Why do YOU want a war?

[Nick Douglas]

It seems that most in this GenDis forum are pro-war, just as a majority of the country is. I am just wondering what your own personal reasons are.

Do you think Saddam will some day attack us? Do you think that occupying Iraq is the best way to dispose of a brutal dictator? Do you think his removal lessens the threat of terrorism? Do you think that America's position in the world dictates that we "police" areas of unrest? Do you believe that this is an important step in helping Israel survive? Do you think oil shortages will happen if we do nothing?

Same thing applies to people who are against this war, though I guess those answers are rather obvious.

It would be rather hypocritical to ask for one's opinion on a sensitive topic without giving my own, so I will honestly say that I have not decided. I want a war in a way because I believe that Israel cannot continue to survive with the way things are headed, but I don't want a war because I believe the safety of Americans should come before the safety of others when determining policy on something with as much impact as a war.

 

[ferdville]

I would say there is a huge difference between "wanting a war" and the realization that a war "may" be necessary. I can't imagine anyone "wanting" war - who could honestly want thousands of people to die? I think it is a question about our way of life in America as we know it. Is Saddam a threat? Yes, he is. Do we have the moral authority to remove him from this planet - well, I'll let others solve that debate. One case for the war that is seldom made is the fact that this regime has brutally slaughtered tens of thousands or more. Th9ugh the U.S. isn't the most consistant country in dealing with human rights violations, a case could be made for intervening on that issue alone in my opinion.

 

[PRO190]

In Brief:::

For the protection of our citizens, allies, and our Vital economic interest>>

 

[djv]

All I ask it is done right. I know many feal screw the UN. But guys if we do it with out some type of blessing. Or at least a majority of our world as it is today. Then what stops other countries from saying and doing the same thing. We just should not open that can of worms. It can really hurt us in the long run.
And we must deside why we are doing it. Is it regime change? Or is it to get rid of weapons of mass distruction. The answer changes to much.
I only hope and pray we do not lose many people. God I hate body bags with a passion.

 

[Nick Douglas]

All semantics aside, Ferdville, either you want a war or you don't. I mean, we all know the damage that comes with war. Nobody is saying they just want to have who knows how many people die. If you want the U.S. to invade Iraq, you want a war. Period. Nobody is ever forced into war. There are always options, just maybe not always better options.

PRO190, I am not really sure what you mean. That was an extrememly vague answer. You could give that *exact* same answer as a reason for not wanting a war.

I also happen to agree with what djv said for the most part.

 

[AR182]

DJV,

How can you expect to have some type of blessing when there are clearly conflicts of interests on the security council.

 

[theGibber1]

But guys if we do it with out some type of blessing

It can really hurt us in the long run

they got over it in the 90s when Clinton bombed foreign countries without asking anyone.. they will get over it again..

 

[Palmetto Pimp]

my reason is simple.. i want revenge from 9/11

:bigun: :bigun:

 

[SmashMouth]

my reason is simple.. i want revenge from 9/11



How many iraquis were on those planes??? How many have we arrested and detained since. Alqueda is made of Saudis Egyptians for the most part.

I want revenge to but I want the right people. They are trying to sell us that Iraq was responsible for this or tied to it. We know the saudis and egyptians were there. We don't have to stretch anything there. Yet Iraq won the lottery and gets to be blown apart. Just a little strange that we don't want to F with those we have solid proof were involved I say.

 

[ferdville]

Well, Nick all semantics aside, I think I spelled out my feelings. I do not believe that anyone in their right mind would "want" a war. However, sometimes a war is necessary. For example, would you have wanted "war" in what became WWI? Or would you have preferred we stayed out of it? Many people fail to realize something about WW2. We fought much of this war in europe against the Germans. If memory serves me correct, we were not attacked by the Germans at Pearl Harbor, we were attacked by the Japanese. Despite that, we joined the European battlefront to fight the Germans. Would you have wanted "war" then? My guess would be "yes" on both accounts. Perhaps you place this conflict in the same pot as the Korean War or Viet Nam. Our motives were not as clear in those cases. So, Nick, would you hve "wanted war" in the case of WWI or WW2? Or are there no circumstances where you would advocate raising arms?

