-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Was it worth it?
- Thread starter NaasPreacher (C4K)
- Start date
They were the same "lies" democrats used to establish Clinton's stated goal of Regime change in Iraq.
There were no lies to invade Iraq
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
You are correct. It is not exactly the same.
In another difference the Iraqi military has much more modern US equipment than they did before the war.
Another difference? Mailiki is much more chummy with the Iranians.
Last edited by a moderator:
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Me THINKS .....
You've been living way too long in Ireland! :laugh:
While the wars and the countless number of men and women who died and lived with horrible injuries and disabilies the rest of their life on earth were sacrificed for people to ask that question you put forth; let me say this ... no war is worth the life, death and misery that results; BUT, it is often more necessary in order to keep the evil at arm's length and out of our backyards!
I am not debating that Saddam would have personally attacked America, but, there is no doubt that this man was evil [paying others for killing Americans], and behind terrrist training!
But that's not the real issue ... it is the kind of questions that you pose, that caused Viet Nam vets to come home discouraged, defeated and ashamed of doing what the powers that be demanded and expected of them. Most of us had no choice. It was either Canada or the summons to report for active duty!
I would suggest that you pose this question to the corporations and politicians who do not have to go and sacrifice their own arms, legs and lives. The corporations and politicans that gain financially from wars! BUT, regardless of the underlying greed, most wars are going to happen with or without your protests?
I suggest that you ask the countrymen who you are now living among in Ireland if their years of fighting the Queen and England and the Catholics, and the Christians was worth all the devastation they caused in years of unnerving guerilla warfare, car bombs, snipers, church bombs, school bombs, and the like that killed innocents as much as it did their socalled enemy, whomever the enemy was?
Yes, you have the right to exercise the freedom of speech with your question, C4K, but it is people like you that would not be asking such questions had men and women not sacrificed their lives in wars and conflicts to allow the freedoms you enjoy to be enjoyed!
Had no one fought Hitler, you wouldn't be asking that question without the fear of imprisonment and death. Had no one fought the other wars that came upon us, you'd be asking this question in: 日本の, Русский, Việt or maybe Deutsch?
I put up with people like you for years after Viet Nam, and I guess our brave men, and women will put up with a small group of people like you in the future wars and conflicts America may become involved in, but it still makes me ill to think I knew a lot of great guys who died in Nam for the "Peace-niks and liberals of this world" who ask such annoying and demoralizing questions! :BangHead:
Still, it is your right ... and even though I am a peace loving sort of fella, I would have to say, YES, it must have been worth, because you are still speaking English as we Americans have come to call it, and you haven't been arrested for questioning the governing body whom you are a citizen of! :thumbs:
You've been living way too long in Ireland! :laugh:
While the wars and the countless number of men and women who died and lived with horrible injuries and disabilies the rest of their life on earth were sacrificed for people to ask that question you put forth; let me say this ... no war is worth the life, death and misery that results; BUT, it is often more necessary in order to keep the evil at arm's length and out of our backyards!
I am not debating that Saddam would have personally attacked America, but, there is no doubt that this man was evil [paying others for killing Americans], and behind terrrist training!
But that's not the real issue ... it is the kind of questions that you pose, that caused Viet Nam vets to come home discouraged, defeated and ashamed of doing what the powers that be demanded and expected of them. Most of us had no choice. It was either Canada or the summons to report for active duty!
I would suggest that you pose this question to the corporations and politicians who do not have to go and sacrifice their own arms, legs and lives. The corporations and politicans that gain financially from wars! BUT, regardless of the underlying greed, most wars are going to happen with or without your protests?
I suggest that you ask the countrymen who you are now living among in Ireland if their years of fighting the Queen and England and the Catholics, and the Christians was worth all the devastation they caused in years of unnerving guerilla warfare, car bombs, snipers, church bombs, school bombs, and the like that killed innocents as much as it did their socalled enemy, whomever the enemy was?
Yes, you have the right to exercise the freedom of speech with your question, C4K, but it is people like you that would not be asking such questions had men and women not sacrificed their lives in wars and conflicts to allow the freedoms you enjoy to be enjoyed!
Had no one fought Hitler, you wouldn't be asking that question without the fear of imprisonment and death. Had no one fought the other wars that came upon us, you'd be asking this question in: 日本の, Русский, Việt or maybe Deutsch?
