They've given up...

[DGMacphee]

It's been a while since we've had a serious political debate with some blood on the dance floor, so allow me to present...

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7307840

Everyone can already guess my opinion on the matter, so we'll skip my "blah blah Bush lied not my president blah blah blah" rant. What's your opinion, looking back after 2 years? Are there still people here who can justify the war? And why?

Also, how do you think the upcoming elections will go?

[Grundislav]

I think the best part of all this is seeing newscasters report the issue with a straight face, and feign surprise that nothing was found.Ã,  Of course, a few local anchors have made sarcastic comments, but overall they have to seem like it's the biggest surprise ever.

I also heard someone report "The United States claims it has no regrets about invading Iraq." I wish the media would stop making George W. Bush = The United States.

[HillBilly]

Well duh. 'Bout time.

I'm really looking forward to 2008.

[YOke]

*sigh*

I was kind of waiting for this to be brought up again. The tsunami certainly took a lot of the pressure off Bush, at least for the time being. Also gave him a chance to profile the US as a friendly and caring nation. It's still interesting (at least to me) that they are sending military down there to help, and not civilians.

But back to the "war"... (To quote the late Bill Hicks: It's only a war when there are TWO armies fighting.)
I'm an idealist. This means that conservative people often dismiss my arguments with "But that's not how things work in the world today!". Regardless I still get pissed off when people do the right things for the wrong reasons and/or in the wrong way. Getting rid of Saddam is not the worst thing that could happen to the good people of Iraq, but I still feel icky when I think of the rather obvious alteriar motives behind this crusade. Icky because even if I'm not a US citizen I feel I was behind this just as much as Bush. I allowed it to happen.

Tarantino said it well regarding the music in the torture scene in Reservoir Dogs. He chose the happy sounding "Stuck in the middle with you" with Michael Madsen dancing and singing along until he suddenly slashes his knife across the face of the cop. "You enjoyed his song and you enjoyed his dance, now you have to take the heavy stuff." He goes on to say that this makes the audience feel like a co-conspirator to the act.

There's not a person in the western world who hasn't grown up with US entertainment and cultural influence all around them. We have enjoyed the partnership. You have provided us with many good times and good memories. But when you do something that we don't like it hurts.

When it comes to war Europe and the US come from very different angles. Europe has been through two "world wars". There's hardly a country in Europe that has not had enemy troops inside it's borders sometime in the last century. (Sidenote: UK was bombed hard but was never invaded and Australia has never had any major military action on it's soil. Those two countries are now the ones most willing to help the US in it's crusade.)

Norway, were I live, was occupied by German forces during WW2. The Germans who came here were not evil people. The Nazis were not a bunch of people who sat down around a table and said "You know, there's just not enough evil in this world!" No. They believed in what they did. They thought that by coming here they did us a favour. They wanted to share their ideology and values with us. They too wanted a better world for their children. Demonising them is the easy way to handle things, but the fact is that they were good people with good intentions going about it the wrong way. Norwegians formed armed resistance groups to fight the occupational forces. The once congenial German forces didn't like this one bit and started executing civilians as punishment. We could play the "word replacement game" as governments often do. We could change "Norway" to "Iraq", "Germany" to "USA" and "resistance" to "terrorist". The story is the same. It's just the angle.

I have used the word "crusade" twice. This is not coincidental. I did that on purpose. This war IS a crusade. We are not in Iraq to give the people freedom. We want to make them like us. They should speak english (or at the very least spanish or french), like sports and talking about the weather, even if it's always 35*C and clear. We just want them to be our friends, but on our terms. In my idealist book that's just another case of doing the right thing the wrong way.

[Anarcho]

Just to be fair Yoke, there are plenty of American-based civilian non-profit groups aiding in relief efforts.  On the other hand, part of the military's purpose in being is to aid in situations such as this, and they're trained and equiped to do it.  Who else would they have sent?  We don't have a mass ive civilian force that has air-craft carriers, helicopters and transportation equipment.

But otherwise, I'm just appalled that Bush is still in office.  Nothing touches this guy!  We've got the press over hear talking endlessly about "Rathergate" when we've got a sitting president that led the country into a war on false pretenses, not to mention all the other illegal and crazy shit he's done.  Where's the press?!  Why don't they get off their asses!

[YOke]

Just to be fair Yoke, there are plenty of American-based civilian non-profit groups aiding in relief efforts.Ã,  On the other hand, part of the military's purpose in being is to aid in situations such as this, and they're trained and equiped to do it.Ã,  Who else would they have sent?Ã,  We don't have a mass ive civilian force that has air-craft carriers, helicopters and transportation equipment.

OK. I might have pulled that point a bit too far, but it is evidence of the huge amount of resources the US army has at it's disposal and the casual relationship the US has to the army. My relationship to armies is such that if I saw uniformed soldiers walking the streets it would make me uneasy. Even if they are there to help an army uniform still sends me a powerful signal.

