Togo Wants Bush to Overthrow Their Leader... - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-12-2005, 06:43 PM   #16
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by STING2


We failed to find WMD, but that does not change the fact that Saddam failed to verifiably disarm of all WMD and failed to meet the conditions of the 1991 Gulf War ceacefire agreement, which authorized military action if Saddam failed to meet the stated conditions.

The need to remove Saddam because of the threat he posed to the region and the world still stands.
That has nothing to do with my post. Did you read my post of did you just see WMD and post your regular "verifiably disarm" reply?
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 02-13-2005, 12:15 AM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 8,876
Local Time: 08:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar
That has nothing to do with my post. Did you read my post of did you just see WMD and post your regular "verifiably disarm" reply?
Its everything to do with your post because you are falsely claiming that Bush supporters are changing their rational for supporting the war which is rubbish. The rational for the war remains the UN security Council resolutions and Saddam's failure to comply with them.
__________________

__________________
STING2 is offline  
Old 02-13-2005, 12:42 AM   #18
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 08:30 AM
I like how people trust bin Laden when he says he attacked us for our presence in Saudi Arabia but think Bush is full of shit when he talks about freedom.

So i guess you all think the idea of freedom is a joke, can't happen in the middle east, and if it does it won't bring peace and prosperity?

andalso.... this talk that Bush needs to conquer every dictator and immediately dissolve any ties with allies because they're not democracies is childish and totally unreasonable. Please stop.
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-13-2005, 01:34 AM   #19
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark
I like how people trust bin Laden when he says he attacked us for our presence in Saudi Arabia but think Bush is full of shit when he talks about freedom.

So i guess you all think the idea of freedom is a joke, can't happen in the middle east, and if it does it won't bring peace and prosperity?

andalso.... this talk that Bush needs to conquer every dictator and immediately dissolve any ties with allies because they're not democracies is childish and totally unreasonable. Please stop.
No it's childish to think we preemptively struck Iraq for freedom.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 02-13-2005, 02:00 AM   #20
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:30 PM
It is not as simple as bombing liberty into people, but removing the shackles that inhibit freedom is definitely one of the factors involved in Iraq that connects it to the GWOT.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-13-2005, 12:46 PM   #21
New Yorker
 
Sherry Darling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 2,857
Local Time: 04:30 AM
Melon, I share your concern. What really worries me about Bush's new policy is that he's making promises to the world on our behalf that he cannot keep, despite the very best of any soldier's or even his (and I'm being generous here) intentions. We simply cannot deliver on this, and it's dangerous to fan the flames of expectation and then dash them. I think that's one of the main reasons for Iranian anti-Americanism, which I'm studying for this class. Under the Shah, there was a budding hope for many that the US would trade with them, be a partner, etc, and then, that hope was dashed. (See Ken Pollack's The Persia Puzzle).

Anyway, some thoughts.

SD
__________________
Sherry Darling is offline  
Old 02-14-2005, 12:36 AM   #22
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 08:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


No it's childish to think we preemptively struck Iraq for freedom.
You missed my whole point. It's about freedom, weapons, tyranny, terrorism, oil, Israel, stability, all the above and more. Stop simplifying it to just oil. You all have more brains than that I'm sure. Freedom is not the only reason for the war but the result of the war, and the light at the end of the tunnel in this war.

Anyway, I'll ask again what's your solution?
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-14-2005, 06:55 AM   #23
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark


You missed my whole point. It's about freedom, weapons, tyranny, terrorism, oil, Israel, stability, all the above and more. Stop simplifying it to just oil. You all have more brains than that I'm sure. Freedom is not the only reason for the war but the result of the war, and the light at the end of the tunnel in this war.

Anyway, I'll ask again what's your solution?
And you've missed mine, for I haven't simplifed anything down to oil.

Solution? W uses words like freedom, democracy, tyranny, etc Well we have the same issues going on here and other parts of the world. But the fact is these other parts of the world(asking for it or not) will go ignored. So my solution, be fucking honest and quit trying to act like we're bestowing this gift upon these people and we get nothing in return.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 02-14-2005, 04:16 PM   #24
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 08:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


And you've missed mine, for I haven't simplifed anything down to oil.

Solution? W uses words like freedom, democracy, tyranny, etc Well we have the same issues going on here and other parts of the world. But the fact is these other parts of the world(asking for it or not) will go ignored. So my solution, be fucking honest and quit trying to act like we're bestowing this gift upon these people and we get nothing in return.
Who said we're getting nothing in return? Nobody I can think of.
What's in it for us? In the long term we get peace, security, stability and oil.

We'll let the UN fix the parts of the world that the US doesn't have interests in. I have a lot of confidence in them

Your "fucking honest solution" isn't much of a solution so I'll recommend some for you:

The Carter solution: Lots and lots of peace talks.
The Clinton solution: Lots and lots of peace talks and a random missile or two.
The Howard Stern solution: Nuke the Arabs.
The Yasser Arafat solution: Nuke the Jews.
The John Kerry solution: Bring in the UN
The Jacques Chirac solution: Solution? What's the problem? I'm making money off this deal.
The Amnesty International solution: Bitch and bitch and bitch about human rights violations then bitch when someone actually does something about it.
The "everyone else" solution: ignore it and hope it all goes away.

Take your pick.
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-14-2005, 04:33 PM   #25
War Child
 
Do Miss America's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: In Ryan's Pocket
Posts: 738
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark



The Carter solution: Lots and lots of peace talks.
The Clinton solution: Lots and lots of peace talks and a random missile or two.
The Howard Stern solution: Nuke the Arabs.
The Yasser Arafat solution: Nuke the Jews.
The John Kerry solution: Bring in the UN
The Jacques Chirac solution: Solution? What's the problem? I'm making money off this deal.
The Amnesty International solution: Bitch and bitch and bitch about human rights violations then bitch when someone actually does something about it.
The "everyone else" solution: ignore it and hope it all goes away.

