A Different Spin on Iraq

[Iplayboard]

This question is designed primarily for those who opposed the war.

My question is, would you have supported the war if Bush had argured for war using the argument that the Iraqis were opressed people rather than saying that Saddam was a threat?

I'm sure everyone has heard the stories about Saddam gassing the Kurds and Udday torturing Olympic athletes and political enemies. Would the United States have been more justified in fighting a war to elimate a brutal dictator who posed a threat to his own people rather than one who possibly might threaten another country?

[natedogg]

Bush screwed up big time. All you have to do is throw around the word "genocide" and the American left will suddenly feel the need to bomb someone. Witness the alacrity with which they supported bombing Serbia/Bosna/wherever that hellhole is and witness the current agitation for military intervention in Sudan. They left LOVES to bomb people as much as the right, you just need to use the word "genocide" first.

natedogg

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]
My question is, would you have supported the war if Bush had argured for war using the argument that the Iraqis were opressed people rather than saying that Saddam was a threat?

I'm sure everyone has heard the stories about Saddam gassing the Kurds and Udday torturing Olympic athletes and political enemies. Would the United States have been more justified in fighting a war to elimate a brutal dictator who posed a threat to his own people rather than one who possibly might threaten another country?

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not trust his words, so his rhetoric would not matter to me.

[zaxx19]

[ QUOTE ]
witness the current agitation for military intervention in Sudan.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did I miss something? Ive been playin ALOT of poker lately and spending time with my new labtop....

Seriously is there a serious movement underfoot to take up arms in the Sudan?

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
Seriously is there a serious movement underfoot to take up arms in the Sudan?

[/ QUOTE ]
See thatpfunk's thread asking why we aren't in Sudan.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question is, would you have supported the war if Bush had argured for war using the argument that the Iraqis were opressed people rather than saying that Saddam was a threat?

I'm sure everyone has heard the stories about Saddam gassing the Kurds and Udday torturing Olympic athletes and political enemies. Would the United States have been more justified in fighting a war to elimate a brutal dictator who posed a threat to his own people rather than one who possibly might threaten another country?

[/ QUOTE ]

I do not trust his words, so his rhetoric would not matter to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which immediately disqualifies any opinion you could possibly have on the subject. People like you just bug the hell out of me.

"Its George Bush, so I don't believe anything he says."

Idiot. (Then again, you're not from here...most of us voted for him anyways, so you can see how things work)

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]
Which immediately disqualifies any opinion you could possibly have on the subject. People like you just bug the hell out of me.

"Its George Bush, so I don't believe anything he says."

Idiot. (Then again, you're not from here...most of us voted for him anyways, so you can see how things work)

[/ QUOTE ]

I have the right to choose in whom I trust without being called an idiot. I guess more than 50% of the world don't trust him, so you call the majority of world population idiots?

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
My question is, would you have supported the war if Bush had argured for war using the argument that the Iraqis were opressed people rather than saying that Saddam was a threat?

I'm sure everyone has heard the stories about Saddam gassing the Kurds and Udday torturing Olympic athletes and political enemies. Would the United States have been more justified in fighting a war to elimate a brutal dictator who posed a threat to his own people rather than one who possibly might threaten another country?

[ QUOTE ]
I do not trust his words, so his rhetoric would not matter to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

How about you pretend this was before you did not trust him.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My question is, would you have supported the war if Bush had argured for war using the argument that the Iraqis were opressed people rather than saying that Saddam was a threat?

I'm sure everyone has heard the stories about Saddam gassing the Kurds and Udday torturing Olympic athletes and political enemies. Would the United States have been more justified in fighting a war to elimate a brutal dictator who posed a threat to his own people rather than one who possibly might threaten another country?

[ QUOTE ]
I do not trust his words, so his rhetoric would not matter to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

How about you pretend this was before you did not trust him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Might have supported it actually.

[nicky g]

I would not have supported it at that time, on the grounds that Saddam was severely weakened and not in a position to commit the sort of large scale atrocities he had before, making the cost so the war too high relative to the benefits, and given that the massive resources used to fight the war could have been far more beneficially used elsewhere.

I would however quite possibly have supported an intervention during the Anfal campaign against the Kurds, which could have saved tens of thousands of lives, assuming the figures for the death toll there are accurate and assuming that no other measures would have stopped him (none were tried).

[BCPVP]

Nicky g, I hope your attitude towards this doesn't extend to regular homicide as well. "I would have been in favor of stopping the murderer during the murder, but now that a few years have gone by I couldn't care less..."

Had Hitler not committed suicide and was captured, would you be as forgiving?

[nicky g]

Arresting a murderer after the fact doesn't generally entail a war that costs tens of thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. I don't see you advocating wars to arrest and punish every dictator that's committed an atrocicty in the world, no matter what the cost. It has absolutely nothing to do with being forgiving, it's about whether the costs justify the benefits. Intervening or some sort of action during Anfal IMO could have saved many lives, intervening now IMO has been costly in lives and wasted resources that could have saved many elsewhere.

[MtSmalls]

Ask the tens of thousands that are now dead as a direct result of the US invasion/occupation if any reasons for the war were justified. Ask the millions that no longer have electricity or running water whether they though there was a justifiable reason for the war. Ask the 1500+ dead US Soldiers and thousands of wounded if there was a justifiable reason for the war. More importantly, ask the millions of US voters if they would have supported a war on Iraq (in the aftermath of 9/11) based on "Saddam's a bad guy". I believe the answer in everyone of those cases would be an overwhelming no.

Can you come up with a justification (that's not hypothetical) that justifies the loss of life, the sheer incompetency, and the disappearing US resources that are now being poured into a hellhole of our devising??

[Bodhi]

[ QUOTE ]
Would the United States have been more justified in fighting a war to elimate a brutal dictator who posed a threat to his own people rather than one who possibly might threaten another country?

[/ QUOTE ]

No, that's the Iraqi's problem, not ours. Do you want to send your son off to some foreign country to fight for people you don't know?

[Dead]

[ QUOTE ]
Bush screwed up big time. All you have to do is throw around the word "genocide" and the American left will suddenly feel the need to bomb someone. Witness the alacrity with which they supported bombing Serbia/Bosna/wherever that hellhole is and witness the current agitation for military intervention in Sudan. They left LOVES to bomb people as much as the right, you just need to use the word "genocide" first.

natedogg

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice generalizations. Most of the left vehemently opposed the bombing in Serbia/Bosnia. I know I did. The Democratic Party is not the left.

[natedogg]

"The Democratic Party is not the left. "

Good point. I totally agree.

natedogg

["spaceman"Bryce]

SUDAN