[SSH]

When will Governments understand?

You can't make people stop doing things them like by making them illegal. It generally make people become criminals. The best you can hope for is making them do the things in a way that doesn't hurt other people. (i.e. drugs, sex, porn, etc.)

You can't make people like you by invading their country, even if you do get rid of  an evil dictator in the process

Forcing biometric ID cards on everyone only wastes money: criminals will still be able to get fake ID no matter how good your system is so once again the only people who will be on the system will be those you don't need to and shouldn't be watching.


On the other hand, when will people understand:

Modern technology such as cheap, minature cameras, reverse telephone directories, spam, internet tracking, etc. spyware,  means that it is very very difficult to get anywhere near the levels of privacy in our lives that we used to have. You can't uninvent this stuff like you can't uninvent nuclear or biological weapons: we need to find a new way of living to adapt.

[Anarcho]

Yes, I would probably have a similar reaction if I saw the military in my neighborhood. 

Actually, on and after 9-11 there were a lot of military all over my neighborhood.  In that instance, they kind of made me feel better.  Normally I wouldn't like a machine-gun equipped humvee outside my apartment, but with terrorists on the loose, you're attitude changes.

But seriously, they have the resources to really help in this relief effort. 

[Darth Mandarb]

I think getting rid of Saddam Hussein needed to be done (it should have been done in '91) but I disapprove of Bush making up a reason.Ã,  The worst part of this whole thing was that, after he found out it was faulty intelligence, he still refused to admit the mistake.Ã,  That's what really bothered me.

You're the president sir, you're the boss, the shift-manager of the U.S.A.Ã,  If something goes wrong while you're on the clock it's your fault ... whether you like it or not!

I still respect the office of the president of the United States ... but I no longer respect the man sitting in that office.

Should we fight a 'war on terror'?Ã,  Yes, I believe we should.Ã,  But I believe the doctrine of this war should be "take out existing terrorist threats, and prevent the creation of new terrorist threats".

Ol' GW is so gung-ho to take the war to the terrorists that his methods are accomplishing nothing.Ã,  Sure ... you took out 50 terrorists with that bomb, but you also killed 10 civilians and now you've just created 100 more terrorists as a result.Ã,  You'll never win this ... it's as pointless as the war on drugs being waged in the US.

Some argue that we (the US) only send our military to places that have oil involved. Ã, That we only fight the battles where the outcome is beneficial to us ... To this I reply that we don't have the military power to right all the world's wrongs. Ã, Yes what's been happening in the Sudan is terrible, what's been happening in the former Soviet Union is horrible, and yes what was happening to the people of Iraq is/was horrible. Ã, So which fight do we make? Ã, Well ... Iraq is where the U.S. will benefit most, so we'll go there. Ã, Is this wrong? Ã, Who can say. Ã, I don't make U.S. foreign policy.

In a couple hundred years, what's left of mankind, will look back on this 'Oil Age' as the biggest mistake mankind ever made. Ã, I mean ... if you think about it, we're sending hundreds and thousands of young boys to their deaths, and killing hundreds of thousands of 'enemies', to secure a substance that is rapidly destroying our planet. Ã, How stupid is this?

We have the technology to stop this from happening ... but as is so often the case throughout history it'll take extreme necessity to effect the change. Ã, Meaning, we'll be forced to make the change rather than realize we need to and do it because we choose to. Ã, But that's not what this discussion is about ...

I still feel that getting rid of Hessein and his regime needed to be done ... but somebody should inform Mr. Bush that not all terrorists are arabs/muslims! Ã, There are other places we should be focusing on in my opinion.

[Miez]

Ok, first up - good thread. And what I'm about to post is only connected to this thread in an oblique way:

New York Times article on legalised torture

The above article just made my blood run cold.
I don't want to turn this thread into an "America is bad" bashfest, but I think that George Bush and his government are one of the worst things we've seen in quite some time. Bad for America, and bad for the rest of the world as well.
Of course the search for WMDs was a completely bogus operation ... hell, if the Iraqis had had weapons of mass destruction we would have known (as we would probably have sold them the parts ...)
I was watching tv the other day and I saw a documentary about the world's oil reserves. Bush's senior economic advisor told the interviewer the following:

"the world's oil reserves will run out in 10 to 20 years."

Take a minute, think about that. Everything we have and do is based on oil. The war in Iraq is about oil. Not because there are major reserves of oil in Iraq but to establish a beachhead and powerbase in that region. America has no influence in an area that is going to be of major importance in the next few decades. They're trying to fix that. Simple.

[Nine Toes]

Well duh. 'Bout time.

I'm really looking forward to 2008.

Ditto.

"the world's oil reserves will run out in 10 to 20 years."

Take a minute, think about that. Everything we have and do is based on oil. The war in Iraq is about oil. Not because there are major reserves of oil in Iraq but to establish a beachhead and powerbase in that region. America has no influence in an area that is going to be of major importance in the next few decades. They're trying to fix that. Simple.

