If You're Happy And You Know It Bomb Iraq

[bigmattyh]

You don't go to the Dictionary to see what Democracy means

Nuno, you still haven't responded to the very issue that brought this up. (This is becoming a noticeable pattern.)

Again: Do you think that all points-of-view, all values, all beliefs must be respected, regardless of their content? Should we, as liberal, open societies allow entry to those who want to see us dead? Should we adopt a live-and-let-live policy to those who, given enough time, will see to it that we ourselves will be destroyed?

These are not rhetorical questions -- they are absolutely critical. They are the crux of this "crisis" with the United States vs the UN. And if you want to understand what is going on in that arena, you have to understand at least this much.

[nuno]

Difference is there are words that CAN be definied.
Using your same reasoning, "what is the meaning of life?" Alrighty then..

Vile, I can't answer your question, nor what are we doing here, or where do we come from, or where are we going, I wish I could, sowwy.
These are three of life's major mysteries, let's not turn those into only two (the first two), do you know what I mean?
T-minus 48 hours.......

[Kathy]

I'm thinking the better definition here would be for Republic.

The US is a Republic which is ruled by democracy.

Let's see if I can word my thoughts to make sense to me:

A Republic is governed by the votes of the people to elect representation to make decisions for the nation.

So although we use democracy (all votes are equal, all people equal) the Republic comes in so that decisions are left in the House, the Senate and the Oval office for the votes we cast at election time (nationally I'm speaking. This works at the state and local level too)

Otherwise, i would think that democracy would provide the people would vote over all decisions, everytime something came up.

This is why policy is not made by demonstrations in the street, by bullying, by double talk. Policy is made by the elected officials that we put into office when we vote.

The importance of our votes is obvious. This, I believe is a Republic.

But perhaps my thoughts aren't clear....and rambling...and I'm too tired with allergies scratching up my throat and itching my eyes to look up the additional dictionary words.

[nuno]

Nuno, you still haven't responded to the very issue that brought this up. (This is becoming a noticeable pattern.)

Again: Do you think that all points-of-view, all values, all beliefs must be respected, regardless of their content?

Yes Matt, I do.
How else will we be part of a solution?
That's why the Middle East conflict between Israel and Palestine its a never ending War, and all because of religion and a piece of Land. It's sad, it leads nowhere, today 10 Israelites die, and tomorrow 8 Palestinians die and so on, why people fail to understand that is still a mystery to me..
There will be a day when there's no one else to kill, and then, that promised Land, will be given to whom, if there's no one alive anymore over there?
Why don't they share it? I still can't understand this.

[/b]Should we, as liberal, open societies allow entry to those who want to see us dead? Should we adopt a live-and-let-live policy to those who, given enough time, will see to it that we ourselves will be destroyed?

They want to see us dead, so what? We go and start killing everyone who says that? Those are only words, words do not kill, men do, but I do understand what you mean, it's just the way things are, damn, the World is a wonderful place isn't it?

These are not rhetorical questions -- they are absolutely critical. They are the crux of this "crisis" with the United States vs the UN. And if you want to understand what is going on in that arena, you have to understand at least this much.

Yes, it is a crisis that needs to be solved, France and Germany have to reconsider, or else this drama could be the beginning of WWIII.

Like I said previously, Saddam is like a Cancer that needs to be eradicated, and not the Iraqi people, they do not deserve this War, but a cancer is a cancer, it keeps growing and growing until it kills everything around it, Saddam must go down, He is an evil man.

[bubadv]

Yes Matt, I do.
How else will we be part of a solution?
That's why the Middle East conflict between Israel and Palestine its a never ending War, and all because of religion and a piece of Land.

You seem to forget that the Arabs have more than 1 land much like Christians - not to speak of The fact that the Palestinians are not really one nation - they are (well were) a mixture of Arabs from Jordan, Syria Lebanon etc etc. True things have changed they might be considered a nation today - but history shows something different - the Arabs from Gaza were under Egyptian control, the Arabs in the Golan were under Syrian control, the Arabs in the west bank were udner jordan's control - they were never one nation - the Palestinian "nation" concept was taken by them in order to start a country in order to make their own cry more justified by the world (Maybe rightfully so).
Anyway assuming that they are a nation (Today) they should also have land but not at any price - not at the price of taking away from someone else's security.

