Why is Everyone so Against the War?

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by MSGMAC47
Good morning all. I'm getting ready to deploy for the third time with the 101st Airborne Division. As much as I hate to leave my family I realize that I am not only fighting for the feedom of my family and yours, but I am also fighting for the freedom of Iraq and Afghan. I am ready and I am willing.
If you have ever been there you could see smiles on faces when we visit villages. It’s a great feeling watching kids play and hearing them laugh trying to get you to play soccer with them. Mothers thanking you a thousand times for something as small as fresh water and food. Fathers hugging you for giving them the opportunity to provide for their family by giving them work. Teachers crying because we supply their schools with much needed school supplies. But you will never see that on the news. Just blood shed. Guess it makes better news for the reporters.
I won't deny that there are those that hate Americans, but the love for Americans out weighs the hate no matter what TV or the poles say. Sometimes I wonder how information is gathered for stats. If you are not there how can you possibly know? If you don't show the good how can the people back at home know?
I respect everyone's opinion. I serve to make sure all of you have the right to voice it, good or bad. I just wanted to say that I am willing to go each time I am told to do so. Its funny how everyone was so patriotic before and when the war started to turn around and shout that it’s wrong now. It’s war. Lives are lost. To say they were lost for nothing is a slap in our (soldiers) face. But for us, we make sure you have that right to say it. Thank you goes to those who support us. For those that don’t, you are welcome for the right not to. Take care.

Have fun if you meet some crazy marine sniper named Sanderford tell him ruben says hi. thank you my hat's off to you and what you do.

 

[rylan1]

To be honest... if I was Sadaam... I would want WMD's too. It seems to be the best way to defend yourself from invasion...which is why we never had a war with Russia and why it seems we are trying different approaches with N Korea and Iran. It is the ultimate deterent b/w nations.
The way these are shaking up, we are on course for WWIII... Its scarry, I pray for my kids because this current conflict is going to affect them.
What we need to do is to concentrate more on diplomacy and reposistioning ourselves as being credible, respected, and the leading nation in the world. We need to concentrate on our economy, technology, education, and strenghthening our military because there is going to be something bigger and more threatening than Iraq that is going to face our nation and the world's safety.
We also need to have alternative fuels and vehicles. We need to beable to better take care of the people here. I also believe that we need to actively search for threats in our country and to get a handle on immigration. For our next president we need someone who can do these things, instead of sticking with the status quo. It is time for a change. As a plug for Obama... he is not part of the current network of previous leaders... he's IMO the fresh start we need. and the one who has ideas, and one who I think international leaders would respect. Im just tired of the conventional thinking that has lead us to our current state of affairs both nationally and internationally.
People are also saying that Iraq supports terrorism and that Saudi Arabia supports it, Libya,Syria...etc... They support them through their oil revenues... we need to be less dependent on this... but the fat cats in washington and their buddies have too much invested in this industry to want to make a change. I know that this may not be the popular opinion on this thread... but thats the reason why we find ourselves in this war is the lack of thinking and the USA wanting to compare this to Nazi Germany or Vietnam and trying to handle it the same way.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
Hmmm....Looks like government positions and offices to me...http://iraq.usembassy.gov/iraq/iraqigovlinks.html
In case you missed it, voting for your leaders, be they sheiks or councilmen, is still a form of democracy. Sure, maybe not a true democracy, but then again...the U.S. is not a true democracy either. We are a Representative Republic.
I'm sure they governed themselves the same way before we got there.

 

[ozmar]

Originally Posted by crimzy
Nonsense, if we keep killing terrorists, we are producing a generation full of parentless Iraqi children who are very susceptible to the recruitment of terrorist groups and hate the US. This is not economics because our attempt to reduce the "supply" of terrorists is creating more terrorists by itself. These terrorists are killing themselves just to take infidels with them. Do you really think that the potential that they may be killed in a war is really a deterrent?
Yes. Yes I do.
Even more of a deterrent is the likelihood that their death will be meaningless and will not advance their ideological goals. If we can get to the point where, more likely than not, a wanna-be terrorist will only end up getting himself killed without killing any Americans in the process, then we'll be deterring terrorism. If we can get to the point where a potential terrorist's families and communities are always saying things like "poor Shalid, what a loser, he signed up for that stupid jihad and got himself killed for nothing", then we'll REALLY be getting somewhere.

 

[jmick]

Originally Posted by Ozmar
Thankfully our soldiers don't regard their lives so highly that they would, like you, sacrifice our freedoms to preserve them.
If we keep killing terrorists, then we will make progress in decreasing terrorist incidents. Its one of the basic principles of economics: if you raise the cost of an activity, you get less of it. Well, if we make the cost of terrorism very high (you're pretty certain to be killed or imprisoned), then we'll decrease its appeal to new converts.