 

[gardenweasel]

to annoy the french.....

to annoy the french.....

i`m almost serious....truthfully,we are a bit hamstrung in the n korea situation.....and as has been said before,weapons of mass destruction are the ultimate bargaining chip.......if n.korea did not have these weapons,and a decent chance to destabilize the entire far east with them,would we stand by as they mark our planes?.....the cat`s out of the bag in n korea....do you stop it now?......or just throw your hands up and follow france(at least they are always consistent-see world war 2)....i`m not crazy about war....even less about occupation or regime change.....but what then?.....truthfully,most of these arguments are more about hating george bush and his administration than anything regarding war....were the same guys dogging clinton when he went into bosnia?..and really,what were our national interests in bosnia?.....it was more a humanitarian issue...that`s fine....but,we also need to make sure we act in our own best interests...why iraq and not n.korea?......the answer to that is 300.000 troops in the middle east and 17 u.n. resolutions(as meaningless as they might be) and israel.........and no nuclear weapons....yet......france and germany are not terrorist targets....and there are more people with dogs in the hunt in the far east(china,s korea and japan)......we will get some help there....here,we are getting blocked at every turn by the france`s,germany`s and russia`s that appear to be looking out for THEIR own best interests.....just as we should be doing....i truly believe that with the cooperation of france,germany and russia,hussein would already be gone....

but,i have to be honest.....i smell trouble in iraq.....i don`t think this will be anything like kuwait.....if saddam isn`t blowing smoke,he`s digging in for the long haul.....and fighting door to door in baghdad will be hell.....iraqi soldiers in u.s. and british uni`s.......al qaeda dressed as civilians so they can kill our soldiers.....oil fields set ablaze........chemical and biological weapons let loose......

this could be a horrible disaster...let`s hope and pray that the bastard takes the billions he stole from the iraqi people and runs before the shit hits the fan.....

and i hope the french continue to fade into oblivion....a once proud power,slowly being relegated to non-entity status.....the u.n. will lose a good portion of their relevance,also....especially if we get the votes and france vetos the resolution....

btw....is anybody starting to question hans blix objectivity?.....the drones(under further investigation?)and the cluster bombs conveniently left out of the verbal report to the u.n.......buried in the paper reports.....seems like the guy might have an agenda...

 

[Eddie Haskell]

Top 10 reasons I want a war:

10. kill non-whites;
9. set up puppet government in Iraq, label it a democracy, then control all oil reserves;
8. revenge for 9-11 (doesn't matter if Iraq had nothing to do with it, can't tell one dead arab from another dead arab);
7. divert attention from domestic economic problems which current administration has no clue how to resolve;
6. accomplish the foregoing and maintain republican majority in congress and white house;
5. open up Iraq for American business (need starbucks in East Baghdad Heights);
4. establish military base in Iraq so that we have more bases to lauch future attacks against Saudi Arabia if Saudi family is overthrown or gets outta line;
3. continualy reinforce American propoganda that we are really the good guys and our purpose in killing the Iraqi people is to liberate the Iraqi people and not for any of the foregoing real reasons;
2. further claim the reason we are invading this country is to disarm Iraq from weapons of mass destruction that we have known they have had since the 1980's when they used them on the Kurds;

and the number one reason I want war with Iraq:

1. cause Dick Cheney told me to do it.

George W. Bush

 

[TheShrimp]

insanely long post follows...

insanely long post follows...

Very funny Eddie. I think I'm about to say somethign similar but in a much more long-winded and boring fashion.

Contrary to my usual positions around here, I'm still really up in the air about this one. Maybe if I get this out there now, I can drop the whole thing and get back to talking about sleeping with Tonya Harding.

This is what bugs me most of all, so I'll put it first....

