War
 

i suppose it has come down to this....

after many months of "negotiations", it seems the US (and allies) is finally ready to go in and remove the Saddam regime and "liberate" the people of Iraq.

Although I'm not a big BUsh supporter, I did agree with most of the things he said in his speech tonight. It's better to act now, remove an imposing threat, than have to deal with a bigger threat down the road.

If we go into Baghad, it's likely many US soldiers and allies will get killed. That will have a negative impact on public opinion....so it should be executed fast and precise.....hopefully moden technology can minimize death...

Tonight, i came home after work, it was such a nice day, I just had to wash and do some detailing work on my 911...i appreciate the many freedoms this country has given me and I hope the oppressed Iraqi people can experience some of those freedoms as well.....


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads/Usa-1.gif

The U.N. "mission" has ended...the USA's mission may soon begin. I'm hoping the best for our troops. Because of their efforts, past as well as now, we enjoy our liberty to mouth off...in this country, even Louie Farrahkan (sp?) and David Duke are allowed to express their opinions.

There are a lot of things to be afraid of in this world, and personally, I consider GW Inc. a greater threat than Saddam Hussein or anyone else. They've got the power, and they're willing to abuse it. They've got the weapons, and they're willing to use them. A question for those who fear Saddam: do you fear everything the authorities tell you to fear? This administration has been all about fear since 9/11. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Do you support the troops? Bring them home now.

Doug
75 911S

I support the President, and I support the Troops. I enjoy the freedom they have both provided me.

If I didn't, I don't deserve to live in the United States.

good job doug!

The president back in Sept. 2001 said it would be a long war on terrorism. He would find it wherever it was and go after anyone who supports it. Saddam fits the bill. You go George! I think people are getting complacent (SP). Its time to support or troops and Commander in Chief.

How many more countries will the US go demolish after Iraq? Where will they stop, until the entire planet has a McDonald's and a Mickey Mouse at each corner? Bush clean the mess this country is first. I'm tired of not being able to go out at night because of of gangmembers and murderers.

I don't belive saddam is that much of a threat that it requires that many soldier's lives. To me this seems like a "I have to be better than daddy" thing, but that's me.

If we're gonna go, then for all you troops out there. Start kickin' some ass and come home safely. We're all behind you.

I support our troops 100%....not the village idiot.

For some educational interest to other parts of the USA here, Oregon is a divided state. There is the state's one huge population center, the Portland area. This is also known as "Moscow by the Willamette". Then there is the rest of the state. Other than a pair of university towns, Eugene and Corvallis, it's pretty conservative. "Moscow by the Willamette" outrules the rest of the state in voting power. Especially in Multnomah county, where I suspect vote hanky-panky. So, many of us are prisoners in paradise, even if we were born here, like my wife. My apologies to Doug, but he doesn't reflect the opinion of all who live in Oregon...

A lot of people on this planet don't want a war.

I am sorry you feel that way but the rest of the world must come first. As the leader of the free world we have certain obligations. I don't think he wants a McD's in Iraq. If the people of Iraq do then good for them let them decide.

I agree. Regardless of your take on the situation, let's try to remember that those guys are over there putting their lives on the line for our country.

I just returned from flying missions in the region and will be back out shortly. Our troops deserve our support, they are dedicated and have a tough job ahead of them. The leadership of Iraq is a great threat to this country and now is the time to put that to bed. They brought this on not us and they will now reap their just rewards. War is terrible but sometimes it is the right thing to do.

:eek: Most people here in Hawaii dont want war either....I live within 2 minutes of a major Marine base....and less that half an hour from Pearl Harbor and some other bases....Bush is so fosused on Saddam Insane, there are other "axis of evil" countries out there.....are they on the back burner untill Iraq is a glass ash tray?? Its unnerving to know the N. Koreans have nukes that can reach us here in HI as well as the west coast!

Dan? Godspeed! I think our commander in chief explained things well in his 15 minute speech. I do believe he has more inside info than we who watch Peter Jennings...My best to you and those near you. Paul SmileWavy

This is OT, but as long as others are jumping in . . . I have a pretty conflicted view.

