Whats wrong?

[Ancient-Admin]

I don’t like the Bush government. I’m not sure exactly why but I know I don’t like it. I like to think of myself as a centrist leaning a little to the right. Why is it then that so many people feel our government is is not what it’s supposed to be. Why do I feel that way? I’m not un -American and I love my country. We are the greatest but we have a problem...Is it Bush? I heard him make a speech the other day and he was great. Funny , sincere, down to earth and he cares...but...something is wrong. Maybe he just don’t get it! Maybe I dont get it? The republicans, the Democrats, the press, the rest of the world...Whats wrong?

[weaver]

I personally like Bush. I like where we have been heading. He doesn't win all of his battles, most of which I support. But - it's not a dictatorship, so I can't expect 100% victories.

Iraq is a mess -- but we did win. Saddam is gone. Unfortanately, we didn't leave immediately afterward and let the UN resolve the govt. issue.

[Stantler]

The UN didn't think there was justification for going into Iraq in the first place. So why should it be their responsibility to go clean upthe mess after the fact?

Funny how the American press is the only one calling it a 'war'....the rest of the world sees it for what it is; an invasion. Saddam had to go, no doubt. But Bush thinks the ends justify the means and that history will judge him as a liberator and crusader for democracy. The Republicans have always been war mongers..... I'm sure the Bush administration was just salivating after Sept. 11 to get the war machine rolling and get that American economy going again. Seems to be the only thing it runs on anymore.

[Ancient-Admin]

Call it what you like...War or invasion..Sadham had to go. How would you make him go with out taking any action. I believe Bush was right at that point. It's all that follows is the bad part. As for the UN..., it seems anything that calls for action is not going to happen with the UN in charge. They could have helped the people of Iraq...they didnt. Instead they duck and make it all our fault. And it is...includingSadham being gone! Now supphose the UN is right. In order to run the country and the people of Iraq you need a Sadham? Is that our mistake?

[zol]

ORIGINAL: Ancient Admin

In order to run the country and the people of Iraq you need a Sadham? Is that our mistake?

You do need someone like a Saddam. They're in a civil war over there. No one is going to come on top of their civil war while USA inc. is still in there. Did USA have other nations looking over us? No, look where we are now. They should spilt the country up into different countrys. Only way to start a peace process.

[Stantler]

There will never be peace in the world, especially in the MIddle East until religion no longer exists. But that's a whole other topic, and since I enjoy opening a new can of worms every once in a while.........something I just had to toss in there [:'(]

[weaver]

Leave Saddam there? Now.. if I had advocated fighting a war on morale grounds.. (and I dont), suggesting that people should live under his thumb is ridiculous. Better to die in a civil conflict against a system you can fight versus dying in a torture chamber after your daughters were raped by his sons.

But as I suggested in the beginning - I don't advocate morale wars. The church has done that enough in history for me. I advocated the war on the basis of kicking the pins out from under the political and geopolitical system that is in place in the middle east (much of which is the fault of US and Western European backing in the first place). Why kick the pins out? I can blithely say "to fight terrorism", and to a degree - -be honest when I say that. On the other hand, forcing a change in the geopolitical balance and allowing us to exert continued and extended force for our own ends is the primary reason among reasons.

Don't kid yourself that any other war is ever fought for any other reason. Self-interest. No one sends their 18 year old sons off to fight to save some other schmuck in in a desert or african jungle, or even eastern asia. Maintaining and advancing our economic, political, and military supremancy is the goal -- and the goal of every other nation.

Did the UN approve of our invasion? No. Would they, could they, under any other circumstance in the political climage of 2001? No. Too many political forces at work, too strong. China, Russia, France, Germany (the French/German/Russian block of 2001 being the anchor in this case).

[fallen1]

Seeing as the topic for this thread is "What's wrong?" I'm just going to jump into the middle of this with something I see as being wrong.
The biggest thing I see wrong with US politics is the inability of anyone on either side to deal with what "is" as opposed to what they think "should be". You never hear politicians say "here's the ugly truth. this is what is actually going on. no matter how much we wish it was different, this is the way it actually is right now, so this has to be our starting point." If I ever hear a politician say anything like that, instead of the usual "this is how it should be" crap that totally ignores reality, that person is more than likely going to get my vote regardless of what party they are a member of.
I am a realist. I will take facts, figures, statistics, and science over opinion, conjecture, and deisres any day. No matter how much I may want something to be a certain way, if the facts prove that it is different I accept the facts and that I was wrong. I understand that reality does not care how much I bitch and moan and scream "no, it should be this way!" If we could actually get politicians that had the spine to tell their special interest groups "look, I wish it was that way too, but the fact is that this doesn't work no matter how much we wish it did or how much we insist that it should" I think we'd be a lot better off.

[weaver]

Amen brother.

[safeace]

You guys are right that saddam was a loser.He used to torture and kill people for no reason but the same thing is happening right now.There's no difference...people are still dying and getting tortured. The only diffrence is that there are more people dying now, not only Iraqis but American soldiers.I don't think the killings will decrease, I can see another Palestine situation here.

So what was the use of removing Saddam?

[Ancient-Admin]

Ahmen again.
Reality always seems to be a problem for so many politicians. Reality is also a problem for the population. Sometimes telling the absolute truth can cause a lot of heartache. When my country has to go to war to make itstronger or safer for me and you......whats wrong with that?. As long as its not to benifit a select few. Bush had good intentions but he screwed us up with bad policies. He listened to the wrong people.He was also attempting to satisfy certain groups who he owed allegiancetoo. He is pissing away our wealth. As for the remarks about religion being a reason for wars...So true. Were fighting a religious war right now. Maybe not on our side (although if you listen to the Religious Right?) But our enemies are fighting a holy war. Call it terroism but dont forget it takes a stong religious belief to strap a bomb on too yourself and pull the trigger..

[weaver]

saface

- go pick Mar/Apr edition of Foriegn Policy review. Great article on why the iraqi's are better off today then they were 4 years ago. Also great article on mistakes the Brits made in the TWO occasions in the last century that they invaded Iraq... and what we should do to avoid them.

[Ancient-Admin]

Iraqi's were killingIraqi'sby the hundreds of thousands. Sadham didnt kill all those people with his pistol. He had an army of Iraqi's that were willing to do what he wanted. What he wanted, they wanted. Nowthey are still killing each other but because the Americans are there (and the English)thousands of people will live. Dont you thinkthose killersare more to blame then the Americans? You cant stop that kind of thing with a feather. Does anyone realy think that if and when the Americans leave they will stop? I dont. I think we should give the world what it wants and leave. Send out troops to Afghanistan. Concentrate on our enemy, the Taliban.Let those Iraqi's get back to the business at hand. They can continue killing each other and even have help from there neighbors .It will be cheaper for us and Americans will not be dying. Allah helps those that help themself.

[safeace]

Yea your right, if US doesn't leave from Iraq the American soldiers will get raped just how they got raped in Vietnam and the UN won't come in between.After 10 years we'll see 1000s of movie about Iraq and how American soldiers wasted their life [:-]

[Ancient-Admin]

Americans value their lives. We don’t explode ourselves and our children with us just to get to meet some virgins. If the Americans hadn’t taken action in Vietnam, you would be speaking Russian and living the communist way. Your little store would belong to the government and if you misbehaved and said the wrong thing.....off with your balls. The Americans left Vietnam because the American people didn’t think it was worth it any more. Thousands died after we left. We stayed in the South for a while and ...look how they prospered. The North is starving. The same happened in Korea. The South is rich...The North...you tell me! How about Germany...East Germany was starving...The west was living the good life. America doesn’t get raped. We get bored and leave if you’re not smart enough to take advantage of what we offer. Iraq will prosper if we stay. It’s up to our peoplewhenwe leave or stay. Now maybe we should take your attitude. Leave them to some other Sadham who will poison and kill them. And you would probably blame America for that also.By the way...why do you see those movies we make...I bet your a “wanna be” American...sounds like it. As for the UN....It’s a place for talking.....talk is cheap. If it wasn’t for the US and some of its allies...you wouldn’t have a UN. Half those countriesdont even want to payfor their parking tickets...some help they would be.

[GreyRaven]

I have to disagree with some of your assumptions Ancient. Especially when it comes to East and West Germany. First off, the poverty rate in East Germany during the time of the Berline wall was almost nothing, compared to West Berlin which had your standard mobs of people living in subway stations like you might find in New York. Perhaps its a common misconception, I know it was my misconception for a long while as well, but though the people of East Berlin did not experience the heights of a Capitalistic economy, they certainly werent starving either, I dont have all the facts my self nor will I claim to be an expert, but I do know that almost no one, and I mean no one, didnt have a home of some kind and some sort of food on the table, which is perhaps more than can be said for the homeless in our own country today.

As well, about us not exploding ourselves along with our children in order to meet some virgins. I dont think its very fair of you to impose an American cultural value system on a culture that is clearly not American. To view the actions of religious extremist living on the other side of the world in an environment generally much different from out own within the context of standard American values generally spawned from the suburban middle class, puts their lives in the wrong context. Once more, I wont pretend to be an expert, or even offer my own feeble, speculatory opinion on the matter, but what I will do is simply offer this criticism, which I think can be applied in general to many different situations in which we all tend to assume s