politics debate/discussion thread.

[cc]z@nd! · Post by **[cc]z@nd!** » Wed May 02, 2007 1:42 pm

I think it's about time to have a nice, intelligent discussion about politics. specifically the Bush Administration and our military action in Iraq (and anywhere else for that matter, if you know of any).

recently, I read this about a new bill to make it easier to spy on communications, and also remember reading an article here correlating things the Bush administration has done to steps to successfully initiate a fascist type of government. now, i don't follow polotics closely, and i try to make sure i'm not jumping on bandwagons, but i'm starting to get sick of the bush administration. he does only have a year left, and the democrats do have a strong presence in congress, so I at least think there won't be a republican president next year, meaning a change in things, but I'm still worried about the thought that bush could leverage 9-11 in his favor to do what he wanted.

For example, i'm going to chat about the Iraq war right now, because i know more about it than what's hapening in congress. basically, sunnis and shiites are at each other's throats, and somewhere out of that, our foreign relations pissed them off, so they carried out 9-11. aside from that, there's the numerous car bombings, shootings, and terrorist attacks happening over there. since our troops were there, a democratic government has been established, and from what i've seen, people were happy about it. maybe this will be a way for sunnis and shiites to understand each other and not kill each other for a second. but right now, the government is so ineffective that insurgents are still carrying out attacks successfully, and all this crap's still goin on. I think we should start drawing some troops out, but stay there long enough to help the iraqi government get on it's feet. it might be odd to think this coming from saddam, but they need a strong leader right now to pull them together. personally, i don't want to stay in iraq, and i'm sick of our guys dying over there, but i know if we just left, the government might not be strong enough to hold up against the insurgents, and it would be a huge morale boost to anarchists/insurgents/terrorists.

i dunno. i need to read up on it more, but that's my opinion right now. what about you guys? hate bush? love him? opinions on iraq?

shadowkhas · Post by **shadowkhas** » Wed May 02, 2007 1:58 pm

[cc]z@nd! wrote:For example, i'm going to chat about the Iraq war right now, because i know more about it than what's hapening in congress. basically, sunnis and shiites are at each other's throats, and somewhere out of that, our foreign relations pissed them off, so they carried out 9-11.

NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.
You've been successfully brainwashed by this Administration. Iraqis had very minute, if any AT ALL connections to what happened that day. It was this little country we call Afghanistan, and the Taliban (linked heavily to al-Qaeda/bin Laden).

I wholeheartedly supported attacking Afghanistan. al-Qaeda plowed aircraft into us, hell, we should've rushed in there with all we had and totally taken the Taliban out! But now, we have WAY more troops in Iraq than what we've got in Afghanistan, and we're just being sheep told to listen to official reports, but we ignore the important ones.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo

Read that. They fucking fixed it. I don't see what else I need to tell people, because no matter how much I tell them that this was OFFICIAL, nobody ever believes it. This war WAS staged, there WERE motives behind it. There's too many to figure out what was prevalent.
Was it oil? Possibly. Most people try to say "it can't be oil because look at how much gas costs," but that's the point. We shouldn't have this much of an increase in gas prices. It's no coincidence that Exxon's posted record profits in the past couple of years.
Was it sheer war profiteering? That too. Halliburton's no-bid contracts are absolutely astounding.
Was it revenge? Bush could be getting back at Saddam for daddy's unfinished job.
I personally think it's much more...it's based off of what the Project for a New American Century thought. They said that America should project their power into a world empire, by controlling key areas such as the middle east. Members of the PNAC? Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz...it goes on. We took advantage of 9/11, springboarded into Iraq, and now we're on the verge of going into Iran and Syria. Iran could also be seen as a revenge issue, getting back at them for getting smart and overthrowing our puppet government of the Shah there.

[cc]z@nd! wrote:democratic government has been established, and from what i've seen, people were happy about it. maybe this will be a way for sunnis and shiites to understand each other and not kill each other for a second. but right now, the government is so ineffective that insurgents are still carrying out attacks successfully, and all this crap's still goin on. I think we should start drawing some troops out, but stay there long enough to help the iraqi government get on it's feet. it might be odd to think this coming from saddam, but they need a strong leader right now to pull them together.

