An Intreasting Email @ Iraq

[widget]

Hi, Tawn...

Please know that I have nothing but respect and admiration for the men and women serving in Iraq...and in the armed forces in general. They are doing a remarkable job.
I think almost all Americans are hugely proud of them.

Obviously, we''re going to have to stay over there for a while...pray not for years and years as some predict. They will continue have my complete support and admiration.

My negativity and utter disgust is reserved for present occupant of the White House.

widget

 

[MINE!!]

That isn''t why we invaded Iraq. Not according to your president, at least.


[/quote]

Whether you like it or not... he is your president too... testosterone and all!!! And at least half the people in the US in the United States voted for him.. better luck next time.

 

[Rank Amateur]

I think the Iraq and the rest of the world is a better place without Saddam controlling Iraq.

We are fortunate that he was not a particularly good leader, for if he were he certainly would succeeded in developing his weapon systems. You are a fool if you believe that Saddam had changed his stripes and was not plotting against his sworn enemy (that would be the USA). It is a good thing we lopped the head off that beast. I also like the message it sends to all the other Saddam wannabes. Installing any sort of democratic State is that medieval region is a huge step towards reforming it. Freedom for the people is just one of the many fruits.

Crass as it seems, I say the 12,000 lives is a reasonable price to pay.

 

[MINE!!]

Date: 6/6/2005 9:57:11 PM
Author: tawn
A little off the subject...and long, I apologize!


Although I have many questions/concerns about how the war initially started etc...and I can''t say that I either full-heartedly support or oppose it. What I can say, is that I offer complete support my husband who is currently in Iraq serving his country. The soldiers serving are not the ones that make the policies or decisions in regards to the war, yet they are they ones that seem to suffer the brunt of people''s negative opinions. That really annoys me...because I am more fully aware than most of the general population what the people in the military and their loved ones go through! They deserve our respect and support!


My husband told me not to watch the news because the reports that are sensationalized on tv...are not even close to the reality of what''s actually happening over there! One small example, most of the suicide bombers are not even Iraqi''s...but foreigners that set their families up for life by giving up their own. They aren''t doing it for love of their country. He has been amazed at the warm reception that he''s received by all the Iraqi people he''s met so far, which is completely contrary to what he was expecting. Public opinion here in the US is that all of Iraq hate Americans and are trying to kill them and vice versa, and he has not been having that experience at all.


I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I honestly believe that few people will ever have the opportunity to actually have a clue about what''s really actually happening there. The media doesn''t begin to give an accurate portrayal...and the government isn''t going to tell all. In my humble opinion, the US really can''t win....either they didn''t do enough, they did too much!


The only experience I''ve has was when I spoke with a man who was originally from Iraq. It was several days after their election, and he told me proudly about how such a huge percentage of the people turned out to vote, I forget exactly, but wasn''t it something like 76%? Anyway, he told me how they risked their lives, and some waited all day because they ran out of ballots etc...and how important this was to them and how the Americans helped make it happen. But, he wondered why, when it''s so easy for Americans to vote...that significantly less than 40% of us bother!! Is it really that low?


Who believes that you don''t have the right to complain if you don''t vote?

Tawn. Thank you husband for me and for my children and even for those people that think that he is ''needlessly killing innocent Iraqis'' He is a true American!! Many are praying for him and everyone else there. Thank you Thank you Thank you!

 

[Rank Amateur]

Date: 6/6/2005 9:25:00 PM
Author: Feydakin
With the appropriate hand wringing, of course..

Yes! Tsk tsking and hand wringing! That will stop the terrorists. And sanctions! I forgot sanctions! Yes! Yes! OOooo. And and and EDITORIALS! Yes! Yes! Very stern editorials! The pen is mightier than the sword! Yes! Yes! Yes!

Did I mention the UN? What a GREAT organization! Sooo powerful! They can do it! And well-run, too! Like a well-greased palm! Yes! Yes! Yes!

 

[movie zombie]

so, its ok to invade a country because we disagree with the ruler? isn''t it up to the people of that country to overthrow their tyrant?

yes, it was WMD that we were told was the reason for this invasion....not freeing the iraqi people.

nixon lied and paid the price. clinton lied and paid a price. one can only hope that bush will pay for his lies.

peace, movie zombie

 

[MissAva]

What price did Clinton pay?

