A great wise man once said " Live and Let Live".

If we all followed it there will be no wars and we wouldn't be selling our arms to other countries and we would be broke.

Yup, and Europe would be speaking German. And Communism was a reform movement!

So, if we simply ignore aggressors, they will go away. Or at least they will become the norm and opposition will go away. Whatever.

What a simplistic and ignorant statement. Oh,but it certainly sounds cute.

Let's hear more from the legions of folks who can't find Chicago on the map nor identify what continent Mexico is a member.

I think the key to his argument was: If we *ALL* ... in a utopia where nobody was an aggressor we wouldn't have to respond to aggressors. Of course, we don't and probably never will live in a utopia.

Who asked to you to sell weapons to the rest of the World?. Who needs's your rubbish stuff?. You guys are in well developed countries can certainly do Humanitarian work that rest of the world I am sure appreciate a lot. What you guys have achived by selling these weapons. Did you achieve peace? in the rest of the world. Technology should be incoperated in such way to help the humanitarian crisis let it be with Tsumani or any other natural (for instance flood, Cyclone) or artificial disaster.

The human race loves war. Some humans never want the war machine to ever stop.

War is an inhuman activity. I am from Sri Lanka and I have experience to this nuisance for last 25+ years. My self is a victim of the war has displaced from Native place Jaffna. Please for God Shake don't promote rubbish ideas about war. We are all humans need to live together forever Irrespective of the Language and Religion.

Ensure Oil or Save People, Ensure Oil or Save People....Ensure Oil ofcourse!

/cynicism

Yeah, we aren't saving anyone in Iraq by removing the bloodthirsty maniac Saddam and helping form a fledgling democracy.

We're just there for the oil...

...and we like to kill things...

...and blow stuff up....

Heh...heh...fire...heh...

That's us. A Nation of Beavises.

Yeah, we aren't saving anyone in Iraq by removing the bloodthirsty maniac Saddam and helping form a fledgling democracy.

Wait, I thought we were there for WMDs, or was it for terrorists?

Uhhh... why do you think Saddam was removed?

Where have you been the past 4 years?

lmao ....

"helping form a fledging democracy"

That's hilarious, man ... You should be writing for SNL! :P

"Uhhh... why do you think Saddam was removed?"

Easier access to the oil under the guise of non-existent WMDs, which weren't there and could never have been had in the 1st place by Sadam, and ofcourse, a son finishing dad's project. We need to stop deceiving ourselves that Iraq was on a totally unselfish agenda and that we went to 'spread democracy' and free people because it simply isn't so. If we were that way, we'd be in Darfur right now.

Anyway, I really don't want to get political nor make betanews enemies, etc. etc. Only 3 things can make pals fight, sleeping with his lover, opposing views on religion and opposing views on politics.
This is all completely beside the point...the point is that I think we should get involved. Help in any way we can and stop acting like it's not happening. Help for a real humanitarian cause for a change. People are suffering and dying and we can do something about that. We don't need to send tired, damaged troops either.

That's all.

Cute answer, except that the US has not gotten the oil from Iraq. Nor has it offset the expenses of trying to prop up a country where they are more concerned with their petty internecine squabbles over which group gets to determine who dies in the name of insulting Allah or Mohamed for drawing a cartoon that was not even of a likeness!

(But then, how many in All of the traditions claim (idiotically) to see likenesses of a worshiped personage that they only know through some Renaissance artist's imagination! I mean, wasn't Jesus a blond haired, blue-eyed hippie?)

And if the oil had been the primary reason, the US could have simply made the ready access to cheap oil the primary condition for allowing Hussein to continue in power! At little or no expense!

Oh...But...Gee...But...

Great thesis. Too bad the bluster is more substantial than the content.

Help for a real humanitarian cause for a change.

Why is it that everyone has forgotten Saddam's atrocities?

What, we should help those in Darfur, but should have ignored the 1000's of dead and dying Kurds that Saddam slaughtered?