I put up with people like you for years after Viet Nam, and I guess our brave men, and women will put up with a small group of people like you in the future wars and conflicts America may become involved in, but it still makes me ill to think I knew a lot of great guys who died in Nam for the "Peace-niks and liberals of this world" who ask such annoying and demoralizing questions! :BangHead:
Still, it is your right ... and even though I am a peace loving sort of fella, I would have to say, YES, it must have been worth, because you are still speaking English as we Americans have come to call it, and you haven't been arrested for questioning the governing body whom you are a citizen of! :thumbs:
You're right ...
Neither C4K or several others on this board would believe you, but, it is true! Thanks for putting this on his plate to consider!
Neither C4K or several others on this board would believe you, but, it is true! Thanks for putting this on his plate to consider!
NaasPreacher (C4K)
Well-Known Member
Sorry, where did you ever see me question the courage or worth of American military forces? Please do not lump me in with the anti-veteran crowd. Most of my family is military and I was on my way till I broke my neck. Questioning the wisdom of military choices hardly qualifies as a 'peace-nik.'
I am not sure how the Iraqi conflict or Vietnam helped me speak English.
We cannot blindly follow on whenever the politicians and corporations decide it is time for a war. I care too much about our brave forces for that.
I assume that since the US has a moral imperative to get rid of the bad guys that some of the folks here would support President Obama if he sent troops to North Korea and/or Syria
I am not sure how the Iraqi conflict or Vietnam helped me speak English.
We cannot blindly follow on whenever the politicians and corporations decide it is time for a war. I care too much about our brave forces for that.
I assume that since the US has a moral imperative to get rid of the bad guys that some of the folks here would support President Obama if he sent troops to North Korea and/or Syria
Last edited by a moderator:
thisnumbersdisconnected
New Member
Perhaps not, but you do more than question. You disparage the efforts made the last 13 years against terrorism.
Both prevented, accept it or not, the spread of evil ideologies. Unfortunately in the case of the former, the attitude you display here is also being displayed in Washington, and the gains of the conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan are being traded for "appeasement" and "accommodation" of a fanatical movement that wants nothing less than the total annihilation of the West and particularly of Israel. And in both the former and the latter, the failure of the politicians to let the military do the job it is supposed to do caused a less-than-optimum outcome for the U.S. and the world. Read my first response to you. I explained that there.
I've been part of those forces. Trust me, the first thing any combat soldier will tell you is that he's scared. The second thing he will tell you is that he wouldn't be anywhere else. They understand what is at stake, and are willing to pay the cost of freedom and a stand against evil.
I give you the answer EW&F gave another naive view of war on another thread.
If and when the time comes to stand against the bluster of Kim or the spread of Assad's horror beyond the borders of his own country, yes, absolutely. As it is, we should be doing whatever it takes in the form of direct support of their opposition and even covert operations to end their bloody tyranny. Perhaps you don't think, for example, that Kim's resemblance to Caligula is concerning. Many do.
Last edited by a moderator:
Syria would be the Little Big Horn all over again. When we were in Iraq in force we should not have let the chemical weapons slip away to Syria and we should have thought about following them there.
As you know, Putin said that they would be destroyed, so you see that Putin is involved in the Middle East. I think that we can agree that American policy has been a failure internationally.
Caligula had PTSD....Kim's just a little faggot.
thisnumbersdisconnected
New Member
It's an interesting theory, one that I know was popularized by Dr. Philip A. Mackowiak, clinical professor and vice-chair of the department of medicine at the University of Maryland School of Medicine. Impressive titles and credentials, but he's not a psychologist. Caligula did witness a lot of death in his family from the time he was a young boy through the death of his wife and childbirth and his mother and brother a few years later. Caligula never seemed overly traumatized by those deaths, though, and was party to debauchery and unfettered sexual perversion even before he became emperor. His behavior doesn't fit the profile of withdrawal and isolation of severe PTSD.
But a very dangerous one, if he is, sexually perverted and fond of gruesome and violent activities, including watching his uncle being torn to death by ravenous dogs. He bears more of the signs of severe antisocial personality disorder and sexual compulsion than he does of being a violent homosexual.
Based on false pretenses, the war in Iraq (coupled with the war in Afghanistan) has been a tremendous waste of lives, resources, and money.
In 2001, following the 9/12 attacks there were estimated to be several thousand Al Qaeda members worldwide. Though the leadership was located around the Afghanistan and Pakistan regions, they were a highly distributed group in as many as forty countries.
