She had the honour and privilege to die for our freedom

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Again you respond as though every part of most post was to you and you alone!

Can you not differentiate?

I responded to you yet was talking about the forum as a whole. There are MANY simply Anti-anything here.

So you are anti-Iraq what? Period? Or just intervention?

Intervention we can agree on.... Probably Bush too.

I was against the reasons for the invasion, mainly because I didn't believe they had WMDs or links to Al-Qaeda. Yes removing Saddam is a positive but the administration needs to own up for the mistakes they've made. Now that they're I'm only hoping they succeed so that the massive loss of human life both American and Iraqi are worth it.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I was against the reasons for the invasion, mainly because I didn't believe they had WMDs or links to Al-Qaeda. Yes removing Saddam is a positive but the administration needs to own up for the mistakes they've made. Now that they're I'm only hoping they succeed so that the massive loss of human life both American and Iraqi are worth it.

And how exactly should they own up to it? Withdraw?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Azure

And how exactly should they own up to it? Withdraw?

Read a few posts above you, champ.

Originally Posted by rubecube

Clearly you've not looked into my posts. I've said that the US clearly can't withdraw now. The country is not stable enough.

[Flashpoint]

Afghanistan is without a doubt a noble cause.

Yes the fight doesn't immediately affect our Nitendo playing time or would her lack of fighting increase it. But some of us believe it is our duty to help those, without our nintendo playing time, to have such time.

This woman stuck her nose in a firefight. Not many here can say the same. There are a few less Taliban now and everyone of them fascist dead makes this world a better place.

Oh, I do equate those that allow a 2 children die in appartment because they are too lazy to pick up a phone with those that happily stand by and see a whole country get raped.

An aside for those peacniks at all cost: Afghanistan is UN and NATO lead.

I took out all the meaningless parts of your post to stick to the matter at hand. Hope you don't mind.

Sounds like your position is that we are trying to export Western culture to other parts of the world (or as you put it - "Nintendo time"). Nothing wrong with wanting to see the spread of democracy. Perhaps doing it at the end of an M-16 isn't the best idea though. There seems to be an arrogance that the democratic - capitalisim model of the United States is the best format for the entire world. I would argue that the British colonial attitudes of the 19th century were reflective of this "our way is the best way" attitude as well.

The reality is that people aren't going to support a method of government until it develops from within. How would the United States have developed if the French had kicked out the British in the 1770's and attempted to set up a government? The plan is flawed.

The death of Captain Goddard is a tragedy, no doubt. It would be lovely to fight a war without any casualties. But why blow it out of proportion? She was killed in the line of duty while doing her job. Was it worth it?

Afghanistan was a terrorist hotspot. They got smashed. Pakistan is a terrorist hotspot. Should we go in there too? Or not, because their government is "friendly" to the US - even though a predominance of their population isn't? The Taliban were bad people. No doubt there. So is Kim Jong Il. Should we take North Korea too? What about Iran? They claim the Holocaust didn't happen, and that Israel should be wiped from the face of the earth.

Bottom line? There are a LOT of bad people out there. Is Canada in the buisness of nation building? The US clearly is. They are doing a bad job of it due to poor planning, but clearly they have identified potential foreign threats and attempted to deal with them. If nothing else, US foreign policy is pragmatic. I have a lot of respect for the Canadian military for going into Afghanistan. It was important to stand beside our American brothers after 9/11 (don't kid yourself, the US is our best friend in the world). The war was just. I gained even more respect for our government for NOT going into Iraq - mainly because it had nothing to do with responding to 9/11.

Was Afghanistan a just war? Sure. The terrorists trained and were funded from there. There was no reason to go in otherwise. Without 9/11, the Taliban would still be in power. But don't kid yourself. Afghanistan wasn't about "bringing freedom" to anyone. It was retribution for a horrendous attack. So don't try to color it any other way. Our freedom had nothing to do with it.

Is Goddard a hero? Sure. To the same extent the victims of flight 92 are heroes. She got killed by terrorists, while fighting terrorists. Her family can be proud of that. Perhaps even moreso than the families of Canadian soldiers killed by friendly fire. Are they heroes too? They were serving their country - maybe because they couldn't find a job, or afford college, or maybe out of a sense of duty - who knows? I guess everyone killed in service to their country is a hero. Firemen and policemen too. They protect society and risk their lives to do it. I guess that is the qualifier.

But I am guessing that between being called a hero and having Jennifer still around, her family would pick the latter.

So lets not call her death a privilege.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

Her along with every other member of our armed forces and their families deserve our support regardless if you agree if we should be there or nor. They are jsut doing their jobs.

I support them 100%. I am saddened, as I said, by her and all the other deaths over there. It was her choice to be in the army, but it was not her choice to be deployed in a relatively pointless war.

And by the way, I feel forcing democracy upon anyone is tantamount to fascism itself. Forcing democracy just because we think it is the best system is no different than making people believe in God just because we do and we think it is the best way of going about life.

Being able to vote is not what separates our government from their's, anyway. It is accountability. A forced democratic state is going to be no more accountable to the people than a fascist one, due to corruption.

[jolinar of malkshor]

I dont think it is so pointless to the millions of Afganies that were liberated from Taliban rule.

[MarchHare]

She had the honour and privilege to die for our freedom

A hero returns.......

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/natio...d-trenton.html


SO unfortunate that there are so few like her.

My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori.

-----

One of my oldest childhood buddies is serving in Afghanistan where he had to see several of his friends and comrades sent him draped in Canadian flags. So while you armchair generals and politicians go on about how much of a hero Capt. Goddard was and how noble the cause of fighting in Afghanistan is, I'll keep in mind the words of my friend -- a man who is actually there -- that he emailed me after the death of Pte. Woodfield last November: "It's not worth it to die in this ****-hole country."

[jolinar of malkshor]

Your friend is certainly entitled to his opinion. I probably would feel the same way if I where there trying to help people and all you get back is bullets aimed and fired toward me.

I can also understand how he may feel about all us "armchair generals" who are debating should we be there, should we not, is it right, is it wrong. But we are also entitled to our opinion and I am sure there are many other soldiars that think being over there is a good think. And the only evidence I have for that are the interviews you see on tv about how the soldiars are making changes. And yes I know they all dont feel that way.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by evman150

And by the way, I feel forcing democracy upon anyone is tantamount to fascism itself. Forcing democracy just because we think it is the best system is no different than making people believe in God just because we do and we think it is the best way of going about life.

Being able to vote is not what separates our government from their's, anyway. It is accountability. A forced democratic state is going to be no more accountable to the people than a fascist one, due to corruption.

And yet your ideal world "Evmanistan" has this?

"It is difficult to tell where the omnipresent, corrupt, liberal, socially-minded government stops and the rest of society begins...."

You don't want to force democracy, and don't like corruption... and yet your ideal world has both?

[evman150]

Originally Posted by calculoso

And yet your ideal world "Evmanistan" has this?

"It is difficult to tell where the omnipresent, corrupt, liberal, socially-minded government stops and the rest of society begins...."

You don't want to force democracy, and don't like corruption... and yet your ideal world has both?

I didn't put that in, it was merely a consequence of the flawed game's response to the answers to the questions posed.

It should read:

"The strong, just government is accountable to the people and resides over the myriad social programs that ensure no Evmanistanian is left behind."

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I was against the reasons for the invasion, mainly because I didn't believe they had WMDs or links to Al-Qaeda. .

So you had more intelligence than every country in the world did? Or you just thought you did?

Because, as is (and has) been proven over and over again on this and a million other websites and elsewhere, there is no reason to think a Hussein led Iraq DIDNT have WMD's.

He did have them....no question. Why? Because he had used them before! Then he kicks out the one group of people TRYING to prove he didnt have them any longer.

So YOU believe the murderous regime in Iraq was telling the truth (all of a sudden and for the first time in their existance) over UN, US, Australian, British and 57 other countries intelligence observations?

You should be the president of the world.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by evman150

I didn't put that in, it was merely a consequence of the flawed game's response to the answers to the questions posed.

It should read:

"The strong, just government is accountable to the people and resides over the myriad social programs that ensure no Evmanistanian is left behind."

Except it doesn't work that way.......

[Azure]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I was against the reasons for the invasion, mainly because I didn't believe they had WMDs or links to Al-Qaeda. Yes removing Saddam is a positive but the administration needs to own up for the mistakes they've made. Now that they're I'm only hoping they succeed so that the massive loss of human life both American and Iraqi are worth it.

Or you didn't agree with it because you can't stand Bush, like many others, then when the US didn't find any WMD, you used that as your arguement.

Just a theory.....

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Azure

Or you didn't agree with it because you can't stand Bush, like many others, then when the US didn't find any WMD, you used that as your arguement.

Just a theory.....

Personally I was wishy-washy on the whole issue of whether or not their were WMDs, I wasn't completely sure whether or not the information was true.

