U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:19 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
12,592 posts, read 8,716,385 times
Reputation: 6305

Advertisements

Quote:
I've said before, you need to pick your battles. It wasn't the time for Iraq.
When was the time? When Saddam aquired nuclear weapons?
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:21 AM
 
Location: chattanooga
646 posts, read 706,924 times
Reputation: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sagran View Post
On one thing we have no disagreement. The Dems had and have no balls. However, the "intelligence" was cooked to support a Bush administration agenda and fed to all. Some few spit it out, but most ate it. With so many in the public and the media swallowing it all, it would have taken real courage to stand up and try to lead in another direction. Where there was the intelligence to know that's what should have been done, there was no courage. Not in the Democratic Party and certainly not in the Republican Party. And that famously "liberal" media was just as culpable because they were the ones with the spoons in their hands feeding the public.
Although I am a proud conservative,I do agree that the 21 democrat senators who voted no on the resolution did in fact "stick to their guns" I do not agree with their ideology but I respect that.Now the Clinton administration had the same intel and Bill Clinton himself was for the war,he was no fan of Saddam either.Also I said in the posts qouted that I am either glad Saddam was dead,or that he should have been removed,I did not say anything on the war other than my mixed feelings.I think we should have done a better job with the taliban.Instead of letting the northern alliance go in we should have carried that burden.But hey we are all just "monday night quarterbacks"
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:22 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
20,328 posts, read 13,806,717 times
Reputation: 5214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Clavin View Post
We (the US) got involved in WWII to aid our allies, France and great Britain. At the time of the Iraq war, Iraq wasn't invading any of our allies.
Saddam never surrendered, all we had was an agreement of truce, and Saddam violated it, along with all the UN resolutions. Part of what Bush did was to enforce the truce Saddam signed and the UN resolutions.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:26 AM
 
Location: a bar
2,563 posts, read 5,028,153 times
Reputation: 2640
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
We dont "police" the Sudan because they havent violated dozens of UN resolutions, hold WMDs, and arent known for their harboring of terrorist camps..
Yeah I'm not sure why the UN has stopped short of calling the crisis there "genocide". That's troubling.

However I would call the Janjaweed a terrorist group, and there were no WMDs in Iraq either.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:30 AM
 
Location: a bar
2,563 posts, read 5,028,153 times
Reputation: 2640
Quote:
Originally Posted by ELOrocks17 View Post
When was the time? When Saddam aquired nuclear weapons?
Not necessarily. N Korea has nuclear weapons. We have no plans to invade N Korea. It would depend on Iraq's presumed intent.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:30 AM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,278,649 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by ELOrocks17 View Post
When was the time? When Saddam aquired nuclear weapons?
Thankfull, Clinton didnt sell that to them like he did North Korea
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Clavin View Post
Not necessarily. N Korea has nuclear weapons. We have no plans to invade N Korea. It would depend on Iraq's presumed intent.
Yeah, something else we can thank Clinton for, which was given to N Korea under the "intent" to create energy..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:32 AM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,278,649 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Clavin View Post
However I would call the Janjaweed a terrorist group, and there were no WMDs in Iraq either.
Anotherwords, you refuse to read the links showing that your dead wrong because your brainwashed..
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:32 AM
 
19,216 posts, read 12,926,924 times
Reputation: 2337
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
So the citizens that were being killed in Iraq by Saddam hold no value?

p.s. NOW Iraq is one of our allies, so in a way, we created two allies in the middle east, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
What right wingers (Nazis) don't seem to understand, is the difference between rape and a marriage vow.

One involves force, and the other involves mutual agreement without fraud, coercion or force.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:34 AM
 
Location: a bar
2,563 posts, read 5,028,153 times
Reputation: 2640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Saddam never surrendered, all we had was an agreement of truce, and Saddam violated it, along with all the UN resolutions. Part of what Bush did was to enforce the truce Saddam signed and the UN resolutions.
We should have let the UN deal with it. We're not the UN. We're only a member.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-06-2009, 08:34 AM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,278,649 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by ergohead View Post
What right wingers (Nazis) don't seem to understand, is the difference between rape and a marriage vow.

One involves force, and the other involves mutual agreement without fraud, coercion or force.
Hate to tell you but "Nazis" were left wingers, they believed in government controlling and limiting freedoms..
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:
Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top