1. I am intensely opposed to the Bush Administration. From the economy to the environment, from personal liberties to foreign policy, even to the approach taken against terrorism, I disagree with just about everything that Bush, Cheney, et al do. I think this is the most ideologically extreme administration since Reagan.

2. I reluctantly feel that Saddam has to be removed and that the UN inspections will never succeed, hence a war is the only way. I don't necessarily think Saddam is a threat today, but in 5 years he'll have nuclear weapons and be the de facto leader of the radical Islamic world in the midst of the most unstable region of the world. We can't deal with North Korea now - imagine North Korea with oil money. So I'm in the unhappy position of supporting Bush's war while opposing Bush's Presidency.

3. Once the war starts, it is in everyone's interest that it be fast and decisive. Whether you support or oppose the war or the Administration, it's a fact that the longer the war, it more will cost in every dimension - US/Allied lives, Iraqi lives, civilian and soldiers, economic destruction here and abroad, etc. Including possibly some Pelican members. So I'm rooting for our troops to win a crushing victory. It's not war-mongering, it's not supporting the President - it is painful logic.

Carreradpt.. Be safe and God Bless. and oh. Give em HELL!!!

NONE off the people on this planet want a war...the debate is about when a fight is called for.

I had the privlage of mooning about 300 protesters last night. My fealing is that if you are ignorant enough to think that Sadam would not drop a bomb on your head without blinking go over to Iraq and find out. I promise that nobody in the US is going to miss you. I will say that the "human sheilds" were funny, im SO suprised they split once that sheild thing came into play. If i was in charge id ask them to hold some homing beacons for the bombs or, at least wear bulleyes. Flaming liberas are one of the few more significant threats than Iraq and Al-Quada.

One VERY important point: Just because someone does not agree with the necessity of this military action at this time, does not mean that the person does not "support the troops", or put another way, I do not completely trust our government's assessment of the threat and/or imminent danger from Iraq, but that does not mean that I want to see one single U.S. troop harmed.

This is a very disturbing logical twist, that the peace crowd does not "support the troops". I have yet to speak to a single anti-war activist who voiced indifference to the safety/well being of our military personnel, in fact they want them home and safe. :cool:

I guess all those soldiers spit on after Vietnam must have deserved it. there are people out there who do not support the troops and still call all military personel baby killers. I do however feel they are the very small minority now and am glad the majority of those apposed still support our troops. I agree with you 95%

I am not that old but I am aware of what my fellow soldiers went through in Vietnam...read below

From 1963-65, Col. Larry Carrigan was in the 47FW/DO
> (F-4E's). He spent 6 years in the
> "Hilton"- the first three of which he was "missing in action." His wife
> lived on faith that he was still alive. His group, too, got the cleaned,
> fed, clothed routine in preparation for a "peace delegation" visit.
>
> They, however, had time and devised a plan to get word to the world
> that they still survived. Each man secreted a tiny piece of paper,
> with his SSN on it, in the palm of his hand. When paraded before Ms.
> Fonda and a cameraman, she walked the line, shaking each man's hand
> and asking little encouraging snippets like: "Aren't you sorry you
> bombed babies?" and "Are you grateful for the humane treatment from
> your benevolent captors?" Believing this HAD to be an act, they each
> palmed her their sliver of paper.
>
> She took them all without missing a beat. At the end of the line and
> once the camera stopped rolling, to the shocked disbelief of the POWs,
> she turned to the officer in charge and handed him the little pile of
> papers. Three men died from the subsequent beatings. Col. Carrigan was
> almost number four but he survived, which is the only reason we know
> about her actions that day.

H.D. I believe that story to be true...I was alive then, remember well her visit to support the troops...of Hanoi. To this day, she is remembered by some as "Hanoi Jane".

While I do have my doubts, I have to remind myself this conflict did not erupt overnight. It started when Saddam invaded Kuwait and has boiled for a decade. The UN has pussyfooted around with numerous resolutions, and few will say they have accomplished anything. I saw documentaries on PBS about inspections in Iraq during the 1990s. The Iraqis pulled the same crap then as they are today.

Regardless, Bush's firm stance means a lot to me. It means he is willing to make a decision and not waffle. I don't think this is Bush's agenda, because the last administration forced military strikes against Saddam, using the same justifications as Bush today.

