Why do people oppose the war?

[machacker2000]

I mean, it's the same bag of greaseballs who bombed us 4 times. You've seen pictures of the Middle East. If we lived there, our houses would be draped with canvas to cover all of the bullet holes, and we'd hear small arms fire every day. We are over there so it won't be like that here. If we continued to let them just bomb us, like French, we would have a war on American soil right now. So stop your whining! And just try to say something Bush has done wrong. I guarantee I can show you you're wrong.

[Jizzlebang]

So all countries who aren't bombing someone in another country, are being bombed themselves because they are weak?

Iceland.

That's my response to that.

[machacker2000]

Iceland.

That's your false response to that.

We have been bombed 4 times. And they had it set in their hearts to bomb us continually until they could get GIs over here. Is it me, or does that prospect seem a little unsavory? That's why we're in war. Helping Iraq is a part of the puzzle that came later.

[Glaiel-Gamer]

At 2/10/08 03:21 PM, machacker2000 wrote: We have been bombed 4 times.

When?

[Empanado]

At 2/10/08 03:15 PM, machacker2000 wrote: I mean, it's the same bag of greaseballs who bombed us 4 times.

Exactly what "bag of greaseballs" are you talking about? Considering that Saddam (or Iraq in general) had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 and Al Qaeda had nothing to do with Iraq until after the US invasion?

[machacker2000]

When?

1998 U.S. embassy bombings
Al-Qaeda is believed to have conducted the bombings in August 1998 of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, killing more than 200 people and injuring more than 5,000 others.

1999 and 2000 attacks
USS Cole after it was bombedIn December 1999 and into 2000, al-Qaeda planned attacks against U.S. and Israeli tourists visiting Jordan for millennial celebrations; however, Jordanian authorities thwarted the planned attacks and put 28 suspects on trial. Part of this plot included the planned bombing of the Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles, California, but this plot was foiled when bomber Ahmed Ressam was caught at the US-Canadian border with explosives in the trunk of his car. Al-Qaeda also planned to attack the USS The Sullivans on January 3, 2000, but the effort failed due to too much weight being put on the small boat meant to bomb the ship.

Despite the setback with the USS The Sullivans, al-Qaeda succeeded in bombing a U.S. warship in October 2000 with the USS Cole bombing. German police foiled a plot to destroy a cathedral in Strasbourg, France in December 2000.

Further information: Strasbourg cathedral bombing plot

September 11, 2001 attacks
Main article: September 11, 2001 attacks
The most destructive act ascribed to al-Qaeda was the series of attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001. These attacks destroyed the World Trade Center and damaged the Pentagon in a series of suicide hijacking of airplanes. Bin Laden did take credit for the attacks days before the 2004 Presidential Election.

Other attacks
Other attacks ascribed to al-Qaeda and its affiliates include:

Strasbourg cathedral bombing plot (1999)
Rizal Day Bombings in the Philippines (2000)
Paris embassy attack plot (2001)
Singapore embassies attack plot (2001)
Kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl (2002)
Ghriba synagogue bombing in Djerba, Tunisia (2002)
Foiled bombings of Western warships in the Strait of Gibraltar (2002)
Limburg tanker bombing (2002)
Kenyan hotel bombing in Mombasa and the attempt to shoot down an Israeli airliner (2002)
Riyadh Compound Bombings (2003)
2003 Casablanca bombings
2003 Istanbul bombings
Al-Qaeda has strong alliances with a number of other Islamic militant organizations including the Indonesian Islamic extremist group Jemaah Islamiyah, responsible for the 2002 and 2005 Bali bombings; Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and Abu Sayyaf.

Although there have been no identified al-Qaeda attacks within the territory of the United States since the September 11, 2001 attacks, attacks in the Middle East, Far East, Africa and Europe involving extensive casualties and turmoil have been attributed to organizations with affiliation to al-Qaeda, though not always directly to al-Qaeda itself.

[machacker2000]

Exactly what "bag of greaseballs" are you talking about?

