RME Foreign Policy on Iraq---Solve International Problems....

[scoutabout]

Doesn't hurt to accept the possibility that our country has been doing other countries wrong.

Our country should be doing what's right for OUR country. Concerns of the other countries are secondary. Not to say that we should completely disregard the effects of our actions on other nations, but we shouldn't be like France.

 

[scoutabout]

OK,

so, where are the new-coolar (Nuclear) weapons that were supposedly in Iraq?

Just wondering about a quote attributed to Bush where he stated that Iraq HAD nuclear weapons. A nuclear weapons program, yes. Again, refer to David Kay's report (or the report of any U.N. weapons inspectors).

Both Rumsfeld and Powell stated that Iraq had chemical weapons stores, and that we knew exactly where they were. Turned out to be less than factual. That's bad intelligence until someone proves they were lying.

How about 'we have intelligence that Saddam was working with the Chinese to supply oil'. I'd at least respect that, and find it half believable.

Actually, it was the French. The primary reason that France wanted to block any attempt to remove Hussein was to protect the oil deals they had made with Iraq. They were illegally smuggling oil out of the country, and were working hard to lift the sanctions so that France's number one oil company could move in and develop new fields in Iraq.

 

[scoutabout]

I don't see myself as suffering from "moral of intellectual confusion" but apparently according to ol' Rumsfield, there's something wrong with me.

If you don't understand that Islamic facism is a threat to this country, then there might be something wrong with you. If you're just referring to the Iraq mess, then you're just thinking.

Other than what we started there, what is that the United States needs from Iraq?

Hopefully, we'll have weakened OPEC by establishing an independant nation putting 10+ million barrels of oil onto the market every day. The price of oil is ARTIFICIAL, and therefore so is everything related to petroleum.

I guess what I am asking is, when this is over, what is it that we built there?

The plan is to build a stable nation that is an example for the rest of the middle east. That is if we finish the job. If we establish an artificial timeline for withdrawl, we might as well just give up now.

Countries with prosperous people and solid economies don't breed terrorists. They don't seek war. They seek further prosperity and economic development. Look at what has happened between India and Pakistan over the last 10 years. Only a few years ago they seemed to be on the brink of a regional nuclear war. Then U.S. companies decided that they didn't want to continue investing in a region that could be wiped out overnight. Instantly, India cut all its BS rhetoric, and went back to taking American jobs for the benefit of its own economy.

 

[scoutabout]

We have a lot of problems here at home that I think we should deal with. Homelessness, low income, health care, even immigration. I think that a lot more money should be spent in the US than what currently is going on.

Ain't that the truth.

 

[scoutabout]

Here's is President Bush saying that Saddam had them.......

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

Nothing in that speech (or any other Bush statement) said that Iraq HAD nukes. Just that he wanted nukes and had a weapons program.

 

[scoutabout]

Stop making me think!

I'm not sure how is right, comparing how people disagree with the adminstration's actions in the Middle East to that of Europe before Germany began it's march with Hitler at the front.

No, the comparison is between terrorist appeasers and people who thought that Germany could be appeased without conflict.

 

[scoutabout]

Sell that to the US..... NEVER HAPPEN

Look at our biggest successes of occupation (maybe our only successes?). Japan and Germany. We instituted the Marshall plan while occopying the countries........(different time, and different circumstances......)

Dang, if we had 24 hour news back then, the same types of people would have been calling for us to stop before we ever landed at Normandy. Wars are hard, and people die. You don't give up just because of a bad day of attacks. Germany and Japan were a huge mess after WWII. We sunk a TON of money into those countries, and it made the world a better place. Now we know why they were "The Greatest Generation."

 

[scoutabout]

I think it's hilarious that the same people who think Bush is an idiot, also think that Bush is the leader of a global conspiracy to deceive the American people and make him and his friends rich. However, this "idiot" has left no tangible evidence that could expose his sinister plot.

 

[Brett]

No, the comparison is between terrorist appeasers and people who thought that Germany could be appeased without conflict.

On that one I was just referring to WMD's of any kind

 

[waynehartwig]

we can barely take care of our own crap domestically

Don't you think it's funny (not haha) that we, the US, take better care of other nations than we do of our own? That's the part that pisses me off.

 

[waynehartwig]

I would really really like to know if the facts were intentionally falsified or if our goverment did think that there were weapons in Iraq. We probably won't ever know unfortunately. Wrapped up in red tape in the basement of some wharehouse is that folder with that info.

I think Bush is clueless. He's a good 'ol boy from Texas and means well. I think he is doing the best that he can with the informatino that he is given. Chaney and Rumsfield need to be hung by their balls. Their sadistic, to say the least. They are the ones that pumped Bush full of inaccuracies to better their agenda. This didn't start with Bush, either. They have been working on their agendas screwing Americans for longer than 7 years. Read up on their lies for yourself, and come up with your own opinion. Don't take mine.

