alo: What country would you fight for then?

If it ever came down to it, I would stand up and fight for America. I hate the thought of it, and I hate violence, but assuming a draft was reinstated and I could non-volunterily enter service, I would not leave.

I don't join now, because of personal feelings, but if I was required to because of my citizenship, I would fight for America.

I have disagreements with America at times, but I can't think of any other country I'd rather live in.

Its 5 AM in the morning at Spain, i will continue with this tomorrow but, belive me, deds are not only "sometimes a sad casualty", you said that because your contry doesen't have had a war inside it reciently, we have ETA that is not a separatist group (as your tv said) the have killed more than 3000 people in more than 20 years and we have not heard a word of help form US 'til 9/11. People in Europ know much more of wars than you because we lived it and unfortunately we have many terrorists groups, its not only the deds and destruction but also fear, desesperation sorrow and many things. Think about that and dont be silly, don't think this is only for saddam.

(pardon my english)

"and it one, two, three what are we fighting for?

don't ask me, I don't give a damn...

We gonna blow up Saddam Hussein..

and it's five, six, seven open up the pearly gates.

there ain't no need to wonder why..

whoopee, Saddam's gonna die......"

thats another fanatic, see waht u get?

we had a good debate Alo hope to see you around... and just like I said to another person earlier in the boards, no one want's to see war, or a bad ending, it's all about what they feel is best for the world Have a good night

ha ha ha... Jammeister... you know how to instigate

Argentina does not have 12 years of resolutions calling for it to disarm
Argentina does not have billions of dollars to create a massive WMD.


USA probably does sell to the black market... to the level of Argentina? Ira?< North Korea? Is the US army weak and unloyal? What happens to someone in the USA who sells arms illegally? In Iraq, is Saddam so careful?


Some of those "atrocities" are considered atrocities by the very people who live there and by there way of code. I am not talking about chopping of a hand because someone stole something, I am talking about dimemberment because he doesn't agree with the leader.



Freedom Fries??? Give me a break! Very childish. I wonder about the mind who thought of that? Just a joke? hmmmmm

yeah... freedom fries gets me too... but I laugh more when i see people dumping out french wine. France doesn't care what you do with it after you buy it. they still got their money.. .

I wonder if anyone realizes the irony that the only reason we are free to have this discussion anyway is largely because Americans were willing to fight, kill, and die in the service of freedom.

From an intellectual, theoretical point of view, war is a terrible thing that should be avoided if possible. In an ideal world, war would never be necessary.

But here, on planet Earth, in reality, there are bad people out there. And life is, unfortunately, not fair.

Who is giving the US the right to replace the regime in Iraq? How about the same people that gave the US the right to replace the regime in France in 1944. The American people. (Vichy France was technically a sovereign country whose government was overthrown by the US and a "friendly" regime - i.e. De Gaulle, installed).

But let's no kid ourselves, it's not wishful thinking and warm fuzzy thoughts that brought us the freedom we all enjoy today. It wasn't love that made the Internet. It was predominately American military might (the Internet came from a cold war military project for instance).

That we live today in countries where individual freedom is respected wasn't inevitable. In many respects, it was a miracle. Two horrific genocidal powers nearly engulfed the world -- Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia. Take the US and its willingness to fight for other people's freedom away and the world would be a much worse place.

The Iraqi people deserve such freedom as well. No, that's not the reason why the US is going to end up liberating Iraq anymore than liberating the Germans and French was the reason the US fought World War II. But that will be the end result.

In World War II, the easy path would have been to accomodate Hitler. But the UK and USA, alone of the major world powers who could have stayed out of the European conflict, chose to stand up for what was right (with Canadian and Australian help too).

Thank God...at last a third party has mentioned Australia...insignificant little buggers that we are...

da_zman20....keep a handle on your language thanks...

Well you're so far away from the rest of us... hehe...
Just kidding...
We're so far away from you...
but we all brothers fighting for liberty and liberty we will have!

Ummm, didn't mean to leave out sisters....... we are all together....

"I had cases of French wine and I pured it all out."

ooookayyyyyy.....

"Let me get some large Freedom Fries to go."

ummmm right.

World politics is not easy. There are and will be interests other than what appears. I don't agree with Bush or with his tactics. Nevertheless, I have yet to here anything that says that Saddam has disarmed.

"Give him 30 more days." That's fine with me, but what happens when those 30 days are up? We know it happened before.

"America is only interested in oil".
Just oil? Not just from Iraq I hope because it is not worth it. We would spend more than the oil they have just fighting the war. I guess Iraq could become a launch pad for 'conquering' other oil rich places. The cost for doing so? More money than most of the oil in the region. Good investment? NO.


The real reason? I think it is for a more stable region. If this region becomes unstable or distructive, it would be very desastorous for everyone.


Why is the USA friends with China? They do the same thing as Iraq... Iraq has oil to fund its weapons production, China has a struggleing economy. The chinese solder is more loyal. I doubt they would sell weapons to those who would later use them against themselves.


People, people ,poeple!!! It is not just about this country does the same thing or hey you have them too... it is about location, economy, additudes, stability, population comfort level.

when you include all of those factors who is more dangerous? Iraq or Argentina? Iran or Canada? North Korea or China? Serbia or Seria?


Is Saddam in breath of the agreement?
Does he have loads of money?

How loyal is his army?

Population comfort level?

How many resolutions for disarmerment?

