2

9/19/2006 5:32:02 PM

Quote :

"i shouldve known better than to try and convince people that Saddam Hussein was a heartless killer"

I can't figure out if you are trolling or you hang out with the Scarecrow on a daily basis.

9/19/2006 5:33:58 PM

It worked.

Genocide was not and would not have been an issue.



[Edited on September 19, 2006 at 5:51 PM. Reason : .]

9/19/2006 5:44:36 PM

Quote :

"how come you guys completely forget how unsafe iraq was when saddam was killing TENS OF THOUSANDS of his own people? oh yeah that was 1988 and saddam is born again nowadays"

You still haven't justified why our tax dollars should fund their salvation. And if you're going to hide behind the purported humanitarian aspect, why aren't we invading any African countries?

Quote :

"^did we start a war with the iraqi people? i couldve sworn it was with the iraqi govt/military..."

I didn't say "people."


Face it, this war was a complete waste of tax dollars. I don't like paying taxes, and I hate seeing what I do pay get wasted. This war is the fucking mother of all wastes.

9/19/2006 6:09:28 PM

^^are you joking about the no-fly zones? the no-fly zones in which iraq repeatedly shot at coalition planes post Desert Storm??

^the amount of money spent on Iraq has nothing to do with whether or not Iraq is safer now that Saddam is out of power

9/19/2006 10:04:02 PM

You have a severe inability to comprehend what you read

Quote :

"He says the world would be better off today if the United States had never invaded Iraq"

the world != Iraq

9/19/2006 10:13:28 PM

This guy said the world would have been safer. My bet is that he's referring to the general animosity generated against America by Bush and Co. lying about WMDs and hamming up the Saddam and mid-East threat to justify the war in Iraq, that Bush and Co. are now bungling. I haven't done any studies on the numbers of what's going on, but it's a valid argument to claim that the world is less safe.

As far as Iraq being less safe, that's far more debatable. Saddam was a facist, but his last egregious act posted so far in this thread was in 1988, which is what he's on trial now for, I think. But it's idiotic to start your Iraq death toll counting from 1988. That's like counting the Holocaust when talking about the overall safety of Germany.

9/19/2006 10:21:11 PM

Quote :

"are you joking about the no-fly zones? the no-fly zones in which iraq repeatedly shot at coalition planes post Desert Storm??"

And how many times were they successful at shooting a plane down?

We had total air superiority over the two minority groups in Iraq.

How many seconds would a tank column last if it started a genocide campaign with our fighters flying over with impunity?

[Edited on September 19, 2006 at 10:54 PM. Reason : .]

9/19/2006 10:54:02 PM

Quote :

"^the amount of money spent on Iraq has nothing to do with whether or not Iraq is safer now that Saddam is out of power"

again, why is Iraq's safety America's responsibility?

you keep dodging.

9/19/2006 11:03:38 PM

We're the most powerful country on Earth, and with great power comes great responsibility, and we also helped Saddam back in the day (and are therefore partially responsible for Iraq's condition, as well as many other countries including NK and Iran).

9/19/2006 11:07:01 PM

Wash hands, rinse, repeat.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mp1z2O5pDEY

Around the 2:15 mark.

[Edited on September 19, 2006 at 11:10 PM. Reason : /]

9/19/2006 11:09:28 PM

Why do Iraqi war supporters suddenly care so much about the Kurds? Millions and millions of Africans are murdered by their governments every year, but there's no talk of going in there......Probably wouldn't be a good thing because we could get stuck there and it wouldn't solve anything.

Fact is, Saddam was no threat to us and hated Bin Laden and his boys. Seriously, if you're comeback for anti-war people is "well, what about the Kurds, don't you care about people?", you should probably start a movement for US Troops to invade Africa.

Plus, you know damn well you never cared about the Kurds until all the other excuses ran out.

9/20/2006 1:16:22 AM

Quote :

"they just arent very humanitarian when it comes to people in iraq, kuwait, etc, having to live with another merciless dictator"

I bet you think the Kuwaiti government is composed of puppy dogs before Iraq invaded (justly mind you) and after Iraq was kicked out.

