Am I WIERD

[Nickokapo]

It'd probably make it easier for the psychologist to treat you if you would actually sit on the couch, dontcha think?

[Duke]

Originally Posted by TeenageMutantNinja Hobbit

first of all, Zenrick, BIC Donnie, and Duke are my new heros.

[Zenrick]

Originally Posted by barkworm

This is my last post concerning the Iraq war because there is no point in discussing this with people who not even try to understand that people have absolutely no right to say they are fulfilling God's wishes by using violence. Besides, my home is Germany, most people here got what this war is about, so the whole war-thing shouldn't be of my business. It just makes me angry...
P.S. Zenrick, your post just shows that you don't know anything about Africa at all.

I'm glad this is your last post seeing as how you really have no understanding of this war.....I'm glad you proved to me that I have won. You should read Teenage Mutant Ninja Hobbits post.....its really good, then you might see some sort of light.
Oh and when you say I know nothing about Africa try justifying your statement before saying it......little do you know that I go to college with many men from Ghana and Kenya, they've tought me quite a bit. adios!

[Duke]

Originally Posted by barkworm

Whole Africa is "in need", they have no food, civil wars everywhere, BUT WHO HELPS THEM???

America was in Somalia less than 10 years ago. Go watch the movie Black Hawk Down

[Barkworm]

Originally Posted by Zenrick

I'm glad this is your last post seeing as how you really have no understanding of this war.....I'm glad you proved to me that I have won.

You know in Germany we say the smarter ones stop first!

[Zenrick]

Originally Posted by barkworm

You know in Germany we say the smarter ones stop first!

In America we say "YEEEEEEEEEEHAW!" and squaredance until the sun rises. So maybe you're right!

[Duke]

Originally Posted by barkworm

You know in Germany we say the smarter ones stop first!

How could anyone post against Bush when there from Germany? You guys had Hitler.

[Barkworm]

Originally Posted by Duke

How could anyone post against Bush when there from Germany? You guys had Hitler.

Oh yeah, great point! He still reigns, you know...and we all here love him.

[Duke]

I never said he still reigns. Notice the key word had.

[Barkworm]

Ever heard of sarcasm???
And of course Germany had Hitler, so noone knows better where the mistreatment of power leads to. But we should really stop this discussion, it obviously leads to nowhere. Let's have have fun again!

In America we say "YEEEEEEEEEEHAW!" and squaredance until the sun rises. So maybe you're right!

BTW, that was a good one!

[Duke]

Originally Posted by barkworm

Ever heard of sarcasm???

I'm not stupid i know it was sarcasm.

[Tokka-B]

lol hobbit, I can name you plenty of countries that have the potential to kill 1000's of innocent lives, us inlcuded I probably wouldn't want to live in China because I wouldn't have an incentive to work, but then again, their economy is so much better than ours now. War may have been the only option, but the fact will always stand that we didn't bother to use other options first, and got too hotheaded. Even if war had to occur, which I highly doubt civilized people should conclude to, (for those of you who think Bush is civilized ) We would need more support than great britain. We violated UN laws and sanctions by invading Iraq and cleansing our imperialistic needs. Could it get any worse? Maybe, there could be more terrirst attacks now..

[heretic888]

lol hobbit, I can name you plenty of countries that have the potential to kill 1000's of innocent lives, us inlcuded

Yup.

I probably wouldn't want to live in China because I wouldn't have an incentive to work, but then again, their economy is so much better than ours now.

I dunno about that..... communism tends to be very unstable economically in the long-run. Just ask Russia.

War may have been the only option

I think so.

but the fact will always stand that we didn't bother to use other options first, and got too hotheaded.

Not really. Weapons inspections took place for over 12 years and were obviously unsuccessful. And, even when the Bush administration was "a'gunnin' fer war", they took a very lengthy diplomatic process that lasted nearly 2 years. To tell you the truth, I haven't heard any valid 'options' that haven't been used in the past. I'm afraid war was the only way.

Even if war had to occur, which I highly doubt civilized people should conclude to

I conclude that, and I consider myself to be quite 'civilized'.

for those of you who think Bush is civilized

Oh, he's civilized.... just not very articulate.

We would need more support than great britain.

