Is War Worth it!?

[Sig]

Originally posted by Darkcyd:
But how can you trust the wisdom of people making choices on topics that they don't fully understand or grasp?

But I have problems blindly following a president whose legitimacy is questionable and who doesn't seem to give a rats ass about the opinions of the global community and what the repercussions of his actions will be.

[This message has been edited by Darkcyd (edited 14 January 2003).]

1)This is intended to be an observation of me reading your thoughts. I am curious why you seem to think your point of view is somehow more enlightened than any others? I have spent more time researching Iraq than I care to admit (I'm a closet international politics nerd), not to mention following the daily goings on even when there was zero press coverage..... from my humble or not so humble point of view, it appears there is much we all do not "fully understand or grasp". If you want to measure what the U.S. should do by the words/actions of the people most informed.... well look no further than Congress. There is a reason that many Democrats including the majority of their leadership support the President on Iraq. I would wager my NSX : ) that they are more informed than all of us.

2) Two things about the second paragraph I have quoted from you.

First, perhaps he is not legitimate in your neighborhood, but the rest of the country even Florida thinks differently. I didn't count the Midwest, those guys don't know anything. Wait, my family is from the Midwest : )

Second, I want to suggest a rewording of your statement about Bush not caring about the global community and reprocussions of his actions and chew on it for a bit to see what is tastes like(****PostReview: this was meant to be funny, though it reads aggressive, oops****). On average it's the global community that does not care about the United States and the reprocussions of their actions.
I am of the school of thought, that it is very easy to criticize, but a very different thing to offer viable solutions. It is along those lines to where I see I a blanket critcal statement about our country's leader that I ask the question to you: If our president doesn't care about the global community, what global leader do you believe cares the most? I really am curious.

[This message has been edited by Sig (edited 15 January 2003).]

 

[Electro]

Sig & others...

Let's try to keep this discussion on the topic at hand and not misinterprit the words and issues that we're bringing up.

Of course we can not talk about politics without it having much to do w/ our oppinions. So everyone has their emotions all tied up in this as well.

Of course no one can make a blanket statement about the citizens of the US nor about anyone else in this world.

Its all about observation. That's the only thing I was doing in the begining of this post... if things dont add up, I WILL question it. I dont care who it is that tells me "oh just believe it because it is so".

-Electro

 

[Darkcyd]

Originally posted by Sig:
1)This is intended to be an observation of me reading your thoughts. I am curious why you seem to think your point of view is somehow more enlightened than any others? I have spent more time researching Iraq than I care to admit (I'm a closet international politics nerd), not to mention following the daily goings on even when there was zero press coverage..... from my humble or not so humble point of view, it appears there is much you do not "fully understand or grasp". If you want to measure what the U.S. should do by the words/actions of the people most informed.... well look no further than Congress. There is a reason that many Democrats including the majority of their leadership support the President on Iraq. I would wager my NSX : ) that they are more informed than all of us.

2) Two things about the second paragraph I have quoted from you.

First, perhaps he is not legitimate in your neighborhood, but the rest of the country even Florida thinks differently. I didn't count the Midwest, those guys don't know anything. Wait, my family is from the Midwest : )

Second, I want to suggest you reword your statement about Bush not caring about the global community and reprocussions of his actions and chew on it for a bit to see what is tastes like. On average it's the global community that does not care about the United States and the reprocussions of their actions.
I am of the school of thought, that it is very easy to criticize, but a very different thing to back it up with viable solutions. It is along those lines to where I see I a blanket critcal statement about our country's leader that I ask the question to you: If our president doesn't care about the global community, what is the name of the global leader whom you believe cares the most? I really am curious.