Take your pick.
Or the Bush solution: Exagerate a reason to strike, strike first, can't find proof of original reason, so then change reason. Oh yeah and that original reason, the ones we can't find, well there are countries that really do have them and really do post a threat, but we'll just ignore them right now.

Sounds great.
__________________
Do Miss America is offline  
Old 02-14-2005, 05:04 PM   #26
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 08:30 AM
The jury's still out on the Bush solution.

You can't get past the fact that there wasn't and rarely is just one "reason" for going to war. The world and especially the Middle East are more complex than that I'm afraid.

For the tenth time, what's your solution?

Go ahead, brain storm.

Can't answer?

Then tell me what your preferred presidential candidate's plan was.
__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-14-2005, 05:33 PM   #27
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark
The jury's still out on the Bush solution.

You can't get past the fact that there wasn't and rarely is just one "reason" for going to war. The world and especially the Middle East are more complex than that I'm afraid.

For the tenth time, what's your solution?

Go ahead, brain storm.

Can't answer?

Then tell me what your preferred presidential candidate's plan was.
Who have you asked 10 times?

The first time you asked me was just a few posts ago.

But I do find it a little odd that you are asking anyone their solution when you yourself admit the jury is still out on Bush's.

What solutions are we talking about? Actions have been taken, so what exactly are we talking about? Are we playing "what ifs" as to what we'd like to have seen before Bush went into Iraq? I think this is why no one's answered the question you've asked so many times, you weren't very clear as to what you wanted.

Plus there's the fact that this really doesn't have a whole lot to do with this paticular thread. This thread was started to ask why some dictators and not others, ones openly asking for and one didn't. I think it was started to show the hypocrisy in Bush's rhetoric about spreading Democracy, that people need to realize there are very selfish reasons for why we pick and choose.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 02-14-2005, 05:54 PM   #28
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 442
Local Time: 08:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Who have you asked 10 times?

The first time you asked me was just a few posts ago.

But I do find it a little odd that you are asking anyone their solution when you yourself admit the jury is still out on Bush's.
Yes, Democracy and stability in Iraq is not a sure thing so the jury's still out. But Bush offered a solution and implemented it. People like to criticize but their solution is to do nothing. Unacceptable.


Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


What solutions are we talking about? Actions have been taken, so what exactly are we talking about? Are we playing "what ifs" as to what we'd like to have seen before Bush went into Iraq? I think this is why no one's answered the question you've asked so many times, you weren't very clear as to what you wanted.
I'm talking about the solution to the greater middle east problem as a whole- terrorism, violence, poverty, opression, unstable oil markets.

Bush's solution is freedom. You can ridicule the idea, call Bush a hypocrite, or explain why giving people freedom would not solve these problems in the long run.

This is typical. Someone presents an idea and instead of refuting the merits of that idea, people attack the person, usually calling that person a hypocrite.

Nobody on any of these posts in the last month explained how freedom would not help the situation in the middle East. All I heard was ridicule.



Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar

Plus there's the fact that this really doesn't have a whole lot to do with this paticular thread. This thread was started to ask why some dictators and not others, ones openly asking for and one didn't.
This has everything to do with this post. The purpose of this post was "He did it in Iraq, why doesn't he do it in Togo? because he's a hypocrite and we're just doing it because we get something in return: oil."

Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar

I think it was started to show the hypocrisy in Bush's rhetoric about spreading Democracy, that people need to realize there are very selfish reasons for why we pick and choose.

In Bush's case, it's not just rhetoric, he backed it up. If defending your country is selfish, then guilty as charged

__________________
drhark is offline  
Old 02-14-2005, 06:28 PM   #29
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,641
Local Time: 02:30 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by drhark


Bush's solution is freedom. You can ridicule the idea, call Bush a hypocrite, or explain why giving people freedom would not solve these problems in the long run.
Yes freedom will be great, but it still isn't guaranteed, plus the vulnerbility of Iraq in the future is a huge concern as well. It's been a poorly planned and executed war. It's gotten critique from all over the world even from within it's own administration.


Quote:
Originally posted by drhark

This has everything to do with this post. The purpose of this post was "He did it in Iraq, why doesn't he do it in Togo? because he's a hypocrite and we're just doing it because we get something in return: oil."

Yet no one's been able to refute this.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 02-14-2005, 06:41 PM   #30
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 06:30 PM
How poorly executed was this war? I mean in comparison to oter millitary actions over the centuries the Iraq was was very sucessful even by todays standards. The regime and army was toppled in under a month, civilian casualties were low for an operation of this size, the scenarios of massive humanitarian disasters involving hundreds of thousands of refugees didn't eventuate, the Republican Guard was unable to mount any proper operations against coalition forces and a counter-insurgeny campaign has been waged for two years with under 1500 KIA. Not to mention the work that has been done fixing up the country - building schools, infrastructure and the like as well as the elections which saw a decent turnout.

Things have gone wrong in this war, in retrospect some decisions created problems now (such as disbanding the Iraqi army ~ but if it had been kept then we would have entirely different problems at this point) but things like this happen in every war. The Greeks at Thermopylae suffered a millitary disaster, the Battle of Trafalgar was a disaster for the Spanish and French, Napoleons retreat from Russia was a disaster, the Battle of the Bulge was a big blunder by the allies ~ shit happens and it is annoying when people act like Iraq has been a series of huge millitary blunders because in the scheme of things it has been a very sucessful operation that reflects extremely well on the men and women that serve there and the millitary leadership that drafted the plans for the war.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com