I do remember laughing at the "smoking gun" Colin Powell presented to the UN, saying it looked like WMDs.. It looked like a picture of the Waco compound or something.

But the Al-Queada argument was trash from the moment it was set forth, it was just another attempt/excuse to justify the war.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Personally I was wishy-washy on the whole issue of whether or not their were WMDs, I wasn't completely sure whether or not the information was true.

I do remember laughing at the "smoking gun" Colin Powell presented to the UN, saying it looked like WMDs.. It looked like a picture of the Waco compound or something.

But the Al-Queada argument was trash from the moment it was set forth, it was just another attempt/excuse to justify the war.

And how exactly would you know that, at the time of the intial invasion? I wasn't aware of the US passing on its intelligence to Canadian citizens who can't stand their government.

[Resolute 14]

Well, there was the fact that Osama Bin-Laden was encouraging the Iraqi people to fight Saddam at the same time they fought the Americans. Iraq under Saddam was a secular nation, this conflicted with Al-Qaeda's world views. That link was complete bunk from day one.

The WMD angle was sketchy, but like Tranny said, he had used them before. The problem, however, is that despite being the best equipped army in the world with one of the most funded intelligence committies, the United States has not found any evidence of WMDs in Iraq. It is a major embarrassment for Bush/Blair, and only gives people like Evman the ammo they need to make the argument. Frankly, it is an argument I am also willing to make: The war on Iraq was completely unjustified as the reasons given for the invasion were fabricated.

As far as calling the death of this soldier meaningless, Evman may ultimately be right, however he is is not right at this moment. Had we voted to pull out of Afghanistan last week, then he would have been compeltely correct, as she, and all before her, would have died for nothing. We are in Afghanistan. We have a responsibility to ensure that we do not repeat the mistakes of the past. The west pulled out of Afghanistan once before, which led to a power vaccuum, a civil war, millions dead and the rest subjected to brutally oppressive rule.

If we leave without ensuring that Afhanistan is stable, then yes, Captain Goddard will have died for nothing.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by Azure

And how exactly would you know that, at the time of the intial invasion? I wasn't aware of the US passing on its intelligence to Canadian citizens who can't stand their government.

Cool down Azure, I don't hate the "American Government".

Actually the sheer lack of evidence was one of the main reasons why this was bunk from the beginning. Osama has more ties with Saudi Arabia on than with Iraq.

At least with Iraq you have "curveball" feeding a pack of lies to the US, but with this information linking Osama and Saddam? There was none and I haven't seen any information to this day to justify it, even false information.

With the way they organized the campaign to sway the opinion of the American people, you think they would have at least tried to provide some evidence other than Zarquai was in the same country as Osama.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Cool down Azure, I don't hate the "American Government".

Actually the sheer lack of evidence was one of the main reasons why this was bunk from the beginning. Osama has more ties with Saudi Arabia on than with Iraq.

At least with Iraq you have "curveball" feeding a pack of lies to the US, but with this information linking Osama and Saddam? There was none and I haven't seen any information to this day to justify it, even false information.

With the way they organized the campaign to sway the opinion of the American people, you think they would have at least tried to provide some evidence other than Zarquai was in the same country as Osama.

Did I ever say you hated them? Or did I say you can't stand them?

But its nice to see that the American intelligence community is passing you the full briefing on Saddam, the WMD and the link to Al Queda. From then you made the decision not to support the war.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by transplant99

So you had more intelligence than every country in the world did? Or you just thought you did?

Because, as is (and has) been proven over and over again on this and a million other websites and elsewhere, there is no reason to think a Hussein led Iraq DIDNT have WMD's.

He did have them....no question. Why? Because he had used them before! Then he kicks out the one group of people TRYING to prove he didnt have them any longer.

So YOU believe the murderous regime in Iraq was telling the truth (all of a sudden and for the first time in their existance) over UN, US, Australian, British and 57 other countries intelligence observations?

You should be the president of the world.

Yes I believed it when the weapons inspectors couldn't find anything. They weren't kicked out right away either. The amount of stuff the Bush people were putting out made it look like they wanted to go to war and were determined to find a reason. That and the administration was known to have some credibility issues before.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Azure

Or you didn't agree with it because you can't stand Bush, like many others, then when the US didn't find any WMD, you used that as your arguement.

Just a theory.....

Actually I liked Bush before the war. I liked how he took action against Afghanistan as quick as he could after 9/11. So did quite a few Americans. I still like him but I don't think he's a good president. Apparently 70% of America agrees with me.