BetterthanU
Banned
esqeddy said:
+1
Just War Theory, folks.
im so tired of these dam iraqis
- Thread starter kbgt
- Start date
+1
Just War Theory, folks.
YesterdayAgain
Banned
esqeddy said:
If you think we need to just up and leave Iraq, then you have reduced your credibility to zero on this issue and no one should waste any time debating with you. I would expect 70% of high school sophomores in this country to be able to understand why we just can't leave, so it's truly sad when a full grown, well educated adult cannot grasp that.
To be an asshole:kbgt said:
Keep your public thoughts generalized. Keep your head down and be safe, My turn is coming up this summer, again. :cryying:
esqeddy said:
If we leave, it will be a playground for Iran. There are always issues of torture and civilians killed in any war. Check your history books. The only reason you hear so much of this now is because of the technology that the media has. I do not agree that it is right to do these things, but it happens in any war. If we leave now it will be a free for all for terrorists. They will kill innocent woman and children as soon as we leave. I support our troops 100% and believe they are fighting for us. I understand we did jump the gun going over there in the first place, but we should try to help them establish some sort of government and then we can leave. I do believe that if it gets to a point where there is no end in sight, then we should leave.
Euphoric One said:
You start your post with the word "If you think" then immediately assume you know what I think.
The reason we need to leave is exactly the same reason we need to stay. Because we were wrong. "Huh?" Yep, you heard me. We were wrong going in, that much is beyond question. However, we created a duty for ourselves we cannot now abandon. The best way I can explain this is to use an analogy:
Imagine you killed a man out of self defense only find out he really wasn't a threat. Would you not feel a duty to help his orphaned children? I would.
Using this analogy, when we killed the Iraqi government, we orphaned its citizens. We have a duty now to help raise them. However, that can be a difficult proposition. The children of the man you wrongly killed may resent you, hate you, and not want to accept your help. They may even try to seek to hurt you despite your efforts to help them. In such a case, you don't bring those orphaned children into your home. Rather, you make arrangements for them elsewhere and pay the tab. A good solution is a family relative.
In the case of Iraq, we should meet our obligation by getting someone else to do the job of providing security for the new government. I would suggest a coalition of Islamic troops under the command of the local government now in place. We replace our troops with Egyptian, Syrian, Iranian, Saudi, and other troops all of whom are of Arab decent and who all speak the local language. We pay the tab. We are already paying the tab, so that is no big deal. In fact, it would likely cost us less in the long run. Why?
Less reason for an insurgency. Therefore less violence. There isn't a occupation force of foreign tongued infidels. And we don't have to pay to shuffle our troops back and forth from the US. It frees up our troops to do other things. The islamic troops earn much less than American troops.
Also, absent the non-islamic non-arab presence, then the focus of the people will shift more to the national identity. Will civil war break out? Who knows. But it certainly wouldn't happen on our watch and with our troops caught in the middle.
Also, it would help repair our credibility world wide. Instead of being viewed as the invaders and occupiers holding up a puppet government, we would be viewed as simply the government that took down the ruthless dictatorship of Saddam, and who is now providing lots and lots of foreign aide.
So, yes, we do need to leave. But we can't do it until we have someone else to raise the orphan. We took the approach of teaching the orphan to take care of itself, instead of getting a relative to take care of the orphan. Raising a child to where it can care for itself takes years. A relative already is mature enough to do it immediately. If we had gotten the relative to do it, we would have already been home, saved a lot of money, and a lot of American lives.
NOW you know what I think.
*Sigh* eddy, you poor, poor man. Here is where I am going to prove you wrong on every single issue you raised.
First off, I did not respond to your bait (images of self grandeur here?), I merely asserted that you are an asshat.
Secondly, I never said you were wrong about anything, I said you were an asshat (kindly refer to the above sentence).
Thirdly, I clearly stated my side, contrary to what you believe. There is nothing to debate since I stand firm in my convictions as you clearly albeit erroneously do too. (Yes, I am right, you are wrong. See Euphoricone’s post.)
Fourth, I never claimed that my opinions changed every minute, everyday or every month. You, like a lawyer, twisted what I didn’t say into what you could use as something to supposedly discredit me. My opinions are the same and it takes a lot to change them. Nothing wrong with being firm in your convictions, I applaud you for that. The difference is that I do not make a habit of typing something just to see what I wrote (spin on the old adage “speak to just hear yourself talk”) every ****ing day. (Please do not point fingers at Taronis, this is about you.)