I'm just going to go off of my political ideas. We can't sow democracy everywhere in an instant. Democracy is evolutionary. It took giant upheavals in Britain to get a very good democracy/constitutional monarchy that functions like a democracy, like Cromwell romping around, and the Glorious Revolution. Those took quite a while. We can't expect things to be fixed in 2 months like we thought they would be. Let's take another example, Germany. The Holy Roman Empire until they weakened and became some Hapsburg holdings, until Otto von Bismarck took over and united Prussia with Germany. They weren't still a pure democracy (late 1800's here), and they had some bumps before they've become good. We had the Weimar Republic, which failed epically, Hitler's reign, and then the split of East and West Germany. Democracy is Evolutionary.

Tural · Post by **Tural** » Wed May 02, 2007 2:05 pm

What are polotics?

My only thoughts on this issue is that I hate this thread with a passion. I'm not going to read either of the above posts, because there is no such thing as an unbiased opinion, especially in a thread such as this. There will be plenty of misleading information, as well as false information, and I'm not going to read it, to save the trouble of getting excessively angry and having to go on a huge rant.

This thread will spiral out of control very quickly. I'd like to see you (Collective, not singular) prove me wrong.

stephen10101 · Post by **stephen10101** » Wed May 02, 2007 2:47 pm

shadowkhas wrote:
[cc]z@nd! wrote:For example, i'm going to chat about the Iraq war right now, because i know more about it than what's hapening in congress. basically, sunnis and shiites are at each other's throats, and somewhere out of that, our foreign relations pissed them off, so they carried out 9-11.
NO, NO, NO, NO, NO.
You've been successfully brainwashed by this Administration. Iraqis had very minute, if any AT ALL connections to what happened that day. It was this little country we call Afghanistan, and the Taliban (linked heavily to al-Qaeda/bin Laden).

Those were my thoughts as I was reading that, people don't seem to realize that we went after bin Laden in Afghanistan. They think we were in Iraq the whole time.

But anyhow, Obama FTW! tru.dat ~T

noxiousraccoon · Post by **noxiousraccoon** » Wed May 02, 2007 3:02 pm

shadowkhas wrote:Was it oil? Possibly. Most people try to say "it can't be oil because look at how much gas costs," but that's the point. We shouldn't have this much of an increase in gas prices. It's no coincidence that Exxon's posted record profits in the past couple of years.

Im just quoting you, not saying anything against you.
Our government would not wage war over oil, considering our government doesnt have the power to steal oil. "it cant be oil because look at gas costs" is the mind of an 8th grader. Just because oil companies have more of it, doesnt mean that prices will go down.
This war has been and always will be split between two issues. The more publicly destroyed one or the what all americans can succumb too. Public: WMDs, Other One: Helping Iraqi people by removing Saddam (considering the name of this war is Operation Iraqi Freedom)
Has this war turned civil? No, the three major ethnic groups having been battling for supremecy for years. I have been saying this since the war started. Do not believe the press, do not believe Army recuiters, talk to the people who have been there and know what is going on.

Now, (look out biased coming your way) I personally believe we shouldnt have went to war. I personally dont care about other countries unless they ask for our help. However, that was 4 years ago and really pointless to keep elaburating on. The most recent legislation that vetoed by the president is not what it was meant to be. There is more pork in that legislation than in a meat packing plant. If congress really cared about getting our troops out of Iraq, they wouldnt attach spinach farms in a Iraq War Bill. In addition, pulling out of Iraq as the president as stated, "would be a disaster" and by all means that would be true. I personally dont believe we should have left Vietnam, losing is shameful despite the circumstances. Our troops are doing their job and I would die for them if I could. (I hope to eventually be a marine, after college)

Anyways, I dont fully support the president. His staff is terrible. Upholding the rights of Americans but taking away the rights of others with torture is absolutely absured. Being one of the president's with the most scandals and scary connections. Failing to capture Osama with a weak force in Afghanistan.

