The Good in President Bush, I would like to know... Options

[sammi rules you]

why is it our job to change the country when a lot of people living there didn't want us to? to them, it's not much different now.

edit:
yes, saddam was a threat and we did need him out of power, but that doesn't mean their country would be better off with democracy. there's other things that work besides democracy.

[waccoon]

why is it our job to change the country when a lot of people living there didn't want us to? to them, it's not much different now.

Because under his rule, Iraq was a potential threat to the United States and the rest of the world.

[sammi rules you]

ahh, you posted that as soon as i did my edit. look up again.

[waccoon]

edit:
yes, saddam was a threat and we did need him out of power, but that doesn't mean their country would be better off with democracy. there's other things that work besides democracy.

Like what? Are we going to give them a new monarch? Appoint new oligarchs?
WE got the job done, WE are democrats. What sense does it make to give them communism, or oligarchy?

[sammi rules you]

socialism also works. just because democracy works in our country doesn't mean it will work in theirs. there's a lot of reasons democracy won't work there - there's three kinds of people there who have hated eachother basically since their existence. the UN just put them all in a country; that's not our fault, and it's not our job to fix the mistake made then.

[waccoon]

socialism also works. just because democracy works in our country doesn't mean it will work in theirs. there's a lot of reasons democracy won't work there - there's three kinds of people there who have hated eachother basically since their existence. the UN just put them all in a country; that's not our fault, and it's not our job to fix the mistake made then.

Then who's job is it? The UN made a mistake, the UN has the obligation to fix it.
The three groups that exist should be removed and dealt with. The general people can then live in peace.

[sammi rules you]

the three groups should be removed? and then who would live there? the three groups ARE iraq.

the UN didn't fix it. america isn't the UN. the UN tried to make negotiations, but it didn't work. the UN should have then thought up another solution. america shouldn't have taken it into their hands.

one of the three groups is a large majority of iraq. when they go to vote, the people the kurds want will most likely win. the other two groups will then be in a riot and killing every kurd they see. it's happened for years and years now; the groups have even put eachother into slavery. you can't make them get along.

[waccoon]

the three groups should be removed? and then who would live there? the three groups ARE iraq.

the UN didn't fix it. america isn't the UN. the UN tried to make negotiations, but it didn't work. the UN should have then thought up another solution. america shouldn't have taken it into their hands.

one of the three groups is a large majority of iraq. when they go to vote, the people the kurds want will most likely win. the other two groups will then be in a riot and killing every kurd they see. it's happened for years and years now; the groups have even put eachother into slavery. you can't make them get along.

I never said the UN was america. The United Nations should fix it themselves, why should they give the job to somebody else? If we can't make them all get along, then seperate them. It'll bring at least a temporary solution until we come up with a better one.

[sammi rules you]

I never said the UN was america. The United Nations should fix it themselves, why should they give the job to somebody else? If we can't make them all get along, then seperate them. It'll bring at least a temporary solution until we come up with a better one.

they should have fixed it themselves, that's why i said america shouldn't have taken it as our duty to fix it. we found out there wasn't WMDs, so we should have backed out and waited for the UN to come up with their solution to the problems in iraq.



the groups are separated..within iraq.

[sammi rules you]

erm..bump. i'm still waiting for a reply from anyone. cmon, i'm getting somewhere here.

[sikdragon]

they should have fixed it themselves, that's why i said america shouldn't have taken it as our duty to fix it. we found out there wasn't WMDs, so we should have backed out and waited for the UN to come up with their solution to the problems in iraq.

The UN is corrupt and has never "fixed" anything. Do you know for a fact that there were no WMD's? Huge convoys left days before the invasion from baghdad and went into syria. What were in those convoys? no one knows. But if Saddam had WMD's they could easily fit enough to wipe out anyone he wanted. Imagine if they had their weapons over here. A U-haul could contain the amount in liquid form to wipe out the entire city of: New York, Chicago, Los angelos, or any other city they wanted.

[sammi rules you]

The UN is corrupt and has never "fixed" anything. Do you know for a fact that there were no WMD's? Huge convoys left days before the invasion from baghdad and went into syria. What were in those convoys? no one knows. But if Saddam had WMD's they could easily fit enough to wipe out anyone he wanted. Imagine if they had their weapons over here. A U-haul could contain the amount in liquid form to wipe out the entire city of: New York, Chicago, Los angelos, or any other city they wanted.

Los Angeles*

they didn't find any WMDs there was all i said, so yes, there were no WMDs there when they got there.

that's wonderful that the UN's corrupt and never fixed anything. it still doesn't give america the right to do whatever it wants to other countries.

[sikdragon]

It doesnt give us the right to save ourselves and others?

[sammi rules you]

there were other things we could have done. yes, we should have taken saddam out of power, but we should have made a plan of what to do afterwards with consent from other countries, especially those in the same area. the people in iraq have been fighting since their existence; making them try to get along and vote is absurd.

[sikdragon]

absurd? liberating a people from the oppression of a country ruled by fear and hate is absurd?

[sammi rules you]

absurd? liberating a people from the oppression of a country ruled by fear and hate is absurd?

did you read my post at all? i said we should have put saddam out of power, but that doesn't mean democracy would work in iraq. there's many reasons it wouldn't. making the people there vote democratically is absurd. i did NOT say putting saddam out of power was absurd.

read it. twice even.

[sikdragon]

Ha HAha. Taking out one saddam and putting another in is not liberating them from a country ruled by fear. I read it.

[sammi rules you]

..when did someone put in another saddam?

[sikdragon]

That is the other way to go besides democracy.

[sammi rules you]

uhm no, not really.
there's socialism, communism..some others that aren't the best, according to me.
socialism, however, works in other countries such as france and britian and such. why not consider that?
democracy and dictatorship are not the only things a country can do.

[*kryogenix*]

uhm no, not really.
there's socialism, communism..some others that aren't the best, according to me.
socialism, however, works in other countries such as france and britian and such. why not consider that?
democracy and dictatorship are not the only things a country can do.

socialism and communism are economic ideologies. democracy and dictatorships are political ideoligies. you can be both democratic and socialist, as well as capitalist and a dictatorship.

[sammi rules you]

..still

i was trying to prove my point that you can't just take these people out of dictatorship and put them in a democracy. they don't get along, it's doubtful they ever will.

[sikdragon]

all of those other governments still rely on a select few for all the decisions. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. When one is corrupt hate rules their life. When one corrupt individual runs a country he tends to oppress. It's all the same thing with different names.

[waccoon]

God, sik.

You piss me off.

[azn_r4pf4n]

good question.. I have no clue. Cali is so anti-Bush that Bush never even comes here. Believe me, most pplz here dont kno much bout Bush at all. The frickin guy hasnt even came here in a while if some of u pplz here r from cali and if u notice, u would kno. i kno a lot bout kerry and a lil bit bout bush. Bush is against abortion, thats somethin good about him. I dont agree with him on the war though. He created one of the most biggest deficits we've ever had.