Fifth, no one asked you to change your opinion. I called you an asshat.
Sixth, I did not “quote” your post at all (my, my we are egocentric!), I called you an asshat.
Seventh, I have never been sued, nor has anyone in my family. I have beef with lawyers that drive up our insurance premiums across the board and the fact that I can’t get a motorcycle jacket with an inflatable air bag in it in the United States because there are “product liability” obstacles to overcome. (http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/24/magazines/business2/softeningcrashlanding/index.htm)
Eighth, it is my opinion that anyone with enough time or money can be trained to do what you do. I could be a doctor, I could be a mechanic, I could be a lawyer. And so can you. I have no idea if you are a “good” one and I really don’t care, the fact of the matter remains that any monkey can be trained to do what you do. (This is my personal opinion and obviously I am allowing for at least marginal intelligence required to function as a human being.)
Ninth, once again, I did not take your “bait.” Nothing about you is irresistible, please stop flattering yourself. I merely called you an asshat. (I find it interesting that you take negative complements as an indicator that people somehow can’t take their minds off of you.)
Tenth, attempting moral equivalency in the analogy of peeing near a toilet and missing is “not a good strategy” is clearly a Red Herring argument. It is not logical to equate your pissing analogy to the Iraq war as they are completely unrelated. If you see it as a similar event, then you might need to get your internal chemical balances checked because something has gone awry. BTW, calling the attempt of peeing in a toilet a “strategy” shows that you clearly do not grasp the meaning of strategy; peeing in a toilet is more than likely a part of another strategy, otherwise it is merely an action. Your understanding makes it obvious that you do not view the Iraq war as anything but just a simple event, like we are there for the sake of being there. (To up your ante and abuse your human waste-related analogy, are you suggesting that we are “peeing” in the wrong toilet? Should we be “peeing” in Iran? You know as well as any body on this forum that your answer is to not pee at all, just hold it in and hopefully the feeling will go away.)
Eleventh, I never implied you didn’t thank service men for their service; to the contrary, I called you an asshat.
Twelfth, quite frankly, I never cared about the Iraqis, though now I do. They may not care about us but I find it much more important to bring the fight somewhere else and Iraq is as good as a location as any in my opinion.
Thirteenth, once again you have violated common sense and used a flippant remark to “refute” my opinions. (Some lawyer you are.) “Putting us in Iraq has nothing to do with making or getting us peace. That is no more reality than Snow White and the Seven Dwarves.” Red Herring argument applied twice in the same post. Clearly you do not understand the concept of “long term strategy.” You see things in a very shortsighted view, which is my whole complaint with most detractors of this war and any subsequent events that must follow.
End of dissection of flawed eddy thinking.
Notes to think about (constructive thoughts): If you understood what bringing peace to the Middle East meant for the long term (next 80-100 years) in regards to our own position worldwide affairs, then you might see what I am saying.
Bringing democracy to the Middle East is a step in bringing the entire world to productivity, economically and to lasting peace. This is on a scale that has not been thought of ever. We must think outside of even 5 generations. We are beginning to set into motion a worldwide change that is only matched by this experiment known as The United States of America. But like anything worthwhile, it takes time and it has to happen on a global scale. Quite often, change such as this is painful and arduous. But just because it is unpleasant, it doesn’t mean that it is not worthwhile.
First off, I did not respond to your bait (images of self grandeur here?), I merely asserted that you are an asshat.
Secondly, I never said you were wrong about anything, I said you were an asshat (kindly refer to the above sentence).
Thirdly, I clearly stated my side, contrary to what you believe. There is nothing to debate since I stand firm in my convictions as you clearly albeit erroneously do too. (Yes, I am right, you are wrong. See Euphoricone’s post.)
Fourth, I never claimed that my opinions changed every minute, everyday or every month. You, like a lawyer, twisted what I didn’t say into what you could use as something to supposedly discredit me. My opinions are the same and it takes a lot to change them. Nothing wrong with being firm in your convictions, I applaud you for that. The difference is that I do not make a habit of typing something just to see what I wrote (spin on the old adage “speak to just hear yourself talk”) every ****ing day. (Please do not point fingers at Taronis, this is about you.)
Fifth, no one asked you to change your opinion. I called you an asshat.