Sig - At no point in this entire discussion have I insulted anybody or said that their point of view was outright wrong. I have disagreed, and stated my reasons for it, yes. I have said on numerous occasions that I have a certain belief or that I think this or that. I have never once labeled myself an expert on the subject, I have merely tried to get people to open their minds (myself included) and point out different points so that people could ask themselves those very same questions and come to their own conclusions. Do I think that I am pretty current on what is going on? Sure. Do I think I'm globally conscious. Yes. Do I think the my concerns about the war with Iraq are valid. Absolutely. When Viper Driver came up with some very valid reasons for going to war with Iraq, I readily conceded the validity of his points. If you want to disprove or dissent from what I have to say on the subject of the war, feel free to do so, that is what this debate is all about.

Let's leave debate about Congress and the last elections to another time. =) That in and of itself could be an entirely separate forum. LOL

As for whether or not there's a leader out there that cares about the world more than Bush cares about the global community, thats not the issue. It's about respecting others. He is insensitive to the fact that just because no other country on the planet has an army to match ours, their voices and concerns are equally important and should be considered. Since he's been president, he's succeeded in pissing off China, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and even Saudi Arabia. 2 years ago we led relatively peaceful lives. In the last 2 years we've gone from that peace to outbreaks of conflicts in several regions of the world. It may not be directly Bush's fault, but in my opinion, he has not handled our international relations with a passing grade.

Note: This is my OPINION. Not to be construed as making my thoughts more enlightened.

[This message has been edited by Darkcyd (edited 14 January 2003).]

 

[Psychoholic]

My wisdom:

Never try a landwar in Asia during winter.

 

[Sig]

Tisk, Tisk : )

DarkCyd-
I guess I misunderstood your your statement:
Originally posted by Darkcyd:
But how can you trust the wisdom of people making choices on topics that they don't fully understand or grasp?

My fault, I withdraw my mention of perceived thought supremacy I attached to you.

Oh the beauty of the internet, despite all of our efforts... most times all context and tone of voice is lost in typing. Perhaps I could have done a better job choosing my words, because the wrong message was drawn from my post. I was typing quickly to finish before a meeting, oh well don't sweat the small stuff. My apologies for the tone.

The main things I was getting at are:
1) I really am curious, seriously, who you believe to be the most honorable global leader currently in power. It is academically interesting to see who those of different views hold in high regard.

2) The reason msot of those countries you listed hate us is not because our govt. is insensitive. It is becasue for the first time in a long, long time that we said enough is enough. Rogue nations/organizations won't vocalize and actionize when we are not doing anything to stop them. They get their pannies in a grundle when we end their honeymoon. North Korea's current discontent is because of their own years of deception. They conned the stuffing out Carter,our top notch envoy in 1994. This led to a great deal for them, which they still couldn't even abide to.

9/11 is truly the impetus to many of our international actions over the past year. After that day, Bush would have been hung out to dry by the majority of the country if his administration did not make concerted activist efforts to stop brush fires before they turn into forest fires. Unfortunately, there is a ton of risk taking that is inherent in such policy. The opportunity cost of the alternative is unacceptable to most voters.

The biggest irony here is the fact that Bush ran on a psuedo-isolationist mantra. That may be a bit strong, but he really wanted to get our noses out of many parts of the world he thought we didn't belong. His mind and the rest of the administration's was changed in one day.... along with the minds of our nation(majority of).

Here's a thought for you. I believe that often times we(the U.S.) are unreasonable when dealing with things internationally. However, as unreasonable as we are, most of these nations in question are exponentially more unreasonable. The unfortunate truth is they view compromise as a sign of weakness and only respond to displays of power. This has been thoroughly entrenched over several thousand years in the culture due to the harsh history of the area. No slick talking negotiator will undue culture. If you read the publications in these nations after past pacts and negotiations, they outcome is reported as if they just won war and showed how cowardly America is. Then the actions which caused the run in to begin with are repeated knowing they will get away with it for a period of time. Negotiation time again. Post-negotiations are treated as another war victory inside these countries.... and the cycle continues. Each time the stakes escalate.