Al-Queda.
Considering that Saddam (or Iraq in general)
had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11
*ahem*
and Al Qaeda had nothing to do with Iraq until after the US invasion?
First of all, the U.S. was not the sole invader. British and Russian troops were in the Coalition as well.
Secondly, the main Al-Queda headquarters was stationed in Iraq. Was. In the 4 months that the liberals tried to keep us out of the country, they f----- moved it! Osama was there too-we could have ended this before it began if it weren't for the very people who oppose it now!

[SlithVampir]

At 2/10/08 03:45 PM, machacker2000 wrote:
Secondly, the main Al-Queda headquarters was stationed in Iraq. Was. In the 4 months that the liberals tried to keep us out of the country, they f----- moved it! Osama was there too-we could have ended this before it began if it weren't for the very people who oppose it now!

You find me one bit of evidence that hasn't been debunked, I'll be amazed. Osama? Where are you earing this bullshit?

[Imperator]

At 2/10/08 03:34 PM, Empanado wrote:
Exactly what "bag of greaseballs" are you talking about? Considering that Saddam (or Iraq in general) had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 and Al Qaeda had nothing to do with Iraq until after the US invasion?

Moreover the War in Iraq has made the War on Terror worse, as cited by the 9/11 Commission Report, and the CIA themselves.....

[reviewer-general]

Why is the sky blue?

;

[G-Locked]

At 2/10/08 03:15 PM, machacker2000 wrote: I mean, it's the same bag of greaseballs who bombed us 4 times. You've seen pictures of the Middle East. If we lived there, our houses would be draped with canvas to cover all of the bullet holes, and we'd hear small arms fire every day. We are over there so it won't be like that here. If we continued to let them just bomb us, like French, we would have a war on American soil right now. So stop your whining! And just try to say something Bush has done wrong. I guarantee I can show you you're wrong.

Let's see, what has Bush done wrong. Well, for starters he cut taxes for the rich and put more of a burden on middle and working class families. He Invaded Iraq which was completely pointless because it had no WMD. He is antagonizing Iran. He has ruined the United States credibility and standing abroad. In addition there would never be a full scale war on American soil against Al-Qaeida because they do not have the capability to project their power across the ocean.

[public-enemy1]

At 2/10/08 03:15 PM, machacker2000 wrote: like French

wttf?

And just try to say something Bush has done wrong. I guarantee I can show you you're wrong.

"Mission Accomplished"
Scooter Libby
Homeland Security
No Child Left Behind
The war In Iraq

[Tomsan]

At 2/10/08 03:42 PM, machacker2000 wrote: When?

1998 U.S. embassy bombings
Al-Qaeda is believed to have conducted the bombings in August 1998 of the U.S. embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, killing more than 200 people and injuring more than 5,000 others.

Yes I guess an embassy is american soil, but I thought you were talking about real american soil you know the main land, not an embassy in a poor country where large groups of people who are born there hate you. btw its, as you said, done by al qaede, thats not a nation is it?

1999 and 2000 attacks
USS Cole after it was bombedIn December 1999 and into 2000, al-Qaeda planned attacks against U.S. and Israeli tourists visiting Jordan for millennial celebrations; however, Jordanian authorities thwarted the planned attacks and put 28 suspects on trial. Part of this plot included the planned bombing of the Los Angeles International Airport in Los Angeles, California, but this plot was foiled when bomber Ahmed Ressam was caught at the US-Canadian border with explosives in the trunk of his car. Al-Qaeda also planned to attack the USS The Sullivans on January 3, 2000, but the effort failed due to too much weight being put on the small boat meant to bomb the ship.

haha so this is not even a bombing only a potential bombing, moreover it was again planned by al qaeda.. not a country remember? and the warship is not american soil

Despite the setback with the USS The Sullivans, al-Qaeda succeeded in bombing a U.S. warship in October 2000 with the USS Cole bombing. German police foiled a plot to destroy a cathedral in Strasbourg, France in December 2000.

not the US idiot

September 11, 2001 attacks
Main article: September 11, 2001 attacks
The most destructive act ascribed to al-Qaeda was the series of attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001. These attacks destroyed the World Trade Center and damaged the Pentagon in a series of suicide hijacking of airplanes. Bin Laden did take credit for the attacks days before the 2004 Presidential Election.

yes once again al qaeda is not a country, sadam did not have anything to do with the 911 attacks (which isnt a bombing even), and even if he did finance it or something, well I mean maybe america should take a hard look at himself then...