Sixth, I did not “quote” your post at all (my, my we are egocentric!), I called you an asshat.
Seventh, I have never been sued, nor has anyone in my family. I have beef with lawyers that drive up our insurance premiums across the board and the fact that I can’t get a motorcycle jacket with an inflatable air bag in it in the United States because there are “product liability” obstacles to overcome. (http://money.cnn.com/2006/04/24/magazines/business2/softeningcrashlanding/index.htm)
Eighth, it is my opinion that anyone with enough time or money can be trained to do what you do. I could be a doctor, I could be a mechanic, I could be a lawyer. And so can you. I have no idea if you are a “good” one and I really don’t care, the fact of the matter remains that any monkey can be trained to do what you do. (This is my personal opinion and obviously I am allowing for at least marginal intelligence required to function as a human being.)
Ninth, once again, I did not take your “bait.” Nothing about you is irresistible, please stop flattering yourself. I merely called you an asshat. (I find it interesting that you take negative complements as an indicator that people somehow can’t take their minds off of you.)
Tenth, attempting moral equivalency in the analogy of peeing near a toilet and missing is “not a good strategy” is clearly a Red Herring argument. It is not logical to equate your pissing analogy to the Iraq war as they are completely unrelated. If you see it as a similar event, then you might need to get your internal chemical balances checked because something has gone awry. BTW, calling the attempt of peeing in a toilet a “strategy” shows that you clearly do not grasp the meaning of strategy; peeing in a toilet is more than likely a part of another strategy, otherwise it is merely an action. Your understanding makes it obvious that you do not view the Iraq war as anything but just a simple event, like we are there for the sake of being there. (To up your ante and abuse your human waste-related analogy, are you suggesting that we are “peeing” in the wrong toilet? Should we be “peeing” in Iran? You know as well as any body on this forum that your answer is to not pee at all, just hold it in and hopefully the feeling will go away.)
Eleventh, I never implied you didn’t thank service men for their service; to the contrary, I called you an asshat.
Twelfth, quite frankly, I never cared about the Iraqis, though now I do. They may not care about us but I find it much more important to bring the fight somewhere else and Iraq is as good as a location as any in my opinion.
Thirteenth, once again you have violated common sense and used a flippant remark to “refute” my opinions. (Some lawyer you are.) “Putting us in Iraq has nothing to do with making or getting us peace. That is no more reality than Snow White and the Seven Dwarves.” Red Herring argument applied twice in the same post. Clearly you do not understand the concept of “long term strategy.” You see things in a very shortsighted view, which is my whole complaint with most detractors of this war and any subsequent events that must follow.
End of dissection of flawed eddy thinking.
Notes to think about (constructive thoughts): If you understood what bringing peace to the Middle East meant for the long term (next 80-100 years) in regards to our own position worldwide affairs, then you might see what I am saying.
Bringing democracy to the Middle East is a step in bringing the entire world to productivity, economically and to lasting peace. This is on a scale that has not been thought of ever. We must think outside of even 5 generations. We are beginning to set into motion a worldwide change that is only matched by this experiment known as The United States of America. But like anything worthwhile, it takes time and it has to happen on a global scale. Quite often, change such as this is painful and arduous. But just because it is unpleasant, it doesn’t mean that it is not worthwhile.
BetterthanU said:
You're almost as brainwashed as eddy! Saddam had and used WMD and used them on Kurds in Iraq. Killing THOUSANDS with NERVE GAS!!!
If I hear one more bleeding heart Liberal, whiney ass moron say "Where are the WMD?" I think I'm going to squeeze their head like a giant zit!
:kaboom: :burn: :loser: :fart:
Last edited:
esqeddy said:
Good thing you're not in the military then. I can promise you the f*cksitcks that shot at me couldn't give a shit less about what happened to my family.
So what you're saying is pass the buck? What do you think we're trying to do with the INDF? The Provisional Gov't? C'mon Eddy, you're smarter than this. At least, I hope so for the sake of your clients.
The insurgency isn't about getting rid of the 'infidels'. It's about not letting democracy take hold in the middle east.
I can assure you, civil war will break out wether we are there or not.
Who gives a shit what the rest of the world thinks? So far we have the right people behind us. The rest of the surrender monkey's can go get f*cked. In fact, so can NATO.
You lost me there. Somewhere in your bleeding heart statement you contradicted yourself, so I quit paying attention.
