Re: Come on now...actionjackson85September 5 2005, 17:24:18 UTC
You're right, gas prices wouldn't be like this, they'd be higher. Countries like France want nothing to do with this war, and they're paying about 6 bucks a gallon for gas. Imagine what would have happened if we never went to war with Iraq. Saddam would still be in power and he would have cut off the US and every other major country from the oil in Iraq. Which yes, is part of the reason why we went to war. Oil wouldn't cost $60 per barrel like it does now, it'd cost $160 per barrel. And we wouldn't be paying 3 bucks per gallon, we'd be paying 13 bucks per gallon. And I would like to know how Bush is making money off of this...
I do know that if we succeed in forming a stable democratic government in Iraq, we'd have a very powerful ally. I was talking to this guy in my Poly Sci class the other day, he had just gotten back from a 9 month tour in Iraq. He was telling me that when the media comes to Iraq, they only go to Baghdad and nowhere else. He was also telling me that the only people who don't want the US in Iraq, are the insurgents who used to be Saddam's personal army. Iraq is split up into 3 basic groups of people; The Kurds, the Sunnis, and The Shiites. Saddam is a Sunni. So when he was in power, the Sunnis had it pretty good. And now that the US is trying to form a democracy, the Sunni people are affraid that the Kurds and the Shiites are going to form together and squeeze them out. Which is why they are resisting. If Iraq were Michigan, all the fighting would be going on in Lansing and everywhere else would be essentially peaceful. You and I would be living basically the way we are now. Believe it or not there is a lot of good being done in this war. But look at it from a media standpoint. Which is going to sell more papers, a frontpage picture of a hospital receiving new beds, or a building that was blown up by a suicide bomber? Unfortunately in this country, the media's number one goal is not to inform the country, it's to make money. But I would highly suggest you talk to someone who has been in the war in Iraq, it's pretty surprising what they tell you..
Re: Come on now...actionjackson85September 6 2005, 04:56:33 UTC
someone's a republican ... :)
gas prices in france and western europe countries are also so high not "just" because they are in no part of the middle east war, but a big part also has to do with the higher environmental standards their country has and how non-automobile travel is also very highly influenced and taxed by their government who, unlike the U.S., can interplay on the economy and change prices how they see fit.
yes, many people have donated and helped the people in louisiana and other victims of hurricane katrina. i myself along with many members of my family have donated money for the beginning of the recover. i also believe that it is a bit crazy that our president, who has spent over 300 days [1/5 of his presidency] on a vacation, goes out the night after Hurricane Katrina hit and practically destroyed the city, and parties with his golf buddies in California. Then, the next night, decides he will do something about it. Both sides to the argument however, must be achieved as i agree the government is doing a lot to help out, and those people that have contributed to rescue efforts need to be more than praised. damn eric, if i could only stroke you off and maybe jam with you, it would be fun... right now.
Re: Come on now...actionjackson85September 6 2005, 06:49:28 UTC
Shanman, you're the only one who has provide thoughtful, unbiased information and opinion. Which means a lot coming from you because I know you were/are a Kerry supporter. And for that, I thank you. I wouldn't say I call myself a republican, but I don't think the troubles of the US are because of one single man, nor do I think this country's president should be our whipping boy. It seems like so many people love to hate bush, almost like it's the cool thing to do, and that gets on my nerves. During the election, I always said; "I don't care who you vote for, just as long as you vote for someone based on knowledge and factual information." I personally knew several people who were voting for either Kerry or Bush simply because either A.) That's who their parents were voting for, B.) That's who their friends were voting for, or C.) Because of what the celebrities were saying. I voted for Bush. And I would rather have had someone vote for Kerry based on intelligence and understanding, than have them vote for Bush because that's who their 'rents were voting for. I've said that to a lot of people, but unfortunately when they hear I voted for Bush, then tend to block out everything else I say.