Not really. American military power is impressive to say the very least. Besides, we do have 'more than great britain': australia, spain, portugal, etc. etc... of course, the more the merrier.

We violated UN laws and sanctions by invading Iraq

Not really. Resolution 1441, as well as a few others, give any nation of the UN justification to use force against Iraq for violation of UN sanctions. We didn't 'violate' any international laws by doing this. The countries opposing war, however, by refusing to enforce UN sanctions, are violating UN authority though.

cleansing our imperialistic needs.

There is nothing imperialistic about this war. Unless the US makes Iraq some kind of Middle Eastern version of Puerto Rico (which is highly unlikely), then there is no claim to imperialism here.

Could it get any worse?

Yes.

Maybe, there could be more terrirst attacks now..

Of course there will, it's inevitable.

[Tokka-B]

Well China is really the only communist country that has proven to be successful, so it usually set aside form countries like russia and north korea.

Yes, we have been trying weapons inspections for 12 years, but after 12 years of failure, wouldn't you think there would need to be a change in the procedures? Probably a more enhanced weapons inspections task could work. If inspections continue to fail, perhaps a more effective way to approach this is try new energy sources for our cars and try to boycott oil altogether. I don't know what would work, I am not a prophet, but we still could have tried many other ways to deal with this.

Article 2(4) of the UN Charter states: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."
War without a new, specific U.N. resolution based upon evidence of Saddam's continued non-compliance with U.N. demands would undermine the U.N. and the ideal of a world system based on lawful principles.

Well, it is pretty obvious that we are a stronger country than Iraq, militarily speaking, but that isn't what we need help with. Where are we going to get money to rebuild Iraq? The regime's money? No, already Iraqi citizens are saying we are invaders, this is there money, if they wanted to rebuild Iraq it would have to come from us. We don't have that kind of money right now, so who do we turn to?

Yes, this has been imperialistic so far, we have invaded their country with like 250,000 troops, if that isn't an invasion I don't know what is. If we control the oil wells after this war, it will further prove my point, but that has yet to come.

[Duke]

Originally Posted by Tokka

Well China is really the only communist country that has proven to be successful, so it usually set aside form countries like russia and north korea.

China has not always been economically succesful. Look at the time they tried to manufactor their own steal instead of importanting it.

[Tokka-B]

I know, no country has always been economically successful, I was just sayng how China is actually quite a successful country for communism...

[heretic888]

Well China is really the only communist country that has proven to be successful, so it usually set aside form countries like russia and north korea.

China has only been financially successful in recent years, and that's only because they have begun to embrace capitalism.

Yes, we have been trying weapons inspections for 12 years, but after 12 years of failure

It wasn't so much that the inspectors 'failed' as much as they were deceived by Saddam Hussein. The simple truth is that the inspectors genuinely BELIEVED Iraq had disarmed when in fact he did not (for example, Hussein used biochemical weapons on the Kurds living in Iraq as late as 1998, killing over 5000).

wouldn't you think there would need to be a change in the procedures?

The procedures were changed and revised. And more than once. But, then end result was the same.... it didn't matter how they changed because Hussein still deceived the inspectors every single time.

Probably a more enhanced weapons inspections task could work.

Ok, now we are just falling into the realm of groundless idealism. An 'enhanced' weapons inspection?? What exactly is 'enhanced'?? That's like saying communism doesn't work do we should adopt an 'ehanced' communist system....... a little more concrete procedures please. I would like to know how you think the inspections could be done that hasn't been tried in the past.

If inspections continue to fail, perhaps a more effective way to approach this is try new energy sources for our cars and try to boycott oil altogether.

Eh?? Ok.... these inspections have nothing to do with oil. They have to do with Hussein possessing weapons he is not supposed to have. How does us using electric cars stop Hussein from gassing Kurds???

I don't know what would work, I am not a prophet, but we still could have tried many other ways to deal with this.

Okay, Tokka, now you are just contradicting yourself. You say you "don't know what would work" but still say there are "many other ways to deal with this". Well, obviously these "other ways" of yours exist in the idealistic realm of "maybes" and "possibilities" and lack any kind of concrete, practical application. This strikes me more as groundless (yet understandable) hope more than anything else.

