This thread is for the continuation of the debate about the Iraq War that sprung up from the thread about the Virginia shootings.

Don't be afraid to quote posts from the other thread in here, use copy + paste and the quote button (looks like a speech bubble, second from the right above where you write your posts).

Altought I said that "casualties always happen", it doesnt mean that I dont care about the civilians or that I support the acts of war.

I dont understand two things: Why are they still hanging in there and WHY did they go to there in the first place (The USA I mean). First they invaded in Afganistan and they were just an inch away to get the (possible) man behind the9/11, the Osama Bin Laden, when they suddenly tought, "Well, now that were in middle-east, why dont we go kick Hussein's behind!". Talk about a bad case of mis-prioritasing.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheChosen @ Apr 20 2007, 07:04 AM) [snapback]287616[/snapback]</div>I still think George W. sort of inherited that from his father. USA failed at vietnam, USA failed at EDIT: Golf War II. :whistling:
And the UN took their lollipop away and raised the finger. Now they (USA) are defiant and upset like a little girl and do stuff nobody likes.

BAM!

Comment please.

Off-topic. This is somewhat funny.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Icewolf @ Apr 20 2007, 07:11 AM) [snapback]287627[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheChosen @ Apr 20 2007, 10:18 AM) [snapback]287645[/snapback]</div>[/b][/quote]What's with that? Am I ... like ... wrong? :huh: Though I had to take a little correction... :rolleyes:

Its Gulf War, not Golf War.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheChosen @ Apr 20 2007, 12:24 PM) [snapback]287666[/snapback]</div>Oh, that's a usual Germish-problem. In german gulf is golf. Which is a VW-car and a sport as well. ^_^

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheChosen @ Apr 20 2007, 07:04 AM) [snapback]287616[/snapback]</div>http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa_iraq.html

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(_r.u.s.s. @ Apr 20 2007, 02:24 PM) [snapback]287696[/snapback]</div>Uhh, that's almost underground stuff.... :ph34r:

USA in Iraq... I said it quite some time ago when Anubis and Stroggy were talking about the situation between Israel and Palestine. It's simple - USA want's to have a foothole in the middle east, so they can have an influence over the oil reserves and the only way they can have an influence there is by having their armed forces in the region. That's why they kept supporting Israel, that's why they got involved in the Iran - Iraq war (although they also wanted to support anybody who was anti-Iran at that point and thus they put Saddam into the leared's chair of Iraq in the first place) and that's why they started both Gulf Wars, not to mention the hostility with Syria - so if they pull out of Iraq they will still be present in the middle east.

USA is on a verge of major crises. Most people are in depts for at least half of their lives before they get an education and when they get a career and start paying the depts off they have to get in more depts to sort their lives - so if they're lucky they won't have to leave any depts for their children. With such an economy the only thing that still keeps US strong at this point is the Military. If US had no military its status of a world wide superpower would colapse. They would still be an importaint player on world political scene - but not the superpower. It has happened to many other empires/kingdoms/countries in the past.

But by going to war at places where an oportunity for profit occurs the US can still give boots to its economy and can prolong the outbreak of the crises. The thing is its military was based on countering the Soviet Millitary, but the Soviets are no more and there's no need for such a large military machine as the US has, so it's obsolete and money consuming - and it would be completely pointless and useless unleas it's put to action under one pretence or another that keeps the US citizens satisfied.

The real question is, what will happen next?

There are countries that are weak and can't really strike back at the US, but countries like North Korea or Iran might be a different story. Russia has sold air defence systems to Iran when a possibility of an US preliminary strike against Iran became a possibility. So is Russia really going to stand by if US attacks Iran? China is still a big supporter of N. Korea (which might itself already have nuclear capatibilities) so it's an opponent that might cause damage to the US. Attacking either one might not be safe and the only advantage US had over Europe in the 20th century was the fact they haven't had any wars on their theritory. Europe was devistated by two world wars and US was able to gain great economical advantages over Europe because it was spare such a devistation. If Us gets involved in a war with a country that can strike back (and I don't mean killing some US soldiers in the middle east or somewhere, but a country that could counterstrike and send forces into the US) what would happen? Would US still exist? Would the union collapse or would it possibly make it stronger? Is the first world democracy already so obsolete that it should be shaken untill all the balast falls away or is it still a superpower which can turn a new page?

Its very simple............................. OIL!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Battlefield Vietnam @ Apr 22 2007, 05:24 AM) [snapback]287911[/snapback]</div>Pretty much the Gospel, I think. But if you look at the US's increasingly aggressive attitude towards Syria and particularly Iran, you can also suspect it has to do with Israel (as a Mid-East watch dog) and who should run the show in the region. Anyone to threaten Israel and Israel's position/power will be subjects to the wrath of the warmongers in Washington.

BTW: Don't give me that goobledygook about peace, democracy and stability in the region. The Western world supported and trained the very same people they later tagged as "terrorists" (a rather cheap tag). It's about control of oil and military/politically power. It's about the Suez and shipping lanes, it's about "friendly nations which will allow forward missile bases" and most probably tons of other reasons. [/rant]

But yes, oil is THE major factor here.

And then what happens when the oil ends? Shall the world start following the same timeline as the Fallout (or Mad Max) universe?

Unjustified (hmm is any war justified, if you attack someone i mean?!), unsuccessful and yes it's still a war.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheChosen @ Apr 23 2007, 06:02 AM) [snapback]288043[/snapback]</div>Well, probably the world's economy will collapse for a while and then developed countries will go to war for some other energetic resource such as gas, uranium or ground potatoes in order to not have to pay their rightfull owners for it.

Nah people will switch to some other energy source, you already have biodiesel and natural gas and don't worry the reserves of oil are known, so it won't run out all of a sudden, by the time it does it will become so expensive on the market (supply and demand dictates that) that some other resource will be used instead.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TheChosen @ Apr 23 2007, 02:02 PM) [snapback]288043[/snapback]</div>Yeah, then while the bombs fall you will be pounding on the Vault Door begging us to open it.

Which I probably will, just don't mess up the Water Chip!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tulac @ Apr 23 2007, 02:36 PM) [snapback]288124[/snapback]</div>Yeah, the reserves or oil are know. As is the greed of the big oil enterprises. If they don't have prejudices about being a responsible part in wars that cost thousands of lifes in order to maintain their benefits, I doubt they will cooperate in a logic transition between oil and alternative energy resources. They will try to keep their bussiness as long as they can, even if that means a great damage in a near future.

You can think that humans aren't that stupid, but just taking a look at how developed and industrial countries are taking the Kioto protocol, even with all the evidence of an upcoming disaster, I'm not very optimistic.

Why can't the US stay clear of other people's wars?

My guess is they need someone to test all their new weapons on.
War also has something of a stimulating effect on their economy (as long as it doesn't come to their home turf, at least) and the masses always need some sort of bogeyman to give them a better target for hate than their next door neighbour.

probably.... but one positive thing is that you dont need to pay taxes anymore :)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Battlefield Vietnam @ Apr 28 2007, 04:39 PM) [snapback]288747[/snapback]</div>Because they need the control.

hahahaha
i will start to stockpill weapons and supplies.