Whereas the jews had and still have only one land....The concept of "it's only land" doesn't match the facts - The Jews need a country - without one they have no shield nor shelter - And believe me they need one with all the racist scum and Anti semitic going around the world.
In a historical view - Jews were murdered because they had no army - no way to defend themselves and above all they had no piece of land they can call their own. Israel for Jews is "the never again" - Never again will they need to ask for others for support, never again will they be left without a barrier against genocide.

In other words - the "it's only land" doesn't really apply - you speak from the point of view of a person who has everything - own home, own government, own army and security, a piece of land you know is yours etc etc - these two sides DO NOT (And no Jews still do not have a country in terms of security they are always under the threat of the sword) - that's what makes it into a harder conflict.

Understanding this would mean understanding this conflict. Whereas a view of "it's only land" would be far from the truth or from the ratio of this conflict.

As for the religious factor - I would rather not go into that, but the legand that all wars start because of religion is in simple words a fabrication of history.

[CondorZ]

I'm thinking the better definition here would be for Republic.

The US is a Republic which is ruled by democracy.

Yes, the United States is a democratic republic. Pure democracy would never work. Imagine having a popular vote on every little thing...........

Anyway, Suddam needs to go. Not only is he a threat to the citizens of the United States with his weapons of mass destruction, but he's a threat to his own people. I predict the people of Iraq will WELCOME the liberation that's coming and will even help. Saddam is not the benevolent leader some would have us think he is. He killed his OWN citizens with chemical weapons. This is a documented fact. What makes anyone think he won't give these weapons to terrorists?! (If he hasn't already, and he's hinting he has.) And if anyone thinks he'll give up all his weapons through inspection, well I've got a big bridge to sell you. As far as I'm concerned, the UN is going the way of the League of Nations. Anytime supposedly enlightened countries paint the US as an imperialist power and Saddam Hussein as the innocent victim, it makes me wonder what history book they've been reading. And I've been reading a lot of JUNK like that in the press lately. And in case you missed it in my other post, I'm a diehard Democrat and did not and will not vote for George Bush. This is NOT a party issue, it's an issue about world and national security.

[bigmattyh]

Why don't [the Israelis] share [their land with the Palestinians]? I still can't understand this.

They tried to come to an agreement on this back in 1994. Israel offered Arafat over 90% of his demands -- which would have led to a Palestinian state almost a decade ago -- and what happened? Arafat rejected the offer and Itzhak Rabin (the Israeli PM) was assassinated by another Palestinian militant. One might have expected Arafat and his people to accept the offer. If there were any other outstanding issues (such as the right of return -- another discussion), they could be worked out. But they didn't even want to compromise.

What makes peace even harder today is that Hamas and other various people within the Palestinian Authority keep publicly saying that they will accept nothing less than the destruction of Israel. If you ask me, Israel is showing some serious restraint by not completely clobbering these guys once and for all. They don't want to negotiate; they want to see Israel destroyed.

Which dovetails nicely into your next point:

They want to see us dead, so what? We go and start killing everyone who says that? Those are only words, words do not kill

Words such as these are clear indicators of intent. Nuno, if someone said to you "I am going to rape and murder your mother tomorrow," what would you do? I strongly suspect that you would not merely laugh this off (words just being words -- not having any real power). You would take the guy seriously, I hope. If you don't -- and your mother is attacked and killed -- you would very quickly change your beliefs about what words mean.

If you'd like another example, Osama bin Laden called for the deaths of Americans everywhere four years before the attack on New York and Washington. Had we taken his words seriously then -- and not passed them off as mere syllabic utterances, stripped of context and meaning -- we might have had the sack to do something about the threat he posed.

It is a reality of the world. And that is why rational, sane people do not go around making idle threats.

Yes, it is a crisis that needs to be solved, France and Germany have to reconsider, or else this drama could be the beginning of WWIII.

I agree wholeheartedly that France and Germany need to reconsider their positions on the matter. France especially. I believe for them this has had far less to do with stopping Saddam than with stopping the US and reaffirming their position as a superpower within the UN and the EU.

But take heart: this will not be the beginning of WWIII. And if you do want to take this war in a broader context, this war started on 9/11, when the US started to take seriously those who threatened it.