And would you rather our president take 300 vacation days, or sit in his office getting a hummer while this country's economy was starting it's decline (Clinton), or organizing strategic operations to sneak women in and out of the White House without his wife knowing while we had a little thing going on called "Vietnam" (Kennedy), or spend taxpayers money to bug the democratic convention for spy purposes to ensure re-election (Nixon)? My point is is that every single president this country has ever had has done something[s] that people don't agree with. They're human, just like you and I. And while taking 300 vacation days may be a bigger crime to you than using the White House security team as an escort service for your mistresses, it might not be to someone else. There is no fact when it comes to morals or ethics, only opinion.
Re: Come on now...actionjackson85September 6 2005, 19:56:29 UTC
Ahhh yes, i'm proud to be a former Kerry supporter during the election in 2004. I agreed with a lot more issues that John Kerry supported than George W Bush. i agree knowledge should be obtained before deciding on who to vote for. One thing i disliked was that a lot of Bush supporters claimed Kerry was "wishy-washy" when it came to his support for the war in Iraq. He supported the war or atleast a cause for war during the months following 9/11 and deemed it necessary for their to be some kind of military response. However, once the war began, and more and more troops were being sent to Iraq instead of Afghanistan [where the taliban roams and where the leaders of the attack were have believed to came from ], he changed his tune and 'suddenly turned his back on US troops'. That is untrue and if you think about it.. how many other americans reacted this way? I did for one, when the direction of the war changed, so did my opinion. Remember that big fucking banner in April of 2004 i believe that said the war was over? The cause for the war may be just, but the slaughters that happen to American troops as well as Iraqi civilians has gone on for much too long. Osama is not going to pop out from behind a rock one day and just give up. He would kill himself before he let himself be captured anyway. I am going on and on but it just seems as though we knew the US will have political involvement and military surveillance on that country for the next 50 years anyway, why keep sending soldiers there?
Re: Come on now...actionjackson85September 7 2005, 00:59:49 UTC
The problem with Kerry's campaign stragety was that he banked on people only watching one debate. Unfortunately, most young adults in this country who vote don't care too much for politics. So they watched some of the whole campaign process in the beginning of the election, and some at the end. Which is why voters thought Kerry was so "wishy-washy" when it came to the war.
If we pulled the troops out right now, everything we've worked for in the past 2.5 years would be for nothing. The only reason we're still there is because Iraq is putting the final touches on their constitution and is in the process of forming, training, and arming a new army. Before now, Iraq had never had a democratic government, they've always been under dictatorship. Which means they never knew how, or had to worry about forming an army. Basically right now we're trying to run security and keep things as peaceful as possible. We're also there to help rebuild hospitals and schools and get life "back to normal." I remember when we first went over there, I saw headlines every day about American casualities, now not so much. I'm not going to pretend to know everything that's going on over there, because I don't. But what I do know is credible because it's come from people who were over there, or from people who still are over there. I just read the other day that the terrorist that was number 1 on our most wanted list was killed in a 15 minute battle in Iraq.
Whether you agree with the war or not, we've got to support the troups that are over there. When soldiers came home from Vietnam, they were being spit on and brought down for being part of such a horrible war. That coupled with all the terrible things that went on in Vietnam were cause for all the mental problems soldiers suffered through. Something that should not be allowed to happen with this war.
Re: Come on now...actionjackson85September 7 2005, 15:17:41 UTC
Well, one thing is for sure, i am not knocking any of the american troops for fighting in iraq. nor will a response be like that of vietnam when they return. i simply noted that i didnt think the war should still be contuining. i see it as a neverending process, but i guess if troops come home in '08 and a full democratic government has been established, then ill put my foot in my mouth.
ALSO, not to sound like a smart ass, but that had to be No. 2 on the Most Wanted List. I'm pretty sure Osama Bin Laden is # 1. :)
Until next time, this has been heated political debates in Chad's LJ. He wishes he never would have started this post, lol.