If their govts. were like those of Germany or France (who both strongly disagree with us)there would be 0% chance of war. Despite the strong disagreements, good faith negotiations are workable because the good faith piece is present on both sides of the table. Every one of these countries has continuously used negotiations as a means to bide time for themselves. That said, though I would support a war if it took place, I sure hope it doesn't come to that. Perhaps a massive buildup will cause the UN to get serious for once or even better stir someone else to get rid of Sadaam and cough up their WMD loot.



[This message has been edited by Sig (edited 15 January 2003).]

 

[Spencer]

Jeez! I cannot bear to read most of this rationale (if that's what you call it).

Given the fact that: 1) Saddam has undoubtably developed WOMD (apologies to Hans Blix but all of you policy wonks must know that he's more than proven his incompetence at finding ANYTHING over the last 15 years), 2) it's easier than piss to bring anything you want into this country (remember the explosives caught via sheer luck coming into Washington State during the Millenium? Well I do, I live here), and 3) Saddam has shown no restraint at using same...just what, EXACTLY, would all of you against the war do? Would you attempt to negotiate with a madman? Send Cheryl Crow to Baghdad to disarm Saddam via her music? Maybe Sean Penn or Barbara Streisand can convince him to forget about developing those nice destabilizing nukes? It's really interesting to note...the only viable thing that I've heard yet...is to get him to agree to exile in another country. And guess what? That's only happening NOW, BECAUSE THE F-16S ARE SO CLOSE HE CAN TASTE THEM... I don't really want a war but I don't hear any real alternatives to one, either.

 

[gheba_nsx]

http://www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml

 

[NeoNSX]

wow... a nice political debate we got going here! *jumps into the action* I want to avoid long sentences, but here are my main thoughts:

* Iraq developing weapons of mass destructions is NOT THE REAL PROBLEM. Why develop them when it's easy to purchase radioactive material and nuclear weapons from the former soviet union?

* Why isn't Iran being investigated? During the 1991 Gulf War, they provided safe-haven for Iraqi fighter pilots & their jets. They have been sympathic to Iraq on numerous occassions. Iran in part of Bush's "Axis of Evil"? Isn't it possible that all Iraq's weapons of mass destruction could be hidden there (or another sympathic country)???

* As much as i like George W. Bush, it is my own opinion that his motive for attacking Saddam is wrong. The issue is not entirely oil however. I have heard George W. talk about Saddam's failed attempt to kill his father in Kuwait shortly after the Gulf War. Perhaps he wants to finish his dad's job?

of course, these are my opinions...flame away.

 

[Ponyboy]

On a lighter note, how many people think the Lakers are going to miss the playoffs.

.02 cents from an Average Middle Class Joe: I have no problem in getting that lunatic out of power in Iraq. But unless they find these weapons of mass destruction, it's going to be a hard sale to the American public. And that's something GWB Jr. hasn't done a very good job of so far. But even if they don't find any weapons, does any one doubt that he has the them or the capacity not only to produce them but to actually USE them? I for one, do not want to be a modern day "Chamberlain," pacifying public opinion, and putting off an inevitable confrontation.

 

[wildbill846]

NeoNSX,

Iran isn't quite the Iraqi sympathizer you make them out to be. Remember, they were fighting a brutal war with Iraq for about a decade before Desert Storm. Plus, most Arabs generally don't like Iran nor does Iran generally like Arabs. While Iran does share religion with Arabs, Iran is Persian....a completely different culture.
Yes, during Desert Storm, Iran allowed Iraqi jet to land in Iran. Those jets were repainted with Iranian markings and never returned. It wasn't so much a friendly gesture as much as a thank you for the free jets.
While I would not say Iran is our best buddy, they are not nearly the concern that Iraq is.