 

[tawn]

Thanks for the words of support...it means a lot to our family. It's a very difficult time for our family, and I know my husband tries to distract me with my ring anniversary "upgrade" when we speak.

My husband was in the Navy when we first met, and we got married shortly after he got out after doing the typical 4 years after high school. We lived a normal civilian life for 8 years...until Sept 11th. He felt that it was his duty to serve his country...and he went back in. It's been an extrememly very difficult adjustment for us, leaving our home and families, but he didn't feel as though he had a choice.

We are very proud of him...and all the others that sacrifice so much!

Freedom isn't Free ~ a popular sentiment in our community!

 

[widget]

What price did Clinton pay?

Well, I guess he gets to live with the fact that he''s only the second president to get impeached....so far, anyway...

 

[blueroses]

I think it''s clear that there are some things that people will just never agree on--I wish that the current atmosphere politically was more tolerant of opposing viewpoints (on any side) without the risk of views that are anti-policy or anti-administration being somehow inexplicably twisted and slandered as anti-American or unpatriotic.

If only more Americans valued their right to vote, then what MINE said "And at least half the people in the US in the United States voted for him.. better luck next time." might be accurate. 1/2 of the voting electorate, perhaps--this time. But sadly, not even remotely close to half of Americans b/c there is SO much apathy!!

Tawn, thank you so much for your and your husband''s sacrifice. THANK YOU.

I''m personally opposed to the war and not a fan of this administration, but I have the utmost awe and appreciation for our armed forces who are fighting for ALL of us, whether we agree w/ this current action or not. Anti-war and Pro-troops aren''t mutually exclusive!

(And--what a surprise

--I don''t really agree w/ the reductive view that all anti-war ''60s hippies were cowards. Maybe I''m more idealistic b/c I grew up in a house where my parents happily cancelled each other out at the ballot box every election, but I don''t think that different politics have to always degenerate into personal attacks. That''s what BOTH sides of the political machine count on, which is why we have mediocre candidates and smear attacks on both sides! So, at the risk of being overly Pollyanna--thank you beer #2--can we at least try to be civil in our disagreements?)

 

[Blue824]

Date: 6/6/2005 6:57:31 PM
Author: widget
I was appalled that George Bush didn''t lose by a landslide in the last election...let alone that he actually won.

In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, there seemed to be almost global good will towards the United States, and an international willingness to join together in a ''worldwide war on terror''.

The invasion of Iraq was an ill-conceived and ill-executed disaster...begun on a premise that proved to be false (WMD)

I suspect that right now America and Americans are among the most hated or at least disrespected people in the world. I wonder how many new terrorists have been recruited since we invaded Iraq?


widget

I am not for the war in the first place, and I wish we were not in this position now. I agree, many people have been recruited against the Americans now using our invasion as a reason. I had a friend who was stationed out there as a contracter, not with the military...he too expressed that the general reception was positive. I can''t help but wonder what would happen if we pulled out before things were more secure...people who may have relied on us would then too be disillusioned and have yet another reason to hate us. I don''t understand a lot of the reasons they hated us in the first place, but I''ve just come to realize the US will be hated and loved at different times, its almost a ''damned if we do, damned if we don''t'' kind of situation.

I don''t know if anyone has read "Reading Lolita in Tehran" and I know that''s Iran and not Iraq, but it was interesting to see how the tides shifted in that country and how Western civilization was depicted and just the day to day life of the average citizen...

Tawn, my thoughts are with you in this difficult time. I wish him a safe return in the hopefully near future!

 

[IrishEyes]

Tawn, I completely agree with everything you have said! I''m in the miliatary and spent 17 months in Iraq. Be proud, as you already are, of your husband!! I''m proud of myself for my sacrifices, my husband for his (he''s in too), your husband and you as well, being the family of a member of the military is a huge sacrifice as well!!

Hang in there! and you''re right; most people have no clue what is really going over there. What they hear on the news and read in the papers is overblown, the real story lies within the soldiers!

Take care!

 

[tawn]

I have a confession...

