| Author | Message | ||
     Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1384 Registered: 1-2003  |
Rastro, You CAN disagree with the mission and still support the troops. But it is a fine line, and very few people can walk it. You don't do it by calling them baby killers, war criminals, or hoping that they fail. You don't do it by wanting the troops to pull out just so theye are no more casualties. You don't do it by looking at everything that happens and hoping it reflects badly on the administration. You can disagree with the mission, but still want it done and done as well as possible, since that is now the only choice. You can realize that even though you disagree with the mission, it is possible that it may well work. You can realize that the VAST MAJORITY of the troops BELEIVE in their mission, and that you are disagreeing with them. War protestors need to realize they are protesting against freedom. What if, just what if, Bush is right, and a world of democracies IS a safer world? If I could look in to a crystal ball and tell you that in 10 years the middle east will have several democracies and terrorism will be reduced to the fringes and not the main method of political statement in the ME. If Islamic extremism were replaced with open societies that frown on any extremism. If millions of people are living prosperous lives in what used to be despotic hell holes. Would the Iraq war be worth it then? Most protestors would say no. What if the world really does change for the better because of our country and its troops promoting freedom? All the war protestors would look kind of silly, wouldn't they? I realize there is a flipside to this, and that the mission may fail miserably, but realistic analysis of what is going on in Iraq doesn't bear this out. And i have confidence in our troops, and their leadership. We are there to build a country, that takes time. I'm more than willing to be patient. The results will be worth it. | ||
| Valentine Michael Smith Citizen Username: Umbert Post Number: 48 Registered: 3-2004  |
You don't do it by calling them baby killers, war criminals, or hoping that they fail. You don't do it by wanting the troops to pull out just so they are no more casualties. You don't do it by looking at everything that happens and hoping it reflects badly on the administration. ________________} Who said all this? I'm not blaming the troops. I'm not calling the troops baby killers. I'm saying war is a baby killer. This is what happens in war, babies are killed. My point was that I don't think many war supporters really understand that, and that if more people saw the real horrors of this war, they probably wouldn't think its worth it. And hoping the troops fail?!?!? Oookkaaaayyy.... for the record I hope everything is a smashing success and that I am completely wrong and that it will end up with a stable honest democracy. I really truly hope it does. I don't think it will, but again, I hope I'm wrong. But to hope they fail?!?!? What kind of sick bastard do you think I am? And I don't WANT things to reflect badly on the administration, they just do. Nothing I can do about that. And I also never said that the troops should just pull out immediately to save lives, I was just trying to say they should never have been sent. But they were sent, and now we are in one hell of a sticky situation that doesn't really seem to have a solution. Again, I hope I'm wrong, but how long do we have to be there fighting this war before we just give up? How long before the American public can't stomach it any more and we leave? How long before its officially just another Vietnam? You think I want these things to be true. I don't. I believe they are though and I'm very upset about it. You think I look at pictures of dead civilians and say, "Awesome!!! This is really going to make Bush look like a jackass!!! Woo HOOO!" Really? the bastard who is responsible for this unnecessary war on the other hand...well I am certain there is special circle in hell reserved just for him. Oh, I'm sorry, was that un-American? __________ War protestors need to realize they are protesting against freedom. __________ Ohmygod. McCarthyism called, they want there totally irrational behavior back. ____________ If I could look in to a crystal ball and tell you that in 10 years the middle east will have several democracies and terrorism will be reduced to the fringes and not the main method of political statement in the ME. If Islamic extremism were replaced with open societies that frown on any extremism. If millions of people are living prosperous lives in what used to be despotic hell holes. Would the Iraq war be worth it then? Most protestors would say no. ______________ Yes, it would be worth it, and I protested the war. ____________ What if the world really does change for the better because of our country and its troops promoting freedom? All the war protestors would look kind of silly, wouldn't they? _____________ I don't know about that, but silly compared to what if it doesn't work? It's not like the protestors are going to feel vindicated when the whole thing fails. And how will the war supporters feel if it doesn't work and all of these people died for nothing? Silly? _____________ realistic analysis of what is going on in Iraq doesn't bear this out. ______________ what? how do you figure this? | ||
| Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1386 Registered: 1-2003 |
