Not to beat a dead horse

[Homer_Rice]

[quote name='bengaljet' date='May 12 2005, 02:26 PM']oh, Homer you do it so well. Minds are set and nothing can change a set mind until the truth hits them in the face. I'm the same way-someone tells me W is smart,knows what he's doing--I just can't buy it,SHOW ME more than once .
  I personally love it when people talk about LIBERALS and then go out and defend the most LIBERAL SPENDING Administration in the history of America.Last count #3.5+ trillion in debt for the last 4 yrs. and tell me what do we have to show for it.Fight the good fight ,Homer and let the cards fall where they may.
[right][post="91571"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Bengaljet;

God, you are gonna hate this, but what makes a "liberal" attitude towards the pursuit of truth different from those on the so-called right? There is plenty of culpability on both sides of the aisle for this war. Personally, I've had as many fruitless discussions with so-called liberals as I have had with so-called conservatives.

I'm of the opinion that a mind-set is an axiomatic condition in which a "truth in the face" tends to have no effect, unless that truth is peculiarly profound to the particular with the mind set.

[Guest bengalrick]

no offense homer, but almost every post i read of yours, reminds me of reading plato and socrates in philosphy class... in other words, i feel like a huge adorable cuddly wuddly teddy bear after i read most of your stuff...

[Guest BengalBacker]

[quote name='Homer_Rice' date='May 12 2005, 02:12 PM']Now pay attention, Mr. Omnipotent Dictator, I'll say this real slow.

[right][post="91568"][/post][/right][/quote]


[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img] [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//24.gif[/img]

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

So how do you Bush supporters feel about the amount of casualities in Iraq and the anti-America protest in which a few people were killed as well. Don't you think that is an indication that things aren't going well and we need to do something different. The longer the war in goes, the more people die, that's not a good thing. Our president has yet to unveil an exit strategy for the war, but he can come up with a way to get our social security privatized, I'm concerned about his priorities. Contray to the propaganda and lies the people who inhabit the countries we have invaded didn't want to come and don't want us to be there. Our best strategy, imo, should be to get the hell out of region as soon as possible before we get into situation that we can't get out of(if we haven't already.) The death toll gets higher everyday in situation that was supposed to be about liberation and democracy, why does America feel the need to make the whole wolrd democratic and capitalistic?

[Guest BengalBacker]

I used to be atheist, but not anymore. I have seen the face of God.




































[img]http://www.footballhuddles.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/bowdown.gif[/img][img]http://img139.exs.cx/img139/8586/hravatarmug5mk.jpg[/img][img]http://www.footballhuddles.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/bowdown.gif[/img]

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='May 12 2005, 03:02 PM']So how do you Bush supporters feel about the amount of casualities in Iraq and the anti-America protest in which a few people were killed as well.  Don't you think that is an indication that things aren't going well and we need to do something different.  The longer the war in goes, the more people die, that's not a good thing.  Our president has yet to unveil an exit strategy for the war, but he can come up with a way to get our social security privatized, I'm concerned about his priorities.  Contray to the propaganda and lies the people who inhabit the countries we have invaded didn't want to come and don't want us to be there.  Our best strategy, imo, should be to get the hell out of region as soon as possible before we get into situation that we can't get out of(if we haven't already.)  The death toll gets higher everyday in situation that was supposed to be about liberation and democracy, why does America feel the need to make the whole wolrd democratic and capitalistic?
[right][post="91586"][/post][/right][/quote]

exit strategy = you lost... it also gives the terrorists a date to fight for...

that would be retarted to give a date... the anti american protest are not good... i hear they are b/c we disrespected the koran in some way... that just shows how important it is to do everything perfect...

these attacks are spurning from desperation... they are scared shitless, and should be...

our strategy is to win the war, which means that iraqis must protect theirselves... we are closer and closer everyday...

so your strategy is to run...

