The goal of USA? (Or at least those in the Europe)

I'm not actually sure I could answer that question. In my eyes it's too broad. There are siuations where I believe it is acceptable to kill innocent people for the greater good, though how much that can be described as your belief is open to debate.

The bombings of Germany in the 1940s and the atom bomb in Japan killed many innocent people, but ended a war that killed and could have killed many more. It would depend if you defined those killings as fighting for a belief in freedom or a form of self defense.
Either way you look at it I'd believe that killings by terrorists or those in Iraq are not justified though.

 

WWII was the last justifiable war IMO. We had no option but to attack Germany and Japan as they were the aggressors. You must defend your home, but when does defending your home end, and becoming the aggressor start?

Tony Martin was a clear example of this. Tony Martin was jailed for shooting 2 burglars he shot one at the foot of his stairs when he triggered a trap, but the other he chased across his garden, and shot him as he climbed a fence to escape ! Should both these shootings be treated equally? in myeyes no, as one was a defensive shot, the second a clear case of attempted murder.

I see what you are saying matt, about it not being clear but. But the bombs were being used to end a war in WWII.

The problem we have is that America feel that they are able to defend their right to freedom by attacking anyone anywhere on earth. And the terrorists seem to think it is accaeptable to travel half way across the globe to do exactly the same.

 

You are either very young or very stupid.

Which is it?

 

Mistermix, that is hardply likely to encourage balanced debate is it

 

I am a christian American, but I will try to post anUn-Biased oppinion.
I believe that our country (America) tries to do good for the general population of the world. Sure, there will always be corruption, but I do not think that oil was a major factor for the war. OIL prices have not significantly dropped since the war, and the goverment has not kept the excess.
America has bailed every country out of trouble and has recieved 0 thanks.
Do you know what germans said after WWII? They said the same thing you are saying now. That America was evil. Now you ask a German if he/she wishes they were still a Nazi country. What do you think they will say.
The war in Iraq was probably a little over-blown, but I do believe that Saddam Hussein should have been removed from power regardless of WMD or 9/11.

WHoever said that taxes are thievery is a fool.
Without taxes a goverment has no form of income, thus forcing them to A. steal from their citizens B. increase outbound raw materials C. go to war with nations just for thier OIL
Taxes are a nessecity

 

Sometimes its best not to enter into a debate with certain people. Lots of teenage 'dude wheres my car' types lurk on this forum!

 

So what? Stalin thought he was getting a long with Hitler.

 

I kinda switched off at that point. How about you go tell that to the 60,000dead Iraqi civilians killed since the start of this illegal war, because that is EXACTLY what it was. Under the geneva convention it is illegal to invade acountry with the aim of forcing a change of government.

I need to say here that I am NOT a lilly livered liberal, I am as hardline as it gets, but this war was illegal, and immoral.

I know lots of Americans who are brilliant, but you are posting like the sterotypical American that is hated the world over. WHY did Saddam have to go? WHY? The reasons used were that he was masacaring Kurds with chemical weapons right? Would these be the Same Kurds who now they are no longer being attacked, have been exploding bombs in Turkish holiday resorts killing innocent tourists.

America pokes its nose into places where it does not have a clue what it is doing. It uses fancy soundbites like 'they must comply with UN resolutions' WHAT ABOUT ISRAEL THEN? Israel has broken more UN resolutions that Iraq, Iran and the whole of the middle east combined, but America Supports them, and Britain (my country) follow like lapdogs! WHY?

This latest attack on the middle east is no different to what the crusaders did all those hundreds of years ago. America is focing ITS will upon others, it is trying to force ITS standards on others. Britain and America are saying they are fighting a war on terrorism, then why is Israel not being pulled on a tighter leash? WHy are we nt doing more to kill the flow of money?

Unless we pull out of foreign countries, we can never return foreig nationals to those countries, and that in itself puts us at risk. We need to kick out this PC rubbish and begin the war on terror on our OWN streets. We ned to clean out the drug dealers, bring people out of poverty. because THOSE are wars I would back.

 

Actually I think this is a valid topic and good one that could encourage understanding rather than simple attacks.

Why did the US attack Iraq when at one time it supported Saddam? Why is the US at odds with Afghanistan when at one time it supported the native Afghani's against the USSR?

Nations, policies, politics, etc all change over time. At one time the US was at war with both Germany and Japan which were allies against the US, Russia, Britain and others.