Other attacks
Other attacks ascribed to al-Qaeda and its affiliates include:

Strasbourg cathedral bombing plot (1999)

not US

Rizal Day Bombings in the Philippines (2000)

not US

Paris embassy attack plot (2001)

not US and PLOT

Singapore embassies attack plot (2001)

jesus H christ

Kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl (2002)

not a bombing not US but in the great US friendly nation of pakistan

Ghriba synagogue bombing in Djerba, Tunisia (2002)

not US not US not US

Foiled bombings of Western warships in the Strait of Gibraltar (2002)

go home

Limburg tanker bombing (2002)

you weird

Kenyan hotel bombing in Mombasa and the attempt to shoot down an Israeli airliner (2002)

little boy

Riyadh Compound Bombings (2003)

not US

2003 Casablanca bombings

not US

2003 Istanbul bombings

not US

Al-Qaeda has strong alliances with a number of other Islamic militant organizations including the Indonesian Islamic extremist group Jemaah Islamiyah, responsible for the 2002 and 2005 Bali bombings; Al-Qaeda in Iraq, and Abu Sayyaf.

you're a retard really.

Although there have been no identified al-Qaeda attacks within the territory of the United States since the September 11, 2001 attacks, attacks in the Middle East, Far East, Africa and Europe involving extensive casualties and turmoil have been attributed to organizations with affiliation to al-Qaeda, though not always directly to al-Qaeda itself.

yes but the US invaded IRAQ

although my opinions on the war are not rightly projected in this post, you are some retarded fuck who supports the war for all the wrong reasons, and taking into account your nice little jesus profile message youre probably also a redneck and that explains alot..

[AlphaTwilight]

Freedom Isn't Free...

[Adonis-of-Atlantis]

I think they keep bombing you, and blowing up your society from the inside, because you are "stunned", i.e. you aren't thinking straight; you think you know what you are talking about, but really it's just a bunch of people trying to get by on this planet. And instead of bombing places, you might be a little better off giving them WATER instead of raping their families and their land. MANNERS. You know, please; thank you; sorry about that whole genocide thing; think maybe we could get along a little better if we forget about this whole DEBT thing? income tax? what? I've never heard of that have you? Sounds like somekind of foreign thing or something; I dunno.

Perhaps it's been a little long since most American Eyes have looked upon some old German and other text...

"If you stare LONG and HARD into the abyss, the abyss also stares LONG and HARD into you"

Cheers,

Carpe Diem and Amor Fati.

But of course, most importantly, Memento Mori,

R.N.

[bobomajo]

Well I oppose war because:

Its only thing it can ever achieve is, the winning country gets to take what it wants from the losing country, much like school bullies. Nothing is solved, you may think you can change them in some way but once you take the iron fist away they revert to their favored system/ideology.

It costs a fortune to wage war, money which could be used on social services (not to mention the needless loss of life). Or since its not technically at war with a country you could improve infrastructure or opportunity of the areas of terrorists so you actually do win the "hearts and minds".

With the current war people are being killed simply because the powers that be made a bad decision and refuse to accept reason. You can't change fundamentalists that say you are evil, by proving their point by bombing their homes and families. It doesn't matter what your side is fighting for, to a civilian that is on the other side would probably reject terrorist propaganda until their home/families are destroyed which then they see the terrorists as freedom fighters against a tyrannical evil imperialists (not my personal view). Hence "purpose" of the war (stop terrorism against the U.S) is actually making the problem worse. Rebuilding Iraq does nothing either because you destroyed it in the first place, it isn't seen as a good thing only a responsible thing (you can't rebuild dead people by the way). So some Iraqis will still hate the U.S even if you make it better than it was before you bombed it.