Who said all this? I'm not blaming the troops. I'm not calling the troops baby killers. I'm saying war is a baby killer. Ah so the war is the baby killer. I'm sure the troops would understand your subtle and nuanced views. for the record I hope everything is a smashing success and that I am completely wrong and that it will end up with a stable honest democracy. So how about instead of complaining that babies are getting killed, you make an effort to help the Iraqis that are fighting and dying so they can live in freedom. How about supporting the effort to bring democracy to the world? How about acknoweleging that democracy and liberty and freedom are achievable in Iraq instead of just trying to make everyone think its another vietnam? How about saying something like "Democracy in Iraq would grow quicker if..." Instead of the tired old "how long do we have to be there fighting this war before we just give up?" I'll answer that for you. We aren't giving up. Its too important. We're in this for the long haul. The US will not lose, and Iraq will be free. It will take time, but its been less than 2 years and there will be elections in January. We are planting the seeds so democracy will grow. It will take care and nurturing. You think I want these things to be true. I don't. I believe they are though and I'm very upset about it. Actually, I do think you want it to be true. I just don't think you admit it to yourself. What makes you think Iraq is even remotely like Vietnam? You think I look at pictures of dead civilians and say, "Awesome!!! This is really going to make Bush look like a jackass!!! Woo HOOO!" Really? No, but I think you take every remark, every image of an injury, every setback, and use that to justify your hatred of the President, and you completely ignore the good being done, both in Iraq and the world because of the war. How did you feel when the video of the MArine shooting the insurgent in the mosque came out? After your initial shock, Did you think "Boy, war is terrible" or "Boy, THIS war is terrible, and its Bush and Rumsfelds fault that this marine had to kill this poor guy, I hope that this video shows the world how vile this administration is". I have a feeling it was the latter. the bastard who is responsible for this unnecessary war on the other hand...well I am certain there is special circle in hell reserved just for him. I agree, Saddam will rot in hell. Yes, it would be worth it, and I protested the war. Then why not give it a chance? Ohmygod. McCarthyism called, they want there totally irrational behavior back. Protestors are actually protesting against US involvement in removing a dictator and promoting democracy. How would you describe it. Sure they love to spout "war for oil" and such, but the reality is that many many many believe that the Iraqis would be better off if Saddam was still in power. Heck, posters on MOL have outright said that. I believe that the US should topple dictators and tyrants, by any means neccessary. That the suffering and sacrifice today will pay off in the future. realistic analysis of what is going on in Iraq doesn't bear this out. ______________ what? how do you figure this? 20 months, only 1000 KIA, Regime toppled, Interim government in place, elections scheduled, Sunni, Shia, Kurds, etc. coming together to build slates of councilmembers for the election. Local Iraqi elections have been held and were successful, Iraqi security forces are being trained and are fighting alongside US forces (remember Fallujah?). There is lots more. | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 591 Registered: 7-2004 |
I love how these blind Bush followers just go with whatever bogus reason for invasion of Iraq that is force-fed them. Freedom and democracy must spread, we are nurturing a seed of hope. It's all bullsh*t. Before it was that the Iraqis attacked us on 911. Then it was they had WMD and were ready to attack anytime they wanted. Now, it's that it's our responsibility to spread freedom and democracy at the barrel of a gun to countries that don't even want us there. Face it, Janay, no matter how much you really hope things are going well, they are not. No matter how much you want Bush to be a hero and have a legacy of success, he will not. We are doing the wrong thing in Iraq, and our enemies are still out there in other parts of the world plotting our demise. We had no vengeance for 911. Read something other than the Fox News website. The Iraqis hate us more than they hated Saddam. Why do you think that is? Ignorance is bliss... | ||
| Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1387 Registered: 1-2003 |
Valentine, The above post by RL pretty much proves my point. | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 592 Registered: 7-2004 |
What exactly is your point, Janay? That we should all be just a bunch of unquestioning drones? How does saying good things about what is happening in Iraq going to make the situation there better? | ||
| Mustt_mustt Citizen Username: Mustt_mustt Post Number: 162 Registered: 8-2003 |
That America went to war to bring about democracy in Iraq and the rest of the ME for altruistic reasons is the biggest load of BS I've ever heard. Mr. Janay is turning out to be a great sposkeperson for the Project of the New American Century. | ||
| Albatross Citizen Username: Albatross Post Number: 407 Registered: 9-2004  |