Last edited:
203Cree said:
Don't be so sure?!! :read:
ac427cobra said:
+1111
Oh My God.... he fell off the stool. Completely missed the floor and fell straight into the spitoon! Someone lend this drunk a hand before he sh!ts himself. Never mind. I think I'll sh!t on him myself.
If that is what you think you did with your pathetic post, you proved my earlier assertion: "Your arguments are weak and shallow".
Let's examine why and how:
CobraGuy99 said:
If that is what you think you did with your pathetic post, you proved my earlier assertion: "Your arguments are weak and shallow".
Let's examine why and how:
Just because you call my opinions firmly and honestly stated "bait" don't make them bait. Further you can call me an "asshat" all you want. Likewise, I can call you the ass this hat sits upon. ;-) Remember this concept. ITS ABOUT TO HAUNT YOU!!!CobraGuy99 said:
OK.... am I to take this as an admission that I am right? Or are you just too sorry to back up your insult with an explanation? I fear you are the yellow sort discribed most accurately with the later phrase.CobraGuy99 said:
CobraGuy99 said:
OMG... another idiot steps up to the plate. Is there an endless supply of the brain dead in this country?
Opps.... my bad. Of course you can't understand that. You are a republican. You think everyone is a threat.
Actually, this is partially true. They do fear democracy because it is a significant change and allows the majority to dictate upon the minority which was until now called the shots. But make no mistake about it, our presense if a catalist helping to fuel the problem. Taking ourselves out of the equation can only help.
Then why be there when it does. Do you want your friends dying in that mess. I sure don't.
You don't care what the rest of the world thinks so long as we have the right people behind us. Well, Einstien, just who are those "right people"? Might they be some the fo the rest of the world who you don't care about what they think? Duh..... Guess what, soon we will have no one behind us because of people like you with your elitist arrogant attitude. You know, the Nazi's thought they were better than every one else and didn't care what the rest of the world though either. :uh oh:
You couldn't follow the argument, yet you understand it enough to declare it a "bleeding heart statement". :rollseyes
Yep.... you obviously did quit paying attention. I think you need to get back on the riddlin and try to finish that GED.
Which part of the "only find out he really wasn't a threat." did you not understand? Duh!203Cree said:
Opps.... my bad. Of course you can't understand that. You are a republican. You think everyone is a threat.
Hmmmm... and letting the arabs decide their own fate is unintelligent how exactly? You make that assertion, yet TOTALY fail to back it with even the simpliest explanation. Or do you lack one?203Cree said:
203Cree said:
Actually, this is partially true. They do fear democracy because it is a significant change and allows the majority to dictate upon the minority which was until now called the shots. But make no mistake about it, our presense if a catalist helping to fuel the problem. Taking ourselves out of the equation can only help.
203Cree said:
Then why be there when it does. Do you want your friends dying in that mess. I sure don't.
opppsss.... was that another brain fart? Must have been one that slipped out:203Cree said:
You don't care what the rest of the world thinks so long as we have the right people behind us. Well, Einstien, just who are those "right people"? Might they be some the fo the rest of the world who you don't care about what they think? Duh..... Guess what, soon we will have no one behind us because of people like you with your elitist arrogant attitude. You know, the Nazi's thought they were better than every one else and didn't care what the rest of the world though either. :uh oh:
203Cree said:
You couldn't follow the argument, yet you understand it enough to declare it a "bleeding heart statement". :rollseyes
Yep.... you obviously did quit paying attention. I think you need to get back on the riddlin and try to finish that GED.
esqeddy said:
Well, I'd say with the endless supply of drivel that flows from your mouth, yes, there's a definite possibility your statement is correct.
So you're saying we're murdering innocent people needlessly over there? Why don't you just take off the gloves and call all soldiers "Baby Killers". I mean, if you're going to say it, have the balls to say exactly what you mean. :bored:
Are you not aware that we have offered to leave anytime they want us to and that the gov't there has requested our presence? That's the only reason we're still over there. I think they should be on their own. But, that's not what you said in your original statement. You implied that it'd be better for us if someone else would step in to clean up the mess. Sorry Eddy, but that's not how this country operates.
These two have the same reply. It's gonna happen one way or the other. As far as us being a catylist, yeah, you're correct. As spineless as most Iraqi's are, they would've given up and quit fighting two years ago. I guess if you look at it like that, then yeah, we are causing the problem.
