Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

I assume it's still ok for Fox News to be opinionated though?

It's OK to be opinionated so long as you agree.

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

Of course it is, because Bond must be biased, right? :rolleyes:

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

That's not my point. Any one channel is allowed to be opinionated as long as they report the news as facts and nothing but facts. I want to hear the facts and details of things reported in an unbiased manner. As do most people.

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

News should only report the facts, and leave people to make their own decisions on how they feel about it. Report the facts, and let people make their own decisions.

Problem is we have things backwards in this country. News media has had liberal reporters for the longest time, and then when we start getting some conservative reporters, they go far right to counter it. So we're getting both sides of the issue, and need to find the middle ground. We should be given the middle ground and formed our own opinions on it.

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

hmm, although i don't agree the US wouldn't go to war simply for oil, i do agree with some of the things you stated gekko, but a lot of it is about opinion. Its easy just to write off Hans Blix as a selfish idiot(to bond) and say its his fault taht nothings been found, but on the other hand, you could also look at the fact that he retired on his own, a little bit ironic if you think that the only reason he didn't find anything was for job security. Another reason why Bush might have started the war is the simple reason taht his dad tried the same thing, and Bush just wanted to continue his father legacy.


Another thing that has been curious to me is the fact taht the first thing the US does is go into Iraq and disarms them, and then wages a war on them!!!!!!!!!! is that not halarious????? i mean its like you want to play basketball with some guy but first you break his arms and legs! as for what strangler stated about those weapons being a breach, they were not, is iraq not allowed to have weapons to defend itself, if you say no, than that means the George Bush has no right to attack them, because if he does, than all the freedom and rights that america stands for is a load of crap. What is a breach??? what was found were not WMD so therefore saddam never stated he didn't have them, so therefore why shouldn't he have them??

I'm probably biased because i'm in canada and am influenced by media here. So that may also be why i believe this entire war (or slaughter) can never be justified.



And what ever happened to bin ladden?? :sneaky:

hee hee, did you know that they were business partners for an oil well the opened up 2gether? too busy to get an article right now, but i'll get one later, its just that bush is a VERY shady character when it comes to morals so i don't think that he should be trusted to lead the worlds most powerful nation

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

Well, from what I've gathered from your posts, you don't fully understand the situation that led to war in Iraq. You're getting bits and pieces, but not the whole thing. You also may just be a pacifist. Learning more about it may help you see that it is justfied, or you might still think there was not an immediate threat or reason to go. But either way, there's a lot that you missed.

Bush 41 didn't try the same thing, Desert Storm was about getting Saddam out of Kuwait, not get him out of power. That is ultimately why we never took him out of power, which I believe was a mistake, but we can't change the past. If you want to use this as a reason to go to war, I must ask you why. Why would Bush 43 want to take Saddam out of power? For no other reason other than his father's administration they choose to leave him in? I would argue that you need to dig deeper, into was leaving Saddam in power and bad thing, and why would George W. Bush want him out of power. When you answer that question, you have uncovered one of the reasons to go to war.

This falls into the UN thing. It's not like we walked in, took their weapons away so they had nothing to fight with, and then attacked them. The UN had imposed regulations on Iraq after the first gulf war, which said they needed to destroy all existing chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, and stop the production of them. It also put restrictions on the range of their missles, so they couldn't attack Israel and other neighboring countries with long range missles. If they need missles for defense only, then they need to travel no further than the country's border. That basically covers the rest of what you said there as well.

He is hiding, in the nasty mountainous regions of northern Pakistan where it's nearly impossible to find someone.

A generalization I have no idea what you're basing it on. Please explain.

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

as much as it was the UN's decision to clear all weapons, it was America's choice to attack, so there is no way to say that they had no idea this was going on, or such. And yes, i am a pacifist, and i referred to Bush being a shady character in morals because of his former affiliations with osama bin laden, which in probability meant he had connections with other people as well, although there is no evidence to support the theory i just stated, it's simply my opinion

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

Now I respect your opinion on Hans Blix gimpy, but let me please point out a few things you may not know about this "mild-mannered" man. Here are three quotes that I found quite interesting:

"I have my detractors in Washington. There are bastards who spread things around, of course, who planted nasty things in the media."

