sweet Video on CNN Killing Americans

[AKIron]

Let's recount:

1. Iraq under a brutal dictator invades and brutalizes their neighbor, our friend.
2. We tell them to leave Kuwait, they refuse. We give them ultimatum, they still refuse.
3. We liberate Kuwait and Iraq surrenders unconditionally.
4. Conditions for continuance of Iraqi government are set and agreed upon by Iraq.
5. Saddam violates every condition he agreed to.
6. US gets fed up and ousts a brutal dictator.
7. US creates democracy in the middle east
8. Stay tuned, one of many more to come.

Originally posted by ramzey
Somone remember small rock country named Czechenya?

US not support (political) those brave warriors who blow up bmp's every day?

let me count
1. We invide independent country
2. We destroy thier market and jobs, structures to provide democracy.
3, No wepon of mass destruction was found
4. No other proofs of  activity against US citizens, even not so many against iraq citizens

so why the hell you are wonder and angry about troops killed in ocupied country?
Its sad somone lost life, YES

I can tell you more, will be more losses. So dont be suprised anymore, please.

ramzey

[Westy]

AKIron that list of yours does not justify the loss of one single American life.   I'm just glad, REAL glad, that no relatives of mine are over there with thier lives at risk for what you think is right.

Yes. I could care less that Iraq invaded Kuwait.  It was a local regional issue and the Arab community inmitially chose to do nothing.
Yes. I could care less if Saddam and his regime were brutal to the Iraqi people.
And Yes. I could careless if there is democracy in Iraq or not.


 Again.  All  IMO and not worth one wounded American, let alone a dead one.

[AKIron]

You could say the same thing about WWI and WWII.

Originally posted by Westy
AKIron that list of yours does not justify the loss of one single American life.   I'm just glad, REAL glad, that no relatives of mine are over there with thier lives at risk for what you think is right.

Yes. I could care less that Iraq invaded Kuwait.  It was a local regional issue and the Arab community inmitially chose to do nothing.
Yes. I could care less if Saddam and his regime were brutal to the Iraqi people.
And Yes. I could careless if there is democracy in Iraq or not.


 Again.  All  IMO and not worth one wounded American, let alone a dead one.

[Westy]

There's that massive leap of logic and using wildly unrelated examples again.  How you can compare WWI and WWII with what the US and UK have done in Iraq is beyond me.  Youy couldn't even compare Korea to Iraq for at least Korea had UN backing. Iraq is much more akin to Vietnam than anything else (modern times).

Now if you'd used the current fight in Afghanistan as the example you'd have had something to stand on.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by Westy
There's that massive leap of logic and using wildly unrelated examples again.  How you can compare WWI and WWII with what the US and UK have done in Iraq is beyond me.

Now if you'd used the currtent fight in Afghanistan as the example you'd have had something to stand on.

Prior to US invlovement in both WWI and WWII many in the US used your exact argument for uninvolvement. Quite similar situations, no "massive leap" required.

[Westy]

True.  In the lead up to both of those many Americans did not want to go to war in spite of the blatant attacks (long before the Lusitania and Pearl Harbor) that occured on US merchantmen and Naval units, all of which had resulted in the deaths of many Americans.

 I ask you now, since you're using WWII and WWII as the examples, to point out where the US is acting in self defense to aggressions to it perpetrated by Iraq and the former regime.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by GScholz
AKIron, how can you compare the war with a nation that attacked you first (Japan) and another that declared war on you first (Germany) with the invasion of Iraq (who did neither)?

Vietnam doesn't fit either because there you supported a friendly government (South Vietnam) already there. Iraq is much more like the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Same objective (regime change), but different ideology.

Of course you are referring only to WWII right? This deserves and has had it's own thread but here we go again. Many in the US made the exact argument for non-involvement made by Westy a few posts earlier in this thread. Roosevelt knew he wasn't going to get enough support to delcare war unless we were attacked. He backed Japan into a corner.

[gofaster]

Originally posted by AKIron
You could say the same thing about WWI and WWII.

I was thinking the same thing.  Its called "isolationism".

What did we care about a war in Europe in 1914?

What did we care about a war in Europe in 1939?

Korea?

Vietnam?

The future of America is tied to the rest of the world.  We cannot hide behind the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.  September 11, 2001 proved that.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by Westy
True.  In the lead up to both of those many Americans did not want to go to war in spite of the blatant attacks (long before the Lusitania and Pearl Harbor) that occured on US merchantmen and Naval units, all of which had resulted in the deaths of many Americans.

 I ask you now, since you're using WWII and WWII as the examples, to point out where the US is acting in self defense to aggressions to it perpetrated by Iraq and the former regime.

I thought I did. Kuwait was our friend. Much the same as was France when they were invaded by a brutal dictator. We liberated them both. Can you not see the parallel?

[gofaster]

Japan had demanded that US remove its forces from certain areas of the Pacific (namely, the Philippines).  Roosevelt refused.  It didn't take a genius to figure what would happen next.  It was just a question of "when?".

[gofaster]

Originally posted by GScholz
OK, this time you're stretching a bit too far. The US did nothing for France when she was invaded. Britton yes, but not France.

Yes, because we didn't care about a conflict overseas in 1939.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by GScholz
OK, this time you're stretching a bit too far. The US did nothing for France when she was invaded. Britton yes, but not France.

Please tell me then who is buried in all these graves? American tourists?

[AKIron]

Originally posted by GScholz
Are you saying Roosevelt forced the Japanese to attack ... that Roosevelt is to blame for WWII???

I'm saying that Roosevelt understood that our involvement in the war (already well underway) was inevitable and simply forced Japan's hand.

[Westy]

"The future of America is tied to the rest of the world. We cannot hide behind the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. September 11, 2001 proved that."

 True. And the future is a bit screwed up as much of the world dislikes the US right now.  But anyway.  Who's promoting isolationism?   If a safe future was the true concern here why didn't the US jump on Iran, Syria or Saudi Arabia?
 



"I thought I did. Kuwait was our friend."


 oh brother.  Kuwait was a tool and a resource. Kuwait was a good supply of oil and an "western aligned" color on the coldwar map of the MiddelEast for the US.  Nothing more. If Kuwait did not have oil to sell the US would have cared less.

" Much the same as was France when they were invaded by a brutal dictator. We liberated them both. Can you not see the parallel?"


 No.  Not at all.

 The US didn't do shat in 1939, 1940 or 1941 other than sell arms and lend material for bases.  The US did not get involved until directly attacked at the end of 1941 and even then France was liberated in mid 1944 as a byproduct of getting to Germany itself.

[crabofix]

Originally posted by AKIron
I thought I did. Kuwait was our friend. Much the same as was France when they were invaded by a brutal dictator. We liberated them both. Can you not see the parallel?

No theres no pararell, because Germany decleared war on you, long after the invasion!