Iraq

B

Brandon

Guest
Should we still be in Iraq? Look at the facts http://www.antiwar.com/casualties/ Post your opinions after you read this articial.

WHEELING, West Virginia (CNN) -- President Bush on Wednesday defended an Afghan Christian who is on trial for rejecting Islam and who could eventually face the death penalty.

"It is deeply troubling that a country we helped liberate would hold a person to account because they chose a particular religion over another," Bush said during a speaking engagement in Wheeling, West Virginia.

"I think we can solve this problem by working closely with the government that we've got contacts with, and we'll deal with this issue diplomatically and remind people that there is something as universal as being able to choose religions."

Abdul Rahman, a 44-year-old father of two, was arrested after telling local police, whom he approached on an unrelated matter, that he had converted to Christianity. Reports say he was carrying a Bible at the time. (Watch how the convert explained his conversion -- 1:17)

The Afghan constitution, which is based on Sharia, or Islamic law, says that apostates can receive the death penalty.

Rahman told reporters last week, "They want to sentence me to death, and I accept it, but I am not a deserter and not an infidel." (Full story)

Bush focused most of his remarks in West Virginia Wednesday on the U.S.-led war in Iraq and the as-of-yet unformed Iraqi government.

"Now it's time for a government to get stood up," Bush said. "There's time for the elected representatives -- or those who represent the voters, the political parties -- to come together and form a unity government. That's what the people want. Otherwise they wouldn't have gone to the polls, would they have?"

The process has been delayed by political infighting since Iraqis voted for a new parliament in December.

Bush told an audience at Capitol Music Hall that he had spoken to U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad and Gen. George Casey, the commander of U.S. troops in Iraq, and urged them to put pressure on Iraqi lawmakers to build a unified government.

"We talked about the need to make it clearer to the Iraqis that it's time," he said. "It's time to get a government in place that can start leading [Iraq] and listen to the will of the people."

He said he understood the trepidation of Iraqis because of their history, but they were beginning to see the promise of democracy.

Iraqi political leaders plan to meet on Saturday to discuss the formation of a national unity government, a Sunni leader said in Baghdad.

Adnan al-Dulaimi, of the Iraqi Accord Front, said earlier Wednesday that one of the topics is expected to be the formation of a national security council comprising Iraq's top politicians.

Bush also praised U.S. troops serving in war zones and said that the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, taught him several lessons.

The president said one of those lessons was that threats to the United States cannot be ignored.

"When you see a threat emerging, you just can't hope it goes away," Bush said.

Bush said he saw a threat in Iraq, and Saddam Hussein had the choice to disarm or face the consequences.

"And then I was confronted with a choice," Bush said. "And I made my choice, and the world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power."

Bush's speech comes a day after his wide-ranging news conference where the president rejected the idea that Iraq was in a civil war and suggested that U.S. troops could be deployed there for years. (Transcript of news conference)

Total withdrawal "will be decided by future presidents and future governments of Iraq," he said.

Wednesday's Iraq speech is Bush's second such appearance this week, after a similar address in Cleveland, Ohio, on Monday. Bush is fighting to reverse plunging approval numbers and opinion polls suggesting American support for the Iraq war is waning.

In a CNN poll released this month, 57 percent of respondents said sending troops to Iraq was a mistake, while 42 percent felt the war was not a mistake. Sixty percent believed that things were going badly in Iraq, and 67 percent believe that President Bush does not have a clear plan for handling the war. (View poll results)

So far, 2,318 U.S. troops have died in Iraq, according to U.S. military reports. In December, Bush estimated that at least 30,000 Iraqis have died.

CNN's Kathleen Koch contributed to this report.
 

James

Banned
Messages
1,062
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Sort of bad that the US have to stay there, its not even there country.
 