I don''t, as a general rule, ever volunteer the fact that my husband is in the military...because of the negative things surrounding the current situation with Iraq, and because my feelings on the subject are so conflicted. It''s been easier to just avoid the conversations...

You guys have really made me a lot better~ and it''s nice to know that so many people support our guys over there!

A heartfelt THANK YOU to you all!

 

[IrishEyes]

I know what you mean. When I got back, everyone had a million questions for me. I know they were just curious, but it was just too much, too soon. I still don''t really talk about it, but I find that here on these forums I open up a little bit about it. I guess its the whole anonyminity thing!

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 9:57:11 PM
Author: tawn
Although I have many questions/concerns about how the war initially started etc...and I can''t say that I either full-heartedly support or oppose it. What I can say, is that I offer complete support my husband who is currently in Iraq serving his country. The soldiers serving are not the ones that make the policies or decisions in regards to the war, yet they are they ones that seem to suffer the brunt of people''s negative opinions. That really annoys me...because I am more fully aware than most of the general population what the people in the military and their loved ones go through! They deserve our respect and support!

tawn,

I am sorry that you have any trepidation speaking about your husband to anyone. Of course he is serving his country! As Widget said, my criticism is reserved for the policy makers, not the soldiers!

That I honor the soldiers there does not mean I have to think that the war is useful or good. I oppose it. Furthermore, I think that President Bush lets down the military at every turn. Who ever heard of having to buy body armor for your own son? The military should supply it! Also vehicles as well armored as is possible. The fact that soldiers have had to gerryrig armor for their own vehicles is pathetic!

And then what about the VA? Care for soldiers is woeful. I am not referring to care immediately after an injury overseas, but later...at local VA hospitals.

I would not have put your husband in harm''s way to remove Saddam Hussein. Since he is there, he deserves to be taken care of by his government.

Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/7/2005 12:31:24 AM
Author: Feydakin
Not at all.. What is/was your solution for Rwanda?? Stand back and watch because the people in Rwanda should have fought for themselves?? This is your solution for Iraq.. Is it the same for Rwanda?? If not, what is your solution??

We are discussing Iraq. Start a new thread on Rwanda if you want to discuss Rwanda. Had I said I was a pacifist under all circumstances, raising Rwanda in this thread would have been relevant. Since I did not, your introduction of this only muddies the waters for no logical reason.

Rwanda is completely irrelevant to our invasion of Iraq. Also Somalia. Cambodia. Nazi Germany.


Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 10:45:57 PM
Author: Rank Amateur
I think the Iraq and the rest of the world is a better place without Saddam controlling Iraq.


We are fortunate that he was not a particularly good leader, for if he were he certainly would succeeded in developing his weapon systems. You are a fool if you believe that Saddam had changed his stripes and was not plotting against his sworn enemy (that would be the USA). It is a good thing we lopped the head off that beast. I also like the message it sends to all the other Saddam wannabes. Installing any sort of democratic State is that medieval region is a huge step towards reforming it. Freedom for the people is just one of the many fruits.


Crass as it seems, I say the 12,000 lives is a reasonable price to pay.

The argument is not whether Iraq is a better place without Saddam. The argument is whether it should be the role of the United States to "reform" places at the expense of their civilian populations!!!!

Had George Bush told Congress and the American people he wanted to reform Iraq, we would NOT be at war!!!! It was only this baloney about Weapons of Mass Destruction that convinced anyone to try war as a solution.

Saddam Hussein was no threat to the US. Until the invasion by the US, al Qaeda was the sworn enemy of Iraq, one of only two modern, secular states in the Arab world. Saudi Arabia is the country supplying all the recruits for al Qaeda. We support Saudi Arabia...with its medieval punishments like whippings and amputations.

Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/6/2005 6:06:05 PM
Author: MINE!!
I have read all of the posts that you have here and I don't think anyone was saying that people who have died don't count. Wether it be 12,000 or 650,000.

You may not have thought anyone was saying it, but they were. That was the intent of telling me that 650,000 people died in the Civil War: to give me a sense of perspective Steve and R/A felt I was lacking when I mentioned that 12,000 lives had been lost.

Now you may read R/A's words in black and white: "Crass as it seems, I say the 12,000 lives is a reasonable price to pay."

