Do you still support America's genocide in the Middle East?

Damocles said:
Again, if there were a formal declaration vote, even John Kerry couldn't say something stupid like, "I didn't think he would invade." after he voted on it.

Politicizing goes to a minimum when Congress has voted for such a declaration, especially when they do so with supermajority vote.

What I speak of is how to end the politicizing and to realize that such declarations protect us against exactly that. IMO, it would be a good thing to create an exact description of how to declare. However, it would take a new constitutional convention as Congress is happy with being able to politicize every moment of a war, to use them to brow-beat and degrade the Presidency at every turn.

I believe that Congress would have declared war against Afghanistan, not against Iraq. And that people like John Kerry used this Act to attempt to be all things to all people. Congresspersons simply chose to vote to allow what they thought was necessary, but knew they could always stand "shocked" if it turned out badly. If they were forced to put their stamp directly on the war, I think they would have avoided such a declaration against Iraq. It would have been nearly impossible to avoid against Afghanistan though.
Click to expand...

Sounds like Ron Paul.
 
Rana said:
I believe the last time that the USA participated in genocide was against the American Natives, an example, the Trail of Tears.
Click to expand...

Well I am a Native American, and as terrible as the Trail of Tears might have been for my ancestors, I still don't believe I would call it genocide. There would have been no Trail of Tears, if Jackson had committed genocide on Native Americans. It would have been known as the Trail of Bloody Corpses down to the Gulf of Mexico. I think some of you need to read up on the horrors of genocide in the world. You seem to have a rather infantile concept of it.
 
Damocles said:
Again, polls showing some people with a mis-perception doesn't change the question I have asked. If "the right" was saying it, you would have myriad examples of their leadership clearly stating so.

Please link to it. Then we can be sure you are actually not being deliberately disingenuous.

Just a few links to some of those who actually made the arguments that brought us into Iraq. One or two of them directly stating that Saddam was complicit? Just a few links to what you claim is all I ask.

I can post polls that show 75% of the nation believes in Jesus, but that doesn't mean I personally convinced them of that. While you might "suggest" it was all my fault, it wouldn't change that it would be wrong.
Click to expand...

You have a problem, Damocles. You're looking for an answer to something I neither wrote nor implied. I responded to one specific line in Pmp's post: his comment that "nobody claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.."

I simply replied that this particular comment wasn't true, and polls backed this up. I did not go into detail, bring in leadership, or try to lay blame. Yet for some reason you've been trying to put words in my mouth, and I don't like it.

If you have a problem with the polls, why don't you post some info refuting them, instead of going on this tangent with your senseless nit-picking.
 
Dixie said:
Well I am a Native American, and as terrible as the Trail of Tears might have been for my ancestors, I still don't believe I would call it genocide. There would have been no Trail of Tears, if Jackson had committed genocide on Native Americans. It would have been known as the Trail of Bloody Corpses down to the Gulf of Mexico. I think some of you need to read up on the horrors of genocide in the world. You seem to have a rather infantile concept of it.
Click to expand...

Not everyone in a race needs to die for genocide.
 
Damocles said:
I honestly don't care about that. What I care about is declaration. Without declaration of war we shouldn't have started any war.

It is my opinion that declarations are a protection against throwing down for war unreasonably and we simply should reflect that there is a reason that the founders gave such declaration powers to the Congress.

Had there been a declaration there never would have been the caviling that followed. I gave an example, the "I voted for it thinking he wouldn't actually invade!" and other nonsense to that effect. Their vote couldn't have been interpreted any other way. If the President doesn't have enough to get Congress to vote for a declaration, then we have no business entering such a conflict. Each conflict we have entered without such declarations have unerringly been obstacles rather than beneficial to our progress.
Click to expand...



And by the degree with wich you do not care about my point, yet you continue to post about it, I too care nothing for your point, since war is a long worn out tool for humans and needs to be discarded, not legislated and mourned. Some day you may understand that invading any country and killing any percentage of it's inhabitants is genocide.
 
Damn Yankee said:
Saddam needed killin'.
Click to expand...

The idiot's solution to everything. 'Kill 'em!'
Tell me please, why do YOU (Damn Yankee) think he needed killin'? Not why did bush think so, or why did Rumps felt think so, but why did YOU think so? Were you related or something?
 
Dune said:
And by the degree with wich you do not care about my point, yet you continue to post about it, I too care nothing for your point, since war is a long worn out tool for humans and needs to be discarded, not legislated and mourned. Some day you may understand that invading any country and killing any percentage of it's inhabitants is genocide.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but you are just plain factually inaccurate. Whether this is because you are ignorant, or being deliberately obtuse, doesn't really matter. Genocide has a specific definition, you can't apply the word to things that don't fit the definition, no matter how much you "FEEL" like doing so. I'm sorry, that's just how the English language works... words have meanings.
 
Dune said:
Not everyone in a race needs to die for genocide.
Click to expand...

I never argued they did. However, the definition of genocide contradicts you.

–noun
the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

Perhaps you have a beef with Mr. Webster?
 
Lowaicue said:
The idiot's solution to everything. 'Kill 'em!'
Tell me please, why do YOU (Damn Yankee) think he needed killin'? Not why did bush think so, or why did Rumps felt think so, but why did YOU think so? Were you related or something?
Click to expand...