Bill
-Currently somewhere in the Persian Gulf with the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit

 

[JaguarXJ6]

NeoNSX, honestly, can you say its not a lot easier said then done purchasing nuclear materials or those that can be used in nuclear (and non-nuclear) weapons with a huge destructive payload? Wouldn't he have done so by now.. ? No doubt Saddam would like to have at least 1 in his arsenal to lob at his most hated enemy should his military toys become broken again.

There's no buy 2 nukes get 1 free stand setup in Russia or any of the countries in the Russian Federation or else we would have had a lot more "rogue" nuclear states besides India and Pakistan.'

The Russians, if not the entire international community are hunting down materials leaks, setting up fake sellers, etc.

Where there's a will, there's a way. Political pressure and sanctions haven't taken away Saddam's destructive will or he would cease firing on the planes in the no-fly zone. Its only a matter of time before the threat becomes exponentionally greater.

Sunny

[This message has been edited by JaguarXJ6 (edited 15 January 2003).]

 

[Joel]

PonyBoy,

I completely disagree with your whole argument! I have never heard of such an inane, thoughtless comment in my life. The basis for your reasoning is completely off!
The Lakers will make the playoffs. You watch!

 

[Joel]

Seriously though, this whole war and global involvement really boils down to one question:

Should the United States police the entire world?

 

[Electro]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/01/17/sproject.irq.blix/index.html

Now that the weapons inspectors have allegedly found some weapons... this might just be all the evidence bush and blair need to strike against Iraq...

Here it comes ladies and gents...

-Electro

 

[NeoNSX]

Originally posted by Joel:
Should the United States police the entire world?

YES: Because Peace is not just the absence of conflict, it's the presense of justice (Quote from Harrison Ford, "Air Force One")

NO: Nobody cheers a Referee. The US could be hated because the Police the world (even if the world is better for it)

 

[NeoNSX]

IN REPLY TO post by wildbill846:

hey wildBill... approperiate username!

i'm aware of the Iran-Iraq Gulf War, and scabbing Iraq's jets (but i love how the US made sure only a few made it across the border; and some even ran out of fuel & crashed)

...but take this analogy for example: two brothers fight. Then Dad steps in and stops them. While there is peace, the two brothers now may have a common enemy: the Dad. Even enemies can join together when it is in their self-interests. It is a strong possibility. Hope this story makes sense.

By the way, if you really are a Marine in the Persian Gulf, then u have my respect & good wishes. It's a harsh environment to live in; let alone wage war. *sincere salute*

 

[NeoNSX]

REPLY to post by JaguarXJ6:

true... there's no Two4one Nukes on sale... if there were, i'd buy a couple to run on my modified NSX (it travels through time... bet MYNSX doesn't have that mod!

)

But back to a serious note... i doubt it is easy to buy a ICBM or nuke, but take note of these facts:

[*]13.5kg of plutonium was once stolen from a Russian Nuclear Submarine Hanager.

[*]Ex-Reporter from Washington Post & Wall Street Journal, Michael Drosnin, was offered by a Russian Missile Scientist to buy plans for a Russian Missile System when he was on assignment there. (no BS)

[*]Nuclear material was caught being smuggled from Germany last year.

I'm not an alarmist, but when Russia is so poor and in neglect that nobody can be certain their security is at 100%. And the above facts are NOT promising. Which freaks me out a bit after seeing the movie "The Sum of All Fears"

 

[David]

Originally posted by Electro:
If you've ever spent any extended amount of time in the bible belt (not to say there's anything wrong w/ the bible but I'm talking about the conservativity and old fashioned methodology of this region of people) of the US - that stretches from Texas to Washington D.C., you'd quickly understand that there is a vast majority of people that don't (or can't) think outside of their own complacent existance. This majority is unable to consider other cultures before taking actions that they deem "the right thing to do"... Most are not able to comprehend other people's perspectives because of the environment they were raised in.