[Jamie_B]

Smoov, this sounds harsh and unsympathetic...but in war people die, I don't like death anymore than the next but that is a cold fact of war. If we leave now and not rebuild the country that helped to destroy they have all the more reason to hate us, and imo will be even more justified to do so. Pulling out now is not an option. Nobody wants to hear this, but we’re not going to be leaving that region 100% in our lifetime, I honestly believe that we will establish military bases there, not unlike we did post WW2 in Germany. I'm not saying whether that’s good or bad, but it’s a very real possibility. Some of you guys sound like your pro isolationism, that isn’t realistic, imo. We need to look at these issues realistically and not idealistically.

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

[quote name='bengalrick' date='May 12 2005, 03:12 PM']exit strategy = you lost... it also gives the terrorists a date to fight for...

that would be retarted to give a date... the anti american protest are not good... i hear they are b/c we disrespected the koran in some way... that just shows how important it is to do everything perfect... they are fighting out of desperation...

our strategy is to win the war, which means that iraqis must protect theirselves... we are closer and closer everyday...

so your strategy is to run... 
[right][post="91590"][/post][/right][/quote]

An exit strategy doesn't mean we lost, it means we don't want to fight this war forever.

This isn't about whose tougher, the world knows we could snuff out whomever we choose with the push of a button. My strategy is to SAVE AS MANY AMERICAN LIVES AS POSSIBLE, that should be the Presidents strategies as well.

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='May 12 2005, 03:24 PM']An exit strategy doesn't mean we lost, it means we don't want to fight this war forever.

This isn't about whose tougher, the world knows we could snuff out whomever we choose with the push of a button.  My strategy is to SAVE AS MANY AMERICAN LIVES AS POSSIBLE, that should be the Presidents strategies as well.
[right][post="91596"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

if we leave now, they're country will be retaken over by these guys... then they will really hate us... and by taking the fight to them, we are saving american lives imo... don't forget we lost twice as much people in one day, than we have in 2-3 years worth of war...

[|Bunghole|]

[quote name='Bunghole' date='May 12 2005, 11:48 AM']In all honesty, the ONLY thing that I can be relatively sure of is that war in the Middle East will ALWAYS exist as long as Israel exists, and the US continues to support it's existence with our best weaponry and training.

[b]The fundamentalist Islamic countries will stop at nothing less than the eradication of the Israeli nation and the expulsion of infidels (Americans) from their "holy" soil.[/b]

So, the war will never truly end and terrorism is really the only effective tool that these ragtag collections of radicals can use to fight us with, since they certainly can't stand toe-to-toe with our military.

Which is why the proliferation of nuclear weapons in this crazy part of the world is literally so frightening--because unlike the Cold War, if I may quote Sting, the Russians loved their children too, but these Islamic radicals have proven they will send their own flesh and blood on suicide bombing missions...and if they obtain ANY type of nuclear device, they WILL USE IT!

And what then?  Armaggeddon?  Do we turn the entire Middle East into glass with nuclear fire?

Frankly, the pessimist/realist in me sees no way out of this other than a prolonged war that will really never end....
[right][post="91540"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
[b][i]I'm quite interested to see if others here see this situation in a similar light as I...I frankly find any cause for real hope in this morass of death and religious fervor to be misplaced and false...[/i][/b]

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Bunghole' date='May 12 2005, 04:32 PM'][b][i]I'm quite interested to see if others here see this situation in a similar light as I...I frankly find any cause for real hope in this morass of death and religious fervor to be misplaced and false...[/i][/b]
[right][post="91600"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Ive thought that as well, I hope were both wrong.

[Guest bengalrick]

[quote name='Bunghole' date='May 12 2005, 03:32 PM'][b][i]I'm quite interested to see if others here see this situation in a similar light as I...I frankly find any cause for real hope in this morass of death and religious fervor to be misplaced and false...[/i][/b]
[right][post="91600"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

to think it's impossible is saying we have no chance of winning... i believe that anything is possible...

is it likely that the middleeast will have peace w/ israel in the middle of it: probably not...

[|Bunghole|]

I think the definition of "winning" a war has become awfully cloudy anymore...