Deborah

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 6/7/2005 5:27:17 AM
Author: AGBF

Date: 6/7/2005 12:31:24 AM
Author: Feydakin
Not at all.. What is/was your solution for Rwanda?? Stand back and watch because the people in Rwanda should have fought for themselves?? This is your solution for Iraq.. Is it the same for Rwanda?? If not, what is your solution??

We are discussing Iraq. Start a new thread on Rwanda if you want to discuss Rwanda. Had I said I was a pacifist under all circumstances, raising Rwanda in this thread would have been relevant. Since I did not, your introduction of this only muddies the waters for no logical reason.

Rwanda is completely irrelevant to our invasion of Iraq. Also Somalia. Cambodia. Nazi Germany.


Deborah

In other words............................you just muddied the water, Steve. History has no relevance to this thread. Damn that pesky history stuff & it's relevance to OUR ENTIRE LIVES. But, Steve, thanks for trying but as you can see AS FACT bringing history up isn't logical.

Most convinient.

Tawn - a simple THANK YOU.

Widget - honestly, I'm confused. Clinton wasn't impeached - as far as my recolletion.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/7/2005 9:57:45 AM
Author: fire&ice
In other words............................you just muddied the water, Steve. History has no relevance to this thread. Damn that pesky history stuff & it''s relevance to OUR ENTIRE LIVES. But, Steve, thanks for trying but as you can see AS FACT bringing history up isn''t logical.

Most convinient.

Now, now...try reading for comprehension, f&i.

First, if Steve wants to be illogical and stupid, he has a Constitutional right to be here in the US. I will even DEFEND his right to be illogical and stupid.

Second, it is a nice try to say I am trying to keep history out of this thread, but if one is LOGICAL, it won''t wash. I have ADDED history to this thread (or at least one of these threads on Iraq). See references to World War I in the context of Storm saying "war is the ultimate game".

Steve is saying that because I oppose bombing the hell out of a country that SUPPOSEDLY has Weapons of Mass Destruction and is SUPPOSEDLY, therefore, a threat to the US, that I am against all military intervention of any kind...even foot soldiers trying to stop genocide. Since that wasn''t my position I pointed out (correctly) that it was totally irrelevant. He can be as irrelevant as he wants to be, however. See POINT ONE.

I am unafraid to discuss Rwanda and, in fact, think we should. Let''s also discuss Darfur there.

Deborah, going off to start a new thread

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/7/2005 9:57:45 AM
Author: fire&ice
Widget - honestly, I'm confused. Clinton wasn't impeached - as far as my recolletion.

f&i, I will refrain from making the almost irresistible remark that occurs to me about your state of confusion and simply say that your recollection has failed you. Clinton was impeached.

Deborah

 

[movie zombie]

no, but there was a vote as to whether or not to impeach clinton...that''s going pretty far. lots of taxpayer dollars spent on a man''s private sex life. and he paid a political price for it all.

again, nixon paid for his lies, clinton also. i can only hope that bush pays for his lies as well.

we were told there were WMD and that it was known exactly where they were. the intent all along was to go into iraq and the evidence manufactured to make it happen. yes, i believe bush should be impeached.

and i believe that our soldiers should have the equipment they need rather than hallibruton et al. walking away with the money. and where is the support for our veterans once they get home? the first gulf war left vets with disabilities caused by our own use of chemicals and medicines. many are on the streets. why are local VA facilities being closed? and why does a mother from arizona have to leave her job to be at the side of her iraqi veteran son in palo alto because palo alto is the closest facility to deal with veteran''s with brain injuries? everyone knows recovery is better when family is there to provide emotional support. these veterans are going to need and deserve care for years. but instead of supporting them, this very same administration that sends them out is cutting their benefits once they return home.

i, too, opposed this war from the beginning and still do so. but i certainly do not believe in taking it out on our vets. our vets follow orders. i blame those giving the orders.

peace, movie zombie

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/7/2005 10:50:58 AM
Author: movie zombie
no, but there was a vote as to whether or not to impeach clinton...that''s going pretty far. lots of taxpayer dollars spent on a man''s private sex life. and he paid a political price for it all.

movie zombie,

You are mistaken. President Clinton was impeached on four counts.