I'd really love to see the logic behind that kind of thinking. What, just because there's Oil in Iraq, it automatically negates any humanitarian reasoning for the war?

Oil is unsubstantial compared to infiltration by WalMart, McDonalds, and other American corporations.

lmao...

Well oil is just one form of fuel. US is having atomic reactors more than rest of the world combined. I am sure even if the fossil fuel vanishes certainly one can find alternative resources that power vehicles for that you don't need war?. More over Iraq didn't say that they are not going to export Fossil fuel at all. From consumers point of view it is immaterial who ever owns the crude oil they need to pay for the Gasoline (Petrol).

Before the current crisis Iraq US and UK lied the rest of the Nations that Iraq has weapons of mass destructions. Every one knows now very well about the economic reasons for war. It is not the case with US or UK many countries people start war with fake reasons and the result is that innocent people get suffered. Rich counties becomes even richer while poor countries become even poorer. Like my country Sri Lanka more than 150, 000 has been displaced and living in the IDP (Internally Displaced People's) camp or in temporary shelters. The result not only waste the human resources of that people as these people are stying in the Schools found to difficult operate the schools as well. I would appreciate a lot if somebody would come up to similar model for Sri Lanka using Google Earth or what ever the model suits.

lmao...

Sure, as soon as the Dems have made sure we run out of money in Iraq and Afghanistan, we'll send whatever troops haven't been killed due to lack of equipment and armor right over.

/sarcasm

Yea, those dems are so in the wrong for wanting benchmarks for our war in Iraq. Heaven forbid we actually force some accountability and action on the part of the Iraqi government. How can Bush say in one breath "this is not an open ended commitment" and then say "we cannot set a timeline and I am not in favor of benchmarks"....

Hell, the dates are even non-binding.

Benchmarks for the terrorists to mark their calendar

Even the North Vietnamese made substantial mention that this same issue was fundamental in their struggle in Vietnam, especially with the Peace Talks.

It simply gave them additional resolve to wait it out.

You fight or get out. And unfortunately, Iraq lacks a statesman who values the welfare of all of the Iraqis more than their narrow minded sectarian self interests who are simply waiting it out until the US withdraws so that they can try to dominate the country.

I wish I was more optimistic, but I fear the US should partition the country and grant the Kurds independence and the means to protect themselves from the Turks and the rest of the fools.

I still do NOT understand the idiotic notion that many had that after Saddam fell, that all of the Iraqis would run out as one people and form neat lines and calmly select a new unified government instead of resorting to the exact same tribally based conflict that Saddam had had to suppress so ruthlessly!

All removing Saddam did was to remove the historic lid on the powder keg that goes back to the British and French and Dutch partitioning of the Middle East after WW1!

The senate and house have *no* say once a military action has been approved.

Who would you rather run your wars, a senator from Oklahoma with *no* military experience or a 4 Star General who actually knows what he's doing?

How can Bush say in one breath "this is not an open ended commitment" and then say "we cannot set a timeline and I am not in favor of benchmarks"....

He can, and will because saying otherwise would mean victory for the insurgents. Think about it, if you were one of them, and the US said they'd be out by "this" date, would you be scared, or jumping for joy at your obvious victory?

When the Republicans stop trying to claim that people who want America out of the war are unpatriotic or "America haters", then I'll start listening to them again.

How are they anything but?

What would be the results of us pulling out now? The insurgents win, they are emboldened, and they spread because there is no opposition.

How *can* this be good for the US? Sorry, but saying we need to pull out of Iraq is the same as saying we should be defeated.

I'm fine with that, you can go ahead and hope for our defeat, but don't think for a second that it makes you a patriot instead of the exact opposite.

More than 50% of the United States voted for Al Gore in the election that got Bush into the White House. I'm one of the majority of voters who didn't approve of George Bush. I also don't approve of the misguided budget busting life ending war he's gotten the US into. I believe the US and the world would be far better off if we had never gotten into the Iraq war. For me to approve of something I believe is wrong for the United States would be unpatriotic.