What it boils down to for me is I really think -- truly believe -- that if the gov't embarked on a 2 year long propaganda campaign against ANY COUNTRY IN THE MIDDLE EAST after 9/11, a majority of American people would back it. That really scares me, and makes me feel like a sap for backing this. It should bother you, too. If you hate Iraq, you hate it because the government and media told you to. They presented you with facts (yes, facts) and opinions about this country that have turned Americans against it. There are hundred of countries on Earth that people could be told equally rotten facts and opinions about and be swayed into supporting an invasion. Yes we are that fickle about heavy topics. That should really concern people because no one would agree that we should just go invading anyone we can make a case against. This sets a really scary precedent.

To address some of the things they've used. . .

Saddam doesn't gas his own people. He used chemical weapons to put down a Kurdish uprising once. The US infected its own citizens with Syphillis once and we used to lobotomize retarded people (and homosexuals, IIRC). We don't do it any more. Should someone invade us because we did it once?

Any links b/w Iraq and Al Qaeda are tenuous at best and seem really close to non-existent. This angle had really been promoted by the administration and conservative media [edit: and by conservative media, I mean the conservative elements in the media. i'm not discussing whether the media is one or the other. there are certainly elements of both] because they know a LOT of people think like PRO190. That's the big reason, "we want revenge for 9/11." That just eats people up that we haven't killed people over it (even though we have...) There have been much stronger indications that the Saudis and the Yemenis and Afghanis harbor terrorists than Iraq does. Again, this goes back to what I said in the first paragraph.

WoMD. Well. There are simply lots of countries that are much closer to WoMD that dislike us just as much as Saddam. And have much great capacities for getting them here. I think this is a complete straw man and Iraw has been singled out on this issue.

I think Iraq had really been portrayed as a fundamentalist Muslim regime, and it isn't. Nothing like it.

As for people who think this will make us safer here. You are completely delusional. AFTER our initial invasion of Iraq did we see Al Qaeda begin to target America. (the embassy bombings, the WTC bombimg, 9/11, etc.) If you think that was just because we left Saddam in power, you're crazy. We finally stuck our military nose in there, directly, and we've paid for it since. Going in again, even if we remove Saddam, will not curb terrorism toward the US or its citizens overseas. We are going to kill innocent Iraqis with surviving family members who are not going to blame Saddam for the death of their relative. They're going to blame the trigger man. This will not make us safer here.

To annoy the French. This is a valid and noble reason.

So many people's reasons seem to hinge on what "could" happen to us. They could use bios. They could use chems. They could use nukes. There could be another terrorist attack we haven't imagined. But, I suppose some of us just don't think that way. As far as I'm concerned, that's simply living in fear. It's fear that I think has been created by government, and piled on by the media. You are just so much more in danger of cancer, heart disease, car accidents. I like to think of some schlub walking out of McDonalds washing two big macs down with a cigarette thinking he needs duct tape and plastic, when in fact, he's probably about 10000x as likely to die by heart disease. Hilarious, in a not-surprising way.

--------------------
So, the logical question would be "Why Iraq? Even Cheney isn't evil enough to kill Americans and Iraqis just for his buddy's defense contract?"

Well, I think they want Saddam gone, and all of what I listed above is propaganda to get people behind it. Not reasons for it, but just propaganda for it. Don't confuse the two.

So, what are the real reasons they want this? (to finally answer Nick's question) I think they do think this will have a positive influence in the middle east. It does seem like a lot of other countries over there would like him gone and they know a lot more about the region than any of us. He's pretty crazy, and these nations don't want to seem like they're selling out their own by calling for it or supporting the US.

At some point, I trust that smart folks in the government have truly weighed the risks and rewards and are coming to the right decision. Let's just say I have a lot harder time getting to that point of trust than a lot of other people do.

But I really hope its a pain-free war, or at least pain-minimal. We've heard that the general troops are ready to surrender all over the country and that the "Republican Guard" is ready to dig in around Baghdad. We could be wrong on one, both or neither of those accounts. Even the republican guard has to realize they're going to be wiped out no matter how hard they fight.

And man, ain't war great on TV? Factories blowing up. Fire and explosions and all those streaks in the sky. Missiles and planes launched from ships. Launching a PLANE from a BOAT. That still impresses me. I can't stand up in a boat without tipping over.

