Draft

[All Else Failed]

I have seen many threads turn to the discussion of a draft....but no threads labeled "draft". So what do you think folks?

My opinion, Americans are soft! More people were killed in the Towers than Pearl harbor. The difference...Americas reaction. 4 years at war in WWII. The battleon the island of Iwo Jima lasted 36 days and took over 6000 american Marines and Corpsman. Twice as many of the total service members taken in the 4 years of this war. We cannot except people killing us in our yard and if some "voluntolds" is what it takes to get the message across that we will ot stand for it than thats what we need to do.

Two different situations that call for different reactions though.

 

[IntruderLS1]

Sorry I missed this one. Too much to respond to with the attention everything deserves, but I will say that things are going better every day in Iraq.

The Dems are even seeing the results, and are trying to get back on the winning team.

Make no mistake. Iraq will succeed if America has anything to say about it. I predict discussion of draft will falter out middle of '08, and be re-hashed every time we find ourselves in conflict abroad with a power struggle at home.

 

[All Else Failed]

I don't think a draft will ever come IMO. War is becoming more and more Dependant on private military companies to do a lot of the work.

 

[GraceAbounds]

Yes, and I believe they already are. We have Americans that are fighting the terrorists war for them, feeling sorry for them, etc., Americans that have the words 'tolerant' and 'accepting' mixed up.

We have Americans that are fighting it for them? You must be kidding me... No really, you must be fucking kidding me. Because every American isn't drinking the Republican kool-aide means that we are supporting the Terrorists. Wouldn't that be the same as saying if I don't support the death penalty and speak out against it, I'm supporting the murderers?

Your cussing, tone, and sarcasm are uncalled for. You read more into my words than is there.

Their ideology already has. It is evident in American opinions/postings across the Internet.

Yes, you are right, they are invading right now and I am posting for them this very minute... Don't be such a drama queen. They are not invading us we are not under attack, we aren't all going to be required to wear turbans anytime soon.

Further sarcasm and now name calling.

It already has started to erode certain belief structures. Many Americans these days remind me of Jane Fonda and her stunts pulled in the Vietnam war. Or idealistic young uns that just are not old enough to know better.

If you are that weak that 9/11 was enough to change your belief system, then 9/11 wasn't your problem, you should look at your belief system and why it let you down

I'm weak, huh? - just further insults and name calling. I never said that 9/11 changed 'my' belief structure. Read more carefully and stop reading things that aren't there.

Yes, it hurt me and changed me.

Hurt who we are as a nation, not you as an individual... It's amazing that 9/11 hurt you so much yet the 700,000 civilians (men women and children) that have died in Iraq hasn't caused you one sleepless night. Just keep supporting the war in Iraq, keep your Republican blinders on, keep drinking your kool-aide and read your bible, because I'm sure Jesus would be on the front lines with gun in his hands.

More insults because I don't agree with you. Nice Tim. I thought more highly of you. I now know I was totally wrong in my assessment of you.

ROFL. There was war in the middle east looooooooooooooong before 9/11.

You're right, but there wasn't 160,000 American troops with bulls eyes painted on their backs walking around.

No we had bulls eyes painted on our all of our backs before then, we were just blind to it. Over 3,000 civilians got shot dead on the targets painted on their backs on 9/11.

Once again, I'm not afraid and I doubt our government is either. If people are scared that is a personal thing that they need to examine.

You don't believe that the President saying that we must succeed over there or they will follow us home, isn't putting fear into the American people? I could pull dozens of examples of fear mongering from this administration.

All I can tell you is that it does not instill fear in me. What it does to others, like I said is a personal issue that they need to examine. It doesn't appear to be causing you fear Tim. I know it is not causing me fear. So why would I ASSUME it is causing others to fear? I have not spoken to anyone that has told me that they are so afraid and that is what they are basing all their decisions on. Have you spoken to people that have said that? Or are you assuming that people feel that way? Do you feel that way? Are in fear?