Since beginning these wars, our government has invested $6,000,000,000,000 (trillion) lost 4,500 brave troops in Iraq and 2,300 in Afghanistan with 50,000 wounded service personnel.
We have done this to track down less than 2,500 active Al Qaeda operatives and approximately 150 of their leaders. Almost all 19 of their leaders at the time of 9/11 have been killed or captured. In Iraq approximately 6,000 Al Qaeda members have been killed in the war there.
The result had been that Al Qaeda has grown, not shrunk in influence throughout the Arab and predominantly Muslim counties. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are less than stable states and our troops continue to die.
All of this, at least for Iraq, for a war based upon verifiably false information and admittedly strong blood lust by the then Commander in Chief.
We have the best, most capable and bravest military ever known to mankind. We have wasted them on this campaign and history will severely punish our country for this failure.
In 2001, following the 9/12 attacks there were estimated to be several thousand Al Qaeda members worldwide. Though the leadership was located around the Afghanistan and Pakistan regions, they were a highly distributed group in as many as forty countries.
Since beginning these wars, our government has invested $6,000,000,000,000 (trillion) lost 4,500 brave troops in Iraq and 2,300 in Afghanistan with 50,000 wounded service personnel.
We have done this to track down less than 2,500 active Al Qaeda operatives and approximately 150 of their leaders. Almost all 19 of their leaders at the time of 9/11 have been killed or captured. In Iraq approximately 6,000 Al Qaeda members have been killed in the war there.
The result had been that Al Qaeda has grown, not shrunk in influence throughout the Arab and predominantly Muslim counties. Both Iraq and Afghanistan are less than stable states and our troops continue to die.
All of this, at least for Iraq, for a war based upon verifiably false information and admittedly strong blood lust by the then Commander in Chief.
We have the best, most capable and bravest military ever known to mankind. We have wasted them on this campaign and history will severely punish our country for this failure.
thisnumbersdisconnected
New Member
You're awash in Marxist spin. Take a shower and come back after you've cleaned yourself up.
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
Those who tout the removal of Sadaam Hussein as being well worth the cost of trillions of US dollars and thousands of American lives forget that in the 1980s the CIA propped him up as a counterbalance to the Iranian threat...and that the Iranian threat existed because of blow-back to the US propping up the Shah. A lot of the folks we propped up against the Soviets in Afghanistan became the same folks who we opposed in the great Global War on Terror, and the same folks (Al-queda) who we denounced as Public Enemy Number One in the same GWOT are the same folks we are supporting in Syria against Assad.
Does anyone see the pattern, that our meddling in the MiddleEast begets blow back which begets more meddling in the Middle East? Or at least can see that the actual facts bely the simplistic narrative of the USA being the unequivocal force for good--and thus whomever we support (at the time) is also good--and whomever we oppose (at the time) is evil? The USA has no qualms it seems in supporting some really wicked folks whenever it's expedient in advancing its national interests, and then quickly turning on them when they've served our purposes.
Fortunately for neocons/neolibs, American historical memory has been very short, and they could always count on stirring up the sheeple to support yet another war with the right propanda (ie "Fill-in-the-blank is the next Hitler and must be stopped at all costs!") once the facts surrounding the previous war had disappeared down the memory hole. ("Oceania is always at war with EURASIA...er, wait...or was that EASTASIA??") However, thankfully for the rest of us, war-weary Americans are no longer necessarily accepting the regime's propanda at face value and are not as eager to jump into another conflict of the Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace.
Does anyone see the pattern, that our meddling in the MiddleEast begets blow back which begets more meddling in the Middle East? Or at least can see that the actual facts bely the simplistic narrative of the USA being the unequivocal force for good--and thus whomever we support (at the time) is also good--and whomever we oppose (at the time) is evil? The USA has no qualms it seems in supporting some really wicked folks whenever it's expedient in advancing its national interests, and then quickly turning on them when they've served our purposes.
Fortunately for neocons/neolibs, American historical memory has been very short, and they could always count on stirring up the sheeple to support yet another war with the right propanda (ie "Fill-in-the-blank is the next Hitler and must be stopped at all costs!") once the facts surrounding the previous war had disappeared down the memory hole. ("Oceania is always at war with EURASIA...er, wait...or was that EASTASIA??") However, thankfully for the rest of us, war-weary Americans are no longer necessarily accepting the regime's propanda at face value and are not as eager to jump into another conflict of the Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace.
poncho
Well-Known Member
The Antonym of ‘Indispensable’
Proclaiming that the U.S. is the sole “indispensable” country in the world renders other countries, by definition, dispensable. Putin himself, at the end of his extraordinary op-ed in the New York Times on Sept. 11, 2013, included this unusual admonition: “It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor. … We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.”
