From the bastion of the left....

LadyT said:
It doesn't. Trying to make up excuses as to why we invaded Iraq or why his invasion was justifiable makes you a Bush apologist.

next question.
Click to expand...

I am not "making up excuses". Explaining why I feel the war was inevitable has nothing to do with Bush or how he handled the war. That is just your "I must defend the UN's failures" voice in your head trying to justify calling me an apologist.
 
Superfreak said:
I am not "making up excuses". Explaining why I feel the war was inevitable has nothing to do with Bush or how he handled the war. That is just your "I must defend the UN's failures" voice in your head trying to justify calling me an apologist.
Click to expand...


Would you disagree that - the way you have characterized it - you have tried to present Iraq as so inevitable, and the UN's failures as so complete, the Bush had almost no choice in the decision to invade Iraq?
 
Onceler said:
Would you disagree that - the way you have characterized it - you have tried to present Iraq as so inevitable, and the UN's failures as so complete, the Bush had almost no choice in the decision to invade Iraq?
Click to expand...

that's what I got. as stupid of a theory as it is.
 
Darla said:
LOL

You know, I think that some people might have bothered to turn off American Idol and maybe even pick up their phone and call Congress.

I know I know, it's crazy talk. To imagine an American getting their head out of their ass for long enough to do even that...but I bet they would have been slightly more motivated.

Dead white children? Dead white babies?

Get off of it SF.

One white girl can't even go missing without the entire country putting down their Ben and Jerrys and gulping.
Click to expand...

Here's a bit of a shocker for ya... both of my senators have heard from me about once a month with regards to doing something about the Sudan.

and someone please tell me WHO is actually watching american idol? Seriously, are there really that many ignorant people in the US? (please don't answer that... I don't really wanna know)
 
Darla said:
It depends, on who you asked.

But if you believe that this is a comparable situation, I think you are kidding yourself. You think this country would have tolerated, lets for arguments sake use, 300,00, white deaths in the Iraqi war?

No. Not even 10,000.
Click to expand...
It also depends on who are are calling "not white". Iraq has many of persian descent, they too are white. To simplify their populace to "brown people" is an attempt at negative spin using racial overtones because you want it to be as negative as possible.

That they invaded without a Declaration, and that it was mishandled by Rummy and Co. from the start isn't enough, you want to make it so everybody believes it was because they were "brown" and that if the nation were populated with white people like Libya or Russia, or even Chechnya, we'd care oh so much about it.
 
Damocles said:
It also depends on who are are calling "not white". Iraq has many of persian descent, they too are white. To simplify their populace to "brown people" is an attempt at negative spin using racial overtones because you want it to be as negative as possible.

That they invaded without a Declaration, and that it was mishandled by Rummy and Co. from the start isn't enough, you want to make it so everybody believes it was because they were "brown" and that if the nation were populated with white people like Libya or Russia, or even Chechnya, we'd care oh so much about it.
Click to expand...

Libya is mostly white? That I did not know.
 
Damocles said:
It also depends on who are are calling "not white". Iraq has many of persian descent, they too are white. To simplify their populace to "brown people" is an attempt at negative spin using racial overtones because you want it to be as negative as possible.

That they invaded without a Declaration, and that it was mishandled by Rummy and Co. from the start isn't enough, you want to make it so everybody believes it was because they were "brown" and that if the nation were populated with white people like Libya or Russia, or even Chechnya, we'd care oh so much about it.
Click to expand...

But regardless, Americans view them as non-white, as "the other". And the lives of "the other" have always been meaningless, or as close to it as you can get.
 
Onceler said:
Would you disagree that - the way you have characterized it - you have tried to present Iraq as so inevitable, and the UN's failures as so complete, the Bush had almost no choice in the decision to invade Iraq?
Click to expand...

The UN's failures were very complete. 12 years of complete. But no, Bush could have continued the status quo and allowed the UN ineptitude to continue. We could have tried to stay another 300 years on the border saying..."well, the UN should resolve this pretty soon"... I mean the sanctions against Israel have only taken what.... almost 40 years.... and that too has been such a "stable" part of the region.

But that, in my opinion, would not have worked. Sooner or later we actually had to face the problem. And again, for the reading impaired.... I have said repeatedly that Bush should have waited until Afghanistan was more secure.
 
Superfreak said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/o..._r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

an interesting article.

For the "I am going to read something into this story that isn't there" crowd.... like Cypress...

THIS IS NOT TO SAY THAT EVERYTHING IS PERFECT in Iraq. This is to say that there has been some improvement as the authors in the article have stated. There is still much to be done to be sure, but it is nice to see this change for the better.
Click to expand...


SF, if you want to think the war in iraq was a great idea, inevitable, whatever...and if you want to think that there's anything there to "win", have at it.

One thing I've learned about Bush fans...they'll never admit their war was wrong, no matter how much blood is spilt, or how many tax dollars are spent.

I just don't think there's anything there to "win"...I think were simply fighting for the egos of NeoCons at this point ;)
 
"We could have tried to stay another 300 years on the border "


Anytime you have to employ such hyperbole, you've pretty much lost the debate.

Iraq was contained & not a threat, even to its immediate neighbors. We would have had to keep troops there 1-2 years tops to allow inspectors to finish their job. I know, I know - Saddam would keep "thumbing his nose." So, we go back in 10 years, to inspect again. And then again in another 10 years. And eventually Saddam dies.

War was never inevitable. War is a last resort, when all other options have been exhausted. If there is any silver lining, it's that maybe we have learned that.

Well, most of us, anyway, whose names don't rhyme with "Tush" or "Stuporbeak"...
 
LadyT said:
You're correct.

http://www.arab.de/arabinfo/libya.htm

Language: Arabic is the official language, although Berber is sometimes spoken and English and Italian are used in trade. Arabic must be used for all official purposes.
Click to expand...
I am telling you, at the Defense Language Institute they learned French, and it wasn't to spy on the French it was to spy on Libya... At least that was what I remember. I'll have to recheck that one. I do know that they are not "all brown" any more than Iranians are "brown".
 
Damocles said:
I am telling you, at the Defense Language Institute they learned French, and it wasn't to spy on the French it was to spy on Libya... At least that was what I remember. I'll have to recheck that one. I do know that they are not "all brown" any more than Iranians are "brown".
Click to expand...

:gives:
 
Superfreak said:
and I have always maintained that they were. But you cannot distinguish that... can you? to you... anyone who thinks as I do must have fallen for Bush's implication to the contrary... right?

please, continue apologizing for the UN's failures. Use the convenient excuse that it is all Bush's fault. Act like the UN did its job over the 12 years. Be the partisan hack they want you to be. Hitlary in '08!!!!!
Click to expand...

I give props to the UN.

We know now, that the UN inspections were successful. What have you been reading - NewsMax? Saddam destroyed his WMD, and the UN inspectors made him blow up or dismantle all his WMD facilities.

The fact that Saddam played some cat and mouse, to keep his main enemy iran guessing about what weapons he had, does not strike me as a reason to invade. A reason to continue to containd Saddam, yes - but not a reason to invade and occupy Iraq.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top