In summary you have spent a shitload of money only to contradict the purpose of going to war in the first place.

[ThePretenders]

At 2/10/08 03:45 PM, machacker2000 wrote:
First of all, the U.S. was not the sole invader. British and Russian troops were in the Coalition as well.

WTF? Russia wasn't involved with the Iraq war. They condemned it.

Secondly, the main Al-Queda headquarters was stationed in Iraq. Was. In the 4 months that the liberals tried to keep us out of the country, they f----- moved it! Osama was there too-we could have ended this before it began if it weren't for the very people who oppose it now!

Can you verify that piece of bullshit you just wrote? It is as truthful as the evidence from the 9/11 truth movement. God, I hate silly neo-con socialist loonies.

[emmytee]

So basically your argument is that towel heads did X so we should kill every single Muslim on earth, since we seem to be sharing the responsibility around the entire muslim population anyway.

[AdamRice]

Why do I oppose the war?

Because it is costing the United States 400+ billion dollars. This war is very expensive and that is certainly a valid reason to oppose it.

Additionally I don't believe we are any safer because of our efforts in Iraq. To the contrary I believe we have actually worsened international relations with Middle Eastern countries.

[SmilezRoyale]

The War in iraq will do little to dirrectly 'attack' the same establishment that committed the bombings you mentioned. The only thing that it would do, if operations are successful in Iraq, is..

1) In a cruel vindicated sense, Redirect terrorist bombings on Iraq and other free nations of the middle east and not Western nations.

2) In a more hopeful sense, create a root for which a positive view of the west are prominent and spread; and weaken the outdated violent beliefs of Islamic Extremism.

I Do actually maintain that a successful operation in Iraq will help to defeat terrorism by creating a source where westernization can spread [This isn't a war that can be won dirrectly by military; only one that can be won by a change in thinking] , but the reasons for going in there in the first place were incorrect Saddam had little to no connection to Osama's plans; He may have done a victory dance at 9/11, but so did many people.

[WolvenBear]

At 2/10/08 03:34 PM, Empanado wrote: Exactly what "bag of greaseballs" are you talking about? Considering that Saddam (or Iraq in general) had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11 and Al Qaeda had nothing to do with Iraq until after the US invasion?

Bunk.

http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/m ccarthy200406170840.asp

Al Qaeda also forged alliances with the National Islamic Front in the Sudan and with the government of Iran and its associated terrorist group Hezballah for the purpose of working together against their perceived common enemies in the West, particularly the United States. In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.

No one has ever claimed Iraq cause 9/11. To say there were no connections between Iraq and al Quida is provably false.

[WolvenBear]

At 2/10/08 03:55 PM, Imperator wrote: Moreover the War in Iraq has made the War on Terror worse, as cited by the 9/11 Commission Report, and the CIA themselves.....

Absolute Bullshit

At 2/10/08 05:21 PM, public-enemy1 wrote:

And just try to say something Bush has done wrong. I guarantee I can show you you're wrong.

"Mission Accomplished"

The mission was accomplished. Saddam had been overthrown. Plus this was an attempt to get our allies to do what they agreed to.

Scooter Libby

This isn't even war related. Moving on.

Homeland Security

Agreed. Bush and the Dems have fucked homeland security.

No Child Left Behind

A Dem initiative.

The war In Iraq

Pathetic. You're an idiot.

[Imperator]

At 2/12/08 02:31 AM, WolvenBear wrote:

At 2/10/08 03:55 PM, Imperator wrote: Moreover the War in Iraq has made the War on Terror worse, as cited by the 9/11 Commission Report, and the CIA themselves.....

Absolute Bullshit

thanks for playing

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15024576/
same story, different source.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/2 4/iraq/main2036338.shtml
Ok, I've covered my three sources.

Now which part of that 'bullshit' don't you believe now, considering it's the consensus of 16 spy agencies....OUR agencies, might I add?

