Anti-War 100,000 - Pro-War 400

Zzz... more low-quality propaganda from the idiot left.

 

The french anti wars argue:

American anti wars say:

Obviously both together cannot be true. there are these three posibilities false-false, false-true, true-false.
What do you think? - if you are an anti war of course-

Do you think Bush went to war for US benefits or for Iraqis libration or both or neither.

There is another theory, Arabs say Bush wants another crusade. - some Arabs of course -.
Well there could still be other theories, for example

• Bush wanted to win the next election or
• he is mad or
• ...

Lets talk about Blair later.

.

 

American anti war people say that? realy? Maybe some, but not all that many that I personally know...

 

mahmood got a point, US antiwar-mongers want to exit Iraq because of the expenses just because few soldiers was killed. European antiwar-mongers thinks more about the Iraqis that are getting killed.

 

Just out out of curosity does anyone know of any other wars in history that were started to "liberate" or "free" people

Pretty much every war I can think of started because one country wanted to take some other countrys stuff, their land, natural resources, whatever

Outside of the occasional independence type war, or civil war, has there ever been a war were one country invaded another to "help" them.

 

Realy? All of those who do not support the war in the US think this hey?

 

I don’t think there is any oil in Vietnam or any natural resources that the US wanted?

D

 

Is there an american anti war here?

I had many questions but I come down to this:

Lets be honest, in my opinion being an american and being anti war is not strange but being an american and bringing strange reasons for being anti war is very strange.


.

 

Well for one doug I said "started" I don't think the US started the Vietnam war, there was already fighting when we joined it

 

ferret:

It's useless to attempt to expain anything to you, as you have repeatedly shown yourself to be truth-resistant.

We could all parade out for you the causes of dozens of wars, and you would simply reply "I think not."

Mankind differs from animals because of our powers of rational thought -- which you have abandoned. You're a disgrace to your species.

 

So are going to list a war were a one country invaded another for noble reason or just spout bullshit?

What are you going to say grenada, panama?

There really isn't one is there? Its not rehtorical, its real question.

So either

1) We invaded Iraq to secure the oil fields

2) GW and the neocons have broke new ground in the history of the world, invading a country to "help" the people. People who don't even pay US taxes or vote.

I don't know, one of those seems more likely to me.

 

3) There is a 3rd option, but ferret doesn't:

a) Think enough to come up with it on his own.

b) Read enough to realize that it has already been explained to him in great detail.

 

If we accept that Bush went to war to secure oil fields or market we should not be surprised when European jump up and down to protest agains it but how about americans?

Now say we believe that Bush went to war to help Iraqies just for the sake of God and Iraqi people then it is completely understandable that the American oppose the war but why the European?

The interest of European and American in the matter is completely opposite. Gain of US was loose of France and Germany - I even say UK - then why american say the same thing as European say?

have you ever thought why European are so worried about a few people being killed in Iraq but don't give a toss about hundreds of thousands being killed in sudan? Don't tell me they care, I don't remember 1 million people protesting against it in London, Paris, Koln,....

.

 

The Europeans have good motivations for opposing U.S. intervention in Iraq.

1. They are beginning to see Europe as a potential adversary of the U.S., and they don't want to see the U.S. gaining influence in the world.

2. They were selling weapons to Saddam, often illegally. They worried that the truth of this would leak out if the U.S. military captured documents from Saddam's military leaders. (It did.)

3. Many influentual Eurocrats were accepting bribes from Saddam. They worried that the truth of this would leak out if the U.S. military captured documents from Saddam's military leaders. (It did.)

4. They were illegally trading in Iraqi oil, subverting the humanitarian purposes of the Oil-for-Food program. They worried that the truth of this would leak out if the U.S. military captured documents from Saddam's military leaders. (It did.)

5. They were engaged in all sorts of non-weapons commerce with Iraq. They worried that U.S. influence in Iraq would increase Iraq's trade with the U.S., thereby threatening their trade with Iraq. (In reality, the economy of Iraq will expand wildly, thereby increasing Iraq's trade with everyone.)

Or did you think that they just really just loved Saddam?

 

c) all of the above.

 

Vietnam
The Gulf War
WWII
Should I go on?

 

Are you re-writing the history again?

 

DFC

,,,,,..,,....

 

And we undrestand why they are crying for a few Iraqies killed.

We understand them, we sympathy them, we praise them for hidding their real intension so cleverly.

I also understand a mother whose son is in army and serving in Iraq. I understand those who for religious reasons oppose the war - any war actually - but I don't understand the American in the street.

I just need an American anti-war to clear why he is opposing the war.


.

 

That's like asking how long a piece of string is...