War without a new, specific U.N. resolution based upon evidence of Saddam's continued non-compliance with U.N. demands would undermine the U.N. and the ideal of a world system based on lawful principles.

Yah see, Tokka, you just answered yourself.... Resolution 1441 (as well as others, such as 786 I believe) DOES give us the legality to use force against Iraq. It flatly says that if Iraq does not disarm, the members of the UN are given jurisdiction to use force to make them disarm. Obviously, Iraq has not complied. Thus, we (along with the rest of the UN) are given the right to force them to comply.

This most recent resolution (which was the 18TH resolution against Iraq), which failed, was more an ongoing formality than anything else. It was only a matter of time until the war took place. Saddam has not been cooperating for the past 12 years. What makes you think things would be different now??

Well, it is pretty obvious that we are a stronger country than Iraq, militarily speaking, but that isn't what we need help with.

Obviously not, given the success of the war thus far.

Where are we going to get money to rebuild Iraq? The regime's money? No, already Iraqi citizens are saying we are invaders, this is there money, if they wanted to rebuild Iraq it would have to come from us. We don't have that kind of money right now, so who do we turn to?

The United Nations has already offered humanitarian aid in a post-war Iraq to the United States. And, funds could always be channeled by the Iraqi oil reserves (which is why its an absolute travesty that Hussein is attempting to have them destroyed). There are other organizations that will be willing to lend a helping hand as well, such as the World Bank.

Yes, this has been imperialistic so far, we have invaded their country with like 250,000 troops, if that isn't an invasion I don't know what is.

You obviously don't know what imperialism is. Your definition of 'imperialistic' is simply 'military action'. Trust me, study a little history, you haven't seen ANYTHING even resembling imperialism yet (unless you include the USSR).

If we control the oil wells after this war, it will further prove my point, but that has yet to come.

No, it doesn't further your point. Taking control of a threatening nation and reforming it is not imperialism. If that were the case, then America's 'imperialistic' reforming of Japan and West Germany shows us that 'imperialism' can obviously have positive results. Again, military action is not necessarily imperialistic. Iraq is not going to be a part of the 'American empire' (which does not exist). Iraq will most likely be a Middle Eastern version of Japan.

Besides, the United States won't have control of the oil--- the Coalition forces will.

[Tokka-B]

Tighten enforcement of the UN weapons embargo.

Stationing inspectors and monitoring technology (such as x-ray scanners and chemical sensors) at border crossings, as well as at the port of Aqaba, could help prevent Iraq from acquiring weapons and components from abroad. Monitoring and inspection could also be tightened at Iraq's main port, Basra. In addition, a more vigorous, multilateral effort to expose and penalize arms embargo violators would address the supply side.

Another alternative is to expand programs to secure and safely destroy WMD stockpiles in the former Soviet Union and elsewhere. (that means us too, no country should be superior than another in my opinion)

But you see, by going into Iraq we are breaking more codes than we are obeying, it destroys a purpose of our invasion. We never won a vote anyway for the resolution, most of the world is against us. You say what makes me think Saddam would comply now as opposed to any other time within the past 12 years. Well, what makes you think he will attack us all of a sudden when he hasn't for the past 12 years?

Success so far in the war? Does that mean killing thousands of Iraqis? Sorry, but IMHO you don't kill a person to save one. This point is a matter of ethics.

The funds that are channeled to by the Iraqi oil reserves should be given to the Iraqis, not us, or a coalition...

I say I don't know what would work, because no one does, but I say what might work, and out of the possibilities, war should always come last, but even then I am a little wary about it.....

Alternate energy sources is a boycott to oil. What does Iraq get the money to buy weapons from? Oil. Without money, he can't gas kurds or other people, maybe then he will change, money always has a negative effect on people. Just think these things out in a logical step by step manner and you will soon get it too heretic. If I say something it might not directly relate to what we were currently talking about, but I thought you'd handle the comparison quite easily....

[Duke]

Originally Posted by heretic888

China has only been financially successful in recent years, and that's only because they have begun to embrace capitalism.

Are you a Capitalist yourself heretic?

[Zenrick]

Originally Posted by Duke

Are you a Capitalist yourself heretic?

No, he is an Archetypal Energy Conservationalist