Interesting way of looking at it DA. I'd suggest that as Saddam was in charge of the whole country that made them all his own people and not just those of his own background. The man was guilty of genocide (imho) but as mia points out, many many countries helped keep him in power and as such must accept some of the responsibility for the number of people's now being found in the various mass graves.
Yep. But the point is this... Saddam did not wake up one morning and say "im gonna kill me some Kurds".. There wil have been alot of people discussing alot of dark issues before they came to that decision.. Im sure not all the people that decided to do it were Iraqis either. Do you realy think he was 'incharge" - Do you think if Bush decided today to kill Canadians that it would just happen?? It takes alot of people to do that kind of thing.. I am sure Sadddams opionions were formed by those closest to him advising him.
Charles Manson did not kill anyone either, yet he sits in a jail cell for multiple murders. So now you are saying that Saddam did not kill anyone? You're posts are hard to understand. And you are speaking of? Anyway, in the US, it is not possible for one person's agenda to be carried out. We have checks and balances to keep that from happening, thank God. We might head in one direction or another, but not without the approval of the people, from those they place in power to represent them. Of the leaders you speak of above, (dictators) do indeed use their power for some personal agenda. Good, I don't kill either, nor steal. I do vote, so I have a right to complain. I do get involved, but not at the higher level, because we all know I'm not going to make a difference there. I stay involved on a local basis in my community.
It amazes me what some people will say and the only excuse I find is being so influenced by some media sources, they just repeat stuff. You do not differentiate in value of people's lives and well being based on race! We are all one people. We as Americans ar one nation under God of people from ALL backgrounds. In Europe it is easier, every nation "tolerates" some foreigners as long as it is made clear they don't really belong there. We are different. We open our arms and as long as you are on our side, we help and integrate and don't look at you like a second class human being. There is a lot of arrogance in Europe and we in America are dealing with trying to make everyone happy which is not always easy. I don't think any other nation is overcoming as many obstacles as we are. Whoever is in charge is responsible, Hitler was kickcing it in the Swiss alps while under his command the master plan was being executed. We never get gratitude for anything and since we are the ones being attacked, I personally no longer care trying to please everyone outside our borders. I have seen the carelessness when in times of need we were being critizised. Mike
If you view every the US does as perfect and just, and do not recognize that are greedy foreign policy creates many of the problems we now face, then you are basically hopeless. Blind faith in imperfect people, is just as cuckoo as being a religious zealot, be it Islamic Jihadist or abortion doctor kill Christians. Saying that people "support saddam" when they criticize the war is also ridiculous. Right now the US supports people who are the same as Saddam in Saudi Arabia, who also are killing their own people, yet there is no moral outrage form the "Values" minded right wingers. We supplied Saddam with the technology to make the chemical weapons he used on his own people, but it was ok then. Also using the argument , well "Clinton/Reagan did this or that" is also corny, retarded shit that one political party did a few years ago , does not justify the other side doing retarded shit now. Saying the terrorist hate us because we are infidels, or because we are free, also makes no sense. There are tons of free "infidel" countries in the World that aren't the target of attacks. Exploitive foreign policies are the reason for people attacking us. When we over throw a popular government and install a dictator puppet to help us exploit a countries natural resources, it tends to make enemies. Saying that "who cares" about other countries.Also seem rather stupid, even if you only care about your personal wealth , and never plan to leave wherever you where born. Its a global economy, the European Union is becoming the dominate economic force in the world, as we fall behind. They are already dictating regulations on products we export.
To argue if they were 'saddam's people' or not is irrelevant imo, as it was genocide pure and simple. Lets test a weapon, and kill these people I hate in the process...that's what it was. ST- you are right, the US gets attacked about it more often because we are the ones acting. You can see the same type of mentality in smaller, day to day actions people do. One person acts, they become a target for someone who disagrees. This is just global. As for the rebuilding of Iraq and what we are trying to do, sure there is another agenda - to try and build a friendly Iraq, but I don't think there is any seedy, deep hidden agenda. I dislike President Bush's policies and think he's sinister, but don't think he's THAT sinister. Mia - the community level involvement is one of the best you can do, imo. There is a lot of tough work to be done there, and not enough people doing it, so congrats. Ferret - you managed to sum up a lot of things in that post, thanks. You are right - past actions dont' justify present, blind faith is not helpful and just because someone disagrees with being in Iraq doesn't mean they support Saddam (i'm one of them). Thanks for a level headed response While I think President Bush has made a lot of mistakes, I also realize it's easy for me to sit here, in front of my computer, with my 20/20 hindsight and talk. I may be a liberal, but I have respect for his job and his position. Not blind faith, but respect, and while I will continue to question and scrutinize, I do have faith that he's not a truly evil man. just my 2 cents of the morning edit:yfs1 - your new avatar is creepy
No offence Mike, but we we we. I have met amazing people in every race, colour + country I have been to. You are not getting attacked as such.. + We are not all 1 people under god - Some dont believe in God. I think there are as many bad people in EVERY country. The US has ALOT to be proud of.. I personally dont feel that Iraq, is one of them or Afganistan. Please dont waste your time making stupid generalisations about: 1. Europeans being less tolerant. - Every Euro would probably say the US is far more racist + less tolerant. 2. the US media is far less transparent. 3. Europeans are arrogant? Foolish Again! - There are millions of US, Africans, asians living in Europe. I live in the UK - do you know what race I am? 4. The US is NOT having to overcome more than any other country. This actually means NOTHING - The tsunami, Iraq, Russian economy, German history - every country has their issues.