People on the right tend to forget about the Slant drilling operations Kuwait had going on. Iraq was protecting its economy and resources.

9/20/2006 1:57:08 AM

I really can't stand people who say that the US invaded Iraq because it was concerned about the human rights situation there. That is a complete falsehood.

One wonders why the US has not invaded African countries where people are being slaughtered and raped wholesale by their own people (including child soldiers). Or how about Indonesia under Suharto... OH SHIT, the US actually looked the other way when that was happening and maybe even helped him.

Darfur. 200,000 dead in the past 3 years.

Bush yesterday saud at the US that the credibility of the UN is at stake if it doesn't help the Daarfurians. ORLY? I think the credibility of the US is at stake, considering how much it wants to help the downtrodden and oppressed of the world. And what about Ivory Coast? And Congo? And...

9/20/2006 8:35:59 AM

Quote :

"again, why is Iraq's safety America's responsibility? you keep dodging. "

welcome to a debate with treetwista. you'll find out soon enough that hes not worth taking seriously.

9/20/2006 9:10:25 AM

I'm with those who think the world is less safe after our invasion. Saddam was a ruthless killer, that is true, but let's not have a short memory.

First, civilians is a relative term. The Kurds have a long history of uprising in a struggle for independence, and in the Iran/Iraq war (1980-1988) the Kurds sided with Iran.

Also, when Bush I invaded Iraq he encouraged a Kurd uprising. When the US pulled out we left them out to dry. Many were massacred.

The invasion has created terrorism in Iraq. We've squandered the good will and trust of our allies. New laws relating to the war on torror have deluted every American's rights, and our treatment of prisoners has reduced our image throughout the world and has put future American prisoners of war at greater risk.

In the end, who knows what will happen. The options are democracy in Iraq, civil war, or an Iranian type theocracy. Right now, democracy seems the least likely. All of this because of an invasion that had nothing to do with terroism. Iraq was not involved in international terrorism (or WMDs for that matter) before we invaded. Of course Saddam was a ruthless dictator, but that's not why we invaded.

[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 10:13 AM. Reason : *~<]Bo]

9/20/2006 10:07:03 AM

i love to hear you guys bitch and moan and whine about everything...priceless

broken records that complain about the iraq war and bush over and over and over and over and over again, as if thats going to change anything

[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 10:15 AM. Reason : .]

9/20/2006 10:09:35 AM

Quote :

"welcome to a debate with treetwista. you'll find out soon enough that hes not worth taking seriously."

Are you refuting anything, or adding anything, or are you just beating off?

9/20/2006 10:15:35 AM

How does it feel to bat 0-infinity in The Soap Box Mr Twista?

Quote :

"A suicide truck bomber detonated his explosives at the entrance of an Iraqi police base Wednesday, killing three police officers and wounding eight more in Dora, a southern neighborhood in Baghdad, Iraqi emergency police said."

THE WORLD (ESPECIALLY IRAQ!) IS SAFER WITHOUT SADDAM!!!!!!

[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 10:17 AM. Reason : x]

9/20/2006 10:16:33 AM

i dunno, how does it feel to win at the soapbox and lose at life? how does it feel to not get your way in the real world so you constantly feel the need to redeem your confidence on an internet message board where 80% of the "political" discussion is OH MY GOD BUSH IS SUCH AN IDIOT?

i could give a fuck less what you people think about what i say on here...its an internet message board...i'm sure it made people happy to "pwn me in the soap box" in 2004...was that internet pwnage satisfaction worth it when Bush was re-elected?

[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 10:19 AM. Reason : .]

9/20/2006 10:18:11 AM

Quote :

"Are you refuting anything, or adding anything, or are you just beating off?"

im saving people time....so in a sense, im adding more than a lot of others.

i guess i could also ask the same question of yourself.

[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 10:19 AM. Reason : df]

9/20/2006 10:18:24 AM

sober is a great soap box poster...he condenses complex issues into caps-locked one liners with exclamation points on the ends

9/20/2006 10:20:18 AM

Quote :

"i dunno, how does it feel to win at the soapbox and lose at life?"

It feels great actually, thanks for asking.

