We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Locked Topic
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
Community Debate #1
Topic Started: Jul 4 2004, 11:29 AM (457 Views)
Simon
Member Avatar
bleh..
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
This is the official debate. It will act very much like the community poll program with a new debate being setup every week. Anybody can enter but please remember to respect each other opinions at all times, and be prepared to take critism of your own opinins.

Here is the 1st issue we will be debate: Do you think the coalition should have invaded Iraq?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Glitch
Blasphemer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
No. Invading Iraq was clearly an imperialistic and unnecessary move by the Bush Administration.

First, let me give Bush's 3 reasons for going into Iraq.

1. Saddam had WMD
No WMD were found

2. Saddam had direct links with Al'qaeda.
No links were found. In a recent recording, Al-Zarqawi, now the "godfather" of terrorist operations, clearly disrespected Saddam's old regime

3. Saddam was a "horrible dictator" and needed to be taken out of power
True. However, there are plenty of dictators out there that are worse than Saddam. Why don't we take them all out of power?
Also, you have to ask yourself- is Iraq really safer with Saddam out of power? Back when Saddam was still in power, the citizens of Iraq could walk the streets without the fear of getting shot in the back of the head by terrorists. Saddam and his sons were only 3 people. Overall, they probably effected less than 5% of the Iraqi population. However, now 95% of the Iraqi population is effected by daily terrorist bombings. Why are the terrorists there? Because the US invaded.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Kazuki-ZNR
...
I am half and half. If WMP had been found then I would be all for it but so far none have been found. I agree that Saddam was an evil person but as Glitch said there is probably more problems are being caused by terroists now than Saddam was causing in the first place. If you think about all the lives lost because of this war then my final answer is probably no.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
limester816
rel1sh
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
We should have not invaded

1. Bush ignored all UN pleas to negotiate with Iraq.

2. Bush claimed there were WMD in Iraq, yet none were found.

3. Bush has already begun buildin an oil pipeline to extract oil from Iraq.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Nekoyamoy
Member
[ *  *  * ]
Don't forget that he said that, Africa sold urianium to Iraq, which they didn't.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Quimby
Member Avatar
dood
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Uhh, we found WMD. Keep up with the news people.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Marxist
Member Avatar
The Comedian
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Ryan
Jul 4 2004, 05:21 PM
Uhh, we found WMD. Keep up with the news people.

Yea we found sarin gas and missle heads.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Glitch
Blasphemer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If terrorists attacked New York with chemical weapons, would you blame the mayor for posession of WMD? The sarin gas was used by independant militant groups that have never recieved funding or weapons from Saddam Hussein.

I don't understand how you could justify the horror that we caused these people. There are 8 year olds in Iraq, the skin and flesh shaved clean off their arms by shrapnel. There are people who've had noses and ears blown off by American bombs. INNOCENT people, just like you and me, who have never done anything against the occupation. How can we justify that? Aren't we supposed to be the freedom-giving life-saving officers of justice?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Wiedle
Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think that we should have. After all, we did find WMD, and we put Hussain out of power and freed an entire country. However, more problems have been created, such as setting up a government for Iraq.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Glitch
Blasphemer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Yeah, we've "freed" a country at the cost of over 500 US combatant and 10,000 Iraqi civilian casualties.

And "freed" is only in our opinion, last I checked most of the Iraqis thought we were oppressing them.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Wiedle
Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
true, but in the long run, dont you think they are going to thank us? I mean, would you rather be with Saddam or the US?
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Glitch
Blasphemer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If you really want to know what I think will happen in the long run...

I think that they'll continue to resist. Eventually, we'll get tired, just like we did with Vietnam, and pull out. Then, they'll blame us for not helping them rebuild their country, and they'll develop hate for us. Just like Afghanistan did after we helped them defeat the Soviets in the 80's and abandoned them afterwards. And then there'll come a whole new generation of terrorists that plan on killing more and more Americans.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
abdominator
Member
[ *  *  * ]
FusionX
Jul 4 2004, 06:24 PM
Ryan
Jul 4 2004, 05:21 PM
Uhh, we found WMD. Keep up with the news people.

Yea we found sarin gas and missle heads.

that were used 10 years ago in Iraq Iran war
and that are not working

sorry had to respond to this
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Quimby
Member Avatar
dood
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
abdominator
Jul 5 2004, 05:33 AM
FusionX
Jul 4 2004, 06:24 PM
Ryan
Jul 4 2004, 05:21 PM
Uhh, we found WMD. Keep up with the news people.

Yea we found sarin gas and missle heads.

that were used 10 years ago in Iraq Iran war
and that are not working

sorry had to respond to this

Who said they weren't working? From what I heard, if they were used they would've caused extreme damage.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
Glitch
Blasphemer
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Here's an article on the Sarin gas incident, straight from the #1 conservative network, Fox News

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C120268%2C00.html

Quote:
 
The artillery shell was being used as an improvised roadside bomb, the U.S. military said Monday. The 155-mm shell exploded before it could be rendered inoperable, and two U.S. soldiers were treated for minor exposure to the nerve agent.

This article was from May 19th, 2004, way after Saddam was toppled and captured. The explosive was likely planted by some extremist terrorist group that had never recieved weapons or funding from Saddam's regime.
Offline Profile Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Enjoy forums? Start your own community for free.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Community Chat · Next Topic »
Locked Topic
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3