I do know that if we succeed in forming a stable democratic government in Iraq, we'd have a very powerful ally. I was talking to this guy in my Poly Sci class the other day, he had just gotten back from a 9 month tour in Iraq. He was telling me that when the media comes to Iraq, they only go to Baghdad and nowhere else. He was also telling me that the only people who don't want the US in Iraq, are the insurgents who used to be Saddam's personal army. Iraq is split up into 3 basic groups of people; The Kurds, the Sunnis, and The Shiites. Saddam is a Sunni. So when he was in power, the Sunnis had it pretty good. And now that the US is trying to form a democracy, the Sunni people are affraid that the Kurds and the Shiites are going to form together and squeeze them out. Which is why they are resisting. If Iraq were Michigan, all the fighting would be going on in Lansing and everywhere else would be essentially peaceful. You and I would be living basically the way we are now. Believe it or not there is a lot of good being done in this war. But look at it from a media standpoint. Which is going to sell more papers, a frontpage picture of a hospital receiving new beds, or a building that was blown up by a suicide bomber? Unfortunately in this country, the media's number one goal is not to inform the country, it's to make money. But I would highly suggest you talk to someone who has been in the war in Iraq, it's pretty surprising what they tell you..
Reply
gas prices in france and western europe countries are also so high not "just" because they are in no part of the middle east war, but a big part also has to do with the higher environmental standards their country has and how non-automobile travel is also very highly influenced and taxed by their government who, unlike the U.S., can interplay on the economy and change prices how they see fit.
yes, many people have donated and helped the people in louisiana and other victims of hurricane katrina. i myself along with many members of my family have donated money for the beginning of the recover. i also believe that it is a bit crazy that our president, who has spent over 300 days [1/5 of his presidency] on a vacation, goes out the night after Hurricane Katrina hit and practically destroyed the city, and parties with his golf buddies in California. Then, the next night, decides he will do something about it. Both sides to the argument however, must be achieved as i agree the government is doing a lot to help out, and those people that have contributed to rescue efforts need to be more than praised. damn eric, if i could only stroke you off and maybe jam with you, it would be fun... right now.
-shandawg
Reply
And would you rather our president take 300 vacation days, or sit in his office getting a hummer while this country's economy was starting it's decline (Clinton), or organizing strategic operations to sneak women in and out of the White House without his wife knowing while we had a little thing going on called "Vietnam" (Kennedy), or spend taxpayers money to bug the democratic convention for spy purposes to ensure re-election (Nixon)? My point is is that every single president this country has ever had has done something[s] that people don't agree with. They're human, just like you and I. And while taking 300 vacation days may be a bigger crime to you than using the White House security team as an escort service for your mistresses, it might not be to someone else. There is no fact when it comes to morals or ethics, only opinion.
Reply
Reply
If we pulled the troops out right now, everything we've worked for in the past 2.5 years would be for nothing. The only reason we're still there is because Iraq is putting the final touches on their constitution and is in the process of forming, training, and arming a new army. Before now, Iraq had never had a democratic government, they've always been under dictatorship. Which means they never knew how, or had to worry about forming an army. Basically right now we're trying to run security and keep things as peaceful as possible. We're also there to help rebuild hospitals and schools and get life "back to normal." I remember when we first went over there, I saw headlines every day about American casualities, now not so much. I'm not going to pretend to know everything that's going on over there, because I don't. But what I do know is credible because it's come from people who were over there, or from people who still are over there. I just read the other day that the terrorist that was number 1 on our most wanted list was killed in a 15 minute battle in Iraq.
Whether you agree with the war or not, we've got to support the troups that are over there. When soldiers came home from Vietnam, they were being spit on and brought down for being part of such a horrible war. That coupled with all the terrible things that went on in Vietnam were cause for all the mental problems soldiers suffered through. Something that should not be allowed to happen with this war.
Reply
ALSO, not to sound like a smart ass, but that had to be No. 2 on the Most Wanted List. I'm pretty sure Osama Bin Laden is # 1. :)
Until next time, this has been heated political debates in Chad's LJ. He wishes he never would have started this post, lol.
-out
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment