Subject:
|
Re: The Essay (was Re: The status of Iraq from a soldier who is there.)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 May 2004 10:42:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
984 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur wrote:
| |
| |
| |
So we agree that your country’s main TV news source is not liberal?
|
Fox is hardly the country’s main news source. The much more liberal leaning
ABC, NBC, and CBS are the big three.
|
This kills both your
points.
|
So Fox a free network channel has better ratings than CNN a ‘pay for’ cable
channel. What does that have to do with ABC, NBC, and CBS (all free network
channels) all having better ratings than Fox?
|
Oops. Is this any
better?
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
After all, as I already stated,
even Clinton when president, was on record as saying sooner or later the
US would have to deal with Saddam and his WoMD.
|
The UN was dealing with him; Blix was doing a great job.
|
The UN has never in its exsistence actually done anything.
|
The last time I looked the UN disarmed Iraq... then Bush invaded.
|
If you actually belive that, it certainly explains to me why you belive half
the stuff your saying.
|
Read this.
| |
(Which to me sounds quite silly, though no doubt half
the stuff I say sounds silly to you.)
| |
| |
In fact the
current Iraq operation merely marks the first time anyone actually asked
permission first.
|
Why ask and then ignore the answer?
|
Maybe Bush thought some other countries would actually want to eliminate a
dictorship.
|
lol. So he only wanted to involve the international community on his terms?
| |
After all, true peace will never exist so long as we tolerate
them.
|
BTW: I thought we’d already established that Bush is not interested in
eliminating dictatorships or supporting democracy?
| |
(Which is what drives me up the wall when Bush says some ‘freindly’
countries are our allies.)
|
Yeah, he is a real hypocrite for sure!
| |
| |
| |
| |
…yep, and Washington helped him every step of the way. Now Bush has
installed his own puppets.
|
No he hasn’t.
|
Who hand-picked the IGC? Who decides who gets power at the end of June? Who
rigged the Iraqi constitution?
|
Funny that huh. Making sure there is a provision for freedom of religion
while at the same time trying to amend the US constituion to take it away.
(Hmmm. Maybe he is just waging a modern day crusade.)
|
Search google for
“IGC corruption”
| |
| |
| |
But if he does he will be making the same mistake as his
predecessors.
| |
| |
Peace with a dictatorship is a farce, and in my opinion
condeming the people of those countries to a fate worse than if we simply
wiped those countries off the map. Of course I realize that you think I
am a “looney” for beliveing that a slave’s exsistence is worse than death
and that nuking a country is better than allowing its people to suffer a
dictator’s rule.
-Mike Petrucelli
P.S. Trivia question: How many Veitnamese civilians were slaughtered by
the Viet-Cong within the 2 weeks after US troops withdrew from the
country at the end of the Vietnam War?
|
|
Over 1,000,000 were slaughtered by the Viet-Cong within the two weeks after
the US left.
|
|
|
I checked my little Vietnam book
last night and it makes no mention of these deaths. It does say that around
400,000 returned to Vietnam from Cambodia in ‘75.
Can you substantiate your assertion?
| |
| |
| |
The point being is that something similar is what would happen
if we were to leave Iraq now as some liberal extremists have already
suggested.
| |
I have no idea. Is it more than the >3,000,000 killed by
Washington in S Vietnam/SE Asia? Care to estimate how many of them were
civilians?
|
|
This is right-wing claptrap. I have yet to hear a coherent argument for Iraq
being abandoned. The right overstate calls for abandonment and talk like it
is the only alternative to the current mess because they can’t justify
themselves.
| |
| |
By 1965 the Washington’s (The Pentagon Papers) stated aims in Vietnam
were:
- 70% Avoid defeat
- 20% Keep S Vietnam out of China’s hands
- 10% Help the people of S Vietnam “enjoy a better, freer way of life”.
Don’t be fooled, the Vietnam war was not about “freedom”.
|
Well no kidding if it was about freedom we would have agreed to Ho Chi
Mhin’s (spelling?) request to kick the French out and help him build a
Republic based on the US constitution. Instead we figuratively flipped him
off and let him think our ideals were mere propaganda and caused him to
appeal to the soviets.
| |
Trivia Q for you:
S Vietnam’s elected leader was President Diem. Which superpower had him
killed when it looked like he’d opt for peace with N Vietnam?
|
Hopefully ours, because more often than not, peace is simply a euphemism
for surrender. (and remember I think death is better than a slave’s
existence.)
|
Was his death the only altervative? What did the people of S Vietnam want;
were they even considered?
|
Personally I don’t think the Delta Force assasination squads are used enough
on people willing to sell out freedom, so your not going to get anywhere with
me on this point.
|
You’ll have to show me that Diem was “selling out freedom”, rather than just
doing what his people wanted. Secondly, Vietnam-Jo did not enjoy a whole lot of
freedom under Nixon et al... should they have been murdered by your Delta Force
death squad?
Scott A
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
20 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