Speaks for itself.

"There are people in [the Bush administration] who say they don't care if the UN sinks under the East River...and other crude things."

That's because the UN is a debating society that does not enforce its own laws.

"It's true that the Iraqis misbehaved and had no credibility, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they were in the wrong."

That makes a lot of sense, doesn't it Mr. Blix?


Now, you probably don't know about Han Blix's history. During 1981-1997 he was the director general of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). That means he was in charge of overseeing inspections of Iraq's nuclear programs. During his time as director general Iraq was able to hide advanced nuclear weapons development programs from the IAEA. These advanced nuclear weapons development programs were only found AFTER the Gulf War in 1991. Mr. Blix is a hypocritical man who did not want to find any weapons so that he could keep his job, as shown in the past.
You fail to remember that Bush Senior could have overtaken Iraq in Desert Storm. Instead Saddam signed a treaty, which I'll get to later and the U.S. did not go into Baghdad. That was a mistake if you ask me, we should have dealt with him before. There are many reasons why we went to this war, which have been stated over and over, and over again. If you really want to know them look them up.
Every media outlet is biased somehow. Canada is a great country if you ask me. I would be proud of the things that you are doing, such as legalizing gay marriage.


I believe you said something about that Saddam should be able to have weapons to defend his own country, although I can no longer find it in your post so you may have deleted it. But in any case, Saddam was not allowed to have certain weapons, because if he did he would bomb the hell out of the Kurds in the North and the Shiites in the South. Of course he still had these weapons, which was in direct violation of U.N. laws and the treaty that he signed during the Gulf War.

That is an extreme opinion that has no factual basis. In other words, you're speaking gibberish.

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

i agree completely with everything else you said, except for this, i think it does, just because someone has a faulty past, there is no sense in not believing them in the present and killing them for it, what was in the past should have been dealt with in the past, it is no reason to simply write them off as liars and ignore their word and proceed with a war.


sorry for the lack of puncutation :D

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

Iraq agreed to the terms, that's why they have these UN regulations in the first place. It's gets down to the point where either he agrees, or we're he's going to be taken out of power. He agrees.

So the UN puts restrictions on what they can do. We could get into the many times they sold oil illegally, by smuggling it to Turkey and Iran. Syria did quite a bit towards the end as well. But weapons are today's topic. Let's look at this situation:

The UN agreed to keep Saddam in power if he signed a treaty and agreed to the terms. Then he makes no effort to destroy his current weapons, and he develops new weapons in violation. Now what are you going to do? Enforce your laws, or give me a slap on the wrist?

The UN is run by a bunch of pussies who don't want to enforce their own law. Iraq violated the terms, and the UN needs to enforce their laws. If you keep turning your cheek, the problem will only get worse. Take a look back in history and you'll find an example that proves this all too well.

First off, you need to explain Bush's connections with Osama bin Laden, and be very clear. Then I'll get back to the rest. But if you don't have evidence, don't make the claim. It kills your credibility. Innocent until proven guilty.

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

hehe, ironic you would say that on this topic, considering WMD are yet to be found :rolleyes:

Exactly. If the whole "Innocent until proven guilty" is true, then we violated Iraq. We went over there and killed Iraqi soldiers because we thought they had WMD. The government probably had alterior motives, oil for example. But the reasons that they gave us and the rest of world have not yet been justified.

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

Good lord? Do you see what I mean? Why did I bother posting earlier? You know, when I laid out exactly why Iraq was ALREADY FOUND GUILTY!?!?!?!

1998 - Illegal weapons found. UN says "prove they are destroyed or face serious consequences". Iraq does not do this and is found to have illegal weapons before and during the war.

What about this do you NOT UNDERSTAND???

Some people only listen to what they want to hear...

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

LOL.

I know what you mean Strangler. We drill the same simple factual points over and over again and no one seems to listen.

Re: Another great idea by the US government
 

lol, tell me, if the WMD have already been found than why is bush still trying to convince the global community that they will find them???

however illegal the weapons may be, the point is that they are not the ones that the war was started over, so therefore, they are not yet proven guilty