WakeWorld

WakeWorld (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/index.php)
-   Non-Wakeboarding Discussion (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=4387)
-   -   mass graves in Iraq (http://www.wakeworld.com/forum/showthread.php?t=788786)

ord27 07-11-2011 6:31 AM

mass graves in Iraq
 
http://news.yahoo.com/mass-grave-222...152813445.html



"The number of people missing as a result of atrocities committed by Saddam, who came to power in 1979, is estimated at anywhere between 300,000 and 1.3 million, according to various sources."

shame on GW Bush for ousting a guy like Saddam. It must really irritate liberals knowing that a leader like Saddam isn't still around to drink tea with............

I guess I have just been in the mood lately to start controversial threads

fly135 07-11-2011 6:57 AM

Maybe it irritates people to know much it cost us to eliminate Iran's long time enemy. Seems to me like it could have been a lot cheaper. If you really felt the need to do it.

ord27 07-11-2011 7:02 AM

I don't know if I really felt the need so much. It just gets to me that being there is such a talking point for the liberal agenda. Obama and the Hollywood types talked about it daily in order to get Obama elected. We are still there. We are also in 2 other countries.

It seems to me that the lies that we were told by Bush have had a far greater positive impact on the world than those told by Obama

digg311 07-11-2011 7:03 AM

Nah... I would guess that it irritates liberals more that Reagan sold Saddam the chemical weapons that put many of those bodies in the ground.

I guess I have just been in the mood lately to reply to controversial threads. :-)

ord27 07-11-2011 7:06 AM

those weapons didn't get used by themselves

brettw 07-11-2011 7:31 AM

Too bad we don't have the practically unlimited resources needed to oust all the tyrants of the world and occupy their countries until we can get them back on their feet.

bigdtx 07-11-2011 8:24 AM

Roughly 1.2 million people have been killed in the US in car crashes since 1975 - maybe we should do away with cars too.

fly135 07-11-2011 9:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ord27 (Post 1692252)
I don't know if I really felt the need so much. It just gets to me that being there is such a talking point for the liberal agenda. Obama and the Hollywood types talked about it daily in order to get Obama elected. We are still there. We are also in 2 other countries.

It seems to me that the lies that we were told by Bush have had a far greater positive impact on the world than those told by Obama

It should be the top talking point for everyone now. But it isn't.

The time has arrived to say no to a foreign military presence. Say no to a bloated defense budget. Say no to excessive govt agency funding like FEMA, Homeland Security, FDA, DEA, ATF, right on down the line to the DMV where they now want every document under the sun to get a DL. Say no to corporate subsidies and foriegn aid. Say no to govt in the healthcare industry's pocket and protecting the excessive inflation of healthcare costs. And finally eliminate the Bush tax cuts and pay for our sins.

As long as we intend to keep a miltiary presence in other countries and sending cash outside of our economy rebuilding nations in our image we should all be paying higher taxes. Raise taxes and make us all accountable for our stupidity.

guido 07-13-2011 10:09 AM

You guys keep arguing rep/dem...... These guys are all idiots. They'll sink our country together. They're doing a great job right now. Why don't we hire some more bankers to keep Wall Street de-regulated? Nice job Greenspan.

Why don't we talk about the fact that the Big 3 banks are back to making record profits off the back of the worst economy since the great depression (maybe worse depending who you ask).

Bush??? Really...... The guy that cut taxes 5 times and caused the deficit to climb by nearly 4 trillion? That guy? Why even talk about him? We're better off forgetting he even existed.

Thank you, John.... I agree.

strife 07-13-2011 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guido (Post 1692837)
You guys keep arguing rep/dem...... These guys are all idiots. They'll sink our country together. They're doing a great job right now. Why don't we hire some more bankers to keep Wall Street de-regulated? Nice job Greenspan.

Why don't we talk about the fact that the Big 3 banks are back to making record profits off the back of the worst economy since the great depression (maybe worse depending who you ask).

Bush??? Really...... The guy that cut taxes 5 times and caused the deficit to climb by nearly 4 trillion? That guy? Why even talk about him? We're better off forgetting he even existed.

Thank you, John.... I agree.


There we go... We need more people to think like this. I agree with your thoughts.

wake77 07-13-2011 11:13 AM

When Saddam was fighting Iran, the US government didn't give one sheet what he did to his people.

deltahoosier 07-15-2011 9:03 AM

Who says they didn't? You can only fight so many evils at once. The Soviets were the greater evil at the time and we did not have the access for this at the time. Who says we did not use the Kuwait issue to knock Saddam down and start this process. You don't know who gave a crap about anything and when they did.

fly135 07-15-2011 9:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deltahoosier (Post 1693431)
Who says they didn't?

Actions speak louder than words. And GHWB explicitly said it was a bad idea to take out Saddam even though he had him on the mat for the countdown. When you're trying to make an argument it's best not to replace reality with conjecture.

jason_ssr 07-18-2011 11:19 AM

Quote:

Nah... I would guess that it irritates liberals more that Reagan sold Saddam the chemical weapons that put many of those bodies in the ground.
Actually, liberals believed there were no chemical weapons.


Seems many forget the context of going into Iraq. Remember, Saddam was one of our allies for many years. We gave him sarin gas to allow him to hold Iran at bay. It worked, as Iran was too scared to start an offensive against Iraq for fear of being gassed. Saddam later decided to move on another one of our allies, Kuwait, and we defended them under threat of being gassed as well. When Iraq surrendered and agreed to ceasefire, they also agreed to destroy all the US sarin. However, Saddam knew that an admittance of being without sarin would unleash Iran on them. So, he kicked out UN inspectors to keeps the status of the remaining sarin unknown. The US dropped the ball on forcing compliance because basically they didnt care and didnt want to feel obligated to protect Iraq, who they just disarmed, from Iran.

Bush Sr. avoided ousting Saddam and destroying the gas because of the cost\benefit.
Clinton avoided forcing complaince to ceasefire agreement and destroying the gas because of cost\benefit.

Would it had been cheaper to correct the sarin problem WE CREATED with minimal effort in 1990's dollars than what we have spent in Iraq?

IMO sometimes you need to do what is right dispite the perceived cost benefit because that cost can be expotntially heavier down the road.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 2:57 AM.