You just summed up my view of people on the left coast. They cling to such an arrogant, narrow minded, PC, leftist world view that they are completely unable to grasp the opinions of the rest of the country (sometimes referred to as "the majority" or "normal poeple").If you are going to call me a redneck can I call you a smug pillow-biting leftcoast whuss? Name calling is name calling - stop trying to rationalize it. If you need it to prop up your arguement, then you don't have one.


[This message has been edited by David (edited 17 January 2003).]

 

[Sig]

David-

I'll be coming to Austin sometime in Febuary. We have to hang out.

We can have a baby-killing thug night out.

 

[David]

Originally posted by Sig:
David-

I'll be coming to Austin sometime in Febuary. We have to hang out.

We can have a baby-killing thug night out.

Love to - but be forewarned; if you see Austin, you will not want to leave. We are some fun-loving backwards war-mongering rednecks. A few of us are almost smart enough to move to SoCal and have opinions of our own.

[This message has been edited by David (edited 17 January 2003).]

 

[Electro]

Obviously I can't make a statement like that and not piss everyone off... even if they don't fit into that catagory... they're insulted because they think I'm trying to fit them into it.

Guys, give me a fuqn break - I'm not calling anyone names... especially anyone in here. Those of you that frequent this board are obviously intelligent enough to make a good living and drive nice cars... If you're offended by the term "redneck" then you're obviously not one, therefore I was not talking to you.

Those that are rednecks are very proud to be one, and wouldn't be offended by me telling them that they're a redneck.

It's really tough keeping this discussion on topic apparently.

-Electro

 

[David]

Originally posted by Electro:
[BGuys, give me a fuqn break - I'm not calling anyone names...
-Electro[/B]

Thank you for beautifully demonstrating one of my other gripes about arrogant left-coast types. You DID engage in name calling. That is the definition of terms like 'redneck.' Now, when you are challenged about it, you deny or rationalze instead of having the stones to just stand up and admit it. If you are going to be arrogant and condescending, please don't add hypocricy to the list. Even a dumb redneck like myself can see right through it and I find it as shameful as the original deed.

 

[Electro]

Arrogant left-coast?

I grew up in Atlanta, as a, yes you guessed it, A redneck. I don't know how you could get upset about a redneck calling another redneck a redneck? Its my heritage.

I only moved to the west coast to do business. Not to be called arrogant or left-wing. You're taking this wayyyy out of context.

That beautifully deomonstrates my gripe about people stereotyping everyone that lives in the west coast... Not everyone fits the stereotype. Just as not everyone fits the stereotype of a redneck. That doesnt mean that rednecks and left-wingers dont exist does it? Thats my point- the more you get pissed about it the more off-topic we get. I have nothing to admit because I'm not 'calling names'... just telling it like it is.

How about contributing to this discussion instead of contributing to bullshit argumentitive stuff that really means nothing at the end of the day.

-Electro

[This message has been edited by Electro (edited 17 January 2003).]

 

[David]

Originally posted by Electro:
I have nothing to admit because I'm not 'calling names'... just telling it like it is.

One of the classic symptoms of delusional arrogance is reffering to your own opinions as if they are facts. You do this repeatedly through this thread.

Aslo, in my effort to become a neo-socialist left-wing psuedo-intellectual so that I can move to the supreme all-knowing mecca of SoCal, I find myself forced to confront your racist and insensitve use of the word "redneck." I demand that you immediately refrain from using that objectionable term and start refering to me and mine with the respect we deserve - we are proud "Cracker Americans" damnit.

Now, get over yourself.

 

[Electro]

You're obviously not reading what I have to say.

Racist? Is being a redneck a race in itself?

I grew up in Atlanta, as a, yes you guessed it, A redneck. I don't know how you could get upset about a redneck calling another redneck a redneck? Its my heritage.

Read that part again. My whole family is redneck. So eat it with a bowl of cherries. I will not continue this meaningless debate. Go flame someone else for something a little more meaningful.

-Electro

[This message has been edited by Electro (edited 17 January 2003).]