I think that's a fallacious statement. War protestors are not saying that Iraqis should not be given freedom; rather, they are saying that direct military force is a poor method of attaining that goal. Whether or not the methods any one side advocates work are irrelevant; that's a whole different arguement. Disagreement over method is not the same as disagreement over result. Unfortunately, the debate over military action versus diplomatic action ended when the old regime fell. Now we are left with a situation in which the United States and its military are the custodian in Iraq. Beware, I'm about to commit blasphemy: the continued presence of U.S. forces in Iraq is the best scenario for the country, because without that presence, there is not an environment in which a functioning, legitimate government can exist, nor is it an environment conducive to the safety of Iraqi civilians. That point can be met with the arguement that the U.S. miltary is already killing Iraqi civilians; my response to that is that we can count on the U.S. military to avoid civilian casualties wherever it can; for example, before the Fallujah offensive, civilians were given an opportunity to leave the city. I trust the military a hell of a lot more than I trust unknown elements in Iraq to accomplish that goal. Short version: the mission has to continue. I trust the best-trained military in the world to accomplish it with the fewest number of civilian casualties as it can. The soldiers participating in that mission are to be lauded for their service. That being said, the President,SecDef and other officials still must be accountable for poor decisions and possible shading of truth. In other words, a positive outcome will not innoculate the administration from its failings, which include poor planning and opportunistic justification. | ||
| tjohn Citizen Username: Tjohn Post Number: 2797 Registered: 12-2001  |
I agree with you Albatross. But I agree without much hope of a postive outcome. One of my major concerns with this war well before we actually invaded was that we would be left holding a wolf by the ears with practically every other country in the world secretly or overtly hoping we would get bitten. | ||
| cjc Citizen Username: Cjc Post Number: 2907 Registered: 8-2003 |
Practically every other country hoping we get bitten? I don't even think the French hope we really, really fail. Just that we get a very bloody nose while we're doing what they couldn't hope to do on their best Napoleonic days. "Democracy at the point of a gun." Great phrase, but hardly definitive and all-encompassing. Our democracy was found at the point of a gun. So was the liberty-challenged France. So was the Eastern Bloc -- after we pointed (but didn't shoot) a superior 'gun' at the Soviets. There are democracy protests in Saudi that are discredited by "every nation that hopes we get bitten" by saying the movements are just tools of the "West." But once democracy is allowed to breathe --however briefly -- you can't stop it. Central Asia has a movement brewing according to the wires, and analysts saying they're not "ready" for democracy (I think the British Empire had the same thoughts about us). I think you underestimate the power of the ideology of freedom over even theocratic movements against it. Egyt, Syria, Saudi, Iran, and not yet in N. Korea -- all hope desperately a 'failure' like that you call in Iraq doesn't come to their borders. Why wouldn't they relish that fight against a 'failure' in hopes of vanquishing it to prevail and solidify tyranny the best means to serve their people? Because they know they can't win it ultimately in the long haul. The only society that's been able to successfully contain it is China, and even there they're only managing it while keeping their communist party power structure alive, albeit with two camps (one pro-freedom) within that structure. Putin has reversed some freedoms in Russia, but do you think that will last over time? Hardly. If you're going to give up, why not give up on Haiti? Too many votes at stake? | ||
| Robert Livingston Citizen Username: Rob_livingston Post Number: 593 Registered: 7-2004 |
"Our democracy was found at the point of a gun." Yeah, but it was our guns, our decision and our will that won us our democracy. Now, we're pointing those same guns at Iraq's head and saying, "Be like us." Arab people are very proud. I wonder if our forcing a democracy on them is going to take the same way it would if the idea was borne out of their geniune interest to stand up and fight on their own for it... | ||
| llama Citizen Username: Llama Post Number: 653 Registered: 5-2001  |
Mr. Janay, Just curious. Are you a fan of Rush Limbaugh? It would answer a lot of questions people might have about you. Please try to answer honestly. | ||
| Straw's world Citizen Username: Strawberry Post Number: 4143 Registered: 10-2001 |
boring | ||
| llama Citizen Username: Llama Post Number: 654 Registered: 5-2001 |
Strawberry, Are you man enough to enlighten us and share your views about Rush Limbaugh? If not, I guess we can assume you are also a "ditto head" . | ||
| Michael Janay Citizen Username: Childprotect Post Number: 1388 Registered: 1-2003 |
I never listen to Limbaugh, Hannity or the other talking heads. What exactly is your point, Janay? That we should all be just a bunch of unquestioning drones? How does saying good things about what is happening in Iraq going to make the situation there better? I'm all for questioning. You don't question. You ACCUSE based on outlandish theories that have no basis in fact. You only see the little bad and let it overshadow the immense good. Iraq is the first arab country to EVER have free elections. That is a big deal. Yeah, but it was our guns, our decision and our will that won us our democracy. Now, we're pointing those same guns at Iraq's head and saying, "Be like us." Arab people are very proud. I wonder if our forcing a democracy on them is going to take the same way it would if the idea was borne out of their geniune interest to stand up and fight on their own for it... Guess what? THEY ARE STANDING UP AND FIGHTING FOR IT!!!!!!! Our guns removed the impediment to the Iraqis building a democracy... That impediment was Saddam. With Saddam in power, any democratic uprising would have been brutally put down while the UN got rich from Iraqi oil. Now there is an insurgency by a small amount of Saddam supporters and terrorists that are desperately afraid of real democracy. THE IRAQIS ARE NOW FIGHTING FOR THEIR FREEDOM