But those out there that care to, please entertain the discussion with regards to the possibility of a [i]lasting[/i] peace in the Middle East as long as Israel exists and the USA continues to militarily and otherwise support said existence....

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Bunghole' date='May 12 2005, 04:46 PM']I think the definition of "winning" a war has become awfully cloudy anymore...

But those out there that care to, please entertain the discussion with regards to the possibility of a [i]lasting[/i] peace in the Middle East as long as Israel exists and the USA continues to militarily and otherwise support said existence....
[right][post="91610"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


Which beggs for the importance of a Palistinan (sp?) state.

[Guest bengalrick]

the same way that racism is easing up in america... time will heal... neither side (palestinian or israeli) want to fight each other at this point... terrorists are losing support b/c of their insane tactics of targeting their own people... the average muslim has got to be losing trust in those tactics... w/ abbas in power there, we have a chance..

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='May 12 2005, 03:18 PM']Smoov, this sounds harsh and unsympathetic...but in war people die, I don't like death anymore than the next but that is a cold fact of war. If we leave now and not rebuild the country that helped to destroy they have all the more reason to hate us, and imo will be even more justified to do so. Pulling out now is not an option. Nobody wants to hear this, but we’re not going to be leaving that region 100% in our lifetime, [b]I honestly believe that we will establish military bases there, not unlike we did post WW2 in Germany[/b]. I'm not saying whether that’s good or bad, but it’s a very real possibility. Some of you guys sound like your pro isolationism, that isn’t realistic, imo. We need to look at these issues realistically and not idealistically.
[right][post="91592"][/post][/right][/quote]

I assume you know how the people in that region feel about Western forgieners who want to set up military bases in their homeland. A US military base in the middle east would be fodder material for any islamic extremist and basically a bulls-eye that would never see peace unless we exterminated all who resisted(that seems to be the M.O. now). That does seem like the only logically course of action though, thus the quandry(trying to do my best HomerRice impersonation) . That's why, I think, Clinton was hesitant about moving into the region, he knew Saddam had to be dealt with, but how is the question( Or maybe he was too busy gettin blown, but whatever). Saddam was a monster who deserves everything that has/will happen to him, but the people of Iraq are the ones who pay in blood for Saddam's and our current adminstration's agendas.

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='Bengal_Smoov' date='May 12 2005, 05:22 PM']I assume you know how the people in that region feel about  Western forgieners who want to set up military bases in their homeland.  A US military base in the middle east would be fodder material for any islamic extremist and basically a bulls-eye that would never see peace unless we exterminated all who resisted(that seems to be the M.O. now).  That does seem like the only logically course of action though, thus the quandry(trying to do my best HomerRice impersonation) .  That's why, I think, Clinton was hesitant about moving into the region, he knew Saddam had to be dealt with, but how is the question( Or maybe he was too busy gettin blown, but whatever).  Saddam was a monster who deserves everything that has/will happen to him, but the people of Iraq are the ones who pay in blood for Saddam's and our current adminstration's agendas.
[right][post="91626"][/post][/right][/quote]


I don't disagree, i'm just speaking from what I believe to be what will realistically happen.... I could be wrong though.

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

[quote name='Bunghole' date='May 12 2005, 03:46 PM']I think the definition of "winning" a war has become awfully cloudy anymore...

But those out there that care to, please entertain the discussion with regards to the possibility of a [i]lasting[/i] peace in the Middle East as long as Israel exists and the USA continues to militarily and otherwise support said existence....
[right][post="91610"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]


I say Isreal has a snowball chance in hell of having substained period of peace in the region it currently occupies. This "country" was born out of contraversy and will mire in such until the day of it's demise. I know that's a very pessamistic veiw but unfortunately that is reality, at least to me.

[Guest #22]

Israel was founded on clearly racist grounds and we need to stop sending so much money over there (for a variety of reasons).

