Supporting our troops.

[Bengl Von Shadowstein]

Alright, Im Tired of all these people doing whatever it takes to yank out troops out of the Middle East. Oh, Sure, Lets Bring our Troops home, Lets let all hell break loose in the Middle East, Lets let them Destroy each Other!

[MightySage]

well, we're kinda in the middle of someone else's civil war...whatever we do, it seems pretty obvious that we've already lost.

[SquirrelBoy]

Why are we fighting there battle?

[Bengl Von Shadowstein]

Because America Can't Mind their Own Business. But now that we're there, we have to finish the Job.

[SquirrelBoy]

Why can't we just go Heroshima on them?

[Arnold]

We can't go Hiroshima because there is still oil to be stolen.

[SquirrelBoy]

Ohhhh. So after we take the oil, we go heroshima on their asses.

[Bengl Von Shadowstein]

And then the UN will probably get pissed at us.

[PacoJoe]

I agree that we definately have to stay the course, but I disagree with people saying that the war was fought over oil. The country was just attacked by a middle eastern terrorist group and intelligence said that Saddam, clearly an anti-American middle eastern leader, had WMD's that could potentially be used against America, and the best course of action given the information that people had at the time was to invade and get Saddam the fuck out of there. Not to mention the benefits it had for the Iraqi people not having some dipshit who gasses entire towns of his own people just because they have different religious beliefs than him and tortures and kills people who disagreed with him. And I highly, highly doubt that nukes will ever be used in the middle east unless some dipshit like the guy running Iran decides to use them first.

[Arnold]

pacojoe said:

Not to mention the benefits it had for the Iraqi people not having some dipshit who gasses entire towns of his own people just because they have different religious beliefs than him and tortures and kills people who disagreed with him.

I'm sure if you asked anyone in Iraq they'd say they would rather have Saddam back in power rather than being an occupied country with a puppet government which is having troubles keeping together the shambles that is Iraq today. This has lead me to conclude that this war had nothing to do with WMDs and "liberating the Iraqi people," but was rather a key economic investment.

That was the whole point of the first Gulf War, which brings up a whole new question: Why didn't the US government choose to remove Saddam from power when they had the opportunity in 1991, if he was truly the evil dictator he's been labelled as?

I'm sorry for putting you on the spot like that, but I feel strongly about this.

[Bengl Von Shadowstein]

Actually, the Avarage Iraqi wants the US there, they feel safer. If our troops left right now, All hell would break loose.

[Arnold]

I was just saying that the average Iraqi probably felt safer when Saddam was in power rather than now, but I'm basing my assumption on what we're being shown in the media so who even knows... unless you are in Iraq.

[PacoJoe]

I think the average Iraqi appreciates the fact that they no longer have to worry about being arrested and tortured for basically no reason like they had to under saddam. But I do see what you're getting at with all the suicide bombings and everything, but you can't really blame that on the U.S. because we're just there trying to stop all that from going on so the new Iraqi government can function on its own safely. If all the violence in Iraq stopped tomorrow, the U.S. would pull out because there would be no reason to stay. And in the Gulf War, the U.S. got involved because Iraq invaded Kuwait, I don't know for sure but I'm guessing Kuwait was friendly with the U.S. and gave us oil and whatnot, otherwise the U.S. probably wouldn't have been involved. But moving along, the sole purpose of the U.S. involvement in the Gulf War was to keep Kuwait its own nation and not part of Iraq, so once the Iraqi invasion was repelled, there was no reason for further hostilities at the time. That's my understanding of it anyway.

[PacoJoe]

And don't worry about putting me on the spot, this is a debate forum thingy, so we have to support our ideas.

[WarmrootBeer]

squirrelboy said:

Why can't we just go Heroshima on them?

We can't do that because there will be huge loads of innoceont people killed, while only a certain handfull of them were guilty (maybe two handfulls).