How many years under said resolutions?


Please, no one liners... "America wants oil!!!" "Bush is Evil!!!"

By the way, what is Good and what is Evil?
/me thinks this topic is something that I saw on another thread

sorry bout that Jaff... I get a little out of hand sometimes... it's that darned Ridelyn(can't spell that at all)... i forgot to take it today...

No probs....BTW I'm sure beer is cheaper...

Many valid points made there JoetheBlow....
dang I've worn out another keyboard.... urrrgghhhh, arrggghhhh...
Yeh, I say send in Buffy... Saddams just another vampire anyway....!

While you're at it, Frogboy, then you probably know that the US owe their freedom to France. So a few facts.
a - The US constitution and most Liberty declaration is based on the writtings of French writters such as Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and a few others who wrote "L'Encyclopédie". Ben Franklin was a good friend with them.
b - Chances are the US could have never successfully won the independance war if it wasn't for the help of France.
c - The Statue of Liberty is a gift from France. The lady herself is a French symbol of the French revolution, she even has a name, it's Marianne.

Sorry, but the US did not invent freedom. You may be a great defensor of it now, but please, not everything is made in America.

paxx i was going to write something about that and you have taken (written) the word out of my mouth!!!.

Anyway, HI again!

>In World War II, the easy path would
>have been to accomodate Hitler. But
>the UK and USA, alone of the major
>world powers who could have stayed
>out of the European conflict, chose
>to stand up for what was right (with
>Canadian and Australian help too).

UK went to war because they were affraid of Nazi power, Russia was the first to enter Berlin and was the one who "killed?" Hitler, so give them the respect and the honor the might have becase they helped a lot.

>Who is giving the US the right to
>replace the regime in Iraq? How
>about the same people that gave the
>US the right to replace the regime
>in France in 1944. The American
>people. (Vichy France was
>technically a sovereign country
>whose government was overthrown by
>the US and a "friendly" regime -
>i.e. De Gaulle, installed).

France is a good country today but they can think at their own and if they feel something different than what does the goverment whey will show it.
US (not America, you don't call Spain->Europe or Russia->Asia!!!) found the UN after WWII and if US wants to go to war without UN, US will kill UN and its thoughts. Recently your pressident has signed some document (that all the world unless your contry has signed) that allows your soldiers to commit atrocities and not being judged by International Laws and International
Courts. That document was signed years ago by other pressident (The moderated one) Bill Clinton who said that it was a step back not to sign it.
If you have the power to commit crimes and "no one" is going to judje you??? maybe???? who knows...

By the way, I mean in no way to diminish the merit of the United States, the greatness of its constitution, or even the fact that indeed the US played a major role in WW2 and in the liberation of France from the Nazi occupation. But there are other contries in the World who value basically the same ideals of liberty and freedom, and History is made of a series of mutual influences and help between countries. France's slogan (sorry, that's not the correct word, but I don't know the word you use in English for that) is "Liberté, Fraternité, Égalité". I don't need to translate it, it's quite easy to understand.

BTW, here is an interesting fact. I'm sure every American knows the name of General Lafayette, who greatly help the American rebels fight to achieve their freedom. But the same Lafayette later went back to France and, as the General of the Royal French army, had to fight AGAINST his own French rebels, AGAINST the same cause of Liberty. He is responsible for the massacre of many French rebels. While he is considered a hero in the US, this French General is considered an evil man in France's history books.

(Applause)

"The Internet came from a cold war military project for instance" - Frogboy

I've decided to stay out of the conversation since being shot down for being anti-Bush. However, I'm starting to question Frogboy's grasp of historical fact in more ways than one.

You are aware that the Internet was created as an ever-growing extension of an experiment between two Universities to create a fast network for the exchange of academic data, right? I'm not sure where this idea about the Cold War comes from, but I'm actually pretty amazed that you don't know basic Internet history...

Sorry, just woken up. Maybe I should clarify that statement.

Although a vague idea was thrown around during the Cold War to create a system to share computing power, the Internet itself was never intended to meet this need. It was created purely for academic reasons, and the Military had no hand in it's development. So I'd hardly credit the US Military with the creation of the Internet!

>I've decided to stay out of the
>conversation since being shot down for
>being anti-Bush. However, I'm starting
>to question Frogboy's grasp of
>historical fact in more ways than one.

Grayhaze, you can be whatever you want, if they don't like your opinions it does't matter, you have the right to think different (apple) (sorry that was a mind popup) and to be different. That's what made more rich the comunity, internet and the world.
Please write something!!!

Oh and about Vichy and De Gaulle... You may, or may not know it, but Churchill and Roosevelt hated De Gaulle. I'm not going deeply into the whys, but part of it is that De Gaulle was the leader of the unified French resistance, which included a lot of communists. Although De Gaulle himself was not a communist, he didn't refuse their help in te resistance. Anyway, the fact remains that the UK and the US first tried to cooperate with the Vichy government and convince Petain and Laval to switch side. When that didn't work, they tried to get De Gaulle's rival, Giraud (General of the French North African army), as the French leader. But in the end, the Free French (resistance, lead by De Gaulle) grew much stronger and played a major role in the liberation. De Gaulle was left as the only option the French people would have accepted.

Poor GrayHaze accusing others of false information when he himself has a scued sense of the facts. Please go to this link and brush up on your history http://net.gurus.com/history/?FRAME=no