Protect Our Freedom.

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
BrewCityBuck

BrewCityBuck

The guy with 17,000 Posts.
Joined
Jan 28, 2006
Messages
17,503
Likes
0
Points
36
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 18 2007, 12:28 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>to protect our freedom</div> Alright Pacersfan, I made a new thread, let's discuss.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 18 2007, 12:45 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>American soldiers are generally regarded as freedom protectors, you see it everywhere</div> You said the soliders in Iraq (that have died, in the previous thread) are protecting our freedom.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 18 2007, 01:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>They are, they are protecting us from terrorists, Al Queda terrorists to be specifiic</div>Was al-qaeda in Iraq before the U.S. got there?
 
right, because Al Qaeda is so likely to take over the US and make us lose out freedom
rolleyes.gif
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 18 2007, 12:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>They are, they are protecting us from terrorists, Al Queda terrorists to be specifiic</div> Al-Qaeda couldn't even take over a small country if they wanted to. Your making Al-Qaeda out to be bigger than they are.
 
I'm not saying they could take over the USA, but what can they do? Well just look at the world trade centers. Imagine if they got the White House.................They have a lot of power. And we origonally went ot Iraq to get Bin Ladin and a few other guys who have enough power to damage a country even as strong and big as ours
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 18 2007, 11:03 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm not saying they could take over the USA, but what can they do? Well just look at the world trade centers. Imagine if they got the White House.................They have a lot of power. And we origonally went ot Iraq to get Bin Ladin and a few other guys who have enough power to damage a country even as strong and big as ours</div>no, we went to afghanistan to do that, we went to Iraq to fight a proxy revenge war.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 18 2007, 01:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm not saying they could take over the USA, but what can they do? Well just look at the world trade centers. Imagine if they got the White House.................They have a lot of power. And we origonally went ot Iraq to get Bin Ladin and a few other guys who have enough power to damage a country even as strong and big as ours</div> Al-Qaeda does not have the power to take our freedom away. Usama Bin Laden was not in Iraq and we didn't go there because of him....I think it's pathetic that a US citizen is so ignorant of whats going on....yikes.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The`Dream @ Jun 18 2007, 01:08 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This thread needs more Braveheart.</div> PFF needs a Barry Bonds sized injection of common sense.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (tHe_pEsTiLeNcE @ Jun 18 2007, 01:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>no, we went to afghanistan to do that, we went to Iraq to fight a proxy revenge war.</div>Didn't we go into Iraq because we thought they had WMD?? Faulty intelligence, yes, but they had to act to keep these weapons out of the hands of Al Qaeda who said in the past that they would use a nuclear bomb immediately on the U.S. if they obtained one. Yes, you could almost say it was a proxy war, and I don't agree with how things are now, but their initial involvement wasn't as malicious as you make it sound.
 
We are in Iraq for basically the same reasons we were in Korea and Vietman, which is to turn their government into what we want their government to be so it won't be a threat to us, which is in a way protecting our freedeom. Should we be over there? I don't think so. Will we be successul? I don't think so, just like we weren't in Vietman or Korea. I don't agree with us being over there, and most soldiers don't want to be over there, but they are obligated to be.
 
Lets do the math PFF 7000 known Al-Qaeda members divide that by 50 = 140 ok so what if they all attack one state lets say indiana then Indiana's population = 6,313,520 al-qaeda = 7000so every al qaeda member would have to kill 901 people.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (noballer07 @ Jun 18 2007, 01:09 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Didn't we go into Iraq because we thought they had WMD?? Faulty intelligence, yes, but they had to act to keep these weapons out of the hands of Al Qaeda who said in the past that they would use a nuclear bomb immediately on the U.S. if they obtained one.</div> Keep those weapons out of the hands of Al-Qaeda? Thats a stretch, their was no evidence that Saddam was selling those weapons. Not to mention he had little contact with Al-Qaeda...not to mention he had little incentive to sell them. Al-Qaeda obtaining a nuclear bomb and setting it off correctly....almost impossible at this point. Movies and TV shows like 24 make everyone think that it's a bigger possibility than it is.
 