I don't believe in generalisations either but 1.) I wouldn't agree - Rather than towards African Americans, Muslims and Mexicans it is directed at Africans, Eastern Europeans and Jews 2.) Don't think either places medias are without agendas 3.) I agree 4.) I absolutely agree I have lived half my life in the US and the other half in Europe. It has certainly given me a different perspective.
OK guys let's cool it. Just remember, it is the US and our government that keeps getting critiqued. We get worked up because it seems we are pushed into this corner all the time. Like I said, my cousin is over there ... I think he is doing something good, and it needs to keep going until there is a better and more humane society established. Peace!
I hope no one is taking these things personally. One thing about DP is you can have a heated conversation without getting heated All prayers are with all of those over there including your cousin. I would hope no one in this forum would think otherwise. (and I suspect don't)
Yeah, i dont take the discussion personally at all.. good luck to all those out there in adverse circumstances!
If we were paying under a buck for gas, I would agree that we are there for oil. But that is not the case. The only people making money off of Iraqi oil as I can tell was Saddam, and the UN. Of all the people/companies and countries involved in the UN Oil scandal, less than 1% of the corruption has come from within the US. That said, the US is actually arresting those responsible. The US does have an agenda... Certainly! But we had an agenda in WWII as well. A peaceful strong Europe is a good thing for the US. We depend on one another greatly. A strong and peaceful Middle East is a good thing as well. It'll happen eventually. These things take time. How much time? Well, how many Americans hate the Japanese? When was the last time you heard someone here refer to them as "Japs"? It's been a long time. We are friends now. I am sure my grandfather's were not friends to them during the war, just like I am not friend to terrorist/muslims today. Time does heal wounds, but for that healing process to work both sides have to come together and make an effort. Now Japan would like a council seat on the UN. However, China and others are against it? Why? Because of a war that is past 60 years old. Those days are over. Let us not forget that Japan foots 20% of the UN's bill. Yes, 20% of the operating expense to run the UN is paid for by a country does not even have a seat on the council. Now, what about Germany? In the coming months President Bush will have a tough decision to make. Should he support Germany's ambition to get a permanent council seat at the UN? If he does not, he will be scoffed, and scolded. Hell, they will call him a Nazi, or some other derogatory statement. Will China support this? Both Germany and Japan (IMHO) deserve those seats. I truly believe they have long since paid for any wrongs their countries committed. In a few more years anyone that had anything to do with those wars will no longer be alive. What then? Why hold a country or her people responsible for the atrocities of the dead? Yeah, I love to debate on an open forum like this, but have sense enough to realize that world leaders are not going to stumble into DP and go, "you know, perhaps we should do what these guys/gals are suggesting." It's amazing what you can do in your own community to better life for on another. I'm not talking about running for a local office even. Little things like watching out for your neighbor's house. Driving a little slower and watching out for your neighbors kids. Keeping an eye out for strange vehicles. Giving a helping hand. Sometimes a "hello, how are you today, or good morning" is all it takes to start someone's day off on a positive note. Agreed, completely. I would never want that job. No matter who you are, imagine the stress. There were hundreds of attempts on Clinton's life when he was president, you have to respect a guy that has the balls to get out of bed every morning knowing that he could be shot. I am sure we will hear about the numerous attempts on our current president once he leaves office. Again, it takes a lot of determination to get up and do the things these people do. Liberal or Conservative, they all take great risk for what they believe in. Whether I agree or disagree with a political view point, I have a great deal of respect for that.
