Which war should we fight?

[PinkCheeese]

Okay so right now (or some point in time) ur in ur room on the computer reading this. But on the otherside of the atlantic in Iraq u.s. soldiers are fighting Iraqian soldiers. On the corner of the street theres a shoot out with two different gangs. In the next state cops are chasing after a drug dealer. Couple miles further some guy just beat his wife and kids nearly to death. To the north another girl is being put on the street for another pimps profit. And next door is some family having troubles with money and hunger. Now i ask u this, which war is more important? Which war should we fight?

[Gooie]

First of all we are not fighting Iraq soldiers..... we shouldn't be in Iraq haven't you figured that out yet?

[Demosthenez]

From the one sided coverage, it sounds like you already know the answer. Next time, it should probably be a little less biased if you want good answers.

Honestly? War on terror. It really would not take much to topple the US economy. One dirty bomb downtown NY, shit, that is just fucking horrible to think about. It may not even kill much. The psychological effect would be enough.

But, our home problems and rampant lack of any morals will damn us in the end (yeah, me included, and probably most of you). I would rather delay the inevitable than have it all end in a nuclear winter.

[The-General-Public]

how bout the war on carbs fatso?

[that-dude2]

Dude please tell me which one's important.
millions who died on 9/11 or people dieing here.
no matter wat war you fight, the other will catch up
we move out of iraq we get hit again, millions more die OR....
we stay in iraq fight terror lose thousands. would you like to be in a country that takes shit from everyone and only focuses on their problems, or a country that takes shit from NOONE?

[PiePie]

At 9/12/04 07:46 AM, that_dude2 wrote: millions who died on 9/11

what millions did not die on 9/11 what are you tlkaing about. Well if I was an american with power like i.g I was Bush I would focus on helping and improving the states and bring some troops back from iraq... Plus bush has to finish what he started or else theres going to be big trouble if he just leaves the war on irag now...

[that-dude2]

At 9/12/04 08:27 AM, piepie wrote:

At 9/12/04 07:46 AM, that_dude2 wrote: millions who died on 9/11

what millions did not die on 9/11 what are you tlkaing about.

i said millions to mean a lot of people

[PiePie]

At 9/12/04 08:37 AM, that_dude2 wrote:
i said millions to mean a lot of people

ok well you could of said thousands to mean alot of people but wtv.

[secondmessiah]

We (the US) are strong enough to fight all of those.

We are not fighting any Iraqi soldiers, they fight alongside us. WE are fighting against insurgents who want Iraq to fall into anarchy.

[Montgomery-Scott]

You are right, we aren't fighting against the iraqi soldiers, because we own their army. We are fighting the regular iraqi people who don't like our presence there. And it has been proved time and time again that iraq had NO link to Al Quieda, and infact, Sadam, bad man that he was, was keeping Al Quieda OUT of iraq,

[RedSkunk]

At 9/12/04 03:03 AM, PinkCheeese wrote: To the north another girl is being put on the street for another pimps profit.

Those fucking Canadians. I think our mission is clear.

[PinkCheeese]

At 9/12/04 07:46 AM, that_dude2 wrote: Dude please tell me which one's important.
millions who died on 9/11 or people dieing here.

Do not exaggerate the deaths of "9/11" becuase ur just trying to it make an even bigger event than it already is. Thats how the media did it by makeing it bigger than it already is. And i guess u would care about the deaths from one day instead the deaths from everyday.

[Carronade]

I, myself being an American, am quite confused on what we should have done and are currently doing. Years ago we completly cut ourselves off from the world and got screwed, then we go out into the world to fight communism and get screwed. Now we poke our noses into places where we arnt needed. I understand that we had to stop the one responsible for the attack on the USA, but is our government starting to ignore its own people here in the states like PinkCheese is implying? I believe so, maybe someday we can get a President that can fix this. I know we choose our leader in this country, but what can you do when your only choice is to pick between the lesser of the two evils?

[subpar]

At 9/12/04 03:14 AM, The_General_Public wrote: how bout the war on carbs fatso?

Another blind personal insult. You must be a n00b.

[that-dude2]

At 9/12/04 04:23 PM, PinkCheeese wrote:

And i guess u would care about the deaths from one day instead the deaths from everyday.

he said right now

[that-dude2]

At 9/12/04 05:33 PM, Carronade wrote:

I understand that we had to stop the one responsible for the attack on the USA, but is our government starting to ignore its own people here in the states like PinkCheese is implying?

no matter wat you do there will always be some guy who thinks if he robs a bank he'll get more money

in another part of the us, someone got dumped by their girlfriend, they're mad, they figure "she's gotta die" you can't prevent that

or, someone got fired, they're pissed, they figure they have'nt had any nookie in a while, they rape someone,

How do you stop that?

[Raptorman]

At 9/12/04 11:06 AM, Quanze13 wrote: You are right, we aren't fighting against the iraqi soldiers, because we own their army. We are fighting the regular iraqi people who don't like our presence there.

And Irainians and Syrians, and Saudis, and Egyptians, ect., ect. Seems like just about every Islamo-nutjob that would do us harm is over there showing that while they aren't very good at killing our troops, they are very good at killing there fellow Muslims. Machiavellinan? You bet. Efective? Thus far....

:And it has been proved time and time again that iraq had NO link to Al Quieda, and infact, Sadam, bad man that he was, was keeping Al Quieda OUT of iraq,

Well it seems that they are there now. Better there than here.

[straight1]

At 9/12/04 03:03 AM, PinkCheeese wrote: Now i ask u this, which war is more important? Which war should we fight?

bush came to office and disengaged with the world, killed kyoto, killed the work done by previous administrations in palestine, etc. he knew jack shit about overseas stuff. then 9-11. engage with outside world again, with guns, with threats.... U.N over-ride!!

ffs. whats with this war on stuff shite.

my answer is, no wars, on anything.

engage the world from a space of wanting to make it a better place for all. stop ppl dieing of no clean water, then perfect the cruise missile and fly to mars.

engage domestic policy after cleaning up campaign funding and election fraude. come at it from a positon of integrity, leadership, not managment. then get a universal health care system going, with a single bench for pharmacuticals.

pie in the sky by straight....of course you wont get any on it, because the companies own your country, you dont. you sold it to them with your apathy.... and you aint going to get it back without one hell of a shit fight.

[Kev-o]

We should fight the one against war a mindless nationalism.