Quote :

"how does it feel to not get your way in the real world so you constantly feel the need to redeem your confidence on an internet message board where 80% of the "political" discussion is OH MY GOD BUSH IS SUCH AN IDIOT?"

Redeem my confidence? Ask my buddies, my confidence is so fucking high in the real world that it actually takes a hit when I log into this site, especially in moments like these where I contemplating why I'm taking the time to respond to a guy like you.

Quote :

"i could give a fuck less what you people think about what i say on here...its an internet message board..."

Evidenced by the very post you just made. The mere fact you have to point it out means you clearly do care good sir.

9/20/2006 10:27:09 AM

My original posting wasn't inflammatory. I just stated my opinion and then supported it - textbook. So yes, in that regard I added something. I didn't say that Bush was an idiot (although I think he is). If it can't be argued with opinions followed by support, than it's just name calling, and beating off.

9/20/2006 10:27:27 AM

Quote :

"Ask my buddies, my confidence is so fucking high in the real world that it actually takes a hit when I log into this site"

that sounds like about the gayest thing I've ever read on this website

9/20/2006 10:28:47 AM

^^i was refering to your comment directed towards me.

as you said, "If it can't be argued with opinions followed by support, than it's just name calling, and beating off."

but i guess according to your definition, i guess what i did wasn't name calling and beating off. there are plenty of people that agree with me. just look at this thread..its full of arguing, opinions, and support: http://www.brentroad.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=422901

9/20/2006 10:31:16 AM

Quote :

"that sounds like about the gayest thing I've ever read on this website"

You gonna give me a kiss the next time you see me sweetie?

9/20/2006 10:32:09 AM

im important enough to have my own thread

in the soap box

^ASK MY FRIENDS IN REAL LIFE, MY CONFIDENCE IS REALLY HIGH

9/20/2006 10:32:20 AM

Sorry Sober, I think it was misunderstanding. My statement was aimed at TreeTwista. I gave a supported opinion and he followed up with nothing that had to do with what I said.

I just used your quote to support the fact that it is useless to argue with someone that follows facts with name calling.

9/20/2006 10:42:20 AM

gotcha, my bad.

[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 10:43 AM. Reason : where did everything go?]

9/20/2006 10:43:12 AM

somebody iframed this shit? probably State409 since his real life confidence is so high

9/20/2006 10:44:46 AM

nm

[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 10:54 AM. Reason : i dont care]

9/20/2006 10:50:57 AM

^^So, I guess by your inability to answer the simple question of why it's America's responsibility to defend the kurds, that you are conceding that reasoning is patently stupid.

And as a preemptive strike, no, i'm not an anti-bush liberal hippie. I'm a registered republican, so you can save yourself the keystrokes on that predictable response.

[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 10:52 AM. Reason : ahd]

9/20/2006 10:52:19 AM

Bobby:

- Iraq sure as hell isn't going to defend the Kurds which is evident by what Saddam did to them when he was in power
- The Kurds are one of the large groups in Iraq that actually appreciate America, at least as far as us coming in to help both Kuwait and the Kurds...ie potential allies in post-Saddam Iraq?
- If you have an "Americans should only worry about America" mentality then thats fine...but America doesn't have that policy, so don't ask me why we defend them

9/20/2006 10:56:23 AM

Saddam is an evil man who killed many ppl. There is no arguing with that. However, he was something that Iraq currently lacks. He was a source of power, a source of fear. He held much of Iraq together b/c no matter if you were with him or against him, you feared him. Without him, Iraq has turned over into civil war.

Granted, Saddam probably killed more ppl in the long run than this civil unrest will, but the entire country is still shadowed in chaos whereas it would have been more stable with Saddam still in place. That that as you will.

9/20/2006 10:56:28 AM

Iraq was more stable with Saddam in power, sure...but

Quote :

"Saddam probably killed more ppl in the long run than this civil unrest will"

also people want to look at an "average Iraqis' safety"...in current Iraq, you might be killed by an insurgent if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time...in former Iraq, you might be killed by the govt if you badmouthed the President or if you were of different descent or religion

now how come so many Americans admit that we can never be totally safe from terrorism (ie wrong place at wrong time is inevitable) yet you badmouth Bush all the time and are completely safe? Put yourself in their shoes...plus wheres all that "life is not worth living without freedom" rhetoric now? Iraq has more freedom nowadays than in Saddam Iraq...but I guess the mentality of "live free or die" doesnt apply in Iraq...just more hypocrisy

9/20/2006 10:58:05 AM

Just stop posting. Your thought process is what I would expect to find roaming the more 'rural' parts of our State.