Bush's speech lacked ambiguity. He made his case, and the ball is in their court. No pussyfooting or waffling accepted.

Too bad Bush Sr. didn't finish the job the first time.

Jurgen

That commie pinko b1tch!! My dad went to Vietnam...he was chief aviation ordinance in VA195(A-7E's)...he was accused of being a baby killer because he loaded napalm and was the 20mm Vulcan specialist....kooks that indescriminately point fingers and blame ought to be drawn and quartered!!

Our President is doing the right thing.... I don't really give a hairy rats ass what you leftwing morons think. This is our President..those are Americans putting their lives on the line FOR YOU!!! As Americans even if your a Liberal this is your Country, you have your freedom and you have your security. Think about the Iraqi people what do they have?
Our Troops are there ...Our troops along with supporting nations will all be putting their lives on the line for Democracy!! and Freedom!!! We will not wait, we will not allow this to go on forever and the as far as the UN is concerned it will soon be dissolved in the next few years anyway..
they have shown the world that their worthless and will never regain that respect.
When it's all over, and we Liberate the Iraqi's from Saddam Insane,
Iraqi's may not drive Porsche's But at least they will all have a Camel to Milk!!!

Jorge (Targa Dude)

Also...the US helped Saddam way back when(early '80's??) against Iran...we put him in power...so how does the assn. of Iraq being part of Bush's axis of evil...and the US helping him back then equate?:confused:

Yesss.. we did help Iraq... we gave them Bullets, guns and Knives..
Not Friggen Chemical and Biological Technology capabilities.. We gave them the means to wage an equal war!!!! Moron!!!

stick and stones.. idiot!! weapons

Jorge (Targa Dude)

This kinda sums up my viewpoint:

Fuq Iraq

Hope you enjoy.

It' Time.. To Open.... this can... can you Dig it??
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads/Whoop Ass.jpg

Jorge (Targa Dude)

Don't forget GW was a cheerleader in college, a cokehead and alcoholic, never worked a day in his life, won the presidency by fraud and sedition, supresses earth-friendly technowlogy, supports a global power monopoly, and his wife killed a friend in a highschool driving accident.

But heck, IF THAT DON'T REPRESENT AMERICA, WHAT DOES?

If you gotta kick ash boys, do it well and come home safe.

I would agree that the way that some Viet Nam vets were treated upon returning home was shameful, (ignorant people calling them "baby killers"), however, I think that these instances were very isolated and milked for maximum milage by those that want to vilify anti-war activists. My surrogate older brother served in the Marine Corps in Viet Nam in '69-'70, strangely enough he does not share the hatred for anti-war people I see here. And most of it coming from guys with no first hand experience of war. War is hell, and to be avoided whenever possible, some people do not agree with or completely blindly trust Bush that it is unavoidable at this moment, that's all.

Also, Targa Dude, if you think that the only reason we risk troops lives in the middle east is for "Freedom and Democracy", then you would be the moron, not the liberals. Wonderful democracy that Kuwait, no? And BTW, I supported Gulf War 1, but anyone who thinks that we were rescuing a democracy doesn't read much.

As for Jane Fonda, she is despicable for her actions during the Viet Nam war, but I am surprised that I have never heard the story above until now if true. The right wing's hatred for her, (justifiable though it may be), knows no bounds and that story is additional fuel, so I am surprised I have never seen it, that's all.

One last story regarding evil liberals who do not "support the troops". The late Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, by far the most liberal member of the senate and an early opponent of war in Iraq, had as one of his most loyal constituencies the families of POWs and MIAs. He was a true champion of the under-represented, and felt that the POW issue had fallen from fashion in congress, so he took it on as his own. He was also the best friend that veteran's rights groups had in Washington. He was an intersting guy, I miss him even though he was more liberal than I am on many issues, this polarization and demonizing of people w/ opposing political views is the most un-American thing I can imagine. Reminds me of certain less savory forms of government than our great one. :cool:

I have the utmost respect for our troops, and wish them the best. I cannot say the same for our leadership in WashDC.

We helped to make Saddam and other despots because our ego led us to believe that we knew what was best for other countries (or at least what was best for US corporate profits). Now we are the morals police for the planet, imposing our version of "freedom". These are troubling times...

ymmv.

