War in Middle East ***REOPENED***
- Thread starter #1weavile
- Start date
RE: War in Middle East
... look, stop coming up with one line posts here. If you want this to be opened again, put some EFFORT into it and do something to START the conversation. At the very least give your own opinion on the situation, but honestly, you need to stop expecting everyone to do everything for you. If the OP is a one-liner, most of the responses will be one-liners too, and that sort of spam is not something that will be tolerated.
PM me if you actually make an effort with this.
*Lock*
... look, stop coming up with one line posts here. If you want this to be opened again, put some EFFORT into it and do something to START the conversation. At the very least give your own opinion on the situation, but honestly, you need to stop expecting everyone to do everything for you. If the OP is a one-liner, most of the responses will be one-liners too, and that sort of spam is not something that will be tolerated.
PM me if you actually make an effort with this.
*Lock*
J
Juliacoolo
I'm not the biggest expert on this stuff, but I'll post what I know. Despite everything that the media stirs up, the U.S doesn't really face too much trouble from Middle eastern countries. (Meaning major terrorist attacks) There is some, but that can always be easily taken care of with self defense. As for "Helping" in other countries, I think we should be spending millions of dollars a day ON OUR OWN problems before helping others. We have enough economic problems as it is, why not take care of those before we go on war sprees? I know it's much more complicated then just coming home, but we should not of invaded.
*Looks forward to Heavenly Spoons' post*
*Looks forward to Heavenly Spoons' post*
What we really should be doing in regards to the Middle East right now is finding a way to stop Iran from building a nuclear warhead (If they are) or hire an assassin to kill their president cause they could become a threat to global security and the global economy If the Islamic Revolutionary Guard is after what they're really after.
Israel must be protected at all costs, but then again Israel can also defend themselves pretty well but they still need backup from the U.S. and other nations especially the U.K., Japan, China, and other countries. I don't see Pakistan becoming as huge of a threat as Iran is right now, and it seems like things with North Korea are settling down which is a good sign of progress.
Israel must be protected at all costs, but then again Israel can also defend themselves pretty well but they still need backup from the U.S. and other nations especially the U.K., Japan, China, and other countries. I don't see Pakistan becoming as huge of a threat as Iran is right now, and it seems like things with North Korea are settling down which is a good sign of progress.
As for the thread itself, this has the possibility to turn into a very bad discussion ultimately ending in some kind of flame war, so I refuse to post my opinion. I prefer your ethical questions, weavile. =/
Also, hhnngh? The terrorist bombers weren't even from Afghanistan. They were mostly Saubi Arabian and Lebanese. Also, the motive for the 9/11 terrorist attacks were mostly the US's support of Israel, and the US being in Saudi Arabia. and the terrorists wanting to be supreme rulers of our world and despising our way of life. ...or it was a conspiracy theory, if you think that that's cool too. But as far as I know, I have never heard 9/11 being linked to the United States invading Afghanistan, because we... didn't invade Afghanistan until sometime in October, 2001. Also, innocent people are suffering almost everywhere in the Middle East.
There is most definitely someone here more knowledgeable than I am, so I'd ask them to correct me if I'm wrong on any of these points. Also, still not posting my opinion.
Haha, I like the "maybe" option on the poll. I find it funny some think of this as a "maybe" question. That's like saying, "well, 'maybe' we should invade this country".
#1weavile said:
Also, hhnngh? The terrorist bombers weren't even from Afghanistan. They were mostly Saubi Arabian and Lebanese. Also, the motive for the 9/11 terrorist attacks were mostly the US's support of Israel, and the US being in Saudi Arabia. and the terrorists wanting to be supreme rulers of our world and despising our way of life. ...or it was a conspiracy theory, if you think that that's cool too. But as far as I know, I have never heard 9/11 being linked to the United States invading Afghanistan, because we... didn't invade Afghanistan until sometime in October, 2001. Also, innocent people are suffering almost everywhere in the Middle East.
There is most definitely someone here more knowledgeable than I am, so I'd ask them to correct me if I'm wrong on any of these points. Also, still not posting my opinion.
Haha, I like the "maybe" option on the poll. I find it funny some think of this as a "maybe" question. That's like saying, "well, 'maybe' we should invade this country".
You only need to take a brief look at the facts to see why this war is one of the most ridiculous things in modern history.
1) Since the "war on terror" began, more than 800,000 lives have been lost.
2) Conversely, roughly 3,000 people were killed in the 9/11 attacks. Under Sadam's 24 year regime, 300,000* people were either killed or ominously went missing.
3) The war so far has cost America over 1,000,000,000,000 dollars.
As complex as this issue is, the statistics convince me that no matter how hard one tries, you can never possibly justify this war. Even if we suceeded in wiping out the terrorism for good, the number of lives lost in the process make it both a hypocritical and futile effort.
I find it difficult to compare the dollars lost to the death toll because a life isn't something that can be (nor should be) valued in terms of money. What I do know is that the money could be spent on more important things.
*This is the death toll estimated by the US government themselves.
1) Since the "war on terror" began, more than 800,000 lives have been lost.
2) Conversely, roughly 3,000 people were killed in the 9/11 attacks. Under Sadam's 24 year regime, 300,000* people were either killed or ominously went missing.
3) The war so far has cost America over 1,000,000,000,000 dollars.
As complex as this issue is, the statistics convince me that no matter how hard one tries, you can never possibly justify this war. Even if we suceeded in wiping out the terrorism for good, the number of lives lost in the process make it both a hypocritical and futile effort.
I find it difficult to compare the dollars lost to the death toll because a life isn't something that can be (nor should be) valued in terms of money. What I do know is that the money could be spent on more important things.
*This is the death toll estimated by the US government themselves.
bacon said:
We've had this war coming since the 1980's, but we haven't listened to any of the warnings of impending growth in terrorism or Al-Qaeda. It's partly our fault it happened and that we weren't better prepared, but when it comes down to it, if we DON'T fight now, the same thing that happened in 2001 is going to happen again, and this time it might not come from Al-Qaeda. I'm not saying the tactics and the way we budget things is necessarily WISE (I'm trying not to speak my opinion here lol), but there is room for improvement. This is a very serious war with a nation very serious about killing every single person who doesn't believe in them, and even those who do. ...and with possible nuclear weapons.
My POINT is, we should have seen this coming, and now we're paying the price for not doing so. And when it comes down to money and innocent people's lives, I'm aware of the problems in our own country but that shouldn't stop us from doing what we've always done.
CCloud said:
While I do agree with most of that statement, what decision would most of the civilians have made? To stay here and pretend like nothing happened?
Galefail said:
Well, clearly most Americans would have agreed to send troops to the Middle East, but the point is, it didn't matter how we citizens felt about the situation, the government would have made that move anyway. It's all about keeping us distracted, so we don't discover what's going on, so slowly they can keep limiting our freedom.
CCloud said:
Okay, when you put it that way I can't feel anything but inclined to agree.
Anyway,
Juliacoolo said:
We don't face too much trouble from middle eastern countries? You really need to tell that to the people who are on the planes that are attempted to be hijacked almost every day. If we DON'T put others before us, we're going to lose our allies, and we'll be left alone with even less than we have now.
Card Slinger J said:
What makes you think they'll be any happier with us if we kill their president? And since when can Israel defend themselves pretty well? North Korea settling down? They're testing missiles lol.
Galefail said:
Even if the events of 9/11 were to repeat themselves, the death toll wouldn't even come close to balancing out the lives lost in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars (unless you believe that it's possible for 500,000 lives to be lost due to terrorism in a nation as security tight as America). America and its allies are effectively committing atrocities against humanity on a scale that the terrorists could only dream of, unless one believes that American lives are worth more than Iraqi lives (a view which many people hold sadly).
I am not against a reaction of some kind. If your country is bombed, then of course you have to retaliate in some shape or form. But going to a war of this magnitude (to prevent terrorism) is logically contradictory- you justify the murder of hundred of thousands of people by saying you want to save the lives of others (and, I should add, antagonizing the terrorists all the more for doing so).
Perhaps everyone should have seen it coming. Another fault on their part, then. But it does not back up this war at all.
It's stupid, we're fighting for peace, and losing lots of lives in the proess ;p I don't see why these countrys can't try to ignore each other.
cool kid master555 said:
Because for one thing, if we ignored one another we'd be in a much worse position than we are in now. There would be no United Nations, we couldn't make decisions that can make the world a better place, and above all, we depend on each other for resources, food, money, and other things. Ignoring each other is almost the worst thing we can do (next to not ignoring each other). Also, can you propose another way to fight this war?
bacon:
While I do agree it's a lose-lose situation, the only thing we can do at this point is buy time anyway. It's not like we're "winning" or "losing" the war, the fact of the matter is we're fighting for our pride as Americans, and there are countries that are kind enough to help us, and we help them in the process because this is everybody's war. At the same time, there isn't much else we can do except try to progress with our plans to find the weapons of mass destruction, and just keep stalling. Terrorism continues to grow to an even bigger threat than ever before and there isn't a whole lot we can DO to stop it. The only thing that justifies the war is what would happen if we didn't try to justify it.
Oh for crying out loud - it's not called "the usa and its allies". It's a real eyesore to see it referred to this way by people in this thread. It's called NATO.
Are you kidding me? That entire post sounds silly. You really think the president calls all the shots? Guess what, he doesn't. Killing him wouldn't do any good. Just like his U.S. counterpart - Barack Obama, the Iranian president is just a figure head. There are hundreds, if not thousands of politicians, officials and policy makers who do all the work. If anything, you should be killing them. Besides, I don't see why it's a problem for Iran to be producing nuclear weapons. Almost every other country with a considerable military strength in the world has them.
Why must Israel be protected at all costs? Because of it's religious influence on Christianity? They don't need assistance from any other country to defend themselves. They've been doing so very well for years. And quite frankly, if Iran ever did try and detonate nuclear or atomic weapons on Israeli soil, I hope you realise at any given time Israel has numerous submarines out in the oceans who would just love to fire their nuclear arsenal and wipe Iran off the map. The only reason this hasn't been done is because of the global implications - the rest of the world would then proceed to destroy Israel. They're just biding their time and are waiting for another country to strike first (i.e. Iran).
Things in North Korea are far from settled down. At any given time they have so much artillery pointed at South Korea to destroy cities like Seoul in 5 minutes. They've got so many R&D programs it's not funny - like their missiles that can reach the other side of the world.
The United Nations are a complete joke in the first place. They can't do anything. They are an overglorified group of tree hugging delusional about world peace hippies. The only thing they can attack people with is words, and then get themselves killed. Refer to Rwandan Genocide of 1994 as one example.
Card Slinger J said:
Are you kidding me? That entire post sounds silly. You really think the president calls all the shots? Guess what, he doesn't. Killing him wouldn't do any good. Just like his U.S. counterpart - Barack Obama, the Iranian president is just a figure head. There are hundreds, if not thousands of politicians, officials and policy makers who do all the work. If anything, you should be killing them. Besides, I don't see why it's a problem for Iran to be producing nuclear weapons. Almost every other country with a considerable military strength in the world has them.
Why must Israel be protected at all costs? Because of it's religious influence on Christianity? They don't need assistance from any other country to defend themselves. They've been doing so very well for years. And quite frankly, if Iran ever did try and detonate nuclear or atomic weapons on Israeli soil, I hope you realise at any given time Israel has numerous submarines out in the oceans who would just love to fire their nuclear arsenal and wipe Iran off the map. The only reason this hasn't been done is because of the global implications - the rest of the world would then proceed to destroy Israel. They're just biding their time and are waiting for another country to strike first (i.e. Iran).
Things in North Korea are far from settled down. At any given time they have so much artillery pointed at South Korea to destroy cities like Seoul in 5 minutes. They've got so many R&D programs it's not funny - like their missiles that can reach the other side of the world.
Galefail said:
The United Nations are a complete joke in the first place. They can't do anything. They are an overglorified group of tree hugging delusional about world peace hippies. The only thing they can attack people with is words, and then get themselves killed. Refer to Rwandan Genocide of 1994 as one example.
PheonyxXx said:
Uhh, in all fairness, it was a valid excuse - at the time, many countries (not just America) had reason to believe that Iraq had possession of WMD's. Of course, after a while, it was shown that they didn't actually have any. If they did, they weren't found. Maybe they are hiding like Hussein was - in a small room under a garden pot.
I won't talk about the Gulf War much, as I don't know too much about it. But I really doubt Bush just wanted to continue what his father started. The Gulf War was really nothing more than an excuse to train military personnel, if anything at all. Most of the costs were covered by Arab countries.