Thought you might enjoy this..
WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 — A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.
The classified National Intelligence Estimate attributes a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee, according to several officials in Washington involved in preparing the assessment or who have read the final document.
The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government. Titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States,’’ it asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, has metastasized and spread across the globe.
An opening section of the report, “Indicators of the Spread of the Global Jihadist Movement,” cites the Iraq war as a reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology.
The report “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” said one American intelligence official. [...] [NYT permalkink]
The Washington Post on the NIE and the threat of terrorist attacks:
The war in Iraq has become a primary recruitment vehicle for violent Islamic extremists, motivating a new generation of potential terrorists around the world whose numbers may be increasing faster than the United States and its allies can reduce the threat, U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by Ozmar
Au contraire. As you said, its really the ideology we need to combat, and "terror" is not an ideology. (One of the problems we struggle with in this war is properly defining the enemy.) The war is really a war against islamic jihadism, or radical islamic fundamentalism, or islamofascism. Any of those terms do well to describe it. They are radical fundamental muslims (fortunately not representative of the majority of muslims) who seek to impose their view of sharia on the world, through force more often than not. In fact, I think the willingness to use force on innocents could be one of the defining characteristics of this breed of radicalism. If a muslim wanted to fight for sharia through democratic institutions and respected my right to live free as a christian, then I'd have no problem with him.
We can be "completely" rid of "terror" (read: islamofascism) in the same way (and through similar means) that we are now "completely" rid of nazism. (Of course I know there are still nazis in the world, but they are marginalized nutjobs who do not pose any real threat to peace and civilization.) We just need to win the ideological struggle and completely marginalize any and all who would promote this radical ideology.
See above. And show your neighbor what happens to those who believe in "AL-Quaida, Allah, or whatever the fanatical terriroist believes in", by killing all the terrorists we can find and helping free Iraqis remake a peaceful and stable nation based on principles that utterly undermine the radical's ideology.
Thank you.
Ozmar the Preacher

Now I need to know - which drugs are you takin, cause I want some just like it! You are living a hugh fantasy if you honestly think you can completely wipe out every terrorist (read: islamofascismist) in the world. The Nazis were easy to quell because they lived essentially in one part of the world (Europe, Germany specifically). These terrorists you fantasize about making extinct, are located in virtually every little country in the world (mainly in every Middle East country). You say they are "radical fundamental muslims (fortunately not representative of the majority of muslims) who seek to impose their view of sharia on the world, through force more often than not." Why do you feel this belief is what caused a group of them to crash 4 planes into US soil? I think your definition of a terrorists is quite vague and incomplete. There's more to it than just a disdain for anyone that doesn't believe in their 'sharia'. If that were the case, they wouldn't just be targeting Democratic-based countries (US, England, Germany, Italy). Why don't you hear of terroristic attacks by these groups in China, Korea, or Russia? I doubt they follow sharia or whatever you think that drives them to do what they do. You can just keep "killing al the terrorists you can find", but I guarantee it's impossible to find them all.
Thank you,
Rudedog40 the Realist

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
I'm sure they governed themselves the same way before we got there.
Ryan, no they really didn't. I respect your opinions as I respect eveyones', but you need to quit assuming things and look into them for yourself. Your'e just saying things based on assumptions that are simply not correct.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
... Why don't you hear of terroristic attacks by these groups in China, Korea, or Russia? ...
N. Korea (because S. Korea has in fact suffered attacks)- Good luck hearing about attacks in that country. No one knows anything that goes on there.
China- Closed country. Religion exists only at the grace of the local government official. If there was a terrorist attack the government would round up and imprison and execute every muslim in the area.
Russia- Have been attacked numerous times. Have you forgotten the 300+ school kids killed in the seige and occupation of their school in 2004 Beslan school massacre ?

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Jmick
Thought you might enjoy this..
WASHINGTON, Sept. 23 — A stark assessment of terrorism trends by American intelligence agencies has found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.
The classified National Intelligence Estimate attributes a more direct role to the Iraq war in fueling radicalism than that presented either in recent White House documents or in a report released Wednesday by the House Intelligence Committee, according to several officials in Washington involved in preparing the assessment or who have read the final document.
The intelligence estimate, completed in April, is the first formal appraisal of global terrorism by United States intelligence agencies since the Iraq war began, and represents a consensus view of the 16 disparate spy services inside government. Titled “Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States,’’ it asserts that Islamic radicalism, rather than being in retreat, has metastasized and spread across the globe.
An opening section of the report, “Indicators of the Spread of the Global Jihadist Movement,” cites the Iraq war as a reason for the diffusion of jihad ideology.
The report “says that the Iraq war has made the overall terrorism problem worse,” said one American intelligence official. [...] [NYT permalkink]
The Washington Post on the NIE and the threat of terrorist attacks:
The war in Iraq has become a primary recruitment vehicle for violent Islamic extremists, motivating a new generation of potential terrorists around the world whose numbers may be increasing faster than the United States and its allies can reduce the threat, U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded.
How many generations did it take us to deal with racism in this country....When Blacks first started asking for civil rights violence against them increased over the following several years. It was almost a generation later before it got better. The same can be said about fundamentalists.....we are fighting a generational war. We won't change the view of the older jihadist and those 25-30 but the children is who we are looking to see a change in.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by Ozmar
Yeah, see, I'm not into surrendering to a murderous anti-liberal ideology. I don't wanna be a muslim!

I'm an American.

And I think I'll stand up and defend my liberty, thanks anyway. Hope you don't mind if, in the meantime, the majority of us Americans continue to use our collective resources to defend the freedoms we all enjoy.

Ozmar the Undefeated

Sounds to me you need to pack your bags and join MSGMAC47 on his illustrious trip to the Muslimland. Go get em' Patton! By the way, what is a "murderous anti-liberal ideology."? You talking about me, or the terrorists you blindly believe you can erradicate completely? Be a Muslim? So you think if we bail out of Iraq tomorrow, we'll all be wearing turbans and riding camels the next week? LOLOL. Just make sure your 'collective resources' don't include me or my kids. And sorry, but you're far from the majority in this argument.

 

[jmick]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
How many generations did it take us to deal with racism in this country....When Blacks first started asking for civil rights violence against them increased over the following several years. It was almost a generation later before it got better. The same can be said about fundamentalists.....we are fighting a generational war. We won't change the view of the older jihadist and those 25-30 but the children is who we are looking to see a change in.
Racism isn't as pronounced as it once was but it is certainly still an issue in our country.
I do agree that the children are the ones we need to try to change but that change is hard when we are killing the fathers, uncles, brothers and friends. On top of that, there are now so many channels for terrorist organizations to use to recruit new members and I think we are at a serious disadvantage. This is a world wide problem and you can not confine it to the middle-east anymore, especially when we are waging what the rest of the world would consider an unjust act of war.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
N. Korea (because S. Korea has in fact suffered attacks)- Good luck hearing about attacks in that country. No one knows anything that goes on there.
China- Closed country. Religion exists only at the grace of the local government official. If there was a terrorist attack the government would round up and imprison and execute every muslim in the area.
Russia- Have been attacked numerous times. Have you forgotten the 300+ school kids killed in the seige and occupation of their school in 2004 Beslan school massacre ?

Your Beslan massacre is a little flawed. Chechens rebels made that attack. Of course any faction that's against their Mother Country has ties to Al-Quaida these days. The Chechens and Russians have been fighting one another as long as the Kurds and Shiites have.
As far as China and North Korea - Believe me, if there was a major terrorist attack in those countries, you'd here about it. America's presence is so prevalent in China these days, I'm surprised more attacks haven't happened there.

 

[1journeyman]

This thread has been enlightening, to say the least.
Some have said that America is no better than Al Qaeda.
Some have said we should retreat and do nothing because we can't win.
Some have said we should negotiate with the terrorists.
yipes.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Your Beslan massacre is a little flawed. Chechens rebels made that attack. Of course any faction that's against their Mother Country has ties to Al-Quaida these days. The Chechens and Russians have been fighting one another as long as the Kurds and Shiites have.
As far as China and North Korea - Believe me, if there was a major terrorist attack in those countries, you'd here about it. America's presence is so prevalent in China these days, I'm surprised more attacks haven't happened there.
Korea-We don't even know the populaton there right now... the information we get is usually from those who have fled. The point is for terrorists to get into Korea and operate there would be virtually impossible. And, if they did, we wouldn't hear about it.
China- Re-read what I said. The terrorists don't attack there because they know what the outcome would be.
Russia- "...In addition, 26 hostage-takers -- including 10 people from Arab countries -- and at least 10 Russian Special Forces troops died.
Chechens have been affiliated with the al Qaeda terror network, and an Arab connection suggests a further link between the Chechen rebel movement and international terrorism. Chechen rebels have been fighting Russian troops for a decade, seeking independence. "
Radical islamists have been linked to much of the violence performed by Chechen rebels.

