he didn't mean to free iraq(i listed some facts that what he cared about wasn't humanity,freedam and human rights),he named it free iraq,it's hypocritical.that's all.
annielou.. i agree with you about the fact that we are underinformed. even though there are so many different news papers and new channels we arent getting all the info we need and we dont always get the unbiased facts. some channels hide needed facts. to answer your question no i have never been to a muslim country, although i would really like to i cant, and i dont have all the facts, your right but i feel really strongly on the subject, at the time of the war my friends and i all had pro war neclaces and we would spend our lunch hours watching the war. we spent more time watching the news than anything else at the time. ill never change my opinions and neither will you. we both feel strongly with two different ideas. neither are wrong and im glad i posted too. not many teens will feel so strongly about something. i commend you.
quote:the troops going in were not under american command, they were under UN or NATO command.
Exactly how do you know that though? Do you know where all our Special Forces and Rangers were at every exact moment? Do you know where the British SAS was? And in Somalia, that was lead by the US. I should know, my dad took the notes back at base.
"so u would rather have saddam still alive and his regime still in power? still torturing groups of little girls sexually? still putting people in sewage after they have been beaten for the past few days? still putting people in large shreadders made for plasic feet first so they can hear their own bones crunching? but then again its just a question"
It's more than a question...it's also a load of rhetorical bull****. Of course no one wants that. But there's a lot of things I don't want. I don't want to know that it was my government's fault that women in Iraq have no freedom. I don't want to find out that the power vacuum in Iraq resulted in the loss of all basic rights for women, but unfortunately my not wanting that isn't going to stop it. People are tortured and oppressed in many countries, but you don't see the U.S. running over and "liberating" them (read up on female genital mutilation, it was actually promoted by some African governments, but the U.S. didn't have a problem with that). That's because this conflict wasn't originally about a human right's crisis, it was supposed to be about weapons of mass destruction. But in case none were found, freedom was added in as a cause for war...
Thank you for allowing this to be a less-heated dispute than what is typically seen on these message boards. I'm not a big fan of confrontation, but I do feel strongly about this war. I'm glad I posted today.
As you well know, so many of todays politicians, journalists, educators, etc. have published specific ideas concerning this war. It's become such a broad issue that, although I read, watch, and scroll through loads of articles every week, I still feel under-educated or not-so-informed at times.
Since I wrote my article, I have participated in toilet paper and candy drives for the soldiers in Iraq. I've written letters to the families of soldiers living in my area but have refrained from writing the soldiers themselves. (Talking to a few mothers who had boys fighting in Iraq, I discovered that most of their letters had been redirected back home. This was pretty discouraging news.)
now, nobodysfool, I ask you: have you ever been to a Muslim country?
I've been to Turkey, as well as Kuwait. I grew up visiting Kuwaiti friends twice a week during my mothers Arabic lessons. (Yea, my mom's a language fanatic...she's amazing) We still keep in touch today.
Fact is, the beards these men grow are a religious symbol. This religion did not die with the fall of Saddam's regime. The men have no desire to shave their beards.
I believe the young radicals you were referring to who shaved their beards for the news cameras, were also doing so in symbolism. Perhaps to them it represented new change, a different page in their young lives.
quote: girls can now walk the streets without a father or older trusted male because there is no longer the fear of one of saddams sons molesting them, raping, or torturing them.
In Turkey, I saw plety of women and girls of all ages walking near to, but slightly behind their fathers or brothers. Were Saddam's son's after the Turkish women as well? No. This is also a Muslim custom. Though demeaning in my eyes, the women don't walk behind the men because they're frightened. They do so in respect for the man.
These customs are practiced by strict religious families, but a number of the world's Muslims are incredibly western in their actions and tastes today. (Even in Iraq.)
I thank you again to your reply to my article and for your positive response.
You're out-spoken and passionate about what you believe, never lose that.
so u would rather have saddam still alive and his regime still in power? still torturing groups of little girls sexually? still putting people in sewage after they have been beaten for the past few days? still putting people in large shreadders made for plasic feet first so they can hear their own bones crunching? but then again its just a question
"he named it operation iraqi freedom for a reason. and thats exactly what happened. men were able to shave their beards. they no longer had to live in terror. girls can now walk the streets without a father or older trusted male because there is no longer the fear of one of saddams sons molesting them, raping, or torturing them."
Actually, this isn't quite the situation in Iraq. Saddam's rule was secular, and while Saddam's sons committed horrible crimes against women, the regime as a whole provided freedom for women. U.S. interference has actually pushed the women's rights situation in Iraq backwards because of the power void we've caused.