Anthony said: That is pretty intuitive, Anthony, I was thinking EXACTLY that two nights ago. You understand stuff like I do, Anthony, when you compliment me for some 'realizations' I've made, don't you forget it. Anyways I was thinking what everyone here would decide if - all the death, damage, birth defects, loss of infrastructure, water, electricity, health facilities, What if Bush had said "For every single thing that occurs in Iraq, we will do the equivalent here in the US, on a similarly sized area and population, to show our understanding of how grave this decision is, the consequences just as real to us as it is to Iraqis." Then, the country would be divided into these zones, and one would have to volunteer to sustain all the damage. Would anyone here say "Oh, do it here if you have to, because the end result will save more lives and make the world safer." Would anyone here feel that Iraq was such an imminent threat that you would sit by and wait to see if and when your family was killed, or any of the other things, IE cities cores being reduced to rubble, all the buildings down town and the houses of the people that live there. Would you offer up you place and loved ones? Same odds of anything happening to you as in Iraq. Would it be so easy then to say 'it was worth it'? Or would you want to avoid it and see if another solution could be used? Are you going to 'volunteer' to do it right now, tit for tat with what happens in Iraq, right now, when most of the world is saying the evidence you are being fed may be, and probably is, wrong? The UN says they find no WMD and don't think there is any? In light of this, are you going to serve up your community, family, belongings, the very, very real possibility of death and destruction (it is war, remember?) in these circumstances? Right now, no questions asked, it is going to be worth the loss of lives and wasted cities if a few of my family have to die? Oh well, it is worth it? To gamble that on the decision to invade Iraq, when almost the whole world and the UN says not to, they don't think it is necessary" How about if bush didn't ask you, he just appointed your area first without asking, he wouldn't even give you the chance to make the decision? Still want to get our asses in gear and go kick Suddams butt and liberate Iraq? "Do it, I'll take that gamble with my family and city" would you be quick to say? I remember a psychology experiment in a journal. Subject were given a situation where a train was going to crash and kill twenty people, but they could avert this by getting a worker to switch the train to a parallel track with 5 people on it that would die, but twenty would be saved. Obvious, right! They picked the second choice, and we would too, have five die instead of twenty by getting a worker to switch the tracks. BUT>>>> When it was presented then that THEY would have to stand there and throw the switch, with the five people standing there on the 'lesser death' track, and had to look at them at say "Hi", and then kill them, to save twenty people. 4 out of every 5 could not see switching the train, getting themselves to do it. Put yourself in that place, and you will probably understand why, because the death has now become personal and you are directly responsible for it, but you don't actually see the people in the train personally and up close watch them die. In that situation, no matter how right it is to kill 5 instead of 20, they couldn't do it ie personally kill five people and save twenty people. anthonycea, your part is bang on also, about who is exactly responsible for the situation and how it got to this point. Design Agent you took it one step further: That is a BRILLIANT analogy!!! I never thought of that way, but your are right!
hm terrorist and muslim in the same sentance again.. So MIA you dont like the 1 billion musilims out there? or do you actually mean muslim terrorists? or maybe the are just the same thing to some. As I see it 1 is a religion and the other is someone who wants to use violence to achieve their objectives.
"I'd be the one figuring out how to stop the train." (Did you all know 10% of people are actually completely unable to put themselves in others shoes? These people make good business men, they don't have emotion or remorse getting in the way of decision making. Donald Trump was the one they used for an example in other psychology stiuff I was reading.) "No KIDDING, mia, we all would but you better be quick because you only have five seconds to make the decision, you aren't sitting there working out all your feelings, it is to test if people are willing to do the killing to save more lives and the answer is no in 80% of the people (there were 20 in the study). It is different when it personal attatchment to the situation is involved" Typical mia" I don't have to imagine or read your stuff, I know I am right" Don't have to, or can't? You where pretty quick to dismiss thought experiments as totally useless wastes of time. Do you know how this can lead to solutions for others, mia?
Personally, I like to consider myself a lateral thinker. As to the little test you mentioned. I am reminded of "Star Trek" and Captain Kirk's reference to the "Kobayashi Maru" The Kobayashi Maru is an example of solving a problem by changing the conditions surrounding the problem, which is all I did in the problem you presented. About the Kobayashi Maru referrence: "One of the StarTrek movies mentions the KobayashiMaru, a training scenario for hopeful captains. There's no way to succeed; no matter what you do, you're destined to lose. Starfleet used it as a test of character, to see how people handle no-win situations. Cadet James T. Kirk (later known as CaptainHornDog) created a successful solution by modifying the simulation." "You cheated!" "I changed the conditions of the test. Got a commendation for original thinking." Simple. I would sound the horn. That should give those standing on the track sufficient time to make an educated guess about what would happen if they remain there. Then we'd slow the train to a stop (depending on the length/type of train and track, as well as the speed, my guess is it would take more than 5 seconds to stop). I'd have 25 guests step on board and head to the dinning car for some cocktails. From there a bit of time in the vista dome (if this train had one) that or the observation car. Do we know if this is a frieght train, or passenger train? I have to make a lot of assumptions here, but that is pretty much what I would do. What Would Brian Boitano Do? Anyway, I do not believe in a "no-win" scenario. Call this my Kobayashi Maru. Most of your posts are completely illegible. So it is not a matter of don't or can't. Your thoughts when not put into complete sentences do not make sense at times. No dis-repect. Like I said, I just assume that English is a second langauge and that translates into your posts. ? What?
I find it sort of humorous that you think any deal we create with the Iraqi oil would acutally be passed on to us at the pumps. Also how come people never talk about the americans that where involved with the oil for food deal http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4445073.stm http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,147497,00.html
Any increase in production will bring prices down. -Source "Economics Class Freshmen year of High School." - The Law of Supply and Demand. Because we are too busy arresting them. Quite to the contrary of your statement, "people" are and have talked about it. So much so we have made arrests in this country and will punish those that participated. I've seen no other such action from any other country involved. Again, the US involvement in the money laundering oil scheme accounts for less than 1% of those involved. Want to guess who the majority of the crooks are, and where they are from Anyway..