9/20/2006 11:06:03 AM

stop trying to censor my freedoms of speech

maybe read my last post instead of trolling me

all the "America is on its way to a police state and I won't stand for it!" people seemed content with Iraq being a police state...hypocrisy

9/20/2006 11:07:08 AM

You don't belong in this forum and generally never have.

This thread was about "is the world a safer place". You have managed to spout the party line about helping the Iraqi people as if that is what the original discussion is about, completely ignoring the fact that by "helping the Iraqi people" (which is highly highly debatable at this point), we have systematically made America less safe with the level of irritation we have caused in the Middle East.

Make a new thread to discuss the merits of being the world police. Why don't you answer the original question in this thread.

Quote :

"also people want to look at an "average Iraqis' safety"...in current Iraq, you might be killed by an insurgent if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time...in former Iraq, you might be killed by the govt if you badmouthed the President or if you were of different descent or religion"

I'd say they were safer under the old regime. If they felt strongly enough about the government and wanted to speak against it, they could leave the country and do it from some other place. It wasn't a nice situation, but in pure "safety" terms, I'll take keeping my mouth shut and going about my daily business to getting blown up going to the corner market for some fruit.



[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 11:16 AM. Reason : a]

9/20/2006 11:11:57 AM

i already answered the original question...yes the world is safer with saddam out of power

why dont you add something to the discussion besides personal attacks on me while ignoring the issue

you're the ignorant one who literally had to ask

Quote :

"Would someone educate me on these matters? Under Saddam's control, were Kurds ... systematically being murdered/tortured? "

if you didnt know that by 9/19/2006 at 4:34 pm you are the one who needs to gtfo of this thread

Quote :

"It wasn't a nice situation, but in pure "safety" terms, I'll take keeping my mouth shut and going about my daily business to getting blown up going to the corner market for some fruit. "

so you dont care about freedom? just safety? interesting...that seems to be the conservative viewpoint (domestically)

9/20/2006 11:16:10 AM

Eh, I was lazy with that post in that, I meant to specify post gulf war during the sanctions era.

People responded with what I needed before I got back to checking the thread to clarify.

Quote :

"why dont you add something to the discussion besides personal attacks on me while ignoring the issue"

I've added a ton to this thread. Can you not see it?

Quote :

"yes the world is safer with saddam out of power"

So I would be correct in stating that in your opinion, the US is more favorbly viewed in the Arab world now than before we invaded Iraq - the possibly incorrect conclusion to be drawn that those wanting a jihad against the US and to come kill us is lower because we have gained this favorable rapport?


Comments like these are apparently why people don't take you seriously

Quote :

"so you dont care about freedom? just safety? "

Please show me in my comments where I said "I don't care about freedom". Feel free to point them out to me!

It's hard not to attack you personally when you are this brain dead. I mean, you're expecting a response, so it's either that or nothing, because frankly you don't debate in a manner that garners respect and appropriate responses.


[Edited on September 20, 2006 at 11:24 AM. Reason : a]

9/20/2006 11:21:48 AM

Quote :

"So I would be correct in stating that in your opinion, the US is more favorbly viewed in the Arab world now than before we invaded Iraq - the possibly incorrect conclusion to be drawn that those wanting a jihad against the US and to come kill us is lower because we have gained this favorable rapport?"

you think the Arab world viewed us favorably before Iraq? You think the last few years have changed anything in perception? And wouldnt you think countries like Iran might actually like what we did in Iraq? You're too confused

Quote :

"in pure "safety" terms, I'll take keeping my mouth shut and going about my daily business to getting blown up going to the corner market for some fruit."

sounds like safety > freedom to me

oh yeah, before you attack MY posts, let me show you THE most ignorant post in the ENTIRE thread

Quote :

"Would someone educate me on these matters? Under Saddam's control, were Kurds (and I suppose shias) systematically being murdered/tortured?"

what a fucking moron

YOU DIDNT EVEN KNOW THAT SADDAM'S REGIME MURDERED AND TORTURED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF KURDS

how the fuck should you know anything else about the matter?

