• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Riots erupt in Egypt as protesters demand end to Mubarak regime

Glad to hear that, it sure sounds like fear.

No, it doesn't even sound like fear.

What inappropriate comments?

Feeling he can give Hosni instructions, for one. Now it seems that Mubarak is going to stay in power, so where does that leave Obama?

Poor BHO has an entire omelet on his face!
 
That may have been the way it was sold, but that was not the core justification
.

Yes, I know what the core justification was. The largest oil reserves in the world had banned Western oil.

We intentionally removed a government that enslaved its population. We freed the people from subjugation.

No we enabled a new corrupt government to set up shop (one that will allow Western oil back in after 36 years of being banned) which we prop up with our military because it can't stand against its own people.

We did not have a problem providing support to dictators to get oil. Hopefully that has changed.

We'll see in Egypt.

We did not unleash them. They chose to fight us[/QUOTE)

I must have missed the Iraqi attack on America. When was this?

We were the approved occupying power. They instituted the violence against us.

Approved by whom, the puppet government we set up?

We were not fighting a counterinsurgency, even though one developed. We corrected that mistake and protected the population. This stopped the civil war. Absolutely we take credit for stopping it
.

Figures we would take credit for something we started. All part of our justification for killing for oil, so we can feel good about ourselves!


Were we suppressing the opposition with a secret police, torture and murder? I don't think so.

**** that ****, we have bombs and tanks to do our killing for us!

Yes. We could have anticipated it better. We disbanded the Army as it was a force of Sunni power, which had to be broken for true democracy to form
.

What true democracy? Is a corrupt puppet government we set up and have to protect from its own people what you call a democracy?

How did we do that!?

By invading and occupying a country that was not a threat to us. That brought in people from all over the region that hate us and the Iraqis, including most of the suicide bombers who were Saudi. Where were the insurgents before our invasion?


I can tell right from wrong by myself, thanks.

Yes, you are a reprobate for not merely assuming the worst on our part, but for talking about it in ways that assigns blame to us for things we are not to blame for, like killing tens of thousands of Iraqis.

Look if it makes you feel better to pretend that we invaded Iraq for any and every reason other than our own self-interest in the world's largest remaining oil reserves, knock yourself out. Just don't expect the majority of the country to buy it any longer. The cat is already out of the bag.
 
It is, until the MB cocks everything up.

Ah, don't be skeered, we still have more WMD than anyone in the world.
 
Whatever, but you lose credibility in pretending to be American.

Because a real American would not put morals before greed? Believe it or not, there are still a few of us that place morals above greed.
 
Feeling he can give Hosni instructions, for one. Now it seems.

What, you think he should have kissed Mubarak's butt instead. I am very proud that we now have a president that is finally standing up to Mubarak.
 
Last edited:
There seems to be a long running discussion-in-discussion about the reasons for the Iraq War.

It's main and only justification Congress and the UN approved was finding WMDs.

Nation rebuilding, getting Saddam, looking for al qaeda, and the popular surge were just feeble attempts to justify keeping our army there. Leaving (cutting and running) without a victory of some kind was political suicide, remember!!

ricksfolly
 
There seems to be a long running discussion-in-discussion about the reasons for the Iraq War.
It's main justification, and Casus belli was Saddam having WMD.
A credible but, as it turned out, wrong one.

But probably the main accusation against Bush (and the neocons) was that they were trying to export/"impose democracy".
And that WAS one of the objectives.

The main public justification was WMD. Humanitarian intervention was also a justification, one that passes Just War Theory. Bush's speech to the UN on Sept 12, 2002 lays it all out.

The PRIMARY objective was to spread Democracy, first in Iraq and then let that example spread through the Middle East. If that were not the PRIMARY objective, we would never have invaded.

The point I originally made in this thread is that the Iraqi model of Democracy, with all of its faults and fragility, is serving as an example in the Middle East today.

So Credit as well as blame must be given by war opponents for any success in Iraq and at least to some degree, the further spread of democracy, however clumsily.

Perhaps this is what is so irritating about Catawba, aside from his incorrectly assigning blame. He is 100% negative about it and doesn't budge. He is just anti-Iraq war at any cost and doesn't see anything positive. All events in human history have both good and bad consequences to them. This underlies the concept of creative destruction. He will have none of that.

Yes, it was at horrendous cost to us in Lives and Treasure.

Yes, it was steep, mainly because it lasted so long.
 
It's main and only justification Congress and the UN approved was finding WMDs.

