August 16, 200619 yr *Bashes head against a wall* What do you guys not get? We went in and killed more people. Period. End of story. How can you EVEN argue that? I'm well aware Saddam killed lots of people, but to go in and kill more and then call it "the price of Democracy" is laughable. I'm sorry to break this to you, but every war has its casualties. IMO, this war is even more reasonable than the First World War. Iraw had nothing to do with 9/11. We just decided to Liberate Iraqi's because we found out we had nothing better to do over there, i.e. why we went there in the first place...WMD's. I'm not sure where ShadowFax said Iraq had to do with 9/11. Could you point it out to me or concede the point that your last post has nothing to do with the fact that every war has casualities? This is not a discussion about the legitimacy of the Iraq war - that will get no where fast. My point was that in order to achieve democracies that are legitimate - wars are fought. Shadow's point was that more pointless wars have been fault. Once again... The legitimacy of the Iraq War is not a matter of debate right now. This forum doesn't need another flame war over a subject that no one will ever agree on right now.
August 16, 200619 yr just to say, the number of iraqi civilians killed by saddams regime is estimated at 600,000 to 1,000,000.....and yet ppl still think it was wrong to go to war....shame.... heres a link to a page about the number dead http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-12/09/content_288443.htm[/url]
August 17, 200619 yr Hmm. I have to say, I think it's unlikely. However, maybe the original plot to blow up planes over the atlantic would have been on that date. "If you look into the abyss, the abyss will look into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
August 17, 200619 yr Guys, keep it on topic. The topic is about Israel, Lebanon, and Iran. The war in Iraq is not an issue for argument (asides from that the war itself has affected the region). There is no need to start a "should the US be in Iraq" debate. There are plenty of other threads for that. My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won. -Sir Arthur Wellesley
August 17, 200619 yr Guys, keep it on topic. The topic is about Israel, Lebanon, and Iran. The war in Iraq is not an issue for argument (asides from that the war itself has affected the region). There is no need to start a "should the US be in Iraq" debate. There are plenty of other threads for that. the topic isnt about that at all actually...its about the M.A.D. thing on august 22nd....
August 17, 200619 yr the topic isnt about that at all actually...its about the M.A.D. thing on august 22nd.... Yeah, I posted a bit about MAD on the 2nd page, which I thought would spawn an interesting discussion. All I got from it was one stupid comment about camels. I love how everyone always reads my posts around here now... :roll:
August 17, 200619 yr Yeah, I posted a bit about MAD on the 2nd page, which I thought would spawn an interesting discussion. All I got from it was one stupid comment about camels. I love how everyone always reads my posts around here now... :roll: I was going to respond to your post but when I got to the end and you attack conspiracists and pessimists, by calling the talk useless garbage. Then you go one step further and call the interesting discussion that you were trying to spawn "stupid". But are you seeing my point? To discuss MAD occuring anytime soon, yet alone in forthcoming days, is just stupid. :-# I think it is an unlikely that a nuclear weapon will be used, but perhaps large attacks on Western Democracies that will happen to coincide between now and the November elections here in the US, aren't outside a realm of possibility. Definantly not mutualy assured destruction. Call me a conspiracist, fine. Call me a pessimist, I'll admit it. Doesn't mean I'm wrong.
August 18, 200619 yr I think it is an unlikely that a nuclear weapon will be used, but perhaps large attacks on Western Democracies that will happen to coincide between now and the November elections here in the US, aren't outside a realm of possibility. Definantly not mutualy assured destruction. Call me a conspiracist, fine. Call me a pessimist, I'll admit it. Doesn't mean I'm wrong. I don't understand why anyone would call you a conspiracist after that statement. Sure, it's very possible that large attacks could happen in the US between now and the next elections. It's also possible large attacks could happen between now and tomorrow. Large attacks are always possible, imo. You said "Definitely not mutually assured destruction", which is what I'm trying to argue. I suppose we're on the same side here then...your post seemed to suggest you were opposing my comments. :? As for calling the "interesting discussion" stupid, it was about missiles on camels...come on. If that's not stupid, I don't know what is.
August 18, 200619 yr the topic isnt about that at all actually...its about the M.A.D. thing on august 22nd.... Shh...facts don't matter when daddy is telling us what to do. :wink:
August 18, 200619 yr if they fire a certain type of nuclear bomb and it flys up in the air high enough, radiation wont matter, so it can knock out the power grid of the whole united states, and cann or will leave us without power for 2-5 years. we should all prepare, but not dread on white might/will/ can happen in the near/ or not so near future Never take life too seriously, nobody gets out alive.
Create an account or sign in to comment