Saddam is like a Cancer that needs to be eradicated, and not the Iraqi people, they do not deserve this War

Like you, I have also been concerned about the Iraqi people throughout this ordeal. I'd like to share with you a great quote that I heard today from an Iraqi-American, who was forced to immigrate to the US after the Gulf War:

Yes civilians will die, my cousins will die -- maybe, Allah forbid. But here is a certainty: ... you are guaranteed to have civilians die under Saddam.... if he is removed, there will be some [death], but for a short time, and the Iraqi people are ready and they will welcome the Americans.

I can't say what the Iraqi people will do when the Americans come, but I can say that he is absolutely right about what the Iraqi civilian casualties will mean in this war. They will be the last deaths at the hands of Saddam Hussein. This chapter is about to be closed, and a new one is finally going to begin. The Iraqis who have spoken out have so much passion for what is possible in the rebuilding of their country; I can't help but to be swayed by the possiblity that great things are possible there. None of us knows how it will turn out -- good or bad. I'm inclined to believe that the best will rise up and meet the challenge of the situation -- which, if I am correct, will make things so much better for everyone involved. You can't help but think, looking at the atrocities carried out by the "cancer" of Saddam Hussein's regime, that the future can't be anything but better for the Iraqi people.

[bigmattyh]

And if anyone thinks he'll give up all his weapons through inspection, well I've got a big bridge to sell you.

Hey! I used that line last week!

As far as I'm concerned, the UN is going the way of the League of Nations. Anytime supposedly enlightened countries paint the US as an imperialist power and Saddam Hussein as the innocent victim, it makes me wonder what history book they've been reading. And I've been reading a lot of JUNK like that in the press lately. And in case you missed it in my other post, I'm a diehard Democrat and did not and will not vote for George Bush. This is NOT a party issue, it's an issue about world and national security.

CondorZ, with that kind of approach, you're the kind of Democrat I would be glad to call a worthy opponent any day. Thanks for not going the way of the freakshow that has taken over a large part of your party.

[Lord Man]

Did you think this is funny ?
are you crazy ?
if you in Iraq, what you will be doing now ?
i think you will be ded before bombs is start explode

انت انسان مجنون , انا الحين اكتب بالعربي , أكيد الحين في عرب كثير يتصفحون الموضوع , وقاعدين يضحكون على هالتفاهات , انا عارف انك حتحذف يوزري , بالعكس , انا ما ابغاه لانه الفي بي ما يستحق يندفع فيه ولا قرش

والله يخلف عليكم يا عرب

[Floris]

Did you think this is funny ?
are you crazy ?
if you in Iraq, what you whell be doing now ?
i think you whell be ded before bombs is start explode

انت انسان مجنون , انا الحين اكتب بالعربي , أكيد الحين في عرب كثير يتصفحون الموضوع , وقاعدين يضحكون على هالتفاهات , انا عارف انك حتحذف يوزري , بالعكس , انا ما ابغاه لانه الفي بي ما يستحق يندفع فيه ولا قرش

والله يخلف عليكم يا عرب

If you are in iraq, you wouldn't bother.

You have not learned to bother.
The dictator has 0wn3d the economy too bad.
People have to work extra to even make money to pay for food for the same day. So they have no choice but to continue their live as it is. War or no war. Those with money, have already left to other countries.

I am sick of bush
I am sick of bin laden
I am sick of saddam

I see no difference between those type of people. They only want war, bush just tries to make one through legal channels.

In a few days or even less now, it will all start, and next year, no one cares no more. Except those who have lost their child in the war for no reason but some 'head up in the history books'.

You guys make me DemocraZy!

War,
Majority doesn't want it, ignore that bush. J00 the man. .. daddy will be proud of you.
Saddam, be the scared little bastard that you are and kill your own family to keep the pride and put up some fake saddams in speeches to avoid getting sniped down. And bin laden, keep hiding in the bushes and keep making those cool tapes you do.

Someone has a problem? Just dail 555-CloneAid and let them replace the person with a more structural dna string to be a bit nicer. Yeah .. we change the world as a we see fit.

I am not so happy with this world.
People are no longer nice to eachother.
If you participate in a conversation, they most likely stab you with some weapon or just ***** at you for trying to be nice.
If you make money, everybody think you fraud or do other illegal things.
If you are poor, everybody walks away from you.
If you try to do the right thing, you turn out to screw up the envirenment.
If you care about your planet, people bomb it to hell.

Where is that big ass astroid called mother nature that we can't avoid ?