Spartan Erik

Retired
Messages
6,764
Reaction score
0
Points
0
la dee f****** da

no war is good, but this was something we had to face eventually
either we take them out while they're still low in numbers, or we wait a couple hundred years for this conflict to only escalate and have our grandchildren fight them with their greater numbers

there is proof that saddam had WMD's and bio weapons
only reason we havent found them is because he shipped them into syria and iran the day the u.s. invaded
his self-appointed general, who was recently caught, admitted this--^

additionally, for those who say all the WMD's are a lie, etc, how else did he manage to kill thousands of kurds instantly?

it was something we had to do, and every life lost makes the war that much harder
but compare these losses to any other war, this war has relatively minute losses

i believe the media is to blame, they're pulling the same s*** as they did in vietnam..

alot of the rich liberals in hollywood just dont get it.. they're in their own little private cocoon.. if they dont like it here, THEN LEAVE.
 

Jake

Developer
Contributors
Messages
4,057
Reaction score
5
Points
0
woo doo daa, we should go make friends with the terrorists so we give them acsess to things and kaboom, not my idea of fun =/

maybe not the best decision but it was gunna happen either way, i mean when it happened... or like 10 years later...
 

soten355

New Member
Messages
278
Reaction score
0
Points
0
First off, we shouldn't even be there. Bush said there were weapons of mass destruction there. When we got there, what was there? My point exactly. We invaded a country, overthrew a tyrant that wasn't as bad as the Bush Administration said, and are in occupation(in a matter of speaking). Our soldiers are dying because the president wants his precious oil.
 

Jake

Developer
Contributors
Messages
4,057
Reaction score
5
Points
0
nah i disagree, he knew we couldn't get into iraq if there wasnt something to go in for... so he made his "weapons of mass distruction" idea. BUT for some reason we should let people who are like hitler (ok a little far fetched, but hey could be somewere close to him) control countries and did you ever see what he made people do? anyways, it was a RELLY bad dictatorship. maybe he shoud have waited a few years until he started something big that we would have to step into? well that would suck wouldnt it?

then we could get into the argument about 9/11 and terrorist attacks that were connected to iraq but thats totally different i guess... it does seem odd, but then again who really knows?

oh yah, and the media makes it all seem so much worse than it really is... if you look and see what happened during vietnam and korea you'll see that its not that bad. but since this is so small the media thinks it has to tell you about every bomb and every death, its a lot of crap too. plus since the media hates bush anyways do you think they will skip a really big oppertunity to show how "bad" he is, and i mean they have full control of what they air.
 
Last edited:

Derek

Community Support Force
Community Support
Messages
12,882
Reaction score
186
Points
63
i think there county is destroyed by now
 
B

Brandon

Guest
They are on the verge of a Civil War. We should have never entered this war.
 

Spartan Erik

Retired
Messages
6,764
Reaction score
0
Points
0
soten355 said:
First off, we shouldn't even be there. Bush said there were weapons of mass destruction there. When we got there, what was there? My point exactly. We invaded a country, overthrew a tyrant that wasn't as bad as the Bush Administration said, and are in occupation(in a matter of speaking). Our soldiers are dying because the president wants his precious oil.

where are you getting your information? liberal talk show hosts?

if you read your reputable news sources (AP, Reuters, etc) they have shown that saddam DID have weapons of mass destruction! why have they not found any? because saddam shipped them all into syria and iran! if you read my older post you'd find out that saddam's captured advisor testified against him in court and said there were WMDs in iraq and that bush was correct. saddam was quite a brutal tyrant, he killed thousands of kurdish men women and children using poison gas, he'd interrogate people by using a series of radioactive elements to harm their health, along with plenty of horrific medical experiments; he is the equivalent of hitler in iraq.

there is also plenty of evidence that he supported the nephew of an al-qaeda official monetarily (in laymens terms, he funded terrorists!)

terrorists are to be dealt with, you dont let them run about

apparently liberals dont understand.. how many more 9/11's will it take to convince you all? how many more thousands of people will have to die? this country has become full of wusses thanks to the media and corrupt politics. like i said before, when we got bombed at pearl harbor we wanted nothing but revenge; we lost even more people in 9/11, so why arent we destroying everything in sight?

heck if i were bush id arm my troops (along with current weapons) with flamethrowers, resort to the technique used in the phillippines against radical extremists by burying enemies face down in pig s*** (disrespectful in their religion), and use the new electromagnetic wave technology to paralyze the enemies temporarily
 

moose

New Member
Messages
1,056
Reaction score
0
Points
0
No offence to American people, but the leaders of America are assholes. All the conspiracies out there, they say nothing to prove them, they hide it and throw away all evidence.