Maybe we should put the draft into affect then, eh?

A quick and agile military that isn't tied up in a bullshit war... we wouldn't need a large military via a draft to accomplish that. Our military is more than capable and equipped to handle any such mission.

Right, and there lies the twist. I don't think this is a useless war. But just because I do not agree with you or others here doesn't mean that I deserve to be cussed at or name called.

 

[Tim]

Yes, and I believe they already are. We have Americans that are fighting the terrorists war for them, feeling sorry for them, etc., Americans that have the words 'tolerant' and 'accepting' mixed up

Their ideology already has. It is evident in American opinions/postings across the Internet.

Those statements right there are straight out of the Republican talking points memo. This isn't something you came up with, this is what every "good" republican is supposed to say when ever anyone questions the war. Excuse me for not buying into any of the talking points that we are unamerican or "for the terrorist" if we don't buy into the war in Iraq. What evidence do you have that Americans are fighting the terrorists war for them? The terrorists' only weapon is fear and the only Americans I see using fear to control us are the Republicans.
odds of being killed by lightening 1 in 2 million
odds of being killed by terrorists 1 in 60 million (worldwide, extremely lower odds in the US)
Even if the entire population of the Middle East was wiped out by war, seeds of hate in all other parts of the globe would only be nourished. There's no force big enough, no country mighty enough to go to war with an enemy who is prolific within almost every country on earth. So how is the war in Iraq helping us? And how does keeping the country in fear help us?

I'd really like to hear why you support the war in Iraq. Why do you think we needed to invade? Why should we still be there? What is it that we are accomplishing there? Finally, what would happen if we were to leave there today?

 

[TripSevens]

The Dems are even seeing the results, and are trying to get back on the winning team.

Where's the evidence of that?


I've seen nothing of the sort, and no self respecting Democrat would align themselves with the criminal Bush and his ship of fools.

 

[Tim]

Well we may need to reinstate the draft if Cheney gets his way and we go to war with Iran.

YouTube - FOX ATTACKS: Iran

 

[GraceAbounds]

Those statements right there are straight out of the Republican talking points memo. This isn't something you came up with, this is what every "good" republican is supposed to say when ever anyone questions the war.

You've got me labeled and wrapped up into a nice little box. So there is no point in us discussing much of anything I guess.

Excuse me for not buying into any of the talking points that we are unamerican or "for the terrorist" if we don't buy into the war in Iraq.

I didn't say you had to. Nor did I state that all people that don't agree with the war are 'for the terrorist'.

What evidence do you have that Americans are fighting the terrorists war for them?

I've made my thoughts and stance clear in the threads I have collectively posted in and find no need to go into the same details in every thread.

The terrorists' only weapon is fear and the only Americans I see using fear to control us are the Republicans.

You never answered my questions regarding the 'fear mongering' you speak of.

Even if the entire population of the Middle East was wiped out by war, seeds of hate in all other parts of the globe would only be nourished.

Yes you are right. There will always be evil and there will always be seeds of hate and evil. Thankfully there will always be people that are willing to risk their lives to push back against seeds of hate.

So how is the war in Iraq helping us? And how does keeping the country in fear help us? I'd really like to hear why you support the war in Iraq. Why do you think we needed to invade? Why should we still be there? What is it that we are accomplishing there? Finally, what would happen if we were to leave there today?

See above responses.

 

[Tim]

way to answer the questions... at least I can see where YOU stand now.

 

[GraceAbounds]

way to answer the questions... at least I can see where YOU stand now.

Those questions have been answered. You just don't read them. You read what you want to see.

Take your own advice Tim.

 

[Tim]

ask me any direct question, I would love to share with you.

 

[GraceAbounds]

I've already asked and you haven't answered.

I think we should call it a day.

 

[IntruderLS1]

Where's the evidence of that?


I've seen nothing of the sort, and no self respecting Democrat would align themselves with the criminal Bush and his ship of fools.