[Guest bengaljet]

[quote name='bengaljet' date='May 12 2005, 02:26 PM']oh, Homer you do it so well. Minds are set and nothing can change a set mind until the truth hits them in the face. I'm the same way-someone tells me W is smart,knows what he's doing--I just can't buy it,SHOW ME more than once .
  I personally love it when people talk about LIBERALS and then go out and defend the most LIBERAL SPENDING Administration in the history of America.Last count $3.5+ trillion in debt for the last 4 yrs. and tell me what do we have to show for it.Fight the good fight ,Homer and let the cards fall where they may.
[right][post="91571"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]
Jamie,not sure what your comment meant.Me-condescending? and to who?Doesn't matter-no response needed.I'm surprised that no one attacked the part of the most Liberal spending Administration. This is not an OPINION cause numbers are involved-what I understand this is the TRUTH. So I'd like a response to the TRUTH about the spending-no opinions needed-just talk about the money spent by this Conservative administration. Give me the truth and not your opinion. And tell me what we have for $3.5 trillion of DEBT.

Homer,no offense taken.

[TheBZ]

[quote name='Jamie_B' date='May 12 2005, 12:03 PM']I wish I could find my previous post but Iraq isnt even one of the top countries we get our oil from (I found a report that showed Canada is the top country we get oil from.) Using that logic, why didnt we just attack Canada?

[right][post="91527"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

The answer is simple...You don't have to attack Canada when you can just haggle around with our supposed 'free trade agreement' to put the bite on Beef, wheat, and softwood lumber.

These issues are in the news here every day, because the United States adds and takes away tariffs according to the current domestic relationship.

Basically...We wrangle over water, electricity and oil...In return for being able to sell our lumber and beef. It's not a system that gets us what we deserve, but fortunately our resources are still relatively bountiful.


As for WMDs...I think that it's really only those in the US that ever believed there were functional WMDs in Iraq. I think they would have also needed missiles more capable than flying about 500 miles (which was all they had).

For the rest of the world, we just call it: "The Rationalization"

The crazy thing is that American discussion on these things always get bogged down in partisan politics, and no one does care about the truth of the matter.

So, from a foreign perspective I have to be leaning towards Homer and JZA on most of their points.


However, the best point had to be that Americans are more concerned with Michael Jackson and Martha Stewart...Because every time I go online that seems to be all that stares me in the face.

It's hilarious, really...And the rest of the world (minus Iraq) can only shake their heads and maneuver around in the background.

BZ

[Jamie_B]

[quote name='TheBZ' date='May 12 2005, 11:02 PM']The answer is simple...You don't have to attack Canada when you can just haggle around with our supposed 'free trade agreement' to put the bite on Beef, wheat, and softwood lumber.

These issues are in the news here every day, because the United States adds and takes away tariffs according to the current domestic relationship.

Basically...We wrangle over water, electricity and oil...In return for being able to sell our lumber and beef. It's not a system that gets us what we deserve, but fortunately our resources are still relatively bountiful.
As for WMDs...I think that it's really only those in the US that ever believed there were functional WMDs in Iraq. I think they would have also needed missiles more capable than flying about 500 miles (which was all they had).

For the rest of the world, we just call it: "The Rationalization"

The crazy thing is that American discussion on these things always get bogged down in partisan politics, and no one does care about the truth of the matter.

So, from a foreign perspective I have to be leaning towards Homer and JZA on most of their points.
However, the best point had to be that Americans are more concerned with Michael Jackson and Martha Stewart...Because every time I go online that seems to be all that stares me in the face.

It's hilarious, really...And the rest of the world (minus Iraq) can only shake their heads and maneuver around in the background.

BZ
[right][post="91733"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

I was being facieses (sp?) when I said why don’t we attack Canada, my point was this war wasn’t about oil. That’s all.

[TheBZ]

I realize that...And while I don't mean to be going at you in particular, my point would be that I believe it IS about oil to a great extent.

I think the United States is at war with Canada...The war just takes place on a different level. It's a war where we can smile, and haggle over foreign trade policy, without weapons coming into play.