Women in Iraq, while under Saddam's rule, could: get an education, have any job they wanted, drive, leave their homes whenever they felt like it, and dress however they cared to.
yeah and why Iraq? why isn't anywhere else where needs more help? why isn't anywhere else less concerned with the US?
you know everything happening in Iraq right now has been warned before.he could get ready for the war why didn't he get ready for the situation right now?cause it's get nothing to do with him any more ever since he won he war.
we don't have a a problem with you protecting yourself--regardless it's right or not.but bush was emphasizing the thing he obviously cared less.
To say the president of our United states does not care is a blunt statement. Why, then, did he go within this war to protect his people and why then is he risking his boys and men to help save those who wish for better. Why then is he doing all he can to help others, when really, we only need to worry of ourselves and our country, yet he will sway out of his way to help the others who need it.
maybe that's what you care about.but NOT BUSH if he cared,he should send troops to help the people in Congo,they could kill 10,000 civilians within 24 hours---before the war on Iraq if he cared,he shouldn't underwrite 0.2 billion while Afghanistan asked for 20 billion after the war if he cared,he should take care of the mess in Iraq right now.he does NOT care.because it all turned out to be good for the US right now.it's NOT about Iraq,it's a war about the US.he could confess,he just didn't.
Well, your ignorance amuses me. Yes, in a sense he did do this for the Iraqi people, as he did it to save and protect our freedoms in America and the American people. When freedom is threatened would you rather sit back and watch, or protect and stand up for what you know is right?
quote:he named it operation iraqi freedom for a reason. and thats exactly what happened. men were able to shave their beards. they no longer had to live in terror. girls can now walk the streets without a father or older trusted male because there is no longer the fear of one of saddams sons molesting them, raping, or torturing them.
did he do this on purpose?did he spend billions just for Iraqi freedom?if it wasn't about the US would he do that?no he wouldn't,then he shouldn't name it this and bring it up every time he got nothing else to say,as if it was the main reason for the action.
politicians trying to pretend the saint of the world ammuse me
quote: 'lets just sit back and watch saddam bomb us, what an awesome 4th of july!'
Doesnt that say it clearly enough, in the words of my friend Kae. Yes, you want to do things your way, look at the way our fourth of July most likely would have ended up.
i choose those nations (and fogot to mention yugoslavia) specifically to point out that genocide happens all the time (in response to the notion that the US has promised to never let another holocaust occur) and that it is a multilateral decision on whether to stop it or not. the troops going in were not under american command, they were under UN or NATO command.
when america goes it alone in the name of freedom for others, and the rest of the world doesn't want to go, you should question it. because collectively the world has shown itself to be somewhat intolerant of genocide. america by herself has no such track record.
annielou... u have a point. but at the end of your article you said that you felt there was nothing you can do. well there is. you can send letters and postcards to those overseas and their families telling them you care. you can send food and necesities to those who have loved ones fighting and to the fighters. nobody likes war even i wish we could have just signed a peace treaty or use diplomacy but with people like saddam nothing gets through to them but violence. yes and many other countries and world leaders support terrorism and have weapons of mass distruction. and we are not attacking them but bush is talking with them. also those who are fighting made the choice to enter the military. they new when they enlisted that there is always chance of war. yea i feel bad that they are dying and suffering but instead of complaining i make it positive. there is a list of soldiers posted in every classroom at school. i wrote to at least ten and my friends did also. we had a food and necesity drive. i donated so much. things i bought with the money i saved to buy something i wanted but i donated to the families. he named it operation iraqi freedom for a reason. and thats exactly what happened. men were able to shave their beards. they no longer had to live in terror. girls can now walk the streets without a father or older trusted male because there is no longer the fear of one of saddams sons molesting them, raping, or torturing them.
quote: racial and religious genocide has been practiced in iraq, rwanda, and nigeria long before we ever thought to invade iraq a 2nd time. this war wasn't about providing freedom for iraqis. it was solely about disposing of saddam for america's convenience/defense (depending on who you're talking to).
Whoa! Let's show our ignorance a little more. There were many US troops in Iraq, Rwanda, and Nigeria fighting to end the genocide. Wait, I forgot, just because CNN didn't cover it must mean it didn't happen? Why would any nation want to do anything in secret? To get the job done better? That can't be true. Does anyone remember Somalia? That's what I thought. And that was even a Democratic President pushing it so it must have been alright. That's why we let those men die in vain and never finish the job in that country. {note the sarcasm please} By the way, there's this thing in America that is how we always elect our Presidents for many, many years. Just because it didn't go right for the Democrats they'll get mad this time. No one had ever complained before.
