emissary Posted December 16, 2003 Posted December 16, 2003 (edited) Wow, this post got long overnight....no way i'm reading this whole thing....so i just read bits and pieces. emissary, the fact that you state the U.S. govt is "illegally elected" just confirms your ignorance on U.S. politics. Seeing as you're not an American, i can understand this, but then you shouldn't be throwing around insubstantiated remarks regarding something you know little about. Some people in other countries found it amusing concerning the "controversy" with the election results. What i found amusing was these people actually thinking something went wrong with the election and trying to mock the U.S. because of it. They know little about the U.S. political system. The electoral vote that determines the president of the U.S. NEVER has been mandated in stone that it HAS to be equal to the popular vote. One citizen's vote means absolutely nothing. It is the consensus that INFLUENCES the electoral college to vote in a certain way. And even so, the electoral college can technically do as they please, as they are elected to do so. It wasn't the first time the popular vote and electoral vote didn't coincide, and it probably won't be the last. Yes, usually the result of the electoral vote is the same as the result for the popular vote, but it doesn't have to be. Take a course on U.S. Politics if you want to understand, I'm not here to lecture you. But most of us Americans here look at your post and merely see ignorance and naivety. ---- oh, and like AYoKoNA stated, the govt that is "in place" right now is only temporary, and is meant to rebuild the Iraqi economy and political climate. It IS necessary for our troops to oversee things there, because there are still some of the elite guard out there and other anti-everybody people out there that would cause chaos if they weren't. Once the economy is stabilized, and order is restored, an election will take place, and shortly after that we'll be able to withdraw a lot of our troops, but we'll still have a presence there...we have to. The Middle East is an unruly environment, and people have to realize that our troops have been stationed in various places in the Middle East even before this "war" began. The fact that we helped overthrow the corrupt Iraqi govt, will help our military presence there. The new govt that will be in place, as well as the Iraqi ppl, are and will be very grateful for the U.S., and know they have a great ally in us. Thus, they will "allow" our military to have a presence there and set up bases and depots. One thing you have to remember is, war is inevitable part of life. We learned after WWI and II, and even with Desert Storm, that we need to have artillery and the sorts in place in case of problems. There's certain Tanks and armoured vehicles that cannot be carried via aircraft. Thus the only way to transport them is by ship. To do so in the midst of war, not only takes time, but also runs the risk of it being attacked before the transport is accomplished. That is one of the reasons we have artillery stationed in various areas around the world, so if a crisis occurs, we don't have to wait a month for artillery to arrive by sea. I'm sure if you asked most Iraqi's, they feel much more comfortable with a U.S. military presence right now, than if they were left alone, so the benefits are seen by both sides. So much for democracy then. My knowledge of the US political system is sound. Where you see my ignorance and naivety, the rest of the world sees US arrogance. The middle east is an unruly environment you say? And I suppose you think that it is up to you to put them straight? What are these people to you sub-human? Well i guess you have answered my question on US arrogance. You are entitled to your opinion but as far as allowing you to build military bases on their soil goes, well I guess the war in the middle east is gonna be going on for a long time to come. Iraqis do not feel comfortable with US forces on their soil, who the hell told you that? CNN? The entire middle east is uncomfortable with the US right now, and that is too big a risk to take in the long term. I AM NOT ANTI AMERICAN! Why would I be when I have family and friends there, after all you dont bite the hand that feeds you. But I will exercise my God given right to free thinking, despite what the popular majority feels. I just feel that there are too many inconsistencies with this war on terrorism. And from that lst post there are some quite negative instances with regard to how you view people in the middle east. Edited December 16, 2003 by emissary Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agallion Posted December 16, 2003 Posted December 16, 2003 What is the U.S.'s position on breaking International Law by discluding France, Germany, and Russia on rebuilding contracts ..orr just see proposition 1441... we had the legal authority to do that whenever Oh and jsut a little fun fact..United States and Britian..cannot