bob
02-28-2006, 07:50 AM
So, I'm not one to place bets or anything, but I think Iraq is going to be having a Civil War shrotly. Anyone agree, disagree, don't care?

terrasin
02-28-2006, 10:30 AM
It's not having one now? Or for the past 50 years?

CJ

Isildur9473
02-28-2006, 10:35 AM
So, I'm not one to place bets or anything, but I think Iraq is going to be having a Civil War shrotly. Anyone agree, disagree, don't care?

People in those countries keep killing each other, why should we care again...? They contribute nothing to the world economy. Just as long as they don't interfere with the US..

bob
02-28-2006, 11:12 AM
Just as long as they don't interfere with the US..

Two groups of 'extremists' attempting to run 2 cars full of explosives into an oil refinery has no effect on the US, of course. (Yes I know that was in Saudi Arabia).

skilltroks
02-28-2006, 11:15 AM
Alot of countries have been having something like a civil war for different reasons. But you never hear about it.
I care about what happens in the world. 1) Sooner or later it will effect USA. you say Iraq contributes nothing now...but later..2) They are our neighbors. We should care.

bob
02-28-2006, 11:17 AM
2) There are neighbors. We should care.

What? Explain please.

skilltroks
02-28-2006, 11:31 AM
*they are our neighbors, we should care.
Bibically, we are on this earth to be a body of Christ [no matter what religion you have beliefs in it doesn't matter...because I'm sure there is some god in Buddhism that says they are a body].

Isildur9473
02-28-2006, 02:46 PM
Two groups of 'extremists' attempting to run 2 cars full of explosives into an oil refinery has no effect on the US, of course. (Yes I know that was in Saudi Arabia).

Ok, so defend the oil.

*they are our neighbors, we should care.
Bibically, we are on this earth to be a body of Christ [no matter what religion you have beliefs in it doesn't matter...because I'm sure there is some god in Buddhism that says they are a body].

It's the duty of the government to remain free of religion, this country needs to look out for its own best interests.

bob
02-28-2006, 03:07 PM
Ok, so defend the oil.

That's all the middle east is, without oil they're just a bunch of people in the middle of a desert.

Isildur9473
02-28-2006, 03:13 PM
That's all the middle east is, without oil they're just a bunch of people in the middle of a desert.

I see it this way, station people around what matters, and nothing else.

riz
02-28-2006, 05:11 PM
Well, it seems that Bush is denying that such a thing is starting to happen. Woot.

bob
03-01-2006, 08:52 AM
Well, it seems that Bush is denying that such a thing is starting to happen. Woot.

He's not that stupid, its easy to see they enjoy killing each other.

riz
03-01-2006, 08:58 AM
You want proof? Here it is:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060228/ts_nm/iraq_usa_bush_dc_2

Check out his exact words.

TheFireBreathes
03-01-2006, 10:19 AM
I love how Bush can be brought up in every thread.

TheFireBreathes
03-01-2006, 10:29 AM
Well, it seems that Bush is denying that such a thing is starting to happen. Woot.

No, he is simply giving them a choice in "chaos or unity"



He said he had spoken to leaders of all Iraqi sects and "I heard loud and clear that they understand that they're going to choose unification, and we're going to help them do so."

[/QUOTE] Administration officials have accused Sunni-led insurgents, including al Qaeda operatives, of trying to foment civil war in Iraq. In Washington, a U.S. military intelligence chief called the situation "very tenuous" but not yet civil war.[QUOTE]

riz
03-01-2006, 11:10 AM
Are you that na´ve to think his name wouldn't be brought up at all, since he is the one who spearheaded the plan to invade Iraq? It's a pretty common thing to hear his name whenever something current about Iraq happens.

Also, if you are trying to disagree with my statement, sure he's pushing for unity instead of chaos (who wouldn't!), but he did state this: "I don't buy your premise that there's going to be a civil war." If he's so confident that there isn't going to be a civil war, what is this special thing he is doing to do to prevent Iraqis from continuing to fight each other? Whatever he has been trying to do at the present time does not seem to be working very well.

bob
03-01-2006, 01:46 PM
what is this special thing he is doing to do to prevent Iraqis from continuing to fight each other?

We should just let them kill each other, they seem to enjoy it.

TheFireBreathes
03-01-2006, 02:12 PM
Are you that na´ve to think his name wouldn't be brought up at all, since he is the one who spearheaded the plan to invade Iraq? It's a pretty common thing to hear his name whenever something current about Iraq happens.

It wasnt just Bush who chose to go along to Iraq, there were more people involved. Heck, even Clinton is pro-Iraq.

Also, if you are trying to disagree with my statement, sure he's pushing for unity instead of chaos (who wouldn't!), but he did state this: "I don't buy your premise that there's going to be a civil war." If he's so confident that there isn't going to be a civil war, what is this special thing he is doing to do to prevent Iraqis from continuing to fight each other? Whatever he has been trying to do at the present time does not seem to be working very well.

Really? I think were doing quiet dandy job in Iraq.

asparagus
03-02-2006, 05:51 AM
It wasnt just Bush who chose to go along to Iraq, there were more people involved. Heck, even Clinton is pro-Iraq.For the last time, Clinton isn't President. Look, no one on here has EVER talked postively about Hillary, so its not fair that everytime someone complains about your president, you simply respond by saying something about Hillary. It's non-sequitor and not a rational argument.

If your entire argument to back Bush is that he is no better than Hillary, then aren't you just admitting something about Bush?

asparagus
03-02-2006, 06:19 AM
We should just let them kill each other, they seem to enjoy it.Bob, we are the ones that created the power vacuume that enabled the possibility of a Civil War. This is just one more example of the Bush administration ignoring the advice of those who had cautions against the war. I vividly remember shortly after the war began talking to someone and mentioning to them that it would be unlikely for us to get out of Iraq without sparking a Civil War and that the Bush administration had turned a blind eye to this concern.

In some sense, it seems we have elected the republican version of Bill Clinton into office. Bush is conveniently forgetful, sly, and otherwise hypocritical and unethical. I remember him campaigning in 2000 on a platform of integrity (a platform that wasn't duplicated in 2004, interestingly), and now I wonder where that integrity has gone since he seems to be pulling so many Clintonish moves.

Here's a video of his latest one: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content//video/2006/03/01/VI2006030101864.html
And here's the article:http://www.suntimes.com/output/hurricane/cst-nws-kat021.html

riz
03-02-2006, 07:57 AM
I think were doing quiet dandy job in Iraq.

Why do I even bother?

bob
03-02-2006, 11:54 AM
Bob, we are the ones that created the power vacuume that enabled the possibility of a Civil War.


That is crap, Britain is to blame for Iraq, they drew the borders for Iraq with the Kurds, Sunis, and Shiites all in the same country with a hope of them killing each other off. The only reason Sadaam had any control over Iraq is because he'd kill anyone who'd defy him (which he's on trial for).

disciple
03-02-2006, 12:59 PM
Why do I even bother?
Because someone had to come here and support that end of the discussion, and I'm no good at discussions like these, I always make a fool of myself.

asparagus
03-02-2006, 01:47 PM
That is crap, Britain is to blame for Iraq, they drew the borders for Iraq with the Kurds, Sunis, and Shiites all in the same country with a hope of them killing each other off.This whole thing is the fault of the British now? They drew the borders? That's what's causing all this? Why don't we just redraw the borders?

bob
03-02-2006, 02:06 PM
This whole thing is the fault of the British now?

Not now, it has been since World War I. Britain screwed everything up when they jiffed Hussein on the teritory they promised him for his "Arabia".

riz
03-02-2006, 02:15 PM
Since when has Hussein and World War I coincided?

TheFireBreathes
03-02-2006, 02:28 PM
For the last time, Clinton isn't President. Look, no one on here has EVER talked postively about Hillary, so its not fair that everytime someone complains about your president, you simply respond by saying something about Hillary. It's non-sequitor and not a rational argument.

If your entire argument to back Bush is that he is no better than Hillary, then aren't you just admitting something about Bush?

Sorry. I wasnt trying to come off that way. I was pointing out that there were more people involved in planning/going to war than just Bush. Even highly respected Democrats (who are traditionally against the war). That's all.

bob
03-02-2006, 04:28 PM
Since when has Hussein and World War I coincided?

Why do I even bother? ;) :P

I'm talking about


Sharif Hussein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharif_Hussein). He fought with the allies during World War I because he was promised all of the Arab land after the war, but he got jiffed by the British and French.