^that's some of what I'm sayingWe're fighting one war now, right? Why does it matter where exactly I'm speaking of? I'm speaking about terrorists that are located between the two countries, and I'm saying that those terrorists are evil and powerful enought to send our country into a flux
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 18 2007, 01:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>^that's some of what I'm sayingWe're fighting one war now, right? Why does it matter where exactly I'm speaking of? I'm speaking about terrorists that are located between the two countries, and I'm saying that those terrorists are evil and powerful enought to send our country into a flux</div> Located between the two countries, what do you mean by that?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (GrizzFanTaylor @ Jun 18 2007, 02:11 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>We are in Iraq for basically the same reasons we were in Korea and Vietman, which is to turn their government into what we want their government to be so it won't be a threat to us, which is in a way protecting our freedeom. Should we be over there? I don't think so. Will we be successul? I don't think so, just like we weren't in Vietman or Korea. I don't agree with us being over there, and most soldiers don't want to be over there, but they are obligated to be.</div>How could Iraq have ever been more a threat than it is right now? National Intelligence Estimates from virtually every available source claims our involvement in Iraq is creating terrorists.U.S. is involved for at least two reasons:-To establish a base that'll get troops out of Saudi Arabia, watch Iran more closely, and blanket U.S. interests (oil).-To enable the military industrial complex to make piles of money beyond imagination. Haliburton won the war in Iraq.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 18 2007, 01:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I mean in the two countries</div> You are completely overrating Al-Qaeda's power.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>-To enable the military industrial complex to make piles of money beyond imagination. Haliburton won the war in Iraq.</div>Good point. Anybody remember that we were in a recession/downturn before the war, and things sped up once things escalated overseas? That's not saying much for how the economy is now though.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (gentile @ Jun 18 2007, 01:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>How could Iraq have ever been more a threat than it is right now? National Intelligence Estimates from virtually every available source claims our involvement in Iraq is creating terrorists.</div>Which is why I think we shouldn't be over there. We're making a bigger mess. Just like in Korea and Vietnam.
 
BCB is there a reason you call him Usama bin laden? Instead of Osama? You have done it more then a dozen times. I haven't said anything, just curious why you don't spell it right. I understand it may be able to be spelled both ways possibly as I'm not used to the language..but you're the only person I've ever seen spell it that way..and don't see why somebody would when everybody else spells it the other way.
 
The ONLY reasons we went to Iraq, and are currently still in Iraq is for money (oil money), and to finish off a vendetta that the old Bush presidency had.
 
Anyway, guys, I'm not the best person to be arguing with over this subjectBut I do beleive that the terrorists we were/are fighting would be able to destruct our country in some big waysAnd Pestilence, look at the World trade towers, how many people did two terrorist airplane pilots kill?
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Combs @ Jun 18 2007, 01:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>BCB is there a reason you call him Usama bin laden? Instead of Osama? You have done it more then a dozen times. I haven't said anything, just curious why you don't spell it right.</div> His name translates different ways. You can call him 'Osama' or 'Usama'....Our intelligence services and professionals usually call him 'Usama', and for short 'UBL"http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pacers fan forever @ Jun 18 2007, 01:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>^that's some of what I'm sayingWe're fighting one war now, right? Why does it matter where exactly I'm speaking of? I'm speaking about terrorists that are located between the two countries, and I'm saying that those terrorists are evil and powerful enought to send our country into a flux</div>PFF, while we are trying to stop the spread of terrorism, Gentile is correct in that us being there is actually causing more terrorist factions to be formed in that country. With Saddam in power there was atleast some control over the country. Now it's all just complete madness, with the sectarian violence between the Sunni's and Shiites. The terrorist networks in Iraq are gaining more and more power since Saddam was taken out of control, and it is turning into pretty much civil warfare. After Saddam was taken out of power, an election was held to get Iraqi leaders into place. The problem was, that at the time lots of Sunni's in lots of provinces decided they was not going to vote. So naturally, the government is mostly Shiite ran, and to go along with that the Shiites are what makes up most of the Iraqi National Police(INP), and Iraqi National Army(INA.) When Saddam was in charge, the Sunni's had the most power and constantly was messing with the Shiites. Now with the Shiites mostly in control, the Police and Army keep on arresting people just because they are Sunni's, and commiting lots of pretty much war crimes on the Sunni's. So naturally the Sunni's feel they have no protection from the Iraqi government, and since the U.S. is backing the Iraqi government and trying to make it work they are not turning to us. So in turn lots of the Sunni's are turning to the terrorist organizations in Iraq, for protection, effectively becoming terrorists which is understandable on the Sunni's part, but is causing more sectarian warfare in Iraq. So right now, the U.S. military's biggest concern is stopping the Army and Police from doing this to the Sunni's, so they will turn to us for their help. It's really not working well though, and major warfare is still going on in this country. So really, the War hasn't progessed much at all for us, it may have even took a step back for us.
 
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (BFR @ Jun 18 2007, 02:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Lets do the math PFF 7000 known Al-Qaeda members divide that by 50 = 140 ok so what if they all attack one state lets say indiana then Indiana's population = 6,313,520 al-qaeda = 7000so every al qaeda member would have to kill 901 people.</div>That is not whats important. Al-Queda doesn't attack as a whole as seen by 911, they send bombs,hijack airplanes,etc. I dont agree with this war but what you said is off base. This war was a prevent- war. In the age we live in with nukes you have to be extra cautious, would you prefer a nuclear holacaust or a war in iraq? Im not saying thats what it would have come to but every day there is always a possibility. Whoever invented nuclear bombs should have been murdered. He may have sent the world to hell that day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top