[whatty]

At 2/10/08 03:15 PM, machacker2000 wrote: I mean, it's the same bag of greaseballs who bombed us 4 times. You've seen pictures of the Middle East. If we continued to let them just bomb us, like French, we would have a war on American soil right now. So stop your whining! And just try to say something Bush has done wrong. I guarantee I can show you you're wrong.

You idiot. it's very easy for you to say you want a war, or that you support it, because you are not part of it. Everyone except you knows the reason there is a war in the first place...$$$, and this is effecting the world globally. it has been. between the clinton's and the bush's there haven't been more wars in modern history,

As for bush... Well, jesus. People have made millions on pointing out his blunders, so good luck trying to prove me wrong on that front.

[AdamRice]

This is the same guy that started the topic on oil fields in Alaska at the beginning of January. If I recall correctly, he made some ridiculous claims, posted about them for a few hours, and never came back.

He's not going to follow up on any of the ten or so rebuttals that have already been put forth. A classic example of a topic being abandoned by the OP.

[Empanado]

At 2/12/08 02:27 AM, WolvenBear wrote: Bunk.

The same article states that, other than Iraqi officals meeting with Bin Laden to secure his cease of support to anti-Saddam insurgents, there were no significant ties confirmed - training camps, resources, guns - nothing substantial.

No one has ever claimed Iraq cause 9/11. To say there were no connections between Iraq and al Quida is provably false.

Okay, I made a mistake. Let me rephrase that: No ties of real significance existed between Al Qaeda and Iraq before the invasion.
The point remains that, while there might exist valid reasons to support the attack on Iraq, the ones claimed by the OP are moronic, and people still clinging to them do nothing more than raise disinformation and make even more of a mess of things, as far as public opinion goes.

[ScreamiNSemeN]

At 2/10/08 03:25 PM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote:

At 2/10/08 03:21 PM, machacker2000 wrote: We have been bombed 4 times.

When?

HAHAHA! Are you fucking serious? Maybe do a little research into the past 50 years. You'll see it's been considerably more than 4 times even. And hijacked planes by filthy stinking middle eastern faggots are not a new thing for 2001 either.

[SlithVampir]

So, topic starter

The Iraq war has made us:

Less safe (See Imperator)

Further in debt

Worse in the world's eyes

AND>>>>> It has cost the lives of 3,959 soldiers (29,092 wounded) plus an innumerable quantity of Iraqi civilians (60,000 to 600,000 depending on which study you do).

Need any other reasons?

[AznWarlord]

I have 2 major points to add in support of the war.

1) Al Quaeda is a terrorist group.

They want to kill people. Whether they're American or Iraqi or French, the is no reason to stand back and watch as a group that is bent on causing terror gets stronger and stronger until they achieve their goal: To take over the world. Sounds comic book and cheesy but that's the point. Even if they weren't a threat, they still existed and that's bad for the future. And all you people are "Act now to prevent Global Warming". Iraq is an "Act now to prevent Terrorism".

2) We can't let Terrorists take over Iraq.

A democracy is slowly growing with many supporters in Iraq. It's just really weak. While it is still developing, America can not leave, or all the lives lost and money spent would truly be a waste. Until Iraq is strong enough (and the Extremist level is low enough) for the country to be stable, we can't abandon the people. If terrorists do indeed take over Iraq, they can really get into business (inviting allies, purchasing Bombs from, I don't know, Iran, who also hates America). Iraq would be the base of operations for terrorists. Sooner or later, we'll eventually get into WWIII and everything's fucked. Plus we have to go to war again, and no one can oppose it now.

Democrats say leave Iraq and solve the problems with Diplomacy, but I don't see how we can engage in Diplomatic relations with a terrorist group.

I guess this is reason enough to not oppose the war.

[AznWarlord]

At 2/12/08 03:36 PM, SlithVampir wrote:

AND>>>>> It has cost the lives of 3,959 soldiers (29,092 wounded) plus an innumerable quantity of Iraqi civilians (60,000 to 600,000 depending on which study you do).

We're not killing civilians, terrorists are. Leave Iraq, and every Democratic supporting citizen will be killed. You can't just say fuck em, they're people.

Owned.