Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Street Fighting

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Sorry, I fat-fingered the trigger.

Posted by Midlife:

"...If liberation is truly the reason, then the priorities should be (1) kill resisting Iraqi soldiers (2) Minimize civilian casualties. (3) Minimize American casualties...."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's quite noble-sounding but if the allies are sacrificing their lives in order to minimize civilian casualties, they aren't going to be around long enough to accomplish #1, terminating Saddam's regime.

BTW, what's your beef with the Bush administration about their motives? Do you really think this is just about oil? What am I missing here?
 
BTW, what's your beef with the Bush administration about their motives? Do you really think this is just about oil?

No, as I said, I don't subscribe to that theory. This war and the preparation for it are trashing an already weak economy. To say that the war was for oil would mean that American big business was willing to take a short term hit for long term gain. Historically it's been exactly the opposite: short term gain and to heck with the consequences.

As far as true motives, I admit to some difficulty about that. Despite a deep cynicism about government (ever read the Pentagon Papers?) I have a basic belief that most people act honorably most of the time. Inconsistent? Yes. Absolutely. But so is "we're there to protect them, but our lives are more important." A Secret Service agent wouldn't last a day in the job with that attitude. But I understand where it comes from.

And, no, I don't think that my accident of birthplace makes me more intrinsically valuable as a human being.

My suspicions (and that's all they are) about Bush's real motives? Well let's just say that I'm not surprised that the extreme evangelical right is already preparing to send missionaries to convert the heathens.
 
midlifeflyer said:
My suspicions (and that's all they are) about Bush's real motives? Well let's just say that I'm not surprised that the extreme evangelical right is already preparing to send missionaries to convert the heathens.
Thanks for the answer. I don't believe it's the case, but it's a better answer than other's questioning the protection our (US) interests have provided.

How about the Constitution? Does it trump all international "laws" for US citizens?
 
flywithastick said:
How about the Constitution? Does it trump all international "laws" for US citizens?
I really don't think I understand the question (wouldn't be the first time).

The Constitution governs the relationship between/among the people of the United States (not necessarily all citizens), the individual states, and the federal government. It's not an international legal document.
 
Now You've Done It

"....My suspicions (and that's all they are) about Bush's real motives? Well let's just say that I'm not surprised that the extreme evangelical right is already preparing to send missionaries to convert the heathens...."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You don't want to go there on this forum. This thread will set records if you do.

But come to think of it, this would all be moot by now if the Israelis had taken care of business 2000+ years ago as they were instructed to (remember the Moabites, the Amalekites, et. al... guess who descended from them?) But they didn't and so here we are!
 
Re: Now You've Done It

Birdstrike said:
You don't want to go there on this forum. This thread will set records if you do.
At least no one can accuse me of being politically correct.

Seriously, I was tempted to sidestep the question altogether. But I've been very impressed with what I've seen in this forum in the past week. People feel very strongly about their viewpoints. Understandable so. But I've also seen an even stronger undercurrent of mutual respect whatever our differences. You don't get that everywhere and it's very refreshing.
 
No, I don't think this is a 21st century crusade... There is an interesting thread on www.pprune.org (the real reason for the war) that deals with Iraq being the first oil producing country to switch from the Dollar to the Euro. The thread states that if the rest of OPEC does that and the world follows suit making the Euro the currency of choice, then hyper inflation will set in (ala Argentina) and the US economy would literally implode to Great Depression levels. I don't know enough about world finance, but it was interesting reading. Hope somebody can explain it better.
 
46Driver said:
No, I don't think this is a 21st century crusade... There is an interesting thread on www.pprune.org (the real reason for the war) that deals with Iraq being the first oil producing country to switch from the Dollar to the Euro. The thread states that if the rest of OPEC does that and the world follows suit making the Euro the currency of choice, then hyper inflation will set in (ala Argentina) and the US economy would literally implode to Great Depression levels. I don't know enough about world finance, but it was interesting reading. Hope somebody can explain it better.

Yikes.
 
$

I really don't believe that is so. The Euro is tied very tightly with the Dollar and with the US economy one of the largest out there, if we catch a cold the rest of the world's economies caught pneumonia. Take a look at the 1928 depression. It was rough here, Europe was devistated. Why do you think Hitler was so easily able to come to power? I believe that the real reason Iraq switched to the Euro was that they were still supported by some European countries like France, which is really pushing the Euro and even prior to GW-1 almost all of their oil production went to Europe.
 
46Driver said:
No, I don't think this is a 21st century crusade... There is an interesting thread on www.pprune.org (the real reason for the war) that deals with Iraq being the first oil producing country to switch from the Dollar to the Euro. The thread states that if the rest of OPEC does that and the world follows suit making the Euro the currency of choice, then hyper inflation will set in (ala Argentina) and the US economy would literally implode to Great Depression levels. I don't know enough about world finance, but it was interesting reading. Hope somebody can explain it better.

Interesting, on this note I have also read and heard a report or two regarding France, Russia or possibly another country spearheading what would eventually become a European superpower rivaling the U.S. This article could have some meaning to it, maybe just one of many ingredients to this theory.

I do not consider myself as a politcal genious but common sense tells me that if the neighborhood had just one big bada$$ that ruled the coup then sooner or later some of the other folks are going to join hands for a joint effort if not to topple but maybe just to show this giant that there is an equal rival, maybe to do nothing more than to keep this giant in check. I am trying to think in other countries terms...I do not consider the U.S to be a neighborhood bada$$ or bully, but obviously others do.
I sincerily believe as an American what we are doing in Iraq is for the well being of a safer world, but as we know by now not all countries have this same view. Fuel to the 'superpower' theory?

Thoughts?
 
low-n-slow said:
I do not consider myself as a politcal genious but common sense tells me that if the neighborhood had just one big bada$$ that ruled the coup then sooner or later some of the other folks are going to join hands for a joint effort if not to topple but maybe just to show this giant that there is an equal rival, maybe to do nothing more than to keep this giant in check. I am trying to think in other countries terms...
I think you're exactly right. There really is only one superpower - us. No less a bleeding heart than Jimmy Carter said that this automatically means that there will be antagonism against the US, no matter what we do. I think our obligation in this context is two-fold: to use our power wisely and not to act like jerks. The biggest problem we're facing right now is that most of the rest of the world thinks we're acting like jerks and throwing our weight around. Do you think that we would be Iraq if the old Soviet Union was around and Iraq was their ally and there was a =real= chance of causing WWIII? (No answer required, they'd just be along the usual lines anyway. Just think about it.)
 
midlifeflyer said:
Do you think that we would be Iraq if the old Soviet Union was around and Iraq was their ally and there was a =real= chance of causing WWIII? (No answer required, they'd just be along the usual lines anyway. Just think about it.)
I have serious doubts that al queda would be a danger to the US today, there would have been no fight in the Balkans/Kosovo and Sept 11th probably wouldn't have happened if the Soviet Union was still here. There also wouldn't be nearly as much rogue WMD threat to the world if the Soviets were still in power.

my 2¢
 

Latest resources

Back
Top