Alexander · Post by **Alexander** » Wed May 02, 2007 3:08 pm

LOL!

shadowkhas · Post by **shadowkhas** » Wed May 02, 2007 3:25 pm

noxiousraccoon wrote:"it cant be oil because look at gas costs" is the mind of an 8th grader. Just because oil companies have more of it, doesnt mean that prices will go down.

My point on that was that people say that a reason for war "couldn't have possibly been oil because look how much it costs per barrel." We haven't had a twofold increase in barrel price, so we shouldn't have a twofold increase in refined cost...

noxiousraccoon wrote:Upholding the rights of Americans[...]

Um...what? If anything, we're getting more rights taken away. Look at what the Patriot Act can do, look at how there have been cases of wiretapping without court orders, look at how our "nonpartisan" justice system has been slanted to the right by Alberto Gonzales...

[cc]z@nd! · Post by **[cc]z@nd!** » Wed May 02, 2007 4:04 pm

when i was talking about sunnis/shiites and 9-11, i didn't say iraq was responsible. in fact, i don't think i've ever seen any direct link between terrorists and saddam other than geographic location. It was rebel/terrorist organizations that carried out the attack, so they should be the targets.

and like i said, the current iraqi government is in no self-sustaining shape. I agree that it will take time for democracy to grow, and that's why i believe troops should be kept there to act like a crutch for the government until it can walk on it's own. really, i don't think fighting in the middle-east will end before our sun goes red-giant and melts us into a large blob of magma, but now that the old government is gone, and a new one was established, it would be best to nurse it for a while until it can grow up and fend for itself, otherwise there's just going to be more civil strife over there that we would've caused by removing the previous form of government, nomatter how immoral we think it is (the previous government).

but what i'm really concerned about is our nation's future. like shadowkhas said, with the patriot act, and with others that i'm sure exist that i do not know about, our right to privacy is raped constantly. because of how our government works, the congress (generally) wants what the people want, and so only bills that the public supports get supported. but when we add terrorists into the mix, it would be trivial to use them to get outrageous bills to be verified that would actually be used to monitor the public.

i'm thinking serious thought police here. i mean, here, before 9-11 we have all sorts of normal organizations for civil liberties and such (i don't know any by name, sorry). but now that we have terrorists to worry about, such organizations have been added to "watch lists" because of their views. college professors and protestors are even being denied boarding on flights because of their political views and speeches they've given. if you ask me, this is the first step to controlling a large populace; you have to silence any opposition.

i'm gonna stop there, do some homework, and read up on my polotics.

Alexander · Post by **Alexander** » Wed May 02, 2007 4:36 pm

[cc]z@nd! wrote:and like i said, the current iraqi government is in no self-sustaining shape. I agree that it will take time for democracy to grow, and that's why i believe troops should be kept there to act like a crutch for the government until it can walk on it's own.

Yeah, I guess if the crutch you are metaphorically referring to is infested with termites and can't stand up by itself either.

[cc]z@nd! · Post by **[cc]z@nd!** » Wed May 02, 2007 4:50 pm

RaVNzCRoFT wrote:"Polotics" is not a word.

damn, it's spelled politics, isn't it?

oh well, i typed it how i pronounce it. *edit*

oh, and here's the patriot act for anyone interested in reading it. just as a heads up, it amends all sorts of other bills, so to get the full message, you'd have to read some of those, and it has TONS of legalese in it -_-.

Patriot act: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Patriot_Act

noscottno · Post by **noscottno** » Wed May 02, 2007 4:54 pm

*waits for idiots who have no idea what they're talking about to enter thread*

*enters*

I liek, tink teh government iz bad.

JK-47 · Post by **JK-47** » Wed May 02, 2007 4:55 pm

Meh, it has it's ups and downs like every other war. I really don't have an oppinion or side to it, it's not that I don't care... it's just, I can't side on something I know pretty much nothing about (in terms of real or fake information).