AmericanRebel and nobodysfool, Saddam is a terrible man. The effects of his rule are loathsome. Simply because you are unhappy with the situation in a foreign country and feel urged to help DOES NOT mean that when you're president cries war, it's the answer to your prayers.
Why hasn't the president done anything to assist the victims in other countries who suffer from the decisions of a dictatorial leader?
Please take the time to read an article I wrote slightly before the start of the war in Iraq.
Thank you. _____________________________________
It's just before 7 o'clock on Tuesday night. The date is March 18, 2003. Our TV is tuned to CNN.
In the past 24 hours I've tackled a PreCal assignment and stressed over a research paper due Friday. Last night I flipped through magazines, trying to get ideas for the perfect prom gown. I painted my toenails baby blue and watched Boston Public with my dad.
It's the only TV show I watch all week, except for the news... I want to be a news anchor someday. If you've seen the show, you know it centers around the faculty of a Bostonian high school (hence the name), and my dad's a teacher so we've initiated this ritual: popping popcorn and sitting together in front of the tube from 7-8 (central time) every Monday night.
This week the drama-packed episode began slightly after 7:15. During those 15 minutes before the show started, my father and I sat together and listened to President Bush deliver a speech...
His speech warned of the initiation of war within 48 hours.
Our leader's words did not comfort me. They felt cold and blunt. He warned Saddam Hussein and his family, not mine. But, somehow I felt as if my livelihood was being threatened too. He directed a part of his address to the Iraqi people, promising food and medicine, a free Iraq, liberation from an evil government. Still, I was uneasy thinking of the men and women from our own country whose lives will surely be affected, even ended, by a war against Iraq.
President Bush gave Hussein two days to leave Iraq. I must admit, as a silly teenage girl, I wondered where Saddam would go. He isn't exactly "boy-next-door" material. Would he buy a home in the Florida Keys and work on his tan? Or might he purchase a glitzy New York loft, formerly owned by Jessica Simpson, in a pricey apartment building on 5th Avenue? Would he insist on having a view of Central Park? Picture Saddam searching for his dream home in L.A.
Okay, I'll get serious. What I mean is, 2 days is a quick move. It's got to be tough to quit your job as an all-powerful dictator. And for what? To comply with the request of another great leader whom you could really care less about?
Let's get it straight. What are Bush's reasons for war?
Saddam Hussein funds terrorism, maybe even the 9-11 attack. He kills his own people. His government conceals weapons of mass destruction. He convinces his followers that Americans are evil. He's the classic "bad guy".
Here's my point:
Libya and Syria both fund terrorism, and their leaders know about it! (Just like Saddam.) In North Korea and Iran, anti-American sentiment is pretty strong. North Korea even houses weapons of mass destruction that they are prepared to utilize. (Maybe even worse than Saddam.) Why aren't we attacking these countries and their leaders? Why isn't Bashar al-Assad, president of Syria, being booted out of his home this week? Plus, I heard on tonight's news that the war's cost is estimated to reach $90 billion. Whoa, that's a lot of tax dollars!
Even if we win, won't those other countries continue to pose a threat? Won't our war with Iraq cause them to further dislike the United States?
I'm petrified of war. I picture Iraqi families torn apart. Mothers, fathers, even children dying in a war in which they've not fired a single gunshot. American husbands, wives, mothers, fathers, and children losing the ones they love the most. Even if we win and Saddam Hussein is over-thrown, even if peace and liberty fall over Iraq, thousands of lives will be lost, and a terror-free America is not guaranteed.
We act, as high school students living in the United States, as if a war won't affect us. It means rising prices of food, clothing, and shoes. Did I mention gas prices? It means that our country has a higher risk of being attacked. War causes a constant worry, for family members and friends, so far away, in battle, risking it all. Many European countries think our war is pointless. If you ever happen to travel to France or Italy for a senior trip, with a religious group, or with your family, you may notice feelings of hostility directed at you. It's not until the mention of war that these feelings arose.
Tonight, as I listen to the reporters on CNN give updates on the war with Iraq, I wish we could go back in time. I wish that President Bush had sided with the majority of the United Nations. I wish that our leaders were signing peace treaties today.
In about a day, thousands of Americans will be fighting a war in Iraq, and I feel as if there's nothing a small-town girl like me can do.
someone's intelligent because he agrees with you?ah...
i told myself hunreds of times that i could care less about someone else's president,but since Bush has so much to say when it comes to foreign countries,i think i should change my concept
well his foreign policies make him annoying.his attitude is annoying.his hypocrisy is annoying.
hmm especially his hypocrisy. he could just stand up and declare he was doing that all for the americans,if so many people would still disagree with him but at least he wouldn't disgust anyone. but he didn't.he had to name it "free iraq"...
Topics 