9/20/2006 11:24:17 AM

Quote :

"The Kurds are one of the large groups in Iraq that actually appreciate America, at least as far as us coming in to help both Kuwait and the Kurds...ie potential allies in post-Saddam Iraq?"

so they loved it when we abandoned them in gw1 when we implied that we'd help them overthrow saddam?

and they love us now when we're trying to make a unified country work that they want nothing to do with?

9/20/2006 11:30:36 AM

Here again, your reading comprehension would make a 6th grade english teacher cry.

Quote :

"you think the Arab world viewed us favorably before Iraq?"

No, I didn't say they did, did I?

Quote :

"You think the last few years have changed anything in perception? "

Of course, which is part of my argument that the US (and generally the world) is less safe.

Quote :

"And wouldnt you think countries like Iran might actually like what we did in Iraq?"

"countries"? You mean their people or their leaders?

Quote :

"sounds like safety > freedom to me"

They are two different arguments. You keep trying to douse every little post with new shit, straying from the main topic again and again.

The Iraqis can be more free and less safe at the same time. So far, and there isn't a clear path to how this will happen, but liberating the Iraqis from Saddam hasn't been the panacea we promised it would be. So, essentially, you're touting how great the US has been for the Iraqi people, when the reality hasn't really shown this to be the case yet.

9/20/2006 11:31:08 AM

Quote :

"oh yeah, before you attack MY posts, let me show you THE most ignorant post in the ENTIRE thread Quote : "Would someone educate me on these matters? Under Saddam's control, were Kurds (and I suppose shias) systematically being murdered/tortured?" what a fucking moron YOU DIDNT EVEN KNOW THAT SADDAM'S REGIME MURDERED AND TORTURED TENS OF THOUSANDS OF KURDS how the fuck should you know anything else about the matter?"

Did you not read what I just posted?

Quote :

"Eh, I was lazy with that post in that, I meant to specify post gulf war during the sanctions era. People responded with what I needed before I got back to checking the thread to clarify. "

9/20/2006 11:32:53 AM

you still fail to realize the hypocrisy of the Americans who:

fear a domestic police state and arent willing to have any rights or freedoms modified or adjusted slightly to make us somewhat safer from terrorists

yet they prefer the police state Iraq of Saddam's regime to the current Iraq with more freedom for the Iraqi's

essentially saying "In America, freedom > safety...In Iraq, safety > freedom"

9/20/2006 11:41:56 AM

Quote :

"you still fail to realize the hypocrisy of the Americans who: fear a domestic police state and arent willing to have any rights or freedoms modified or adjusted slightly to make us somewhat safer from terrorists yet they prefer the police state Iraq of Saddam's regime to the current Iraq with more freedom for the Iraqi's essentially saying "In America, freedom > safety...In Iraq, safety > freedom""

you've still yet to say why it is our responsiblity to nation build. And let's not forget all the dictatorships the United States supports that are just as ruthless towards human rights as Saddam was, but are our allies.

9/20/2006 11:53:26 AM

^

Quote :

"If you have an "Americans should only worry about America" mentality then thats fine...but America doesn't have that policy, so don't ask me why we defend them "

9/20/2006 11:55:27 AM

Quote :

"If you have an "Americans should only worry about America" mentality then thats fine...but America doesn't have that policy, so don't ask me why we defend them"

you cannot make the human rights argument when we support regimes that violate human rights.

you also cannot make the human rights argument when the United States is abandoning human rights.

9/20/2006 12:00:23 PM

TreeTwista:

Quote :

"i already answered the original question...yes the world is safer with saddam out of power "

Did you? ... I looked through the entire 2 pages and didn't find any statements by you saying why you thought the world was safer without Saddam. You did certainly say why the Kurds were safer though.

The closest you came was the assertion that we were showing Arab countrys that they couldn't indoctrinate people with violence. There is a certain irony in that ...

9/20/2006 12:09:45 PM