be tried for war crimes(its leaders and millitary members) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AYoKoNA Posted December 16, 2003 Posted December 16, 2003 (edited) So much for democracy then. My knowledge of the US political system is sound. Where you see my ignorance and naivety, the rest of the world sees US arrogance. The middle east is an unruly environment you say? And I suppose you think that it is up to you to put them straight? What are these people to you sub-human? Well i guess you have answered my question on US arrogance. You are entitled to your opinion but as far as allowing you to build military bases on their soil goes, well I guess the war in the middle east is gonna be going on for a long time to come. Iraqis do not feel comfortable with US forces on their soil, who the hell told you that? CNN? The entire middle east is uncomfortable with the US right now, and that is too big a risk to take in the long term. I AM NOT ANTI AMERICAN! Why would I be when I have family and friends there, after all you dont bite the hand that feeds you. But I will exercise my God given right to free thinking, despite what the popular majority feels. I just feel that there are too many inconsistencies with this war on terrorism. And from that lst post there are some quite negative instances with regard to how you view people in the middle east. Bah your knowledge of the US POLITICAL SYSTEM IS SOUND?? Why then did you make that ignorant statement about stolen elections and all that other crap..... What arrogance do you say? Ill tell you a man that has billions of dollars in oils and castles, and statues, and has KILLED MORE MUSLIMS than any other MUSLIM LEADER.....(Saddam) The entire middle east uncomfortable... YES YOU ARE CORRECT... The ARAB DICTATORS are worried that DEMOCRACY will spread in the middle east..... YES it is up to us to put them straight... If its in our NATIONAL SECURITY INterest... watch out NOrth korea, Iran, Syria, Lebanon........... I don't view the middle east negative considering IM FROM THEIR I am an immigrant but a citizen of the U.S. and PROUD of IT..... Edited December 16, 2003 by AYoKoNA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewtWare Posted December 16, 2003 Posted December 16, 2003 (edited) ^^ IRAQ missle launcher ^^^ Edited December 16, 2003 by NewtWare Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClayMeow Posted December 16, 2003 Posted December 16, 2003 So much for democracy then. My knowledge of the US political system is sound. Where you see my ignorance and naivety, the rest of the world sees US arrogance. The middle east is an unruly environment you say? And I suppose you think that it is up to you to put them straight? What are these people to you sub-human? Well i guess you have answered my question on US arrogance. You are entitled to your opinion but as far as allowing you to build military bases on their soil goes, well I guess the war in the middle east is gonna be going on for a long time to come. Iraqis do not feel comfortable with US forces on their soil, who the hell told you that? CNN? The entire middle east is uncomfortable with the US right now, and that is too big a risk to take in the long term. I AM NOT ANTI AMERICAN! Why would I be when I have family and friends there, after all you dont bite the hand that feeds you. But I will exercise my God given right to free thinking, despite what the popular majority feels. I just feel that there are too many inconsistencies with this war on terrorism. And from that lst post there are some quite negative instances with regard to how you view people in the middle east. as AYoKoNA stated, your "knowledge of the US political system" is NOT sound if you believe their were illegal elections. We are not a pure democracy. We are a democratic republic. So your "so much for democracy then" comment is moot. of course the middle east is uncomfortable....but who cares about the surrounding countries....I can tell you that most Iraqis are a lot more comfortable with a US presence than a Saddam rule...as well as Isreal, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia for that matter...and probably all others whether they want to admit or not. What makes you think Iraqis don't want us there? Yeah, members of the elite republican guard didn't want us there, and the the terrorist groups that get funding from Saddam, but those are the exact reason we went there in the first place, to overthrow those people and bring justice to the nation and peace to the region. Just wait til Saddam goes on trial, and all the crap he's done comes out. Then we'll see what you'll be saying after that. This isn't some kind, generous leader we overthrew, this was someone who tortured, raped, killed, etc etc. I never said you were anti-american....but like i said, i didn't read this whole thread, so maybe someone else did? It's not about being pro- or anti-american. Saddam obviously had to be stopped for the security of not only the US, but all other countries around the world. The US was the one to do so because we're always the only one to have the balls to go into another country and fight for it without and direct benefit such as land...think of all the wars back in the day, when countries fought for land....we could easily have more land than we do if we were as greedy as some of you international people think we are. Hell, we even took land away from Isreal that they won legitimately and returned it to their previous ownership. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly_C Posted December 17, 2003 Posted December 17, 2003 howie b Posted: Dec 14 2003, 05:11 PM on CNN real quick.... i would never turn my tv to the Clinton News Network. (bigred @ Dec 14 2003, 10:42 AM) ya know I supported this war from day 1. I look at as preventive maintinace. do we wait for sadam to get nukes, and use them on us? do we wait for him to dump tons of nerve gas on our friends and family? or do we squash him NOW? exactly my point. I agree... the U.N. is a shaky and irrelevent organization... oh man finally, finally someone can agree with me that the UN is useless and i love how mr bush is basically telling them to kiss his butt. gotta love a president with balls. and i love the pictures NewtWare. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ballz2TheWallz Posted December 17, 2003 Posted December 17, 2003 lol i still have reasons its a conspiricy. i mean iraq leaders are supposed to fight back or kill themselves instead of surrender to americans. he was in a 4 foot deep 8 foot long hole? why didnt it collasp. and air tube and exhaust fan?. when e surrunderd he sayd i am suddam hussane leader of iraq. this hapens just before the elections. A hole? <_< Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
young-joseph Posted December 17, 2003 Posted December 17, 2003 (edited) Its amazing how quick people forget things like vietnam 100000 americans dead 3milllion vietnamese Sorry, stocknotclocked, but as soon as I read that I had to roll my eyes and skip the last five pages and go ahead and post, so I have no idea where this thread is at the moment. Try these numbers on for size. U.S. casualties in Vietnam during the era of direct U.S. involvement (1961-72) were more than 50,000 dead; South Vietnamese dead were estimated at more than 400,000, and Viet Cong and North Vietnamese at over 900,000. Do you really expect anyone to take your opinion seriously when you give insanely incorrect figures and information? Edited December 17, 2003 by young-joseph Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xtreme21 Posted December 17, 2003 Posted December 17, 2003 hihidng in a hole LOL Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sly_C Posted December 17, 2003 Posted December 17, 2003 (edited) Sorry, stocknotclocked, but as soon as I read that I had to roll my eyes and skip the last five pages and go ahead and post, so I have no idea where this thread is at the moment. Try these numbers on for size. U.S. casualties in Vietnam during the era of direct U.S. involvement (1961-72) were more than 50,000 dead; South Vietnamese dead were estimated at more than 400,000, and Viet Cong and North Vietnamese at over 900,000. Do you really expect anyone to take your opinion seriously when you give insanely incorrect figures and information? BURNED Edited December 17, 2003 by Sly_C Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
d3bruts1d Posted December 17, 2003 Posted December 17, 2003 lol i still have reasons its a conspiricy. i mean iraq leaders are supposed to fight back or kill themselves instead of surrender to americans. he was in a 4 foot deep 8 foot long hole? why didnt it collasp. and air tube and exhaust fan?. when e surrunderd he sayd i am suddam hussane leader of iraq. this hapens just before the elections. A hole? <_< Yes, a hole. Heck, even Hitler was found in a hole. Sure... anyone can say, death before surrender... but could you do that? Death is a joke to most people until you are faced with it. He probably also knows that by living on, he'll get food, shelter, and the chance to talk... and then there is also the posibility of an escape, or loyalist doing something to try and get him out of there. And yes... a hole. Why didn't it collapse? Umm.. maybe because it was built with solid walls to keep it from collapsing. Greg Palkot - "It was a bit of a tight, dirty squeeze going down. But once I got to the base compartment, it was relatively well-built, with a smooth floor and ample headroom." Also, from other reports I've seen... it looks like Saddam actually stayed in the house where the hole was, but moved to the hole when danger came near. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClayMeow Posted December 18, 2003 Posted December 18, 2003 Also, from other reports I've seen... it looks like Saddam actually stayed in the house where the hole was, but moved to the hole when danger came near. ^-- yup Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts