|
Post by Gran Gran on Dec 17, 2007 1:30:26 GMT -5
Well, Vietnam was a lost cause. It had already gone on for a while before the US stepped in. And there, too where no clear drawn fronts on which to battle.
Getting Saddam....he wasn't doing anything he had not done in the 1980's when he had the support of the US, in hope he would take a bite out of Iran. Much of the stuff US troops had to faight against was courtesy of the US government.
It is a popular version of why to go into Iraq. there was no reason.
There is enough corruption in DC, other countries expect government officials to line their pockets, as holding office there comes with much greater risks.
And last, I don't see anybody fighting a war in the mid west of the US. Afghanistan is a great deal higher if memory serves me right then the above mentioned locale...and you can't just pop into your neighborhood 7/11 for a splash of and a slurpy. The terrain is harsh, the climate harsher, and the people don't want anybody meddling with their affairs. You get to sit between a dozend o more little warlords who fight each other, all while financving the deal with poppy
|
|
|
Post by aangstheone on Dec 17, 2007 21:40:26 GMT -5
I was talking Climate wise, not terrain, if there was no Buildings or streets, or 7/11's then yes they would be the same.... I got a reason no one will belive... WMD's were in Iraq and got shipped out on passenger planes where the seats had been taken out of, There was proof but I cant find the site, an Iraqi general was intervied and he told the US, supposabdly they were shiped to Syria and then destroyed
|
|
|
Post by Blind Bandit on Dec 17, 2007 21:45:35 GMT -5
I was talking Climate wise, not terrain, if there was no Buildings or streets, or 7/11's then yes they would be the same.... I got a reason no one will belive... WMD's were in Iraq and got shipped out on passenger planes where the seats had been taken out of, There was proof but I cant find the site, an Iraqi general was intervied and he told the US, supposabdly they were shiped to Syria and then destroyed Please try to give more soild information on senstive subject such as this.
|
|
|
Post by Gran Gran on Dec 17, 2007 21:48:03 GMT -5
I was talking Climate wise, not terrain, if there was no Buildings or streets, or 7/11's then yes they would be the same.... I got a reason no one will belive... WMD's were in Iraq and got shipped out on passenger planes where the seats had been taken out of, There was proof but I cant find the site, an Iraqi general was intervied and he told the US, supposabdly they were shiped to Syria and then destroyed I mean, it's no secret that Iraq had all those things. It was used against Iranian soldiers and against Iraqy Kurds...but that was pre Desert Storm...after that - if the stuff was flown out of the country, it was gone...no WMD in Iraq, in compliance with UN regulations, no reason to go in...it is also o secret that with the exception of the people briefing congress and President, nobody in the free world believed that any were left.... And feel free to ask any soldier currently stationed in those areas her in the US with winter rapidly approaching....how much they like a week in the field under those conditions, knowing their meal will be provided, on time and warm, their truck will not be fired upon and after the week is over they can craw back into warm barracks... Afghanistan is one of the more hostile climates in the world.
|
|
|
Post by aangstheone on Dec 17, 2007 22:05:41 GMT -5
Alriht lets drop the climate its got nothng to do witht he topic... When my dad came back from Desert Storm he said when he walked in the sand for 6 months and then walked on the Concrete it felt like he was on the moon...
Yes they Had WMD's but at the time the US did not know they had been shiped out of Iraq, and they did not tell the UN in fear of what the conciquences would have been, Now they are destroyed (I remember watching a bunker on TV being cleared out of Medium sized WMD's they were all really old and looked deactive, but we cant take the chance...) So
|
|
|
Post by Gran Gran on Dec 17, 2007 22:44:57 GMT -5
Alriht lets drop the climate its got nothng to do witht he topic... When my dad came back from Desert Storm he said when he walked in the sand for 6 months and then walked on the Concrete it felt like he was on the moon... Yes they Had WMD's but at the time the US did not know they had been shiped out of Iraq, and they did not tell the UN in fear of what the conciquences would have been, Now they are destroyed (I remember watching a bunker on TV being cleared out of Medium sized WMD's they were all really old and looked deactive, but we cant take the chance...) So That is the rhethoric used to promote the war. While a picture tells more then a thousand words, they can be doctored and footage staged. At the time of the invasion there where non present. I am sure it was an act of defiance not to tell where they went... And the climate is very important when you plan a war. I know MASH is just a TV show, but there are all types of things to consider, how to get the equipment in and keep it running...how to keep the troops fed and clothed, etc...the desert might be hot and dusty (water...never run out...) but it's flat, other areas are hills on top of mountains on top of rock....it's not easy to get in or out, let alone in combat conditions. Best resolution to stay away...walking in sand is the least of concernes...
|
|
|
Post by Exorcist on Dec 17, 2007 23:43:48 GMT -5
Minato: you know that no country in the world wants to fight the U.S. If Iraq had WMD, then who cares. What gives us the right to own those weapons instead of them. Saddam was smart enough not to use them. He might have been a dictator but he kept his country running pretty well. We could have gotten along with him.
|
|
|
Post by Gran Gran on Dec 18, 2007 0:31:38 GMT -5
Minato: you know that no country in the world wants to fight the U.S. If Iraq had WMD, then who cares. What gives us the right to own those weapons instead of them. Saddam was smart enough not to use them. He might have been a dictator but he kept his country running pretty well. We could have gotten along with him. Well, he did use them. The Geneva Convention says you can't have them and the US is actively destroying stock piled chemical ammunition. The Horror of the gas attacks in WWI were obviously on a scale that made the relevant people ban these things from war fare... (Saddam held the country together, with fear as the glue, but together no less...)
|
|
|
Post by Exorcist on Dec 18, 2007 21:19:03 GMT -5
The U.S. might be destroying their own supplies but they still will keep some around. Who did saddam use those weapons against?
|
|
|
Post by Gran Gran on Dec 19, 2007 13:03:09 GMT -5
The U.S. might be destroying their own supplies but they still will keep some around. Who did saddam use those weapons against? I am sure the CIA has a stock pile, but all official stock piles of this nature are being destroyed. Because it's some nasty philoprogenitiveness, you don't want it used on the battle field, it kills everything but the roaches. If you would read up close you would have notice I listed Iran and Iraqy Kurds that have been the target of gas attacks by Saddam.
|
|
|
Post by Consonant*** on Dec 19, 2007 18:56:54 GMT -5
Why did we help Vietnam, they were struggling. Why did we help Iraq, They were struggling. Vietnam and Iraq have allot in common. Most people hated the War in Vietnam, Most people hate the War in Iraq. Were helping them, let me use Immigration in the 1700’s as an example, Those people wanted a better life because they were struggling. Once they were in the US they struggled to get money, but eventually they made money and built upwards in the economy. Those people had to make sacrifices such as leaving things behind, loosing family members, etc. We are losing our friends, brothers, sisters, fathers, mothers, and mentors in Iraq all for a better outcome. This is My Opinion… Vietnam and Iraq is a TERRIBLE comparison to make no matter WHAT side you're on. For one thing, the North Vietnamese were a legitimate nation, meaning they had an actual government. The only reason we didn't want to pull out is because of the Civil Rights of the South Vietnamese. There's so much more at stake in Iraq. It's not a situation similar to Vietnam, it's a situation similar to Haiti. I'm not ripping on you, I'm just tired of seeing Vietnam pop up in these arguments.
|
|
ilovetaang03
Avatar Yangchen
Im a secret AGENT MAN. A SECRET AGENT MAN!!!! (though im a girl)
Posts: 1,522
|
Post by ilovetaang03 on Dec 19, 2007 19:23:21 GMT -5
why do u think the war is good? america is hurting innosent people i live in america but i some times dont like there choices like this whole war
its bad
|
|
|
Post by Consonant*** on Dec 19, 2007 20:43:50 GMT -5
why do u think the war is good? america is hurting innosent people i live in america but i some times dont like there choices like this whole war its bad If you're talking about the Iraqi civilians, there'll be a lot more deaths if we leave. And the only people killing innocent civilians are A. The insurgents, B. random soldiers doing exactly what they're NOT supposed to do and C. the Turks.
|
|
|
Post by aangstheone on Dec 22, 2007 20:27:12 GMT -5
Its for the better that those WMD’s are gone, who knows what Saddam could have done with them. He could have used those on us right after 9/11 when we were focusing on the devastation Al Qaeda caused. I know it was not staged, and neither was the US landing on the moon, we are a proud nation we have no need for a lie, or a fake video…
I understand that climate is a big part of war, and it lends a great hand to operations, and strategy in modern warfare, but that’s not what this thread is about, but I do see where your coming from, it makes sense…
|
|
|
Post by Gran Gran on Dec 23, 2007 16:21:37 GMT -5
Its for the better that those WMD’s are gone, who knows what Saddam could have done with them. He could have used those on us right after 9/11 when we were focusing on the devastation Al Qaeda caused. I know it was not staged, and neither was the US landing on the moon, we are a proud nation we have no need for a lie, or a fake video… I understand that climate is a big part of war, and it lends a great hand to operations, and strategy in modern warfare, but that’s not what this thread is about, but I do see where your coming from, it makes sense… I admire your trust in the government. At least the current administration has not warranted it in the last - heck, since the election...IMHO. if Saddam had indeed be inclined to use the weapons on US troops he would have done so in 1991, Desert Storm. After that he had not much chance, being under constant scruteny... (and for the record, the Moonlanding has absolutely nothing to do with the topic!)
|
|