How in hell are we supposed to have faith in them? They've making people unsatisfied and unsafe, which is really easy, but have done nothing to get faith from people.

So, going to Iraq was a bad idea. Why can't we give those countries things to improve their places? Give them freaking resources, we have more than enough. It's horrible to see how much of a difference there are in rich countries and poor countries.
 

unpixelatedgamers

New Member
Messages
674
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Brandon said:
They are on the verge of a Civil War. We should have never entered this war.

Heind-sight is such a wonderful thing isn't it?

However, it is too easy to play the blame game and critisise people for their decisions. I think that since we (as in, America and U.K.) have started this war, we should stay there until an independent and stable Iraqi government that can keep the peace.

Surely leaving straight away wouldn't actually do anything to improve things? Leaving their army and policing forces half-trained and with little equipment. The various attacks and bombings have proved that they (generalising those who wish to continue violence) have no respect for rules of war. Blowing up civilians, srines etc.

The divisions within the muslim community there seems to be more at fault than anything else. The ousting of Saddam Hussein merely brought these problems into the world view.

The arguments about WMDs and Saddam's 'evil' dictorship rule were really only valid before the war started. Pulling out and saying 'aw screw it. too many of our guys are dying' won't achieve anything in my view.

Besides, what are soldiers to do except fight in wars? people die in every war. This has probably been the least bloody war, definately in the last 100 years.

So in short: yes, we should still be in Iraq.
 

moose

New Member
Messages
1,056
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I don't see how people want to stay in war.. I just don't get it..

I think the government should be able to do this without sending a ****load of random people. The people in the military can't even seperate citizens and terrorists. They're killing innocent people. Think about it, just one day you're at home like usual but you hear that your father got shot by an american troop. I would probably want to kill them.
 

Spartan Erik

Retired
Messages
6,764
Reaction score
0
Points
0
moose said:
I don't see how people want to stay in war.. I just don't get it..

I think the government should be able to do this without sending a ****load of random people. The people in the military can't even seperate citizens and terrorists. They're killing innocent people. Think about it, just one day you're at home like usual but you hear that your father got shot by an american troop. I would probably want to kill them.

at least we arent like the japanese, who killed thousands of chinese civilians in world war two
you cant leave all because you accidentally shot someone

and it is hard to separate citizens from terrorists! its not like the terrorists have big flags tied to their backs saying HEY SHOOT ME IM A TERRORIST. this is guerilla warfare, what more do you expect?
 

moose

New Member
Messages
1,056
Reaction score
0
Points
0
You can't really compare stuff to the past, you shouldn't. Well, duh, stuff was worse back then. Think about it, just about everything was worse back then compared to now. Does that make today good? No. I hear a lot of people saying, well, we have to, but I really really think that the American government was being an asshole just jumping into countries.

They do have a government there right? Maybe we can see if they can handle it themselves.

Bush spoke that winning the war in Iraq means a more secure America. I belive that this is the right way to get security, you are killing innocent lives. We can't be saying bull**** that people dying is a sacrifice.

There really isn't anything anyone can do though because the government seems to just be ****.

My opinion..
 

Spartan Erik

Retired
Messages
6,764
Reaction score
0
Points
0
moose said:
They do have a government there right? Maybe we can see if they can handle it themselves

haha but right now in iraq they DONT have a government
saddam sure wasnt a good form of government, its not a democracy like it is here, it was a dictatorship

we're going to be there for awhile until their government AND army is prepared
then its one less terrorist haven

then we'd have to deal with all the other middle eastern countries..

the quick solution? dump israel IMO
 
Top