Oh, and as for my friends. We all signed the same contract and agreed to take the same risks.
Yeah, I don't care what the rest of the world thinks, esp when most of the people crying the loudest are people that supplied Iraq and the region with weapons and intel for years. They're just pissed cause their money teat has been milked dry all of a sudden, and now they're getting thirsty again. Do not compare me to a Nazi. There's a huge difference btwn us and them. And if anyone is elitest, I say it's you, you pompus assbag.
Yeah, I read it, but what you typed made absolutely no sense. Lemme break it down for you.
How did you come to the conclusion that another country would be able to restore order any better than us?
So we go in there, stir shit up, piss everyone off, then leave and let someone else come in, spend their money and let their people die to fix a mess that we made. Boy, I'm glad I'm not in your family.
Your reply had better have something good in it. If it's just more hot air, supposition and spin on what other's have said, don't even bother typing it out and quoting me.
For all the brainwashed puke-sticks in here that keep spouting the tired rhetoric that Bush and Co. drilled into their narrow heads, I would like to show you this:
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob1.htm
http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm
Notice what caused a HUGE job in his approval ratings? And NO, it's not because he did a good job with it (9-1-1), it's because we all needed someone to rally around.
A ****ing McDonald's manager would have been fired by now with that kind of approval record. It's sad that the only other President with lower ratings in history is Nixon.
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm
http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob1.htm
http://www.hist.umn.edu/~ruggles/Approval.htm
Notice what caused a HUGE job in his approval ratings? And NO, it's not because he did a good job with it (9-1-1), it's because we all needed someone to rally around.
A ****ing McDonald's manager would have been fired by now with that kind of approval record. It's sad that the only other President with lower ratings in history is Nixon.
The only popularity contests that matter are for cheerleading team captains and elections. He won the only popularity contest that mattered, sorry your guy lost.carrrnuttt said:
My best bosses were never popular, they were decisive, visionary and didn't have a spinal cord attached to a wind vane.
BetterthanU
Banned
Bush is not a great president, and at a basic level, not the "Compassionate Conservative" and "Uniter, not divider" he claimed to be.
The real test of any president will come at the end of his term, when we look back and ask "did he leave America a better place than he found it?" We'll have to see about that one.
-There's a big difference between being able to say "I personally don't like my boss" and "My boss does a horrible job for the company"
The real test of any president will come at the end of his term, when we look back and ask "did he leave America a better place than he found it?" We'll have to see about that one.
-There's a big difference between being able to say "I personally don't like my boss" and "My boss does a horrible job for the company"
Last edited:
Eddy, you are the single most shallow individual I have ever come across. You simply do not understand anything. I don't know how people on this earth get so mixed up. Your credibility is zero and every time you post in this thread, you somehow manage to drop even further in every one's opinions. No one takes you seriously and I am thankful for that.
Since I am going to just walk away from this retarded conversation, you will go on and call me a coward or an intellectual ineffectual. I don't care. I know that I posess intellegence. So does everyone else on this board. They might not appreciate my opinions, but thats ok, they are free to call me an asshat without recourse.
You are a very sorry individual eddy. I feel sorry for the people who surround you in your life.
Since I am going to just walk away from this retarded conversation, you will go on and call me a coward or an intellectual ineffectual. I don't care. I know that I posess intellegence. So does everyone else on this board. They might not appreciate my opinions, but thats ok, they are free to call me an asshat without recourse.
You are a very sorry individual eddy. I feel sorry for the people who surround you in your life.
BetterthanU said:
You just claimed our reason for attacking Iraq was incorrect. Would you mind sharing with everyone who obviously isn't privy to the vast knowledge as you seem to have and share it with us? Thanks.
If you're refering to Sadam's country/gov having materials and weapons that consitute a "WMD" and the saddam's gov "attempting" to enrich Uranium for weapon purposes... then you are totally incorrect. There was and is plenty of proof that there are tons of radiological materials which can easily be used in a dirty bomb (a dirty bomb is a WMD), There was also 12 or so tons of Enriched uranium (yellowcake) which saddam has enriched to that point (12% or so) So he obviously was trying to get weapons grade uranium.
I know all this because my father was one of the lead scientists for the WMD disposal team in iraq 2003-2004.
Users who are viewing this thread