How much evidence would you like? I can produce pages and pages. I can start in 2003, and I can move through the years up until the last few weeks when the Democratic presidential hopefuls started changing their tunes if you like.

When did this struggle become a "Republican war?" If memory serves, we all went into this together. It's true that Republicans are the ones not willing to leave a friend hanging now, but that doesn't make it their war. Now that progress is becoming clearer, even the angiest of Democrats are starting to change their tunes (again).

 

[All Else Failed]

YouTube - Dick Cheney '94: Invading Baghdad Would Create Quagmire

 

[Tim]

This one is much better...

YouTube - CHENEY: "IRAQ WAR A QUAGMIRE" IN 1994

 

[IntruderLS1]

A wise man once said, "Two different situations that call for different reactions though."

Does anybody here find it interesting that the people who are slamming this administration for going into Iraq are the EXACT same people who were slamming G.H.W.B and Chenny for NOT going into Baghdad? It's a political game, nothing more.

In 1991 there was no thought of Iraq being capable or willing to stage a large scale civilian attack on the United States. As such, the threat was not sufficient to warrant an attack. After September 11th, this was no longer the case. With the new threat level, there WAS sufficient incentive to mount an assault. Beyond that even, the U.S. Military is much more capable of fighting this type of war now than it was in the early 90's. At the end of the cold war, we were tooled for heavy combat. Large formations. Massive firepower. Lightning speed on the plains of Europe. We weren't tooled with the equipment required to fight successfully in a third world urban area. You can thank half the people on your hate list for reforming the military into the more agile fighting force it is today.

We can play word games all night about WMD, who had them, when they existed, why they weren't found, etc.... The point is, that the best we can do is act on the information we have available to us at the time. The President shared the information he was getting with Congress and the world, and with very little exception, we all saw the same thing. We saw what Saddam intentionally wanted us to see. Chenny didn't "flip-flop" on Iraq. The world changes a lot in 12 years. Look at ANY 12 year stretch in American history and find me a time where things were stable.

We can talk about France, Germany, and Russia not buying it; but who here has looked into the financial gains those three nations stood to lose by Saddam falling out of power? They were looking out for themselves the same way we were looking after ourselves.

Tim, the video you posted is weak on the production side. It was edited poorly, and in some cases actually cut the speaker off mid-sentence to avoid passing context to the viewer. I personally felt it was below your usual gold standard.

We are there now. Right or wrong, we are there. If we abandon our friends, what does that say about us? What would become of Iraq if we were to simply pack up and come home? Why would we quit when we're WINNING so decidedly??

There is dishonesty and distortion coming out of the anti-war movement too. I can't tell you how many stories I've read, or YouTube videos I've seen where the author KNEW they were mis-leading.

We're almost done in Iraq. The good guys are winning, and the bad guys are loosing. Our children will look at Iraq the way we all look at German or Japan. They'll be aware of their parents remembrance of a different time, but it won't be real to them.

 

[All Else Failed]

All in all in all, we will see how all of this pans out. Maybe when our kids are born.

 

[Tim]

In 1991 there was no thought of Iraq being capable or willing to stage a large scale civilian attack on the United States. As such, the threat was not sufficient to warrant an attack. After September 11th, this was no longer the case. With the new threat level, there WAS sufficient incentive to mount an assault.

If we were in Iraq for the reasons you laid out, then I would be standing right by your side in complete agreement. But it's not that simple. There are many reasons we invaded Iraq and terrorism wasn't one of them, it was only an excuse and a way to rally the American people behind him. You know, the next "pearl harbor".
Doesn't anyone remember the recent past and what was going on in Iraq? Iraq is potentially sitting on the worlds 3rd largest oil reserve and this is what our government wants. In 1994 Cheney was right in what he said about invading Iraq... so what changed to convince him that it WAS in our interest to invade? Well in 1997 Saddam signed a deal with China National Petroleum Corporation, the country's largest oil company basically thumbing his nose at the US. Saddam also publicly announced that it was going to sell Iraq's oil to countries other than America and this is something that would hurt American "big oil". But Saddam sealed his fate in 2000 when he decided to switch to the euro in late 2000 (and later converted his $10 billion reserve fund at the U.N. to euros) at that point, another manufactured Gulf War become inevitable under Bush II. In rolls 9/11 and the Bush administration couldn't be happier. Now they had their "in" all they had to do was tie Saddam to the terrorists. When this didn't pan out, they made their case directly to the American people, they used 9/11 and the mourning of our country to set their plans in action. EVERY speech that Bush made, he was sure to use Saddam and Al Qaueda in the same sentence. He would say it over and over, associating 9/11 with Saddam, and he was very good at this. The American public bought it hook line and sinker.

Now back on topic... if it was essential to invade Iraq to ensure our freedom and safety, then I would be standing right by your side brother... but as it is, I am 100% against this occupation and all the profiteering that has been done. If this was indeed a noble and just cause, then we wouldn't see companies and individuals making billions in profits while only the soldiers are making the sacrifice. We would all be willingly sacrificing for this fight, every one of us.

 

[IntruderLS1]

The selling of oil to our enemies idea is flawed at its very core. The idea stands in defiance of High School economics.

If Iraq wanted to sell all of her oil to China, the only thing that would change for us would be our supplier. The price doesn't change, because world wide, the supply and demand remain constant. If China stated buying all of its oil from one place, then whoever USED to sell to China would now simply sell to the next country in line. Namely the U.S..

 

[Tim]

The selling of oil to our enemies idea is flawed at its very core. The idea stands in defiance of High School economics.

If Iraq wanted to sell all of her oil to China, the only thing that would change for us would be our supplier. The price doesn't change, because world wide, the supply and demand remain constant. If China stated buying all of its oil from one place, then whoever USED to sell to China would now simply sell to the next country in line. Namely the U.S..

It's not about China changing suppliers, it's about China's future needs as it's economy changes.

With 1.3 billion people, the People's Republic of China is the world's most populous country and the second largest oil consumer, behind the U.S. In recent years, China has been undergoing a process of industrialization and is one of the fastest growing economies in the world. With real gross domestic product growing at a rate of 8-10% a year, China's need for energy is projected to increase by 150 percent by 2020. to sustain its growth China requires increasing amounts of oil. Its oil consumption grows by 7.5% per year, seven times faster than the U.S.'
Growth in Chinese oil consumption has accelerated mainly because of a large-scale transition away from bicycles and mass transit toward private automobiles, more affordable since China's admission to the World Trade Organization. Consequently, by year 2010 China is expected to have 90 times more cars than in 1990. With automobile numbers growing at 19% a year, projections show that China could surpass the total number of cars in the U.S. by 2030. Another contributor to the sharp increase in automobile sales is the very low price of gasoline in China. Chinese gasoline prices now rank among the lowest in the world for oil-importing countries, and are a third of retail prices in Europe and Japan, where steep taxes are imposed to discourage gasoline use.

China's expectation of growing future dependence on oil imports has brought it to acquire interests in exploration and production in places like Kazakhstan, Russia, Venezuela, Sudan, West Africa, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Canada. But despite its efforts to diversify its sources, China has become increasingly dependent on Middle East oil. Today, 58% of China's oil imports come from the region. By 2015, the share of Middle East oil will stand on 70%. Though historically China has had no long-standing strategic interests in the Middle East, its relationship with the region from where most of its oil comes is becoming increasingly important.

You are right when you say it's a matter of economics.

Don't you think our government is completely aware of these numbers? Knowing what is right around the corner and to keep our piece of the pie, doesn't it make sense to remove Saddam (who we couldn't control) and replace him with our own puppet government who would accept oil sharing agreements with American big oil? Why fight for the oil on an open and fair market when we can just go in and take it?