Have U.S. policymakers become so callous as not to care what happens to those with the bad luck to live in “dispensable” countries? It does appear so – and that arrogance about U.S. “indispensability” and “exceptionalism” has caused Official Washington to lose its moral compass.
In 1995, the United Nations reported that U.S. economic sanctions against Iraq had brought death to 500,000 Iraqi children below the age of five. Asked about that by Lesley Stahl on CBS’s “60 Minutes” on May 12, 1996, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright answered, “We think the price is worth it.”
Apparently that was the correct answer, at least for Official Washington. A few months later, President Bill Clinton nominated Albright to be Secretary of State and she was confirmed unanimously by the full Senate. No one asked about the children.
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/04/30/kerrys-propaganda-war-on-russias-rt/
Proclaiming that the U.S. is the sole “indispensable” country in the world renders other countries, by definition, dispensable. Putin himself, at the end of his extraordinary op-ed in the New York Times on Sept. 11, 2013, included this unusual admonition: “It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor. … We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.”
Have U.S. policymakers become so callous as not to care what happens to those with the bad luck to live in “dispensable” countries? It does appear so – and that arrogance about U.S. “indispensability” and “exceptionalism” has caused Official Washington to lose its moral compass.
In 1995, the United Nations reported that U.S. economic sanctions against Iraq had brought death to 500,000 Iraqi children below the age of five. Asked about that by Lesley Stahl on CBS’s “60 Minutes” on May 12, 1996, U.S. Ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright answered, “We think the price is worth it.”
Apparently that was the correct answer, at least for Official Washington. A few months later, President Bill Clinton nominated Albright to be Secretary of State and she was confirmed unanimously by the full Senate. No one asked about the children.
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/04/30/kerrys-propaganda-war-on-russias-rt/
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
Those who tout the removal of Sadaam Hussein as being well worth the cost of trillions of US dollars and thousands of American lives forget that in the 1980s the CIA propped him up as a counterbalance to the Iranian threat...and that the Iranian threat existed because of blow-back to the US propping up the Shah. A lot of the folks we propped up against the Soviets in Afghanistan became the same folks who we opposed in the great Global War on Terror, and the same folks (Al-queda) who we denounced as Public Enemy Number One in the same GWOT are the same folks we were supporting in Syria against Assad.
Does anyone see the pattern, that our meddling in the MiddleEast begets blow back which begets more meddling in the Middle East? Or at least can see that the actual facts bely the simplistic narrative of the USA being the unequivocal force for good--and thus whomever we support (at the time) is also good--and whomever we oppose (at the time) is evil? Fortunately for neocons/neolibs, American historical memory has been very short and they could always count on stirring up the sheeple to support yet another war with the right propanda (ie "Fill-in-the-blank is the next Hitler and must be stopped at all costs!") once the facts surrounding the previous war had disappeared down the memory hole. However, thankfully for the rest of us, war-weary Americans are no longer necessarily accepting the regime's propanda at face value and are not as eager to jump into another conflict of the Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace.
Of course, some will simply wave their hands and dismiss this as 'Marxist spin' despite the fact that those of us who oppose Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace oppose totalitarianism in ALL its guises--Marxist or Fascist.
Does anyone see the pattern, that our meddling in the MiddleEast begets blow back which begets more meddling in the Middle East? Or at least can see that the actual facts bely the simplistic narrative of the USA being the unequivocal force for good--and thus whomever we support (at the time) is also good--and whomever we oppose (at the time) is evil? Fortunately for neocons/neolibs, American historical memory has been very short and they could always count on stirring up the sheeple to support yet another war with the right propanda (ie "Fill-in-the-blank is the next Hitler and must be stopped at all costs!") once the facts surrounding the previous war had disappeared down the memory hole. However, thankfully for the rest of us, war-weary Americans are no longer necessarily accepting the regime's propanda at face value and are not as eager to jump into another conflict of the Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace.
Of course, some will simply wave their hands and dismiss this as 'Marxist spin' despite the fact that those of us who oppose Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace oppose totalitarianism in ALL its guises--Marxist or Fascist.