Should the United States, among other countries be there? If so, why? and what should be done about anything.
(I dont know, just trying to get things started)

lol
I got a pop up for that

Honestly I hate wars but I don't pay attention to politics

Yes

I don't think that America should be there. If for no other reason, because I can't rembmer Congress actually declaring war.

I don't think that America should be there. If for no other reason, because I can't rembmer Congress actually declaring war.
The "War powers act" does not exist you fool; and actually it's perfectly legal because according to the "War Powers Act" the president has to report to congress within 60 days. (Permission to continue)

you fool
T.T

And about the rest of your post...meh, I'm too tired to think about any of that. So I'll just take your word for it.

Should the United States, among other countries be there? If so, why? and what should be done about anything.
(I dont know, just trying to get things started)
WTF??? United states IS the Iraq war. Of course it should be there

yes they need to be here now, after what they done. The need to control the peace in Iraq after making such a mess.

We made no mess.

i don't believe AUSTRALIA should be there
Because John Howard is so stupid for sending them off to Iraq, ONE of them actually got killed
rofl he got killed cleaning his gun
but there are rumours that that isn't what happened...

Yeah i thought he shot himself..

Well, i'm glad NZ's kept out of it. After events like the Vietnam war, helping America fight Dictators in other countries is a waste of our time. Now if the dictators went and invaded AMERICA, theres definately no reason not to send out troops

Think about it, good things have come of the war, but it is a shmae about the lost lives

This is why people should be allowed to reproduce

Well, i'm glad NZ's kept out of it. After events like the Vietnam war, helping America fight Dictators in other countries is a waste of our time. Now if the dictators went and invaded AMERICA, theres definately no reason not to send out troopswere not fighting dictators anymore.

were not fighting dictators anymore.
Well, when North Korea attacks South Korea I'm sure resistance will be put up to defend freedom.

North koreans scare me

we all know why this war is even happening
CONTROL OF IRAQ'S OIL
and thanks to this war australia's petrol prices go higher and higher
AND SADDAMS ALREADY CAUGHT end this war so that petrol prices stop going so high

we all know why this war is even happening
CONTROL OF IRAQ'S OIL
and thanks to this war australia's petrol prices go higher and higher
AND SADDAMS ALREADY CAUGHT end this war so that petrol prices stop going so highWhy do i get the feeling you dont understand economics whatsoever.

we all know why this war is even happening
CONTROL OF IRAQ'S OILActually. Its foreign policy. When Iraq was known by our intelligence to have WMD's. They became a threat(They harbored OSAMA for a time). Therefore after we take a country over, we introduce democracy(which is apparently what the people want)

we all know why this war is even happening
CONTROL OF IRAQ'S OIL
and thanks to this war australia's petrol prices go higher and higherplease. just read this. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3708951.stm

If we went to Iraq for oil... wouldn't we have gotten some?

I can honestly say I do not know everything that is happening in the war right now (I don't think anyone does), but I trust that the decision making in all of the matters there are in capable hands.

its for CONTROL

It'll be ironic when the new freedom tower gets bombed

yes it would

its for CONTROL
Yes, it is. We are trying to get iraq to govern itself and under its own control. Good job.

>. >
well i've had my moment...

One reason is that we want an ally in the middle east.

its for CONTROL
You seriously should watch the news, dumbass.

You seriously should watch the news, dumbass.
They're foreigners; they don't know anything.

sigh im gonna give up on this thread
goodbye now

ok, cya

can someone please tell me why America is in the Iraq war?

can someone please tell me why America is in the Iraq war?
To help create a stable democracy, thus making a strong ally in the Middle East.

To help create a stable democracy, thus making a strong ally in the Middle East.Dont foget the possibility of an oil embargo in the middle east if we continueto fight terrorism in that region. Iraq would provide some oil in case of that emergency.

well lets see,

Iraq fell
Baghdad fell
Saddam fell
The only thing that didn't fall was the price of gas

well lets see,

Iraq fell
Baghdad fell
Saddam fell
The only thing that didn't fall was the price of gas

We aren't trying to make iraq "fall", if you haven't realized we're trying to help them start over again. Our real enemy is Alqueida (Spelling).

well lets see,

Iraq fell
Baghdad fell
Saddam fell
The only thing that didn't fall was the price of gas

They didn't go in there to lower gas prices. Please shut the **** up. Weve already seen you know nothing about the U.S. or any world afairs.

well lets see,

Iraq fell
Baghdad fell
Saddam fell
The only thing that didn't fall was the price of gasHeres a lesson in world economics for you. the United states gets the majority of its oil from itself. We have so many oil rigs and wells that we used to barely need to import anything. These oil rigs are getting old. therefore they produce less. Therefore we need to import more. And what is levvied on imported goods? A Tarriff. Tarriffs are taxes on imported goods. therefore they cost more. Get it?

We aren't trying to make iraq "fall", if you haven't realized we're trying to help them start over again. Our real enemy is Alqueida (Spelling).
just exactly what has Iraq got to do with Al Qaeda?

Heres a lesson in world economics for you. the United states gets the majority of its oil from itself. We have so many oil rigs and wells that we used to barely need to import anything. These oil rigs are getting old. therefore they produce less. Therefore we need to import more. And what is levvied on imported goods? A Tarriff. Tarriffs are taxes on imported goods. therefore they cost more. Get it?
well Clinton didn't invade Iraq or the middle-east and he got the economy from the lowest in history (at its time) to the highest (ever). SO much for this great plan of Bushes.

They didn't go in there to lower gas prices. Please shut the **** up. Weve already seen you know nothing about the U.S. or any world afairs.
why don't you "shut the **** up" because all you do is make yourself look retarded.

just exactly what has Iraq got to do with Al Qaeda?
Considering Saddam's regime supported terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, a lot.
why don't you "shut the **** up" because all you do is make yourself look retarded.
You should be careful when throwing around the word “retarded”; you're the one who believed Stalin invented Communism.
Heres a lesson in world economics for you. the United states gets the majority of its oil from itself. We have so many oil rigs and wells that we used to barely need to import anything. These oil rigs are getting old. therefore they produce less. Therefore we need to import more. And what is levvied on imported goods? A Tarriff. Tarriffs are taxes on imported goods. therefore they cost more. Get it?
That is incorrect; we get most of our oil from the Middle east.

Considering Saddam's regime supported terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda, a lot.I've seen no proof.

You should be careful when throwing around the word “retarded”; you're the one who believed Stalin invented Communism.like I said I'm sorry I don't study 19th century Russia. If you're gonna talk like that you might aswell say Andrew Jackson didn't "invent" the democrats because it dates back to Jefferson.

That is incorrect; we get most of our oil from the Middle east.
but then Saddam decided to sell oil in Euros, which Bush didn't like.

Heres a lesson in world economics for you. the United states gets the majority of its oil from itself. We have so many oil rigs and wells that we used to barely need to import anything. These oil rigs are getting old. therefore they produce less. Therefore we need to import more. And what is levvied on imported goods? A Tarriff. Tarriffs are taxes on imported goods. therefore they cost more. Get it?

right, actually we're trying to make it so we're not dependent on any other country for oil, we have the oil stocked up in case we really need it

do you want the proof? we had Abu Muzab Al Zarqui (spelling) killed and he was the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, he had close personal relations with Saddam Hussein

what about Zapata and Halliburton?

just exactly what has Iraq got to do with Al Qaeda?
Ever heard of al Zawahri?


well Clinton didn't invade Iraq or the middle-east and he got the economy from the lowest in history (at its time) to the highest (ever). SO much for this great plan of Bushes.actually, imcrease in economy began durning GB Seniors presidency. Clinton ended it.
http://www.tvnewslies.org/bushbudget.gif

oh, and BTW that doesnt show the National deficit, it shows how each president added/subtracted it. that graph basically means clinton didnt do anything.

If you're gonna talk like that you might aswell say Andrew Jackson didn't "invent" the democrats because it dates back to Jefferson.I’m not the one with false information; I never said Andrew Jackson invented democrats. Andrew Jackson wass responsible for the death of thousands of Native Americans.

but then Saddam decided to sell oil in Euros, which Bush didn't like.

Bush doesn't care what Saddam sold oil in. He could sell it for ****ing banana's... it still makes no difference. Stop being such a idiot and don't waste your time making another post quoting me saying "omg you are just making yourself look like a moron", cause in reality, you are the moron.

Right, I am giving up my policy about not posting, as I was bored with it, and shall make this my first post on this forum ever, so, hoorah for all of you lucky people.
*mutters to self: “Wow, I am going to make so many enemies”*
So, I am British, and as such, involved in a war that makes little sense to me, though I claim to understand it. Britain are in this war as we are America’s puppets, which is fine, as it offers us economic stability, which, as an island, is difficult to maintain without powerful allies. I am not ignorant enough to say that I understand this war, as I don’t, though, like many others, I have strong opinions about it. America and Britain see themselves as modern superheroes; they see it as their job to maintain world peace, and there are many ways in which to achieve this. War is the last one, and can only come about with the UN’s permission. To gain this permission, the UN must deem the war to be just. A just war must meet certain criteria:
• A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause. Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.
• A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.
• The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.
• The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.
• The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.
The UN declared this war just, and so, the USA was allowed to begin it. However, originally, the war was not only against Iraq, but rather against terrorism. At one point, the war was aimed at overthrowing the Iraqi dictator Sadam Husain, though, again, this was because he had strong affiliation with terrorism, and fascist dictating, which is one of Americas most hated things. Anyway, after the overthrow of Sadam, terrorism remained in a smaller amount, but America and allies saw it as their responsibility to regain a sense of peace and trust between Iraq and other countries. This might be to do with oil, but you will also find that it is because, as countries have learnt from past world wars, if peace is not properly regained, further conflict develops.
As I have previously mentioned, this is not the only reason for the war, and is not my opinion about the justification of the war, but I am pointing out that it has been deemed just by a higher authority than all of you.