Now the US is allied with Japan and Germany. Immediately after the end of WWII the US and some of its allies such as Britain, France, etc immediately were at odds with Russia (the Soviet Union). My oh my things can change.

Changing alliances can occur all the time and have through history.

When the USSR attacked Afghanistan the US, the cold war between Communist nations and Western nations dominated US foreign policy. The US supported various nations at different levels when the USSR would attack or attempt to take them over. Simple. During that period the US provided arms to help the native Afghani's fight the USSR.

When Saddam first came to power he was also someone who was opposed to Iran as a Sunni opposed to the Shiite government of Iran. The Iran of that time (and currently) had an Islamic fundamentalist government that had also captured Americans for a year and held them hostage. They had declared the US the enemy. The US ended up somewhat supporting Saddam in his war with Iran.

We weren't best friend buddies...but our interests intersected with regard to opposition to Iran.

Things changed. With the USSR out of Afghanistan, the Taliban took over, established their sect of an Islamic fundamentalist government, supported Al Queda, allowed Al Queda to establish bases and training camps and became the host country for Al Queda that attacked the US on 9/11/01. The US was appropriate in defending itself and attacking Afghanistan to enable it to attack Al Queda.

Things changed with Saddam also. He subsequently attacked Kuwait. Basically he became a threat to the West and the US. Yes, a large part of it has to do with oil.

Oil runs the world. It fuels the economies of much of the world. For a madman to take over this resource would threaten world economies. If the US didn't take on responsabilities in this regard ultimately China, India or others would.

After the 9/11 attack on the US, Bush tied the threat of Saddam in with the threat from Al Queda.

While I'm not one who totally agrees with Bush on this action, he saw Saddam as a threat and intimately tied with extremist fundamentalist Islam that sees the US as an enemy.

Why do various sects of Islam see the US as a threat. Why did Iran kidnap American's back in 1979? Why did Al Queda fly planes into the US and blow up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon?

 

But yet, Earlpearl castigates rumsfeld for a photo with Saddam.

 

The answer to all of this goes back to the carving up of the Middle east lands at the end of WWII

And yes, of course, good old Israel !

If Israel withdrew from the lands it occupies illegally, then then Muslim fundamentalists would largely have very little to complain about. CERTAINLY nothing to wage war for on a global scale.

 

If Israel wasn't there, Sunni's and Shiities would be carving up one another!

 

Will Muslims ever be able to clean up their own backyard without outside help?

 

Nice looking picture isn't it. Don't they look like the best of friends? Rumsfeld must have tons and tons of friends and forgot about Saddam. Otherwise he never would have made his comments about equating opposition with administration policies with appeasing Hitler. Who would say something like that about a "good buddy"!

 

sarcasm....

what about those bloody Africans! Will they ever be able to live a consumerist, indulgent, resource wasting lifestyle without outside help?

 

hopefully, but we are dealing with more than just the lack of resources. There are wars, dictators and such. Do you know the percentage of food donated by Live Aid 1986 going to waste, because African dictators didn't allow them to bring in the goods into their poverty stricken nations?

 

And that is the way history is made. let them carve each other up. survival of the fittest. Hit them with financial wars. refuse to trade with them. Get a resolution passed that means UK US & European union will not trade, and there you have it.

We are NOT the police for the world. The world has its own police, and it is called social unrest.

Picture this. your walking home late one Saturday night, you hear some fighting going on. It is a man and woman hitting each other. You walk over and pull the guy off because it is wrong to do what he is doing. I can guarantee you that if they are a couple, then in 9 out of 10 cases, they will BOTH turn on you and attack you. This is how human nature is. Yet we STILL can not learn from this simple fact.

 

agreed... take the log out your own eye before you complain about the splinter in another's eye

However don't give me a bit of crap about how you honestly believe that taking Saddam Hussein out of power was a bad move.
Granted that there are many problems with this war, but I belive honestly that it was a good move. The rest of the junk that goes on, I will not comment on because of my lack of expertise on the subject.

One question. Does anyone in this thread have any first hand 100% knowledge about what they are saying. I don't think anyone here knows exactly what they are talking about... Me Included

 

Is that a problem for the people donating the money or for the people whom it was meant for?

The countries we live in were in a similar state of affairs many many years ago, I just look at Africa as being on a different place on the timeline. Things will eventually get better but the rich countries need to change their policies to help rather than hinder.

Love not just thy neighbour.

 

your sig cracks me up lol