History of the Impeachment of President Clinton

Deborah

 

[fire&ice]

Date: 6/7/2005 10:55:37 AM
Author: AGBF

Date: 6/7/2005 10:50:58 AM
Author: movie zombie
no, but there was a vote as to whether or not to impeach clinton...that''s going pretty far. lots of taxpayer dollars spent on a man''s private sex life. and he paid a political price for it all.

movie zombie,

You are mistaken. President Clinton was impeached on four counts.

History of the Impeachment of President Clinton

Deborah

I read your link. According to my interpretation, four counts were reviewed. He was brought up on two. Seems, in keeping with the pure sense of the word impeachment, he was voted on only one.

And, the issue had little to do with his sex life. At the core, he lied. Probably would have been a she said he said if someone didn''t keep a certain semen stained dress.

Go figure that one.

 

[widget]

Date: 6/7/2005 11:30:22 AM
Author: Feydakin
If the main reason had been 'Regime Change' and liberating the Iraqi people from a government willing to murder it's own people to the tune of 300,000 over 20 years, would this have been an acceptable reason to invade??

Acceptable to you, perhaps, but NOT to the majority of Americans and the US Congress.

They lied.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 6/7/2005 11:30:22 AM
Author: Feydakin

You say we should not go in to remove a tyrant at the expense of the civillian population.. The civillian population was being killed at the rate of nearly 15,000 per year under Hussein.. The current death rate of the civillian population is roughly 5,000 per year.. Again, simple math for liberals, that is 2/3 fewer, or 10,000 MORE people are alive during the WAR than durring the PEACE.. Why is this simple math problem so challenging to you??


Also, you say that the main reason for invading Iraq was WMDs, since no WMDs were found, we should have never invaded.. If the main reason had been ''Regime Change'' and liberating the Iraqi people from a government willing to murder it''s own people to the tune of 300,000 over 20 years, would this have been an acceptable reason to invade??

Steve,

"The main reason for invading Iraq" was not WMD. It was the STATED reason for invading Iraq.

President Bush would not have gotten Congress (which has the sole authority to declare war) to support the invasion of Iraq had there been any purpose less important to the citizens of the United States than defense of the United States.

As to whether it is better to remove Saddam Hussein and lose lives doing so versus losing Iraqi lives TO Saddam Hussein, it isn''t "a simple math problem".

You can argue that there should have been oher reasons to remove Saddam Hussein, but there were none given to Congress. That was the reason Congress approved the invasion. Congress does *NOT* remove most maniacal dictators from power around the world. There are many the United States *helped* into power.

Had the war been fought to stop Saddam Hussein''s killing of civilians it would have been fought years earlier and in a totally different manner (minus the big bombs and the troops that cannot speak Arabic, both of which kill civilians).

I did not oppose George Herbert Walker Bush''s invasion of Kuwait. He invaded with one stated purpose that was based on reality, not fantasy (the Weapons of Mass Destruction which didn''t exist). He invaded with the stated purpose of removing Iraq from Kuwait. He did it. He left.

Deborah

 

[widget]

We Americans really are something else, aren't we?

We impeach Clinton for lying about sexual dalliances.

We force the resignation of Nixon for lying to cover up the crazy antics of his underlings...

And what do we do to Bush for lying in order to invade a sovereign country?

We reelect him!

go figure...

 

[strmrdr]

My bottom line on Irag is that we should have finished the job the first time and owed them to finish it.
Afghanistan needed to be done because of 9/11
But enough is enough get them on their feet and get out.
Then pull out of all the off hell holes including europe and let them fend for themselves.

 

[movie zombie]

good to know i''m human and can err!

and while i buy the fact that nixon, clinton, and bush are also human, when they err, it costs the world in a big way.

if lying is grounds for impeachment, then bush should be impeached immediately.

peace, movie zombie

 

[MINE!!]

What I find interesting is the fact that people continue to think that president of the UNited States has all this ''mighty'' power. That is just HILARIOUS!!! Checks and balances ladies and gents.. checks and balances..

It is so easy to blame the big bad mean president.. but not so easy to see that he is not the only one in Washington... nor is he the only one making descisions, or representing those that want the same!