Right, I am giving up my policy about not posting, as I was bored with it, and shall make this my first post on this forum ever, so, hoorah for all of you lucky people.
*mutters to self: “Wow, I am going to make so many enemies”*
So, I am British, and as such, involved in a war that makes little sense to me, though I claim to understand it. Britain are in this war as we are America’s puppets, which is fine, as it offers us economic stability, which, as an island, is difficult to maintain without powerful allies. I am not ignorant enough to say that I understand this war, as I don’t, though, like many others, I have strong opinions about it. America and Britain see themselves as modern superheroes; they see it as their job to maintain world peace, and there are many ways in which to achieve this. War is the last one, and can only come about with the UN’s permission. To gain this permission, the UN must deem the war to be just. A just war must meet certain criteria:
• A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause. Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.
• A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.
• The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.
• The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.
• The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.
The UN declared this war just, and so, the USA was allowed to begin it. However, originally, the war was not only against Iraq, but rather against terrorism. At one point, the war was aimed at overthrowing the Iraqi dictator Sadam Husain, though, again, this was because he had strong affiliation with terrorism, and fascist dictating, which is one of Americas most hated things. Anyway, after the overthrow of Sadam, terrorism remained in a smaller amount, but America and allies saw it as their responsibility to regain a sense of peace and trust between Iraq and other countries. This might be to do with oil, but you will also find that it is because, as countries have learnt from past world wars, if peace is not properly regained, further conflict develops.
As I have previously mentioned, this is not the only reason for the war, and is not my opinion about the justification of the war, but I am pointing out that it has been deemed just by a higher authority than all of you.

Thanks for sharing your opinion without using the words "idiot" or "moron", the way xyz does. I must ask you, what is with the font? Next time might I suggest using the default font size, for most people don't enjoy having their eyes strained when reading posts.

you're a moron.I like how you have no response, other than an insult. Looks to me as though you've given up.


Lets start fresh shall we?

Thanks for sharing your opinion without using the words "idiot" or "moron", the way xyz does. I must ask you, what is with the font? Next time might I suggest using the default font size, for most people don't enjoy having their eyes strained when reading posts.

Well, on my schools forum, I have banned spelling mistakes, under penalty of being banned, and so, out of practice, type all posts in MS word first, and when I did that for my last post, it appeared at an A4 size at standard 12px, so I decided to shrink it, out of politeness. If it is too small, might I suggest using the windows magnifying glass (provided you run windows, which I don't), or, assuming you run firefox or opera, get an add-in for it.

If it is too small, might I suggest using the windows magnifying glass (provided you run windows, which I don't), or, assuming you run firefox or opera, get an add-in for it.We shouldn’t have to accommodate you and your small font. If you wish to be a part of this community, you’ll have to change just as everyone else has. It's not difficult to change the font size, simply click this button to do so. http://abs.gprime.net/fontsize.jpg

We shouldn’t have to accommodate you and your small font. If you wish to be a part of this community, you’ll have to change just as everyone else has. It's not difficult to change the font size, simply click this button to do so. http://abs.gprime.net/fontsize.jpg

I am confused as to what you think I did...I didn't change the font, but did change the font size, thus the tags reading: SIZE="1".

I am confused as to what you think I did...I didn't change the font, but did change the font size, thus the tags reading: SIZE="1".
The default size is 2, which is easier to read.

I like how you have no response, other than an insult. Looks to me as though you've given up.


Lets start fresh shall we?
seems fair. Now, the increase and decrease were between elections, so it's likely that what the president started doing at the election is why there was an increase.

Not only that but I doubt that Bush didn't do something right until his last year and Clinton didn't do something wrong until his last year. And I also doubt that neither Clinton or Dubya did anything during this increase/decrease.

To me, it's more believable that Clinton made the increase and Dubya made the decrease. Or, kept the budget increasing and decreasing.

seems fair. Now, the increase and decrease were between elections, so it's likely that what the president started doing at the election is why there was an increase.

Not only that but I doubt that Bush didn't do something right until his last year and Clinton didn't do something wrong until his last year. And I also doubt that neither Clinton or Dubya did anything during this increase/decrease.

To me, it's more believable that Clinton made the increase and Dubya made the decrease. Or, kept the budget increasing and decreasing.You were born when Clinton was first effected into office; how would you know how either president really was?

Pwned

Pwned...Or is he?

...Or is he?
Hes only really pwned if 'lolitsaxel' follows up with a "pwned" response because he alone is the end-all authority.

update: 8 people on here have more posts than there are U.S. soldier deaths in the war in Iraq

the U.S. death toll in Iraq is 2500 soldiers

"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic."

-Joseph Stalin

well, he's not around to see us evolve into a different state of world powers now is he?

well, he's not around to see us evolve into a different state of world powers now is he?Its just a quote...Attempt to understand the anecdote, and move on.

I don't care for it because you brought it up

Hes only really pwned if 'lolitsaxel' follows up with a "pwned" response because he alone is the end-all authority.
and he's really smart isn't he? lolitsaxel is pretty ignorant if you ask me.

You were born when Clinton was first effected into office; how would you know how either president really was?
internet, duh. :rolleyes:

if you trust all that you find on the internet, you're an idiot

Hes only really pwned if 'lolitsaxel' follows up with a "pwned" response because he alone is the end-all authority.
Blah? Where did that come from?