 

[dawgball]

Maybe I am an ignorant wretch, but I don't feel that our country would start war just for propaganda. If you think any of us know the REAL facts about what goes on over there (or here or any other place where you are not an eye witness), then I think you are sadly mistaken.

The general American public always wants proof and our plans and measures. Don't you thinnk that would put our soldiers in more danger?

Every four years I vote for the candidate, regardless of party, who I think will run our country the best. Once that is done, my role as an American citizen is to support the person in power. If I don't like the way things were handled, I make sure I vote for someone else. Who do I help if I were to protest war on the streets? I honestly think anyone who does picket for political issues is a complete moron. WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN if you have something to say. Our country is built on the fact that we have spokesmen in place. Many people would say that they don't listen, but if you don't send them your opinion, then I guarantee that they won't listen. The only reason people protest is to get their cause on the front page of a newspaper and newspapers eat it up!

I like to be informed about what is happening with our country, but who do you believe? Fox News, CNBC, etc--they are all full of bullshit and are looking out for the political group that is paying their bills. I have started trying to read foreign papers to see how each country's spin differs. It is a very interesting way to look at things.

All we can do is pray (or hope if you are not of religious nature) that everyone comes out of this better. People are going to die over there. If they do, I hope it is for the right reasons. I also pray that the aftermath is not an on-going destructive scene.

To answer Nick's question: Why do I want war? I feel that if my leaders are convinced that we need to attack, then we need to attack. I felt this way when Clinton called to arms as well. Do our leaders make mistakes? Astoundingly YES! But I feel that my duty is to support them in the measures that they feel necessary.

 

[djv]

Thegibber1, the differance here from the 90's. Yes we did some bombing. But we did not take over any countries. We have so many pacts with other countries. Such as S Korea, Tiawan. If China desides, what the hell USA did not need anyones permission to take over Iraq. Well lets get this Taiwan problem handled. You get the idea. We only need a majority from the UN not the whole worlds blessing. If we are any good at diplomacy we should be able to handle that. After all we will just open our, that's your's and mind wallets and pay for votes if need be. I have to believe someone in this adminastration is good at diplomacy. Im still wondering what everyones so dam worried about to start with. Saddam only had these weapons for 15 years. Never used them on us. Sure the hell is not gong to happen in next 15 days either. War should be last option. This seems to get that oil smell back into it every once in a while. I mean we know oil has nothing to do with it. But then Russia, France and the Germans dont buy that story. So go around those three if you cant buy them off. Get the 9 votes and have a war.
I only hope the world is this super safe place after the war.
Like I said above. If we are any good at diplomacy this wil be easy.

 

[gardenweasel]

shrimp

shrimp

poor saddam hussein.....we hate him because the liberal media has said such harsh things about him...because of that SCATHING interview dan rather did?....dan rather was shameful.....i thought that was larry king interviewing him......are you for real?.....isn`t this the same saddam that invaded kuwait?......with an eye toward saudi arabia?.....what if we don`t go in?.....we don`t expel him?....what if his nuclear reactors weren`t bombed before he was able to manufacture a nuclear weapon?....then you`ve got a true dictator with nuclear,chemical and biological weapons in control of the majority of middle east oil.....talk about destabilization.........then, this guy is able to control a good portion of the life`s blood of the western world and the middle east(yes,i`m aware of how much oil we get from venezuela and canada)...when we pull our troops out,will saddam promise to be good?...will blix continue to overlook the drones and the cluster bombs? ...well F-CK THAT.....we have to do what`s in OUR BEST INTERESTS...and if that wasn`t enough,what about our ally israel?..... it`s obvious that there is a load of anti-semitic feeling here and around the world....but they are our strongest ally in the middle east....do we turn our backs on them?...what if this same nut that dropped scuds on israel during the gulf war,decides to drop cluster bombs on israel with chemical and biological weapons?....is israel supposed to continue to sit on their hands.....the potential for a full-blown war in the middle east is increased 10 fold with saddam in the mix.. .......iraq can`t be allowed to be the big kid on the block in the middle east...if all the afforementioned steps had been ignored,what would the middle east look like...we don`t NEED their oil.....we also don`t need them controlling the oil of other countries in the region...hell,if we just wanted access to their oil,let them pursue weapons of mass destruction and lift the sanctions.........if it was just about their oil,we could buy it from them.......

