approval of its Congress who was told a lie that WMD's were confirmed to be ready to fire and that was not the case this war is illegal thats what my whole deal is.............

Originally posted by Gazrok

Now if this outrages you what would you write in a letter to congress to make them stop the war. Better yet would you even write them at all?

What good would that do...??? We've just told Congress that we agree with the president by re-electing both him, and the Republican majority in BOTH houses of Congress... That sent a much louder message than any of the letters in the world...

Those of us who didn't agree with this madness are now still doomed to suffer the legacy of it...and there is absolutely nothing we can do about it...

More good than it does to accept it and not to fight to stop it , at least fighting it has more of a chance of stopping it than setting their and saying my complaints will do no good why bother anyway......you may be able to live with your conscience as kids die and you say that but others cant and wont............fight for the lives of those kids those soldiers, those innocents even though they are Iraq, muslim etc. it's the right thing to do.

To those who say Iraq was an unjust war...

We are just begining to realize how pervasive Iraq's exploitation of the UN's Oil for Food program was. We are starting to see not only that, but also which terrorism organizations Saddam Hussein was in bed with.

www.foxnews.com...

The western world is a better place without Saddam just like the world became a better place without Hitler. I suppose you anti-war folks believe that we should have just minded our own business during WWI.

Hopefully, in the years to come, Iran, Syria, and N. Korea will be next on the chopping block--provided, of course, they don't comply with future UN resolutions and continue to be a threat to western interests.

dr that is the point. History repeats itself. FDRand GWB broke the law. When you defend one Your defending both.Iguess you can't see that. Sorry.

Originally posted by Karl der Grosse
dr that is the point. History repeats itself. FDRand GWB broke the law. When you defend one Your defending both.Iguess you can't see that. Sorry.

Bush has no defense from me nor will he , in fact I can only see more to come. I can just say this about history , I sucks and yes it's redundent.
We're cool I see you point and respect your opinion , Thank you.


PS man my anger management classes seem to be working , Just joking But, I don't find any anger in this.........which I hope helps everyone to enjoy my thread despite the grim content.


[edit on 5/11/2004 by drbryankkruta]

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
To those who say Iraq was an unjust war...

We are just begining to realize how pervasive Iraq's exploitation of the UN's Oil for Food program was. We are starting to see not only that, but also which terrorism organizations Saddam Hussein was in bed with.

The unjustness is the lack of care to defend innocents, and to blow off the fact you started the war under false intentions, Bush Jr is just trying to play super cop.

In order to eliminate the issue of the war not having benefits, I agree and hole heartily submit to the fact that while Lying and careless behavior has been an issue the Iraq war HAS had a positive effect by removing someone as dictator and murdered, I have no problem with that. It's just the crimes and errors and lying are quickly negating the benefits of the removal of Saddam, when innocents die due to faulty targeting policy, and innocents are intured in prison with out the possibility of defending themselfs , and when those prisoners guilty or not are subjected to unlawful torture and death for simple amusement and of course the constant lies, it makes the issue of just cause not exist............Thank all and believe me I am listening
although 1940 erra issues where not the purpose of this thread I will conceid I did learn how to see the US falabilities happened then as well,

Keep them comming I am looking forward to learning more.......Dont give up on me I want to know your views...........

Originally posted by drbryankkruta

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
To those who say Iraq was an unjust war...

We are just begining to realize how pervasive Iraq's exploitation of the UN's Oil for Food program was. We are starting to see not only that, but also which terrorism organizations Saddam Hussein was in bed with.

The unjustness is the lack of care to defend innocents, and to blow off the fact you started the war under false intentions, Bush Jr is just trying to play super cop.

President Bush had intelligence input not only from the CIA, but also from Germany AND Russia, all of whom agreed that Iraq had WMD. Let's assume for a moment that Bush did NOT act on that intelligence and chose NOT to invade Iraq; and subsequently we were attacked with WMD's supplied by Iraq. Would you call for an immediate impeachment of George Bush? I would!!

Liberals are quick to blame Bush for not preventing 911 despite only having onerous warnings that gave no specifics other than islamic terrorists would like to hijack aircraft. Yet when he acted on specific intel about WMD's in Iraq, you extreme left libs are quick to persecute him for acting in his nation's security interests! You can't have it both ways. Iraq was an integral part of the war on terror and so is Iran, Syria, and to some lesser extent, N. Korea. If you can't see that, it is only an indication that you have your head in the sand.

As far as innocents dying: that is the ugly part of war. And besides, it's hard to defend "innocents" when your enemy is hiding behind them! Look back into history and find how many died in WWI, WWII, and Vietnam. The Iraqi's are a weak people who were unable to take down their own brutal dictator. They needed help. But our purpose for being there was only to stem the tide of WMD's getting into islamic terrorists' hands, which clearly Saddam wanted to do.