I find it strange that in the early 80s, the USA assisted Iraq against Iran by supplying weapons and munitions, only for Iraq to fire two exocet missles at the USS Stark in the Gulf in 1985. If not for the valiant Damage Control teams, the ship would have been sunk, but more importantly, over 70 US Navy sailors lost their lives.

Where was the swift retribution then? Surely they represented a significant threat when they were taking shots at US Warships. :confused:

The War for Kuwait... what the heck are you talking about... That had nothing to do with establishing Democracy.. we Liberated Kuwait from Suddam Insane.. The only problem with that war was Liberal Clinton didn't have the Balls to finish the Job!!!!


Jorge (Targa Dude)

This seems very simple to me. Saddam invaded another country and would not leave. So it was decided that war was the only option to get his troops to leave. The war was won and Iraq (Saddam) was forced to live by some common sense rules. You don't allow people who invade other countries to keep building weapons. Saddam has decided not to live by these rules. Would we have let Germany, Italy and Japan build the A-bomb right after they lost WWII? He has played games for 12 years now. At what point do we enforce the rules the UN has layed down. I have one question for those of you who don't think we need a war to end this. Please tell us all what you think we should do. I hear people saying peace not war on TV every day. Not once do these people have an idea of what to do. Do you think we should just forget about the rules we handed down after the last war. Should we just let him build up an army again? Should we not care if he builds nukes or toxic weapons? Do you think he has learned his lesson and won't use his weapns or armies? Maybe we should give him one more chance, as if 12 years wasn't enough. Please tell us all your ideas on how to deal with a dictator who won't disarm and has a history of invading his neighbors.

Targa dude, let's get the facts straight before we start the name-calling. It wasn't just sticks and stones:

How the US Helped Create Saddam Hussein
By Christopher Dickey and Evan Thomas
MSNBC, September 23, 2002
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/2002/0923monster.htm

The war against Iran was going badly by 1982. Iran's "human wave attacks" threatened to overrun Saddam's armies. Washington decided to give Iraq a helping hand. After Rumsfeld's visit to Baghdad in 1983, U.S. intelligence began supplying the Iraqi dictator with satellite photos showing Iranian deployments. Official documents suggest that America may also have secretly arranged for tanks and other military hardware to be shipped to Iraq in a swap deal-American tanks to Egypt, Egyptian tanks to Iraq. Over the protest of some Pentagon skeptics, the Reagan administration began allowing the Iraqis to buy a wide variety of "dual use" equipment and materials from American suppliers. According to confidential Commerce Department export-control documents obtained by NEWSWEEK, the shopping list included a computerized database for Saddam's Interior Ministry (presumably to help keep track of political opponents); helicopters to transport Iraqi officials; television cameras for "video surveillance applications"; chemical-analysis equipment for the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC), and, most unsettling, numerous shipments of "bacteria/fungi/protozoa" to the IAEC. According to former officials, the bacteria cultures could be used to make biological weapons, including anthrax. The State Department also approved the shipment of 1.5 million atropine injectors, for use against the effects of chemical weapons, but the Pentagon blocked the sale. The helicopters, some American officials later surmised, were used to spray poison gas on the Kurds.

********

On a separate note, check out http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.html for a clear articulation of US's new national security policy. In it, you'll find the thinking behind our "preventive" war in Iraq. There were hints of this document in Bush's last two speeches.

Lukeh.. Don't ever ask Liberal for answers.. don't ever try to convince one either..They have the leave them alone and they will go away attitude... What they don't understand is that they will never go away..

Jorge (Targa Dude)

Tiger - thanks for the link, LMFAO!!!!!

As for Iraq, any leader that terrorizes/kills his own people does not deserve to lead a nation. Seeing our soliders on TV tonight, prepared to follow the commander in chief's orders sent tears welling in my eyes and a lump in my throat - This is not a trivial, I'm finishing daddy's business, etc. issue. The MoFo is spitting on the foundations of democracy and decency and belongs in the bunker with the other villians of history. The USofA is standing firm on its role as a global leader to enforce the rules of common decency.

My hat's off to our troops and to an administration willing to draw the line and stand for something.