|
| Author | Topic: Iraq |
|
Rich (Moderator) |
posted 3/6/03 4:32 PM
I believe the money that will be spent fighting these wars should be spent at home on jobs & health care. http://rahjx.net webmaster |
|
Rich (Moderator) |
posted 3/6/03 4:58 PM
I also believe too many innocent people will suffer & die! http://rahjx.net webmaster |
| cody |
posted 3/15/03 9:02 AM
one person dying is too many |
| Matt |
posted 3/24/03 4:29 AM
Death during war is horrible. Death during peace by giant shredder or cloud of gas is horrible too.This war will bring some freedom to the people. They will be able to think and to love and to travel and to prosper, without being ground up by the butchers of Baghdad. Peace will come. Peace was not there before the war, but it will be there after. |
| Stan |
posted 3/24/03 5:44 PM
US forces hit a civilian bus today, killing five and injuring ten. Peace can not be bought through a war like this. Freedom will not be found by destroying the country. We believe Saddam is an evil tyrant, but we also believe other, more peaceful methods could have been used to remove him from power. The US motives for the war are also criminal, certainly not worthy of support. http://www.angelfire.com/rebellion/stanarchism |
| andrea |
posted 3/25/03 2:52 PM
matt,from reading both of your posts, i came to the conclusion that you are a very, very, very misguided person. especially about this war. i can honestly not even comprehend how ANYONE could think this war is just. yeah..saddam is a dickhole... but there are MANY ways people could have dealt with this without going to war. well...i could go on arguing my point for hours. but instead i'm just going to give you advice; stop swallowing EVERYTHING that is fed to you by the media, and by bush. read from unbias magazines, websites,books, etc. need some...just ask...and i'll be glad to help. |
| Jon |
posted 4/6/03 7:38 PM
People always say "there are other ways to free Iraq", what exactly are those ways? Saddam's been in power for a long time, he has a very effective stranglehold on Iraqi society, I don't see much opportunity for the Iraqis to liberate themselves. It seems to me that there is no non-violent solution to this problem. Sanctions haven't worked, Bargaining (Offering Saddam a cushy exile in Libya) hasn't worked. Every day that passes more people are killed, and Saddam gets a little bit closer to attaining weapons of mass destruction to throw at israel. In the final cost benefit analysis it seems to me that a short period of lots of people dying followed by peace, is a lot better than a prolonged period of low level violence that will end when Saddam feels like giving up Godhood. |
| Matt |
posted 5/2/03 4:42 AM
Andrea demonstrated what is wrong with most liberals, just because someone disagrees with them, they attack them as misinformed or un-educated. Far from the truth, at least for me. It would have been impossible to unseat Saddam peacefully. And who was to blame for setting Saddam's regime up for a violence only ending? The French, the Germans, and the Russians. The food for oil deal was big business for those countries. They traded not only food, but intellegence, arms, and their Security Councel votes... for oil. |
| Five-0 |
posted 5/12/03 7:47 AM
Matt, I think blaming the Russians French and Germans is part of a bad habit that both liberals and conservatives have: selective memory. You might want to remind yourself that it was the United states who put Saddam in power, and gave him the weapons that he's used to reign terror across the middle east. Why did the US give Saddam chemical and biological weapons? Oil. Why is the US supporting tyranny in Saudi Arabia today? Oil.Why did the US invade Iraq? Not oil. Politically and Geographically Iraq was a hub of violent radical activity. Saddam paid Palestinian Homicide bombers, and trained terrorists (we haven't seen the end of the Fedayeen), he also created a reason for the formation of 2 large anti-saddam revolutionary groups (Where do you think the Kurds and Shi'ites get their money? The same place as the KLA and IRA - organized crime) It can be comforting to view the world in black and white. Being able to colapse everything down to a binary opposition makes it easier to decide things. However I don't think people in powerful places can afford the luxury of those illusions. I don't think people who want to make a difference in the world can afford them either. |
| i dont know |
posted 8/7/03 3:01 AM
I hope all those bastard US soldiers get their asses blown up by a bunch of five year old iraqi children. |
| Ann |
posted 4/24/04 8:03 PM
Have any of you guys looked at history? We droped thousands of bombs on japan killing more people than were killed with the atomic bombs and they refused to surrender. Then we droped 2 atomic bombs and they still refused to surrender. It was only two months later that they finally did, even then the japaneese were against surrendering. This war is similar. Some people want peace, some others want to fight till the death. Both sides have both ideologies. There isn't any perfect way to solve this problem. We must remember to see all sides of an issue. Some people do not and they are just as ignorant as bush. All I ask is to open your eyes to history and the ideologies in Iraq. |
| bolt |
posted 5/2/04 7:22 PM
anne-i agree that these issues are intensely complicated and that we need to take a more in depth look at them by searching out accurate information. i don't believe that your information concerning the attack on hiroshima and nagasaki however is correct-according to noam chomsky, howard zinn, and a multitude of other historians the japanese in fact had made several attempts to surrender previous to the dropping of the a-bombs-the germans were basically defeated and they had little choice but to do so.if they were to fight to the death as a country then why didn't they just keep on fighting and dying regardless-they wanted to but they didn't want to?the dropping of the atomic bomb was a barbaric warning to the rest of the world as to the power that the us had consolidated and was willing to use. i believe that you maybe looking to very conventional and pro-usa/nationalist sources for your information and that you should look deeper-the myriad of indymedia.org sites maybe a good place for you to begin. as always the main question is what can we do to stop these things from happening in the future-the anarchist perspective is that we need to bring control back to the local level by radically de-centralizing government-the way to do so is to form local, consensus based decision making, groups to work out how to provide resources for the community and to trade/share resources with other groups and communities. these groups will then create a way of working together in a larger compacity to deal with bio-regional,continental,and planetary promblems all the while staying decentralized and controlled from the local level. this will elimate a few individuals from gaining world control and starting wars where millions die for their personal profit. |
|
|