[edit on 5-11-2004 by Freedom_for_sum]

We know Iraq had WMD's. Ask iran and the kurds.The question is were did they go? And just because they walked off doesn't mean they couldn't have made more. And we should have gone in in 91.and not have listen to our Arab allies.
Soldiers make lousy occupation [police] troops they have to much firepower for this ie. civilians get killed.Send in UN Peacekeeper's and let them let the iragis kill each others. Who ever gives the UN leaders the best monetary deal will win anyway.

Karl der Grosse and freedom for sum ...


The US and other forces all said no wmds were found .....the Reagan administration did sell some but they were used years ago, the intell was flawed as per US and UK and others. See link for more info on Reagan sales deal.

REAGAN SELLS CHEMICAL WEAPONS NYTIMES STORY

Reagan sells chemical weapons to Saddam






[edit on 6/11/2004 by drbryankkruta]

the NYT articke was very informative.I had not been awary of this level of involvement by our intelligence agencies.The other aarticle I wary of and will need to try to find the sources for comfirmation and contact some friends in the NSA and CIA. But the real concern is were did they go. I don't think Syria has them my understanding is they have become very cooperative with the US.Whi else would have taken them?

Originally posted by Karl der Grosse
the NYT articke was very informative.I had not been awary of this level of involvement by our intelligence agencies.The other aarticle I wary of and will need to try to find the sources for comfirmation and contact some friends in the NSA and CIA. But the real concern is were did they go. I don't think Syria has them my understanding is they have become very cooperative with the US.Whi else would have taken them?

I am glad your found something of interest. Please when you finish you info search fill us in here by post. I always love to see it. Most time I find flaws in some videos and say something to the poster, and the poster gets upset, I am not going to, I want as much interpretation of this material as possible........Thank you for your input.........

I have been told Iran don't support terrorism in many of a response to my posts in many threads where the issue comes up. Well I wonder were I got the idea and why others have the same idea, my view of events is not unique.

THREAD LISTING STORIES AND OTHER INFO NOT COLLECTED BY MYSELF

[edit on 8/11/2004 by drbryankkruta]

Keep your friends close and enemies closer. Syria is no friend and Iran "IS" the the great "EVIL". No not the people, the Clerics. The islamic thugs that run the country. My view is that all activity to date is just "stageing" to get at Iran. My pointy headed "Doctorial" buddies tell me they have "A" bombs and are trying to get "H" bombs. They must be stopped........NOW. What ever it takes...........

Originally posted by DrHoracid
Keep your friends close and enemies closer. Syria is no friend and Iran "IS" the the great "EVIL". No not the people, the Clerics. The islamic thugs that run the country. My view is that all activity to date is just "stageing" to get at Iran. My pointy headed "Doctorial" buddies tell me they have "A" bombs and are trying to get "H" bombs. They must be stopped........NOW. What ever it takes...........

They are dangerous and must be dealt with, but not now Iraq has left us with not enough support to do it, for one, and Iraq can't be allowed to be repeated, let's know for sure before we send people to die and kill....Iraq can't be repeated......

The American people need to start reviewing the root causes of everything that is going on in the world and stop screaming about the end result. The U.S. is directly at the heart of everything going on and not because 'We were attacked' or 'We had to defend our Nations security'.

www.serendipity.li...

www.historic-battles.com...

www.globalresearch.ca...

www.greenleft.org.au...

www.msnbc.com...

flag.blackened.net...

student.cs.ucc.ie...

www.nancymatson.com...

www2.gwu.edu...

www.casi.org.uk...

Im sure this is all old news although for whatever reason its always neglected. America supplied WMD's to Iraq and watched as they were used on Iraqi and Iranian people. America trained and supplied Osama and his crew. America supported the Shah in Iran, a ruthless dictator, and the people revolted. Why is it these things always seem to get forgotten?

Any comparisons made to WWI and WWII to the Iraqi 'Liberation' are totally misguided. In both wars America wanted nothing to do with them except to sell arms, commodities and technologies to whoever wanted or needed them. The Liberations were True Liberations in that the people had their freedom (Normal way of life) unjustly taken from them and restored by the ALLIES. On the other hand the Iraqi people supported and helped Saddam to power, thus they freely chose the path they took, as did the Iranians, Syrians, Suadi's, and to a lessor extent the Afgans. If they didnt like the situations they found themselves in, all you can ask is why didnt they then start attacking their leaders in the same way they are now attacking you? The point? Freedom must be chosen by the people not imposed by an outside force. FREEDOM CANNOT BE IMPOSED.

As far as WMD's go on a global level, everyone should be entitled to them. The only people you need to fear are the independant terrorist groups and NO NATION would allow them to get their hands on them simply because that would spell their own nations demise. No matter how extremist a nation is, WMD's would only be used in a defensive manner. Why? MUTUAL ASSURED ANHILATION. Whats the point in nuking another nation if it means you lose? Look at Pakistan and India, no matter how much hate they have towards each other they would never start tossing nukes at each other. India had the bomb 1st why didnt they just nuke Pakistan? Because they would have been nuked in turn by someone else. Osama would use 1 but hes got nothing to lose, however, any evidence no matter how small, pointing to a source nation would immeadiatly mean the utter Obliteration of that nation.

The key that the U.S. must learn if they want to be accepted and liked is that they must LEAD BY SETTING EXAMPLES, not MAKING EXAPLES OF THOSE WHO DISAGREE.

Originally posted by Alexian
Im sure this is all old news although for whatever reason its always neglected. America supplied WMD's to Iraq and watched as they were used on Iraqi and Iranian people. America trained and supplied Osama and his crew. America supported the Shah in Iran, a ruthless dictator, and the people revolted. Why is it these things always seem to get forgotten?

As a matter of fact alexian no I didnt forget the Reagan fiasco, where in chemical wmds were sold by Reagan to Saddam. I believe I provided More than one story on that during the course of this thread.

As for the end result there is no end result the crap is still going on it never came to an end. And Bush if he had underlying reasons should have gotten congressional approval on those issues , Not the non existant WMDs as the reason for war.....That's why the war was approved of by the people of the US and The US Congress period, the other reasons didnt start coming out till the screw up on WMD's had been exsposed and they needed too bail themselves out.

FREEDOM CANNOT BE IMPOSED.

I agree 100%

As far as WMD's go on a global level, everyone should be entitled to them. The only people you need to fear are the independant terrorist groups and NO NATION would allow them to get their hands on them simply because that would spell their own nations demise.

In theory this might sound good but terrorists are activly supported and in some cases actually hold positions of great power in the middle east region, so in that case those goverments just hand the WMDs right to the terrorists...........but until they come for us we shouldnt get involved in their internal goverment issues.....If their goverment wants terrorists in office or wants to support them that's their issue until they impose their goverment on the US the US dont have a right to Impose the same on them. right?

The key that the U.S. must learn if they want to be accepted and liked is that they must LEAD BY SETTING EXAMPLES, not MAKING EXAPLES OF THOSE WHO DISAGREE.

VERY EXCELLENT POINT , Thank you for all your contributions and the links provided I believe some of the regular visitors might enjoy them....Thank you...

So as to appease some requests made I have , gathered some clips to show the injustices and crimes from the other side of the lines, in this photo essa I have the clips of terrorists crimes and violence to balance the plaing field.......


CLIP 1 RECRUITING THE JIHAD"S FUTURE, Osama recruiting tape

CLIP 2 A JIHAD MILITARY IN ACTION,Road side bombing of brits


CLIP 3 MURDER OF POLICE OFFICER,Iraqi Police officer Major Hassein was killed during this the making of this tape (edited to exclude showing of beheading)


ClIP 4 CoMeDy Of PrOpAgAnDa, funny recruiting cartoon (not attack or real recruiting related)HAVE FUN WITH THIS

[edit on 10/11/2004 by drbryankkruta]

[edit on 10/11/2004 by drbryankkruta]

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
One question Dr. Kruta. Why do you have so much concern for our enemies.

you say "our" who said they where HIS enemies?

Why can't you see that if the US is going to prevent more 9/11s that we are going to have to root out the terrorists and their supporters.

so now your saying iraq was planning a 9/11? you cannot wipe out these kind of poeple, they never die they just grow old and pass on thier hatred to the younger ones.

I know it's hard for a scholar like you to understand, but liberty has always been paid for with blood.

who's blood though?
yours or thiers ?

I don't like that fact, but it is a fact, nonetheless. Is it so much to expect you to stand on the side of liberty, rather than support the brutal regimes of dictators?

atleast in iraq before they could walk around the town and cities in safety not in fear of an american bomber blowing them up for walking across the road.

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
One question Dr. Kruta. Why do you have so much concern for our enemies.

I don't voice on opinions combatants but a child ,old person, or non-combatant should not be killed there have been more civilian deaths than enemy, and that is unacceptable. The combatants exploits should not kill an entire people, by this I mean killing people who are not involved because they are the same nationality or in the same country is not acceptable. Killing is against my belifs but if a man comes to kill me I shall return the favor to save mine and others lives, the innocent civilians have not come at us they are caught in the middle of a war, that was started originally over WMD's and esculated to it's present state.

Why can't you see that if the US is going to prevent more 9/11s that we are going to have to root out the terrorists and their supporters.

Can you tell me without any doubt what so ever the innocents deserve to die because they will just come and do another 9/11, that sounds alot like what someone commiting geonocide would say to justify their actions.

I know it's hard for a scholar like you to understand, but liberty has always been paid for with blood. I don't like that fact, but it is a fact, nonetheless. Is it so much to expect you to stand on the side of liberty, rather than support the brutal regimes of dictators?

Yes war and liberty/freedom have costs in blood, but not innocent blood.
I do not support either side militants or soldiers in the killing of innocents.

The picture was missing from you post but if the upload description says anything as to the content, then it's no wonder you are 2 warns in for the last 72 hours, If protecting lives makes me a liberal moron then so be it,
I guess I am a liberal moron.

[edit on 10/11/2004 by drbryankkruta]