America has problems, but America is NOT THE PROBLEM!~
Published on June 12, 2006 By Moderateman In War on Terror
thats the whole question.
Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jun 12, 2006
If your going to fight, then wade in and fight. I hate to fight, but when diplomacy fails and I'm forced to fight because an aggresor refuses peace, then I fight dirty as hell. If your gonna fight a war, fight it to win. If not, then cut your losses and go home. And that's my opinion for what it's worth.
on Jun 12, 2006
I am anti-war, but I was for the erradication of Saddam. His brutality and genocidal practices meant that whenever he was taken out, hundreds of thousands would be saved. That many have died after the fact is an indication of the thugs he left behind (and they are finite in number) and the hatred that men do to their fellow man (and woman and child).

We can make excuses against not figting in any war. Against Tojo and Hitler, and Ho Chi Minh and Kim il Sung. But as we see, ignoring the problem does not make it go away. It just means that many more suffer.
on Jun 12, 2006
I'm against war.

By the same token, I'm in favor of making wars nasty, brutish, and short.
on Jun 12, 2006
If you mean the war in Iraq...

I am all for it. I remember being in Iraq in 91 when the ceasefire was called. I can't remember my exact words to the others on my team, but they were something like, "When we get back to the world, keep your ruck packed. Hussein isn't going to honor the agreement and we'll be back." The sad thing is, we waited so long to go back that another generation of troops were left to finish the job "diplomacy" prevented us from accomplishing.

I'm also for it because that ceasefire agreement was not a UN document. A UN resolution was passed based on it, but the original Ceasefire agreement from Safwan was signed by the representatives from the U.S. and Iraq. The UN was responsible to uphold their resolution (figured the cowardly liars wimped out), but it was on the U.S. alone to enforce the ceasefire once Hussein broke it.
on Jun 12, 2006
I support the war in Iraq. I believe Saddam was a menace that needed to be taken care of, once and for all. I did not like it when the first gulf war ended with saddam still in power.

He may not have been a direct threat to us, but I do believe that given time (which is what the left and France/Germany/Russia was trying to do), he most definetely would have been a major threat.

The only problem with this Iraq war I have, was the timing. I really wish we would have taken care of Bin Laden totally before we went into the Iraq

Chris
on Jun 12, 2006
I don't like war. However, if it is the last resort, and *all* other options have been examined.Then, war. Sometimes, it is just what the doctor ordered. Example: World War 2

~L

on Jun 12, 2006
I do not think we should have went there in the first place because I don't think Sadam Hussein was a direct threat to the U.S. but I also figure Bush was privy to intelligence that was not released to the general public. That being said if it were my call we wouldn't have went in the first place but I stand behind the President and our troops until their mission is accomplished. I think Sadam Hussein was definately a bad guy but I don't know that it was our place to take him out of there ...

on the other hand I'd like to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony
on Jun 13, 2006
I'm with shovel on this one. War is never a good thing. But when push comes to shove, ya gotta do what ya gotta do. And right to h*ll with fighting fair! Fighting fair is for "idiots" and TV. Kick butt, take names and WIN at just about any cost!
on Jun 14, 2006
I am anti war, because of my personal, deep held, philosophical beliefs. But I believe that war is, at times, a tragically necessary lesser of two (or more) evils. And in the case of the current conflict, I believe this is the case.

So I support the war as much as I can support any conflict. But I do, as always, hope for a time when it is not a necessity.

Does that answer your question?
on Jun 14, 2006
Yes, I support our actions in Iraq. I wish we'd quit trying to be so goddamned NICE about it though and get it over with already.


Right. As with the killing of Zarqawi, it should be done efficiently and with a sense of purpose. We have a job to do let's do it and get our men and women home.
on Jun 14, 2006
did not support it when US wanted to goto war.. but now that they are there i 100percent support them
on Jun 14, 2006
I support our actions in Iraq. I wish we'd quit trying to be so goddamned NICE about it though and get it over with already.


Ditto.
on Jun 15, 2006
Ditto.
Yeah, as in Haditha, I suspect?

War is not a wilful either/or proposition for this nation; it is simply a necessity when the country is in imminent danger or has been attacked.
on Jun 18, 2006
Philosophically, I do not support war. I particularly don't support the war in Iraq. Australia should not be involved. Having said this, though, I don't hold the troops responsible. They have a job to do and orders to follow. Its the administrations giving the orders I have problems with. In Australia, the rise of conservative politics and values is really starting to concern me, but thats a matter for another blog.

I hope I've answered your question, Elie.
on Jun 18, 2006
15 by steven dedalus
Thu, June 15, 2006 00:41 AM


Ditto.
Yeah, as in Haditha, I suspect?


this is totally UNCALLED FOR. and damn disrespectful. So your article about HADITHA, was a condemnation of the marines, you have them tried, and convicted without a fact being known. How very LIBERAL of you. You are a hypocrite Steven.
2 Pages1 2