As for Bush invading for his own inbetterment <SP?>, naw, I don't think so. Sadamme needed to be taken out of power, for the people.

But now that we are over there, we need to finish. The govt needs to leave our boys alone and let them do their job, which they can do a LOT better than the govt can!!!! If it wasn't for the govt trying to tell them how to do things, I believe they would have found Bin Laden and Saddame (and others in power) in the very early stages, 1-2 months. This is another Rumsfield thing...

 

[Herzog]

Our country should be doing what's right for OUR country. Concerns of the other countries are secondary.

Then WTF are we doing in Iraq? Irony?

 

[mbryson]

Dang, if we had 24 hour news back then, the same types of people would have been calling for us to stop before we ever landed at Normandy. Wars are hard, and people die. You don't give up just because of a bad day of attacks. Germany and Japan were a huge mess after WWII. We sunk a TON of money into those countries, and it made the world a better place. Now we know why they were "The Greatest Generation."

Probably true. I think 'journalism' was much more true to the facts without mingling their opinion within the facts then too.

 

[78mitsu]

I've flipped through this thread I didn't read it all: so if this is a re-peat flame me.

First, I strongly believe that there were WMD, Not Nukes (they never claimed they were a nuclear power) but chemical and bio warfare in Iraq, and when we were giving Sadam the ultimatem step down or we'll force you, he moved them to his frines in syrria or in Iran(lesser of two evils), and I believe we know where they are and we're saying "we didn't find them" to calm the general populus. Secondly, regardless of whether they were there or not, Saddam through his actions lead us to beleive that there were - stone cold bluff (I don't know).

In Iraq there were atrocities that violate some of the founding principals of the UN and they should have intervened to protect the people of Iraq, but they're a bunch of weaklings afraid of conflict, when they failed to act, the US stepped in like the neighbor who kick's the pi$$ out of the neighbor for beating his kids.

It was the right thing to do at the time given the facts and inferences we knew then. We'er pot committed now. if we pull out, it'll be civil war and someone else like Saddam will rule again. - This should be a UN thing, but if they can't moxy up the courage to do something, someone needs to.

Moreover I don't think that we'll ever be able to stabalise the region, they've been fighting for 5,000 years. they'll fight for another. I think the only thing we can do is try to enforce the balance of power, prevent one faction from overpowering the rest, which is what we're doing with Iran.

 

[mbryson]

I've flipped through this thread I didn't read it all: so if this is a re-peat flame me.

First, I strongly believe that there were WMD, Not Nukes (they never claimed they were a nuclear power) but chemical and bio warfare in Iraq, and when we were giving Sadam the ultimatem step down or we'll force you, he moved them to his frines in syrria or in Iran(lesser of two evils), and I believe we know where they are and we're saying "we didn't find them" to calm the general populus. Secondly, regardless of whether they were there or not, Saddam through his actions lead us to beleive that there were - stone cold bluff (I don't know).

In Iraq there were atrocities that violate some of the founding principals of the UN and they should have intervened to protect the people of Iraq, but they're a bunch of weaklings afraid of conflict, when they failed to act, the US stepped in like the neighbor who kick's the pi$$ out of the neighbor for beating his kids.

It was the right thing to do at the time given the facts and inferences we knew then. We'er pot committed now. if we pull out, it'll be civil war and someone else like Saddam will rule again. - This should be a UN thing, but if they can't moxy up the courage to do something, someone needs to.

Moreover I don't think that we'll ever be able to stabalise the region, they've been fighting for 5,000 years. they'll fight for another. I think the only thing we can do is try to enforce the balance of power, prevent one faction from overpowering the rest, which is what we're doing with Iran.

I think you cheated and read through the thread.........

 

[scoutabout]

Then WTF are we doing in Iraq? Irony?

In theory, we prevented a country that was hostile towards the U.S. from collaborating with other anti-American parties to harm U.S. citizens. Sounds pretty important to me. Oh yeah, and we wanted to secure our oil interests in the region.

 

[Brett]

Big Oil......any of you seen Syriana? I haven't seen a movie closer to the truth than that one.


http://imdb.com/title/tt0365737/

 

[78mitsu]

Big Oil......any of you seen Syriana? I haven't seen a movie closer to the truth than that one.


http://imdb.com/title/tt0365737/

The Question then is how do you KNOW what the TRUTH is? Or are you drawing assumptions from what others tell you? Seems almost religous.

 

[Brett]

The Question then is how do you KNOW what the TRUTH is? Or are you drawing assumptions from what others tell you? Seems almost religous.

I draw my own conclusions on what I read, see and hear about the entire situation. Go use your religious mumbo jumbo elsewhere

 

[notajeep]

I saw that movie, it wasn VERY interesting. Truthfull??? Who knows. But it was beleiveable (sp). But even it that movie, who was the bad guy? The people who are trying to protect american intrests, while making a ton of money? Or is it the guy who is looking out for the best interests of hi own country while aiding and supporting our enemy (sp)?