[cc]z@nd! · Post by **[cc]z@nd!** » Wed May 02, 2007 5:07 pm

JK-47 wrote:Meh, it has it's ups and downs like every other war. I really don't have an oppinion or side to it, it's not that I don't care... it's just, I can't side on something I know pretty much nothing about (in terms of real or fake information).

almost exactly how i feel. I follow politics close enough to tell me conservatives from liberals, republicans from democrats, and get a vauge idea if a new bill or act is bad news, but not much more than that, and the last thing i want to do is jump the gun and take a position based on false information.

noxiousraccoon · Post by **noxiousraccoon** » Wed May 02, 2007 5:25 pm

shadowkhas wrote:Um...what? If anything, we're getting more rights taken away. Look at what the Patriot Act can do, look at how there have been cases of wiretapping without court orders, look at how our "nonpartisan" justice system has been slanted to the right by Alberto Gonzales...

That entire sentence was meant to be hypocritcal. What I meant was, the president of the United States is suppose to uphold and represent the rights of the people under the consitution, he however has not and while doing so has taken away the rights of others who are not Americans. Forgive me, I live in Texas and storms were ah comin' and I had to finish it off as best as I could before my computer died.

newbymodder · Post by **newbymodder** » Wed May 02, 2007 7:54 pm

ok here's my say in all this i live in Texas not far from Bush's ranch im used to seeing him at times before his presedency i think that he is goin on an ego trip my self if you think about it the middle east is a war zone for one thing only OIL thats all control the oil u control lots we need to get out of there but yes the iraq goverment will fail because there are too many insugents and dictators that want to take over now that saddam is gone the taliban started this all Iraq got pulled into this because we thought they had weapons of mass destruciton which havn't been found its good he is gone considering he practiced genocide on his own people not only the kurs (pardon that might not be right) in north iraq but others too that didn't want to follow his rule if you think that all iraq's are ready to die for alia (might also be wrong) aka god then you have no concept oh how the people live most of them don't beleive in killing people based on religion only the radical iraqies i did like the bush administration i may have gone overboard on this subject but when his presidency is over i beleive that we will bring our troops out of iraq or one can only hope

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Wed May 02, 2007 10:14 pm

newbymodder wrote:Post

Well, Oil would be a good export from Iraq and the Middle East, It seems like there

shadowkhas · Post by **shadowkhas** » Thu May 03, 2007 4:28 am

newbymodder wrote:ok here's my say in all this i live in Texas not far from Bush's ranch im used to seeing him at times before his presedency i think that he is goin on an ego trip my self if you think about it the middle east is a war zone for one thing only OIL thats all control the oil u control lots we need to get out of there but yes the iraq goverment will fail because there are too many insugents and dictators that want to take over now that saddam is gone the taliban started this all Iraq got pulled into this because we thought they had weapons of mass destruciton which havn't been found its good he is gone considering he practiced genocide on his own people not only the kurs (pardon that might not be right) in north iraq but others too that didn't want to follow his rule if you think that all iraq's are ready to die for alia (might also be wrong) aka god then you have no concept oh how the people live most of them don't beleive in killing people based on religion only the radical iraqies i did like the bush administration i may have gone overboard on this subject but when his presidency is over i beleive that we will bring our troops out of iraq or one can only hope

Please.

Cuda wrote:The argument many dems bring to the table time and time again, "He wasn't Elected by popular vote" has somewhat diminished by the fact that where they had their chance to get rid of him

When did that chance happen?

INSANEdrive · Post by **INSANEdrive** » Thu May 03, 2007 8:43 am

*sigh*

Ok well here

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Thu May 03, 2007 11:09 am

shadowkhas wrote:
Cuda wrote:The argument many dems bring to the table time and time again, "He wasn't Elected by popular vote" has somewhat diminished by the fact that where they had their chance to get rid of him
When did that chance happen?

They could've elected Kerry, and not have to deal with 4 more years of Bush.

Geo · Post by **Geo** » Thu May 03, 2007 12:45 pm

Amerika polotics r bad.

And not a single one of you has the right to complain about 'gas' prices.

HaloMods "Classic" Read-only Archive

politics debate/discussion thread.

politics debate/discussion thread.

Re: polotics debate/discussion thread.

Re: polotics debate/discussion thread.

Re: polotics debate/discussion thread.