[ArabsEmperor]

if the WAR CAME like MR.BOSH SAD U.S will get more 11 septmber
and u will see
you said OSAMA BIN LADEN is TERRORISM
look what the U.S do and say why OSAMA BIN LADEN is TERRORISM
he is not he wakeup amarican people to see who is the real TERRORISM
BOSH BLEAR is the TERRORISM if sadam go out of IRAQ 100% U.S will ATTACK IRAQ no way .................
But If you CHose nice preson for U.K or U.S will Get PEACe in the world
U.S ARMY will die at the war ,..... do you like your father to die there
or ur brother or any one you know you will feel so bad if they die at that war ......... why the war IRAQ do every thing to U.N but coffe ANAAN get out of U.N people out of IRAQ now U.N i think break down it not do anything ..............

[ArabsEmperor]

My DES

[bigmattyh]

I am not so happy with this world.
People are no longer nice to eachother.
If you participate in a conversation, they most likely stab you with some weapon or just ***** at you for trying to be nice.

Xiphoid, if there's one thing I hope you can understand, it is that the world is, and always has been, a dangerous place, filled with barbarous people. It is only recently in human history that "peace" and free, civilized society have become the norm.

I would argue (persuasively, I hope), that it is only because of our systems that encourage freedom, uphold the law, and punish wrongdoers that this has even been possible. The first step is in recognizing that man is a blank slate when he is born, and that he will grow up with whatever values we teach him. This is not an automatic process -- it takes a whole lot of effort on the part of the good guys to encourage the good and to punish the bad in our world.

UPDATE: This quote sums it up far more succintly than I can. From Albert Einstein:

The World is not dangerous because of those who do harm but because of those who look at it without doing anything.

[Floris]

Yes, I say Bin Laden is terrorism,
I also say that war is NOT good.
I would like to add that Saddam is terrorism too.
I also say that Bush and many others in this world are not making it a better place.

If you all say that my words are based on ignorence, I don't blame you.

I am pretty sure that 50% of what I know is through the news, and not because I personally experience it.
And I am pretty sure that the other 50% of what I don't know, is kept away from me on purpose.

So yes, I don't know anything about it. But I have learned that hurting others isn't the right way.
That killing yourself for your believes is also not the right way, and that forcing your thoughts upon others, is not a way to educate others.

Yes,
the world is a dangerous place.

Does that mean that a man with money who trains others to kill on demand, is the right way ? That being an American, a Dutch man, a mr. bin laden or even my brother?
No.
War is bad
Don't stop it ...
Prevent it.

If you are hurting others, you are not getting respect from me. You are not worth my sight and you are not worth the conversation.

I see no difference in a man flying a plane into a building, or a man sending troops to iraq. They both result in the same : casualties.

[bigmattyh]

If I may use this as a summary of your feelings on the matter:

I see no difference in a man flying a plane into a building, or a man sending troops to iraq. They both result in the same : casualties.

I understand your concern about the deaths of innocent civilians in these two situations. As civilized people who value human life, we are right to be concerned; we are right to support the conditions that preserve human life, and right to oppose conditions that lead to its destruction.

There are great differences in the two scenarios you describe. Most obvious is the issue of intent. On 9/11, Al Qaeda's goal was specifically to kill as many Americans as possible. They deliberately did everything they could to end as many lives as possible. The World Trade Center was a perfect choice -- in no other place in America was there a greater potential for maximum damage. Death was the goal, in itself.

There is a clear difference between that and Iraq. They are there to remove one of the cruelest dictators of the 20th century, a man who has slaughtered untold numbers of people, cut out the tongues of others, set people on fire while others are forced at gunpoint to listen to their shreiking screams -- the accounts are too numerous to list here. This is a man who has deliberately ended life and caused suffering to thousands and thousands of people. America is standing up for the Iraqi people by removing this man. We do so to end the suffering. To end the slaughter. It is likely that some civilians will be killed in the process, but in direct contrast to the actions of Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, America will do everything in its power to prevent them from being killed.

If there were a way to depose Saddam without having to remove him forceably, obviously that would be the ideal choice. But it is foolish to think that Saddam would step down voluntarily. He is a murdering butcher who has fed off his people for long enough. When this is over, the Iraqi people will never have to deal with him again and will be free to live their lives in their new government, without fear of being executed for, say, speaking their minds or doing anything to offend their leader.

To put this issue another way: if 3,000 people die in this campaign -- it will be less than Saddam killed last year. And at the end, it will all be over. Leaving Saddam in power will guarantee more death; this action puts an end to it.