<Can sustainable farming feed the world? The Oil Drum The Oil Drum Celebrates Its First Year Today>

68 comments on More on the Military concerns

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Oilrig medic on March 24, 2006 - 6:15pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Valid Reasons for Military Action in Iraq
  1. Saddam stated his goal was to erradicate Israel/US
  2. Saddam like Hitler/Stalin and countless other dictators in history ran a murderous regime (minority driven by the way) with gross human rights violations.
  3. Stabilize the region/ build democracy.  I disagree with this one but many analysts liberal and consevative thought it a good idea pre-shockandawe.
  4. Oil....not to steal it but to secure it.  Stealing would be going into a stable country IE Kuwait for the sole purpose of killing and controlling the locals and taking the oil.  We pay the Iraqis for all the oil we get from them. We also pay them higher than market value for a host of services.  We also train their military and police and equip them.
  5.  Saddam paid bounties to families of suicide bombers in palestine.  On sept 12 Bush said terrorists anywhere and those who support them will be hunted and killed/captured.  
  6.  Saddam said he wanted WMD's and there was legitimate fear he would cooperate with a terrorist faction.

When a bomb dropped from the sky on a legitimate target kills innocents it is called "collateral damage"  Saddam used his women and children as shields to make the us look bad. Intentionally in Desert storm and the recent conflict he did this.  If you can't recognize the moral difference between intentionally targeting civilians and legitimate military targets then you are obviously "morally bankrupt" yourself.  Snipers are highly trained in target recognition.  Their role on the modern battlefield saves lives on both sides by taking out highlevel threats without full on engagements or large amounts of ordinance.

There is a difference between killing a soldier and murdering a civilian. It is a soldiers job to put his life at risk.  He is a fair target.
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/93.htm
Show me any violations the US has allegedly made and I'll show you 100 the Enemy has.

The "Enemy" as I already put it is a tiny fraction of Muslims the footsoldiers of which are often uneducated young men being led by power hungry often highly educated leaders.  They are being recruited from all the disenchanted youth across the Islamic nations.  The religous rhetoric combined with poverty and squalor makes for a powerful recruiting tool.  

Twilight every time you post it seems like you have not read my post.  I am all about protecting human life.  The murders we are fighting are an enemy to the US, Israel, and Islam.  When the World Trade Center was attacked the planners knew there would be an american response.  Just as every american knew we must respond.  You repeatedly confuse my statements against terrorism for a pro Iraq war argument.  

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Twilight on March 24, 2006 - 6:36pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I should have quit this one long ago - clearly we live in different worlds, and are failing to communicate.

And this is not the right forum for this discussion, so I appologize to the TOD community for increasing the noise.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
worried on March 26, 2006 - 10:51am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I have to jump in here, increasing the noise level only because I think most people will have left this thread by now, but that I can't see this comment left alone. Also, forgive my laziness in not using quote formatting.

1. Saddam stated his goal was to erradicate Israel/US

Israel has stated its goal is to erradicate Palestine, Iraq and Iran. US has stated its goal to erradicate (sorry, spread democracy) to Afganistan, Iraq, Korea, Vietnam, Haiti, Cuba..... Ok, to be fair, they never have stated that as their goal, but I would like to see quotes from Saddam saying he wanted to erradicate Israel/US. Would that have been after the famed meeting with Rumsfield, after the years of CIA support? I find it so hard to believe that a country the size of California, half the world away, was considered a serious threat. You were worried they would invade you?

2. Saddam like Hitler/Stalin and countless other dictators in history ran a murderous regime (minority driven by the way) with gross human rights violations.

Ignoring the H word, it is also true that the US is running a murderous regime with gross human rights violations. Have you not heard about the latest UN and Amnesty reports? Covert operations are terrorism from the other side. Gulags anyone?

3. Stabilize the region/ build democracy.  I disagree with this one but many analysts liberal and consevative thought it a good idea pre-shockandawe.

Yes, bomb them into stabilization. Bomb them until they vote. (bombing was carried out from Gulf war I)

4. Oil....not to steal it but to secure it.  Stealing would be going into a stable country IE Kuwait for the sole purpose of killing and controlling the locals and taking the oil.  We pay the Iraqis for all the oil we get from them. We also pay them higher than market value for a host of services.  We also train their military and police and equip them.

I'm not sure there is a difference. I believe that when the war started, it was stated that it would be paid by Iraqi oil, and that reconstruction would be paid by Iraqi oil. Bomb them and make them pay. Higher pay as a rational for war? Disband an army then claim credit for trying to start a new one?

5.  Saddam paid bounties to families of suicide bombers in palestine.  On sept 12 Bush said terrorists anywhere and those who support them will be hunted and killed/captured.  

Israel should abide by all UN resolutions against it. How about the right of return for 4 million refugees. How can you justify supporting an apartheid nation? Why didn't Bush say he would seek justice on only those who pepetrated 9/11? Why is that an excuse to attack anyone now labelled by Bush as a terrorist? Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

6.  Saddam said he wanted WMD's and there was legitimate fear he would cooperate with a terrorist faction.

Now the whole world wants WMD's, as it has been proven if you don't have them, you will be attacked by the US. Is the US now the world's thought police, attacking states because they might cooperate with someone that the US doesn't agree with, because they might want something?

Really what I find amazing is that some Americans (there are so many representations of smart and well informed ones here on this site) cannot see the other side. Up until the start of the Iraq war I also believed most American propaganda about how the US is good for the world. Its only because it has been so badly bunged up by Bush that I started researching other sources and other points of view. The more I read the more shocked I am. As been repeatedly stated here, Bush has worn through all the goodwill the US had. More and more people I talk to are coming around to understand the role the US has had in trying to dominate the world through force. While I know I will not change your opinions, you must realize that you are becoming part of a smaller and smaller section of Americans (latest polls say only 1 in three supporting Bush).

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Oilrig medic on March 26, 2006 - 5:50pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
Saddam formally assumed the Iraqi presidency in 1979. He maintained power through the devastating Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) and the first Gulf War (1991), which both corresponded with a sharp decline in living standards and the human rights situation. While hailed among some sectors of the Arab world for standing up to the West and his unflinching support for the Palestinians, the United States continued to view Saddam with harsh scorn following Iraqi defeat in the 1991 Gulf War. He was deposed by the U.S. and its allies during the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and was captured by U.S. forces on December 13, 2003.

http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/s/sa/saddam_hussein.html

Right and wrong are not a matter of the whims of the mob.  I do not care what opinions are held.  In the entire post above I have stated I do not support an occupation or democracy building. In the current trial procedings saddam said it was a duty of muslims to destroy Israel. I am in support of hunting down this perverted faction of Islam and killing them any means neccesary. Very few countries have WMD's and we have not invaded th others.  Are we in Venezuela?

"While I know I will not change your opinions, you must realize that you are becoming part of a smaller and smaller section of Americans (latest polls say only 1 in three supporting Bush)."

Public opinion should not sway a presidents will.  His conscience should.  For whatever successes and failures he has I truly believe GW believes he is acting in good faith.  I disagree  with his tactics but not his principles.  You will not change my opinion unless you can yank back some ficticous green curtain and show me the true OZ.  

The bombings continued through clintons era because Saddam was a threat. Left alone he would eventual have made something nasty.  Saddam SAID he wanted to.

Once again I hate war.  Many of my buddies are dead in the past five years.  I hope you understand a large percentage of moderate democrats are fed up with the lunacy of that party.  This election will be up in the air and I think dems could win but they will probably run a far lefter and alienate the country.  4 more years republican. :)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

68 comments on More on the Military concerns

Comments can no longer be added to this story.