 

[jovial]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
If another 9-11 happens, it will happen if we're in Iraq or not. You need to face reality that no matter how many of the terrorist you fight over there, there are 10 other factions just as dangerous pulling together in some other part of the world. You can yank Osama out of his cave (or Iran palace he's probably living in), Hang Em' High like Sadaam, and the next week one of his replacements will be blowing up the Golden Gate Bridge. So yeah, I'd prefer to do nothing if that spares just one more American soldiers life.
What happens when it's your building that gets hit, would you still prefer to do nothing?

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by crimzy
Nonsense, if we keep killing terrorists, we are producing a generation full of parentless Iraqi children who are very susceptible to the recruitment of terrorist groups and hate the US. This is not economics because our attempt to reduce the "supply" of terrorists is creating more terrorists by itself. These terrorists are killing themselves just to take infidels with them. Do you really think that the potential that they may be killed in a war is really a deterrent?
yes, a dead terrorist doesn't kill anymore. Economics concepts do apply. If they don't then we should just close all prisions. Because that isn't a "deturent" either.

 

[rudedog40]

Originally Posted by Jovial
What happens when it's your building that gets hit, would you still prefer to do nothing?

Reread what I said. If another 9-11 is gonna happen, it will whether we're in Iraq or not. Yet another person with blinders on who thinks the only terrorist that could do something destructive against the US is currently fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. You could hunt down and find every single solitary person you deem a terrorist in those two countries, and there would still be hundreds more living in Iran, England, France, Italy, Germany, Minnesota, LA, Dallas, and practically every other major city and country in the world. So if your only reason for keeping American troops in Iraq is to destroy all terrorists, then you're wasting their time and lives doing it.

 

[jmick]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
yes, a dead terrorist doesn't kill anymore. Economics concepts do apply. If they don't then we should just close all prisions. Because that isn't a "deturent" either.

Economic principles do not apply here. Sure, you can kill the one terrorist but through his death he can become a martyr to many more and his death can have a much larger impact...this individual died for their religious convictions.
Also, with technology today it is soo much easier for them to spread their messages to the young people of the middle-east and the other Muslim areas of the world and using these martyrs can be a powerful tool.
In addition, when people see their family, friends, neighbors, ect die they tend to get angry, not scared (at least that would be my reaction, not sure what kind of person you are).
Mark my words, as long as they have the funds they will NEVER run out of new recruits.
I think that a lot of the people here who are pro-war and harp on our need to be there do so because it really creates a false sense of security for them. They see us killing the enemy and taking action and this gives them a false sense of security.
Then, there are others who are able to grasp a more full scope of the situation and see it at a larger scale and not as a black and white issue. Inevitably, we are doing far more harm then good. This is a war we can not win; we are losing our most precious resource (the young people of our country) to a futile effort that is doomed to fail. We are creating more hatred, more terrorists, more funding for the terrorist groups and a less stable region. How long till Americans are completely despised by the rest of the Western World?
BTW, do people commit crimes in the name of Jesus before they go to prison or do they go to prison because they are criminals? Your analogy is terrible.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by rudedog40
Reread what I said. If another 9-11 is gonna happen, it will whether we're in Iraq or not. Yet another person with blinders on who thinks the only terrorist that could do something destructive against the US is currently fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. You could hunt down and find every single solitary person you deem a terrorist in those two countries, and there would still be hundreds more living in Iran, England, France, Italy, Germany, Minnesota, LA, Dallas, and practically every other major city and country in the world. So if your only reason for keeping American troops in Iraq is to destroy all terrorists, then you're wasting their time and lives doing it.
No one is arguing that all the terrorists are in Iraq, but if we've killed 2500 of them there that's 2500 less that could be over here.
This argument baffles me... Would you rather be fighting them here?

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Jmick
...
Then, there are others who are able to grasp a more full scope of the situation and see it at a larger scale and not as a black and white issue. Inevitably, we are doing far more harm then good. This is a war we can not win; we are losing our most precious resource (the young people of our country) to a futile effort that is doomed to fail. We are creating more hatred, more terrorists, more funding for the terrorist groups and a less stable region. How long till Americans are completely despised by the rest of the Western World?
... .
I would respectfully say it is not those that want to keep fighting that aren't looking at the big picture.
Al Qaeda hit us 7 times during Clinton's administration. That's almost 1 attack per year. They haven't hit us on our soil in 6 years... why is that? You argue they are recruiting more and hate us more, yet attacks on the homeland are down?
The West doesn't despise us. Recent elections in Germany and France show that.