Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
France Won't Say Which Side It Wants To Win War...
- Thread starter taeclee99
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Define muderer?. look at Saddam and his history, he has killed more people then you, or all of mac rumors visitors combined. I wont even mention the ones tortured or raped. If you pretend that Saddam is not a murderer then you are simply playing pretend. While France has played pretend while selling and making deals with this killer, America has had enough. Saddam will be history with or without Frances help. He will no longer be cuting the tongues out of people who disagree with him and he wont be allowed to murder anymore.
I think you, being a mindless twit, missed the whole point of my post.
I wasn't saying there won't be a victor, someone who can say they killed more people and made them surrender.
Sure, there will be one of those. BUt really, is there a REAL winner??? I think not.
Gee, I would sure hope so. Although sometimes I'm not too sure... How many people have you killed today?
Actually I myself am a murderous savage, so dont count me out of the game yet folks.
But really guys, where do you pull this stuff from, I mean do comments like that really form in your head! France doesnt want to war so why would it choose a side, but like pantagruel said they said they would help US troops if Saddam decided to use chemical weapons, that is good enough isnt it, we did go on with the war without their help to begin with so why would we expect them to join now?
But really guys, where do you pull this stuff from, I mean do comments like that really form in your head! France doesnt want to war so why would it choose a side, but like pantagruel said they said they would help US troops if Saddam decided to use chemical weapons, that is good enough isnt it, we did go on with the war without their help to begin with so why would we expect them to join now?
The problem is that in the eyes of the world, the U.S. does not have the moral authority to claim that its main aim is to liberate Iraq from oppression, since the U.S. itself has been responsible for supporting more oppressive regimes than almost any other nation in history.
The U.S. actively gave military aid to dictators just as brutal as Saddam all over Latin America. In the Middle East especially the U.S. has no credibility, since it has always supported dictators in the region.
Why is this relevant? Because this war will be meaningless unless we can win the hearts and minds of the Arab people. And because of the air of illegitimacy that this war has from the beginning, the objective of the war is already lost before the first shot is even fired.
Don't Hurt Me, I realize that your heart is in the right place and you genuinely want freedom throughout the world. But I think it is naive of you to believe the government's propaganda that this is the reason for the war. Whatever our country does, it does for its own interests.
Now there's no shame in that. Why shouldn't a country act in its own interests? As long as it doesn't violate the sovereign rights of other nations that is, which unfortunately we are clearly doing by our outrageous pre-emptive action. Not to mention the fact that I firmly believe that this war will work against our interests in almost every way imaginable. Our security and prosperity is being ruined before our very eyes.
Originally posted by Moxiemike
I think you, being a mindless twit, missed the whole point of my post.
I wasn't saying there won't be a victor, someone who can say they killed more people and made them surrender.
Sure, there will be one of those. BUt really, is there a REAL winner??? I think not.
Yes, there will be a real winner. The real winner in the end will be the Iraqi people free of a despot like Saddam Hussein.
Unless they plunge into civil war or the new regime that the Iraqi people elect is even more anti-American than the current one or...
Yes, you are right. Anything is possible. The Middle East is a hotbed of instability.
That is why the US is going to set up a civil authority in Iraq to ensure that civil war does not erupt. Once a coalition gov't is formed the US will relinquish control. I would rather place my bets on the future than to trust in Saddam's regime.
Man this thread is sooooooo gunna end up in wasteland, Can people try to not have thouse anoying 1 liners please... Anyway, who cares if france dosen't give us support we were gunna do what we *needed* todo without thier support in the first place. The UN has become another league of nations, but meh.. and would all you people read the site news section in the disscussion fourms, you might find THIS VERY!!! helpful... Maybe the french want the Iraqi people to win regardless... How the *&(* do you know...
Originally posted by Moxiemike
First off, bloated's post has been reported to the mods. Hopefully he'll be dealt with in course.
Primarily, I'm DISGUSTED that there is a thread on this site referring to "winning" this war.
There's going to be NO WINNER.
Saddam's a dead goose, innocent iraqis will die. innocent americans will die, our economies will be decimated, international relations are going to become tougher, and of course, bushie won't win re-election....
So no winners here. Never winners in war. So I think France not sayig anything shows how smart the french might be... smarter than us cocky americans.
MOXIE! There will be a victor in this war. Iraqi people. Period. If no one ever wins in war, I suppose we lost WWi, WWII, etc. There are always winners in war. Don't generalize your feeling into broad statements that have no basis
Oh man, will you guys go hug a tree or something
Seriously, war is a method to solve political disputes. Period. Nothing more, nothing less. This, whether you agree with it or not, is an extention of diplomacy that failed. Now, that being said. There is generally a clear defined victor in war. Sometimes there is not. This is not going to be one of those times.
Now, discussing whether we have the moral authority to conduct this war is NEVER going to be agreed upon. All of those on the left are not going to support it, those on the right will. 78% of Americans do. That number is growing every week, and will continue to do so.
Now, instead of sitting here posting all day, or PROTESTING somewhere today. Lets go work in a homeless shelter, or volunteer in a hospital. Take some old people some food and visit with them. Visit children with Downs Syndrome. Lets do something that will matter, make a difference, and mean something in this world, instead of either debating the issue in here, or marching down a street where no one is really listening anyway.
Originally posted by Backtothemac
MOXIE! There will be a victor in this war. Iraqi people. Period. If no one ever wins in war, I suppose we lost WWi, WWII, etc. There are always winners in war. Don't generalize your feeling into broad statements that have no basis
I find it amazing that even you don't understand what he was getting at.
Who won WWII? Well, I guess at the end of the war, the Germans saw that they could no longer fight successfully and surrendered, so we won. Right?
But what about the countless troops we lost during the war? The resources and lives diverted to the cause of war. In the end we lost much more than we gained. Is that really winning? It was a necessary war. But the cost of even a necessary war can be staggering. And just because its necessary doesn't mean that at the end we all haven't lost something.
That is the point.
And I, like so many others, argue that it is questionable whether this war is the best thing for the Iraqi people. Why the fudge do you think so many people oppose this war? If everything was as straighforward as you make it sound, there would be far higher support.
And your 78% number is a single poll number likely contorted to fit your view of the truth. Bullox.
Taft
this thread could have been called.......
France expects renewed relations with US
"But he said he was also confident that France and the United States would re-establish the close ties they enjoyed before the Iraqi crisis unfolded."
France expects renewed relations with US
"But he said he was also confident that France and the United States would re-establish the close ties they enjoyed before the Iraqi crisis unfolded."
Haha, really. Damned Sky News. They shout out a question at the end of the press conference - one of many, I'm sure, the way reporters shout out questions once questions are no longer being taken - and to their delight, it isn't answered, allowing them to so title their article. The title betrays nothing about France's opinion, only about Sky News'.
Dont Hurt Me:
I'm sorry, but you completely missed the point of my post. I never stated that I think Saddam isn't a murderer. On the contrary, I actually believe Saddam has killed countless people.
My point was that Saddam certainly isn't the only person in the world who has killed people. Not by any standards.
And for the record, unless anyone on MacRumors is a war veteran, I doubt either of them have ever killed anyone.
I'm sorry, but you completely missed the point of my post. I never stated that I think Saddam isn't a murderer. On the contrary, I actually believe Saddam has killed countless people.
My point was that Saddam certainly isn't the only person in the world who has killed people. Not by any standards.
And for the record, unless anyone on MacRumors is a war veteran, I doubt either of them have ever killed anyone.
Well the world can either say we wont let murdering, dictator, ruthless,torturing,raping,polluting,killing,oppressive,cease fire ignoring Tyrants disobey the world or we can do as the french have and ignore all of this for monetary gain and pretend the Saddams and Hitlers of history are just fine. Sorry i choose the first choice and so do most americans.