This is why so many Canadians would be sceptical about motives behind U.S. 'intervention' in foreign countries. We experience that intervention first-hand, and while it doesn't come in the form of a tank round...It is no less tangible.

I am sure the same applies to other countries as well...The Germans and French were already involved in Iraq before all of this went down, and they had forged a relationship where Iraq would start to take Euros for oil instead of American dollars.

It's about oil and currency value...But the kicker is that US currency is still floundering, and there seems to be nowhere to go but forward into other countries. It's the only way to control their trade with China and Europe.

BTW...I think Iran just cut a trade deal with China and Pakistan for oil. I wonder if that has anything to do with the next target?

BZ

[Guest oldschooler]

You know what makes me sick ?
People acting like we went to Iraq for oil.
You know what makes me angry ?
People overlooking the fact that Saddam thumbed his
nose at the U.S. for over a decade before 9/11.
It`s like people don`t remember all of the Bullshit that
happened before 2001. It also kills me that people want to
blame Bush ...but the ENTIRE U.S. Congress voted for War.
Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and every other top Democrat was all for
using force against Iraq EVEN BEFORE SEPTEMBER 11TH 2001 !!!!

Just because Saddam didn`t have missiles that could have made it
to U.S. soil doesn`t mean that Terrorist couldn`t have gotten their
hands on his WMD`s and used them against us.
IF Saddam would have complied ...there wouldn`t have been a war.
IF the ENTIRE U.S. Congress hadn`t voted to go to war....there wouldn`t
have been a war.


After 9/11 I thought Americans had finally came together for
the good of America. They would back our Government so that
something like September 11th would NEVER happen again.
I was wrong.
Bin Laden did more damage to this Country than just what happened
September 11th. He crippled our economy and divided our Nation.
I`d say until some people start realizing that the U.S. isn`t the enemy,
the Terrorist are winning this war...

[Guest Bengal_Smoov]

[quote name='oldschooler' date='May 13 2005, 08:43 AM']You know what makes me sick ?
People acting like we went to Iraq for oil.
You know what makes me angry ?
People overlooking the fact that Saddam thumbed his
nose at the U.S. for over a decade before 9/11.
It`s like people don`t remember all of the Bullshit that
happened before 2001. It also kills me that people want to
blame Bush ...but the ENTIRE U.S. Congress voted for War.
Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and every other top Democrat was all for
using force against Iraq EVEN BEFORE SEPTEMBER 11TH 2001 !!!!

Just because Saddam didn`t have missiles that could have made it
to U.S. soil doesn`t mean that Terrorist couldn`t have gotten their
hands on his WMD`s and used them against us.
IF Saddam would have complied ...there wouldn`t have been a war.
IF the ENTIRE U.S. Congress hadn`t voted to go to war....there wouldn`t
have been a war.
After 9/11 I thought Americans had finally came together for
the good of America. They would back our Government so that
something like September 11th would NEVER happen again.
I was wrong.
Bin Laden did more damage to this Country than just what happened
September 11th. He crippled our economy and divided our Nation.
I`d say until some people start realizing that the U.S. isn`t the enemy,
Bin Laden is winning this war...
[right][post="91870"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

Do you really think that if Iraq didn't have large quanities of oil we would care about what going on in Iraq? If Iraq's main export were radishes, no one would care who ruled or how many people died there. In Africa it happens all the time, no one cares how many people are killed by ruthless dicators because they don't have natural resources that interest the powers the that be. It seems like you just take what politicians say at face value and don't try see what's really going on. I'm not going to back our government if I don't believe in what they are doing, especially if it's invading a nation that nothing to do with 9/11. I think it's a problem when we have taken control of the oil fields in Iraq, but we haven't captured Bin Laden, yet. How does killing Iraqis atone for 9/11?

Since the fall of communist Russia terrorist have had access to WMD's, so invading Iraq is not stopping the terrorist from acquring WMD"s, its just creating more anti-American sentiment in a region were we should be trying to make peace not war. If you haven't noticed the country was pretty divided before 9/11, so I think your giving Bin Laden more credit than he deserves.