and that u.s. media....boy aren`t we sheep....that`s why our country(and this forum)is fractured on this issue.....i was pretty much middle of the road,before the president bashing and these stupid,coddled celebrities started playing politics with this issue....there are no easy answers.....

please remember winston churchill before ww2....he railed for the british and europe to watch germany and hitler........"the gathering storm" he called it....france did then what the french always do..rolled over onto their backs..iraq isn`t germany...but think about a full blown war in the middle east and what it might do......and think about saddam`s history...

..don`t make the mistake that france is our ally...they are not....wouldn`t even let us fly over their country to hit libya and khadafi after that nightclub bombing in berlin...the french look out for the french....and their foreign policy decisions over the last century regarding threats to their own national security have been abysmal......we can`t let the france`s of the world dictate our national security policy decisions .....they don`t like being the irrelevant world player that they have become....they`d like nothing better than to undermine our position in the world....

 

[Blazer]

preemtive strike

preemtive strike

I have expresed my fear about us starting WW3 in several posts so I will assume my position is known. I see reasons for war ,but I fear the backlash.

Preemptive strike. Not revenge. Should be the only reason for the US to take action. This action should only take place if concrete evidence is found.

The UN made resolutiuon 1441. If the UN does not wish to inforce it; we should not be the cowboys who take the law into our own hands.

I miss sports.

 

[TheShrimp]

Well, weaze, I would still contend that the President could talk a majority into an invasion of many countries. I do believe that certain folks, yourself included, have thought this through and concluded that an invasion is a good idea. That's all I really want to see. Just as I would expect someone against and invasion has thought it through and concluded that an invasion is a bad idea. The majority of people on both sides haven't done that, though, and that is not surprising but always disconcerting.

Kuwait...Nolan had an interesting post a couple months ago in which he indicated that Saddam's big Invasion Of Kuwait was in fact him taking some disputed oil wells and that he had confirmed with one of our ambassadors that the US wouldn't mind. Hardly the aggressive action its been portrayed as. I don't feel like digging that post or any news stories up. I do seem to recall Iraq being a lot further into Kuwait than a few oil fields, though.

Nick's original question is a good one for people to ask themselves. Some of the answers in the thread indicate some support isn't from people who really get it.

No one can gauge what effect this will have on sentiment towards America. Will Arabs rejoice that we've removed this evil despot or view it as expanding American imperialism? Anyone that thinks he knows the answer to that question is kidding himself. And its a crucial one in deciding what our actions should be.

 

[gardenweasel]

no one can possibly like or want war

no one can possibly like or want war

but,absent israel`s preemptive bombing of iraq`s reactor in 1981,iraq would almost assuredly have had nuclear weapons in 1991....and kuwait would probably be the 19th province of iraq and saudi arabia #20(all due respect to nolan`s opinion)....

a man that is responsible for roughly 1 million deaths,has attacked 3 neighbors,proclaimed his implacable hatred for the u.s.,has built enough chemical and biological weapons to wipe out nearly everyone on the continent of asia,pursued the production of nuclear weapons,set oil fields in kuwait ablaze causing an unprecedented environmental hazard that is still being dealt with today,paid handsome rewards to suicide bombers families and defied countless u.n. resolutions.......he should be taken very seriously.....

i think this would all be over with a united front opposing hussein...... but, the french,russians and chinese don`t see this as being in their best interests.....they didn`t need permission from the u.n. to discipline the ivory coast,to grind the chechens into submission or to suffocate tibet.....

do i want war...of course not....will this all go smoothly and turn out perfectly....obviously not....does anybody have the perfect solution.....of course not.....something has to done,though....as is also the case with n.korea......i`m glad i`m not making the decision....

great debate ,guys....

btw....i need a couple b`ball winners to start a little stake for the ncaa`s......anybody have anything in the conference tourneys that looks strong?...never really got into b`ball this year....lines probably aren`t even out yet....appreciated.....

 

[Turfgrass]

I fear it's the only way out of the UN for good.