Actually, this may be little off topic, but right now the Ford motor company is working on a car that runs off of hydrogen.Ã,  They expect these automobiles to start being released around 2010.Ã,  Ford says that they're doing this because they want to fix the problem of pollution, but there is also the fact that if everyone's car ran on something other than gasoline, I think it could put a major dent in the amount of oil that we use up every year.
...
I'm sorry... I forgot what my point was... 
(dammit, I hate it when that happens)

[Moox]

Your wrong about the oil supplys buddy, in 10 to 20 years we will hit peak production. Peak production is when half of the available supply has been exhausted. the economy does not feed on oil, but rather cheap oil. Plastics, gas, almost everything runs on oil. The problem is not the supply but rather the price. When peak production hits, people are going to realize that there needs to be more alternatives such as nuclear power, hyrdoelectric, maybe even wind and geothermal. Yes, nuclear can be dangerous, but as was coal mining in the beginnig of the industrial revolution. 65% of our power comes from coal currently. If investments went into nuclear power, then it to could become as safe, if not safer, than coal power. Peak production will lead to some hardships, but oil will be available long enough to get into the alternatives. Its more ofÃ,  scientific revolution then a problem.

Now to the issue at hand. I supported the descision to go to war. There is hardly any causaltys on our side, in our only six months in ww1 over half a million died. Im not trying to put the war into retrospect but rather to bring it to a reasonable level, a successful removal of a dictator, securing valuable resources, and granting a foothold into the middle east. Did the lives of VOLUNTEERS get taken away just for personal gain? NO, they did what they were trained to do, these people were trained, payed, profesionals, if they dont want to do their duty they shouldnt be taking tax dollers. As to personal gain, I dont know about you, but I use oil and plastics, the consumer gained from this, not the bush regime.

[Redwall]

Off topic, but the oil thing is complete bogus. No one has any idea when our oil reserves will run out, though many people throw out numbers like that for whatever purpose they might have.

[| Bass |]

Are there still people here who can justify the war? And why?

Why would the war not be justified...what are we supposed to do, stand by and let terrorists do what they do?

[jason]

Why would the war not be justified...what are we supposed to do, stand by and let terrorists do what they do?

Um.. most of the 9/11 terroists weren't even from Iraq. But good point, I guess that's why we were so diligent in capturing Osama.

Anyway, I plan on moving back to Canada as soon as I can. I don't think I can stand 4 more years of Bush.

By the way, Election Results by IQ. I'm sure most of you have seen this, but it's worth posting again.

[Pelican]

I wish the media would stop making George W. Bush = The United States.

And I wish that they didn't make Tony Blair = United Kingdom.
Just because he kisses Bush's butt, doesn't mean we do.

[modgeulator]

The sooner the civilized world can overthrow the governments of all these Muslim heathens, convert all their people to Christianity and turn them into safe "trading" partners the better. Best for our interests, best for our economies. So yes, the war in Iraq was completely justified. 
8)

[jason]

The sooner the civilized world can overthrow the governments of all these Muslim heathens, convert all their people to Christianity and turn them into safe "trading" partners the better. Best for our interests, best for our economies. So yes, the war in Iraq was completely justified.Ã, 
8)

Wow, what ignorance...

[| Bass |]

The war in iraq's not about "converting people" its about giving the Iraqies freedom and making it safer

[Las Naranjas]

What a smiley. [really people]

I was thinking the other day about crowds, and how they end up rioting and stuff, because everyone thinks that everyone else thinks it's a good idea.

Or parties, when you end up doing stupid things, because everyone thinks that everyone else wants to.

Then you think that the Japanese really knew that in no circumstance would a war against the US be successful, but they did it anyway...since all the other generals are doing it, if they beleive it can be done, it must be alright.

And the fact that the vast majority of people who allowed the gradual move from a boycott the final solution were quiet because everyone else was.


and it makes me wonder if alot of the people in the white house had managed to convonce themselves that their evidence was conclusive, through reinforcement. Although I doubt very much that this was the reason behind the plans to invade to begin with [and I don't think it was entirely oil either, perhaps it really was misguided ideas about American exceptionalism and enlightenment], I would not be surprised if, for a willingness to believe it was true, they continually expressed their belief in it. And when the administration is largely of the safe political orientation, and the media is somewhat lacking in it's scrutiny, the lack of dissenting voices amongst the administration would prevent any of the people there who had doubts from airing them.

Because no-one else is, the majority must be right...

maybe the solution would be responsible government [i.e officials who are answerable to parliament], rather than the cloistered nature of an administration, but I doubt it.

--edit--

and just a note, when it's claimed that Australia was "more than willing", remember that like in Britain, it was an unpopular war, and in regards to participation in world wars, remember that in the first world war Australia suffered greater per capita casualties than any other country, despite being as far from the action as physically possible on the earth [and note PNG was Australian soil when it was invaded]