You forgot some folks... about 26 million of them, to be exact. Damn Yankee didn't kill Saddam... Bush didn't kill Saddam... Bush's army didn't kill Saddam, nor did Tony Blair's... The UN didn't do it, some wild vigilante group didn't... you know who DID kill Saddam? The People of Iraq, after finding him guilty in a court and sentencing him to execution.

No go to hell, fucktard!
 
Dixie said:
You forgot some folks... about 26 million of them, to be exact. Damn Yankee didn't kill Saddam... Bush didn't kill Saddam... Bush's army didn't kill Saddam, nor did Tony Blair's... The UN didn't do it, some wild vigilante group didn't... you know who DID kill Saddam? The People of Iraq, after finding him guilty in a court and sentencing him to execution.

No go to hell, fucktard!
Click to expand...

Not my point at all. DY said Saddam needed killin'. That is HIS opinion and I asked him why HE thought Saddam needed killin'. There was never any question that he was an evil despot.
Simple.
 
Lowaicue said:
Not my point at all. DY said Saddam needed killin'. That is HIS opinion and I asked him why HE thought Saddam needed killin'. There was never any question that he was an evil despot.
Simple.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what his opinion is, what matters is FACT. The People of Iraq held a trial, and found Saddam guilty and sentenced him to death... THIS is the only opinion that really matters. Were the Iraqi people wrong, in your opinion? Perhaps that's a more legitimate question?
 
Dixie said:
Doesn't matter what his opinion is, what matters is FACT. The People of Iraq held a trial, and found Saddam guilty and sentenced him to death... THIS is the only opinion that really matters. Were the Iraqi people wrong, in your opinion? Perhaps that's a more legitimate question?
Click to expand...

He stated his opinion. Are you saying that he had no right to express an opinion because it did not cover all aspects of the subject? I'm sure you are not.
So, he expressed an opinion and I asked him why he held that opinion....

or...... are you just trying on a troll hat?
 
Lowaicue said:
He stated his opinion. Are you saying that he had no right to express an opinion because it did not cover all aspects of the subject? I'm sure you are not.
So, he expressed an opinion and I asked him why he held that opinion....

or...... are you just trying on a troll hat?
Click to expand...

I'm saying his opinion, as well as your opinion and mine, on whether Saddam "needed killin" is irrelevant... doesn't matter. He was convicted and sentenced to execution by the people of Iraq. It was their opinion he "needed killin" and ultimately, that is the opinion which mattered.
 
christiefan915 said:
You have a problem, Damocles. You're looking for an answer to something I neither wrote nor implied. I responded to one specific line in Pmp's post: his comment that "nobody claimed Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.."

I simply replied that this particular comment wasn't true, and polls backed this up. I did not go into detail, bring in leadership, or try to lay blame. Yet for some reason you've been trying to put words in my mouth, and I don't like it.

If you have a problem with the polls, why don't you post some info refuting them, instead of going on this tangent with your senseless nit-picking.
Click to expand...
Again, polls are not evidence that anybody at all said Iraq was complicit in those attacks anymore than a poll that shows lots of people believe in Jesus means that "everybody" was saying that was why we attacked.

Such polls are not evidence of what you claim.
 
Dune said:
And by the degree with wich you do not care about my point, yet you continue to post about it, I too care nothing for your point, since war is a long worn out tool for humans and needs to be discarded, not legislated and mourned. Some day you may understand that invading any country and killing any percentage of it's inhabitants is genocide.
Click to expand...
Totally incorrect. That's just pretense because you want to feel "better" than others. To do this you will ignore any piece of information, such as actual definitions and meaning, to just say whatever you want to say.

Genocide has a specific meaning, it has nothing to do with what the US has done in either Afghanistan or Iraq.

Amazingly, with these disparate views we still agree that invasion was incorrect. However it's stupid to pretend that it is other than what it is so you can feel somehow "superior" to those with which you even agree. And it is ironic that one has to actually deliberately ignore actual meaning to do so.
 
Damocles said:
Totally incorrect. That's just pretense because you want to feel "better" than others. To do this you will ignore any piece of information, such as actual definitions and meaning, to just say whatever you want to say.

Genocide has a specific meaning, it has nothing to do with what the US has done in either Afghanistan or Iraq.

Amazingly, with these disparate views we still agree that invasion was incorrect. However it's stupid to pretend that it is other than what it is so you can feel somehow "superior" to those with which you even agree. And it is ironic that one has to actually deliberately ignore actual meaning to do so.
Click to expand...

Regardless of the eloquence and strength of your speech, it is but a matter of opinion that our actions in the middle east, ongoning for many decades, and far from completed even now, do not constitute genocide.
 
Dune said:
Regardless of the eloquence and strength of your speech, it is but a matter of opinion that our actions in the middle east, ongoning for many decades, and far from completed even now, do not constitute genocide.
Click to expand...
No, it's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of facts. The facts say it is not genocide, just as facts say 2+2 can only = 4. You can disagree with facts all you like, but doing so only shows willing ignorance.
 
Dune said:
And by the degree with wich you do not care about my point, yet you continue to post about it, I too care nothing for your point, since war is a long worn out tool for humans and needs to be discarded, not legislated and mourned. Some day you may understand that invading any country and killing any percentage of it's inhabitants is genocide.
Click to expand...

wow...so in your world even killing ONE person is genocide.

:palm:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top