If you really want to talk about being unpatriotic...tell me what you think of an administration that would take actions that have allowed the citizens of the United States to become this fractured? Under the guise of an American flag and God, this administration has long since stopped representing Americans. Americans don't share this administration's beliefs nor do they support thier actions. For this administration not to acknowlege such overwhelming citizen concensus is unpatriotic.

If a broad and overwhelming percentage of Americans and elected officials want the United States out of Iraq, it's the duty of the administration to represent thier constituents.

More than 50% of the United States voted for Al Gore in the election that got Bush into the White House. I'm one of the majority of voters who didn't approve of George Bush. I also don't approve of the misguided budget busting life ending war he's gotten the US into. I

Sorry, but you're not living in a true democracy. It's a Representative Democracy.

If you really want to talk about being unpatriotic...tell me what you think of an administration that would take actions that have allowed the citizens of the United States to become this fractured? Under the guise of an American flag and God, this administration has long since stopped representing Americans. Americans don't share this administration's beliefs nor do they support thier actions. For this administration not to acknowlege such overwhelming citizen concensus is unpatriotic.

The majority of Americans have been misguided by the media and have no clue about what this country was based on and what it stands for. The administration represents the values that got it elected (by the electoral college), not the tyranny of majority rule.

a broad and overwhelming percentage of Americans and elected officials want the United States out of Iraq, it's the duty of the administration to represent thier constituents.

There's that tyranny of majority rule again. If the government followed *only* what the majority of people wanted, we'd be the poorest country in the world, our borders would be wide open, we'd have universal (and horribly under-equipped and under-staffed) medical care, and we'd be taxed out of every last penny to pay for it all.

The government does not exist to appease the entitled masses. It exists to protect the country from foreign threats, balance the budget, and uphold the virtues upon which this Country was founded.

[i]For me to approve of something I believe is wrong for the United States would be unpatriotic./i]

And it is your right to do so. But please keep in mind that those in power have a lot more information and are better able to understand the details and consequences of such decisions. You certainly cannot claim to know more about the war in Iraq than the generals, soldiers and administration running it.

How are they anything but?

What would be the results of us pulling out now? The insurgents win, they are emboldened, and they spread because there is no opposition.

How *can* this be good for the US? Sorry, but saying we need to pull out of Iraq is the same as saying we should be defeated.

I'm fine with that, you can go ahead and hope for our defeat, but don't think for a second that it makes you a patriot instead of the exact opposite.
-------------------------------------
People like you scare the crap out of me. Yours is a defeatist attitude.

Your thinking about what makes a patriot is also very one dimensional.

The government does not exist to appease the entitled masses. It exists to protect the country from foreign threats, balance the budget, and uphold the virtues upon which this Country was founded.
----------------------------------------------
How much of that has been done with this administration? None that I can see. We have more foreign threats than we've ever had, there is a deficit even our 10th generation grandchildren will be paying. And virtues? Give me a break!

lmao...

I want us to stay and win, they want us to leave with our tails between our legs and *I'm* the defeatist?

That's too rich. I really would love to see the logic (or complete lack thereof) behind that connection.

None?

Are you blind?

Protecting the country from foreign threats? Afghanistan, Iraq, our diplomacy (attempts) with Iran, Syria, and North Korea? Did you miss all of that?

Balance the budget? Yeah, Bush gave us tax cuts and now the Dems want to give us the *largest* tax hike in the History of the US *and* repeal the Bush Tax cuts.

Virtues? Yes, by upholding the principles above (or at the very least trying to keep the Dems from making it horribly worse), and *not* listening to all the wanna-be commanders telling them how to defend our country or run a war they know *nothing* about.

Give me a break, indeed.

I thought this was a website devoted to new developments in the computer software and hardware world. Political arguments belong somewhere else. Anyone who thinks they can change someone else's viewpoint on politics, religion, or pro-life/pro-choice has to be on crack. You will wear yourself out and never change your view, or anyone else's...so why bother.