[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Originally Posted by sa1177

We don't bomb innocents...or at least we'd like to pretend that's the difference between us and them.

Our innocent didn't matter to them, so why should they matter to us?

[hoojacks]

Originally Posted by David_Ortiz

I don't understand.

Really. Do go on.

Just go ahead and bomb the **** out of it already (after pulling out our troops of course). If innocent Iraqis get killed, tough. Plenty of innocent Americans died in 9/11.

Hey, you were right! You don't understand. You have no ****ing idea what you're talking about. Congratulations.

Our innocent didn't matter to them, so why should they matter to us?

Who are "they" again?

[Stepping Razor]

Originally Posted by David_Ortiz

Our innocent didn't matter to them, so why should they matter to us?

Because we're better than bloodthirsty terrorists? Or most of us are, anyway.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Originally Posted by hoojacks

Hey, you were right! You don't understand. You have no ****ing idea what you're talking about. Congratulations.

hhhmmmm... how do you figure?

Originally Posted by hoojacks

Who are "they" again?

Iraqis, genius.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Originally Posted by Stepping Razor

Because we're better than bloodthirsty terrorists? Or most of us are, anyway.

Remember the pain and suffering on 9/11? If Iraqis can do that to our innocent people, why can't we do it to theirs?

Call me a bloodthirsty terrorist. I don't care. I live by the eye-for-an-eye policy.

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by MARIS61

Agreed.

So you'll join me in ending the war-for-profit on Iraq and concentrate on taking back America from dictator Bush so we can rebuild the democracy he has destroyed here at home?

That IS what you're saying isn't it, because there was certainly no movement by the people or even an expressed desire to unseat Saddam going on that we could be "helping". Iraqi's were quite content with him as their leader, or they were simply too cowardly to oppose him. Either scenario is a guarantee that we'd be in the nightmarish mess we're in right now.

Oh, dear. There are far too many bumper-sticker slogans in this post for me to possibly address them all. I'll just say that I disagree with pretty much the entirety of your post.

I'll also say I love the freedom we have in this country to say what we want and be able to disagree with those in power, despite the fact that we're evidentally run by a dictatorship. I've traveled to countries with actual dictatorships and in those countries unfortunately they don't have the same rights you just exercised.

Go Blazers!

[Stepping Razor]

Originally Posted by David_Ortiz

Remember the pain and suffering on 9/11? If Iraqis can do that to our innocent people, why can't we do it to theirs?

Call me a bloodthirsty terrorist. I don't care. I live by the eye-for-an-eye policy.

Iraqis didn't do a goddamn thing to our people on 9/11. Iraq had NOTHING THE **** TO DO WITH IT.

The ******* who did that to us has gotten away with it, scot-free, because we moved all our resources to Iraq, which, once again, had NOTHING THE **** TO DO WITH IT.

"An eye for an eye" may or may not be the best policy for every situation. But if you're going to go with it, at least make sure you're going after the right people's eyes.

The ignorance here is just appalling.

Stepping Razor

[Ed O]

Originally Posted by David_Ortiz

Remember the pain and suffering on 9/11? If Iraqis can do that to our innocent people, why can't we do it to theirs?

Call me a bloodthirsty terrorist. I don't care. I live by the eye-for-an-eye policy.

You're kidding, right?

I find it more likely that your post is satire than sincere.

Ed O.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Originally Posted by Stepping Razor

Iraqis didn't do a goddamn thing to our people on 9/11. Iraq had NOTHING THE **** TO DO WITH IT.

The ******* who did that to us has gotten away with it, scot-free, because we moved all our resources to Iraq, which, once again, had NOTHING THE **** TO DO WITH IT.

"An eye for an eye" may or may not be the best policy for every situation. But if you're going to go with it, at least make sure you're going after the right people's eyes.

The ignorance here is just appalling.

Stepping Razor

then who did it and what are we doing in Iraq if they didn't do anything?

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by sa1177

We don't bomb innocents...or at least we'd like to pretend that's the difference between us and them.

I'm not calling you out, so please don't take it that way, but do you really draw from this conflict that the two sides are morally equivalent?

Here is my view: The insurgents' strategy is to intentionally harm civilians and then attempt to hide among them. They pursue this strategy because they are having difficulty getting what they want via the ballot box. Our strategy is to spare as many civilian lives as we can, even though it may result in higher coalition casualites. We have not only lived with, but supported the results of Iraqi elections, even though those results have not turned out to be as supportive of our efforts as we would have hoped.

[maxiep]

Originally Posted by David_Ortiz

then who did it and what are we doing in Iraq if they didn't do anything?

Big Papi, I think that very statement is the primary beef of many people who oppose the war in Iraq.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Originally Posted by Ed O

You're kidding, right?

I find it more likely that your post is satire than sincere.

Ed O.

Well you know EVERYTHING, you decide.

[Stepping Razor]

Originally Posted by David_Ortiz

then who did it and what are we doing in Iraq if they didn't do anything?

Are you serious?

Ever heard of this guy?



Well, he's not Iraqi.
He wasn't supported by Iraq.
He wasn't a friend of Saddam Hussein. In fact, he hated Saddam and called for his overthrow.
Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11, in any way. Sweden had exactly as much to do with the awful events of that day is Iraq.

So, to go back to your question: "What are we doing in Iraq if they didn't do anything?"
Exactly.

Stepping Razor