AGAINST THE FORMER BAATHISTS AND TERRORISTS. We are helping, we are training them to fight the insurgents, we are teaching them about how a democratic government forms and works, but we are NOT pointing a gun at Iraqis and demanding they be free. More Iraqis die every day fighting for their country than American forces do. The Iraqis want freedom and they are fighting hard for it. You discount their great sacrifice every time you open your mouth. Albatross, That being said, the President,SecDef and other officials still must be accountable for poor decisions and possible shading of truth. In other words, a positive outcome will not innoculate the administration from its failings, which include poor planning and opportunistic justification. What if its not poor planning? Really? What if these guys are a little smarter than you or me? What if Iraq, while a real threat, is more of a training mission? We had no way of ACTUALLY knowing what would happen when we invaded an arab country. You can plan all you want, but you can NEVER take all sceneraios into account. What if Iraq was seen as a weak country we were justified in invading, one whose people want democracy, but more importantly, where we could learn what will most likely happen if we had to invade a stronger Arab country. There is no doubt our military is superior, but we've learned SO much about local cultures, how to handle insurgencies, how to build alliances, what kind of personell are needed, what has to be secured first, building infrastructure, what needs to be armored, what specialized equipment is needed, etc. It is far better to make these mistakes in a country weakened by sanctions. We were able to test out new and revolutionary strategies like forward air support and quick response surgical attacks. New strategies are being invented and tested daily. Its far better to learn against a small insurgency than a big one. With the knowledge we've gained in Iraq, should we need to invade oh say Iran, now we know far better what to expect... and can PLAN far far better because of the experience we have gained. Just what if? | ||
| Guy Citizen Username: Vandalay Post Number: 436 Registered: 8-2004 |
This is some of what the Arabs are thinking. This is a of a poll of 5,000 Iraqis, taken in and around Baghdad, that appeared yesterday in the Arabic newspaper Alsabah: What will you base your vote on? Political agenda----------------------------65% Factional origin----------------------------14% Party Affiliation---------------------------- 4% National Background----------------------12% Other reasons--------------------------------5% Do you support dialog with the deposed Baathists? Yes-------------------------------------------15% No--------------------------------------------84% Do not know----------------------------------1% Do you support the postponing the election? Yes-------------------------------------------18% No--------------------------------------------80% Do not know---------------------------------2% Do you think the elections will take place as scheduled? Yes-------------------------------------------83% No--------------------------------------------13% Do not know---------------------------------4% More Iraqi views: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/12/16/iraq_through_iraqis_eyes/ Janay is right, it is still too early to judge the Iraq war. | ||
| Albatross Citizen Username: Albatross Post Number: 408 Registered: 9-2004 |
Mr. Janay, what I'm getting is that we should make our mistakes in Iraq so that of we invade, say, Iran, we won't make them in Iraq. Mistakes in Iraq would be justified by what we learned from them? That just doesn't fly. True: Mistakes are a learning experience. But does that make the mistakes worth it? No. They can't possibly take all possible scenarios into account, but clearly they did not prepare for a prolonged insurgency. It doesn't matter that they learned from it: they should have been ready for it before it happened. I can't believe that in a country they called a haven for terror they weren't prepared for insurgency. Did they expect those subversive elements to vanish with the regime? They're making do with what they have, and for all that not too badly, but they weren't ready for this. The extensions in the soldiers' tours make that clear. Iraq's outcome may be 'what if,' but the poor planning has already happened. The test now is if they can pull out of it. And that doesn't even touch what I said about opportunistic justification. Remember, the liberation of the Iraqi people wasn't even mentioned until it become less likely that WMD would be found. Colin Powell's presentation all those months ago barely broached the subject. | ||
| tjohn Citizen Username: Tjohn Post Number: 2798 Registered: 12-2001 |
You can't anticipate all the turns a war will take. However, after based on the experiences of the last half of the 20th Century, there is ABSOLUTELY no excuse for not expecting a prolonged insurgency. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle are either stupid, naive or just didn't care as long as they could invade Iraq. | ||
| bobk Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 7034 Registered: 5-2001 |
Tjohn, I think they are idealogues. I am not sure that they have faced reality. The latest "problem" is that very obviously people and money are slipping into Iraq across the long and still mostly undefended borders with Iran and Syria. I am betting that by this time next year we will have troops in Damascus and wondering why the Syrians are throwing grenades instead of the expected rose petals. This is why Rumsfeld and his merry band have to go. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 4796 Registered: 1-2003  |
/discus/messages/26018/52592.html?1103312502 |