Nation rebuilding, getting Saddam, looking for al qaeda, and the popular surge were just feeble attempts to justify keeping our army there. Leaving (cutting and running) without a victory of some kind was political suicide, remember!!

ricksfolly
It's immediate justification (UN, etc) was WMD. Without which war was less a pressing issue.

BUT, it's Objectives and motives were clearly beyond WMD.

Accusations against Cons/Neocons/Bush were many. (Grudge, Oil, Crusade, etc)
Spreading/"imposing democracy" is indeed the Main credo of neocons who were widely blamed for the War and influencing Bush.
So people who used that line of attack should acknowledge That was an objective.. now too.
 
Last edited:
The main public justification was WMD. Humanitarian intervention was also a justification, one that passes Just War Theory. Bush's speech to the UN on Sept 12, 2002 lays it all out. The PRIMARY objective was to spread Democracy, first in Iraq and then let that example spread through the Middle East. If that were not the PRIMARY objective, we would never have invaded. The point I originally made in this thread is that the Iraqi model of Democracy, with all of its faults and fragility, is serving as an example in the Middle East today.

Perhaps this is what is so irritating about Catawba, aside from his incorrectly assigning blame. He is 100% negative about it and doesn't budge. He is just anti-Iraq war at any cost and doesn't see anything positive. All events in human history have both good and bad consequences to them. This underlies the concept of creative destruction. He will have none of that.


You can try to spin the war however you like but the fact is the American people were misled about our reasons for invading Iraq. Without the fear mongering, the American public would have never agreed to an invasion and indefinite occupation of Iraq. And despite your pretend visions of Iraq being a beacon of Democracy in the Middle East, our invasion and occupation of Iraq was the biggest recruiting tool that al Qaeda had in its arsenal.
 
What, you think he should have kissed Mubarak's butt instead. I am very proud that we now have a president that is finally standing up to Mubarak.

Yeah, now we have a prez that is openly supporting the terrorists.
 
What, you think he should have kissed Mubarak's butt instead. I am very proud that we now have a president that is finally standing up to Mubarak.


Stand up to him?

Mubarak is ignoring poor Obama!

Does anyone really care what BHO says anymore? Do you still believe him?
 
The Muslim Brotherhood.

Sung to the tune of "Lions, tigers, and Bears." ~

Doctors, lawyers, and bankers, oh my! Doctors, lawyers, and bankers, oh my!
 
Saudi Arabia has threatened to prop up President Mubarak if the White House tries to force a swift change of regime in Egypt. In a testy personal telephone call on January 29, King Abdullah told President Obama not to humiliate Mr Mubarak and warned that he would step in to bankroll Egypt if the US withdrew its aid programme, worth $1.5 billion annually. America’s closest ally in the Gulf made clear that the Egyptian President must be allowed to stay on to oversee the transition towards peaceful democracy and then leave with dignity. “Mubarak and King Abdullah are not just allies, they are close friends, and the King is not about to see his friend cast aside and humiliated,” a senior source in the Saudi capital told The Times. Two sources confirmed details of the King’s call, made four days after the people of Egypt took to the streets.

The Times | UK News, World News and Opinion

well, one thing you can say about obama---he's obedient

embarassed yet?
 
Seven whole years, eh? You think America put democracy into place in seven years?

It takes decades to put in place what we have, and there's still only about a 10 percent chance it will take root. (in that part of the world, probably 1 percent or less of a chance)

It was harder to get around in the late 1700's, but I imagine we managed to get the congress in one room and hammer out how to open the place for business fairly quickly. The Iraqi congress is so divided, half of the elected officials have refused to even step into the room with the other half. There is not only a lack of desire to actually, you know, govern the country, there's organized obstructionism to keep governing the country from even happening. That's not on the US; it's on the Iraqis. And it's something that the US can't fix no matter how long we stay there.
 
What???? There are 3 main factions in Iraq. Saddam, though a SOB, managed to keep the 3 factions from warring with one another. We removed the stabilizing factor and the 3 warring factions picked up where they left off.

The fact that we disbanded both Iraq's military and police force resulted in a chaos of looting, faction-related murders by the 100's, and there was nobody left to establish order. The US sure as hell couldn't do it. The criminal element took over as soon as the occupation began, and literally sacked what was left of their country while our esteemed Pentagon officials scratched their collective heads and said, "Wow, didn't see that coming." Really? Didn't see riots in the streets as a result of disbanding all military and law enforcement in the country?

And we actually PAY these boobs to make military decisions and plan wars?? Arghhhhhhh
 
Back
Top Bottom