Cost of War

by teejay 135 Replies latest social current

  • jst2laws
    jst2laws

    I love American history and, like you. I highly respect the sacrifices of the founding fathers. This particularly was a great point:

    Each signer became a marked man, pursued relentlessly by the British retribution. None who had property or family were spared. Most lived to see their families killed or separated forever and their property sacked. Nine signers died of wounds or hardships during the war. Many died in poverty-the fathers of our country! Their pledge-"our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor"-was no idle boast. The cost of freedom is incalculable.

    American was fighting in their own land to protect their own land and to be treated, as you say, as a fellow Englishman.

    The problem now is WE have become the equivalent of the "English" oppressors of freedom. Now the people in Iraq, Iran, N. Korea and most of the Arab world are determined to "fight in their land for their land and to be treated like" a HUMAN BEING.

    What in the world has happened to the principles and priorities of the great men who founded this country??

    Jst2laws

  • frenchbabyface
    frenchbabyface

    Jst2law / Teejay / Abbadon !

    Wow those 3 lasts posts are just ... WOW ! ...

  • ThiChi
    ThiChi

    I will try to answer most here:

    Regarding the quote from Teddy, it is relevant, since our objectives are right for the US and the World. You can sit around, all day long, and point out where "this and that" could have been done better, however, the US has once again taken the lead, the task, of bringing democracy to Nations like Iraq and Afghanistan. To not acknowledge the progress that has been made in these two countries, is mind-boggling.

    Like President Regan, who in the early 80s?, laid out his "Sick Bear Theory" regarding the USSR, which resulted of the build-up that was needed to subvert the USSR?s poor economic situation, even though many critics came out and stated that Regan was a war monger and would bring in Armageddon, he pressed foreword and now, even his hardest critics agree Regan was right....So too, Bush is pressing foreword with a proactive Geo-political strategy that will benefit the US and many other Nations.

    Do you want to be surrounded by a bunch of negative people who constantly say, "It can't be done," or by people who say, "It can be done," and who work to make it so? Bush spoke with vision when he said: "It is presumptuous and insulting to suggest that a whole region of the world, or the one-fifth of humanity that is Muslim, is somehow untouched by the most basic aspirations of life. Human cultures can be vastly different, yet the human heart desires the same good things everywhere on Earth."

    No longer is the goal of this war "regime change" or disarmament. For the first time, the president said that we're going to close the Islamic "freedom gap." This belief and faith in humanity comes from Mr. Bush's faith in God - at a time when the EU's biggest battle over a new constitution is whether or not to mention the Almighty. You can't keep freedom bottled up, or drip it out as the USSR tried to do. Remember, Reagan brought them down with his vision in the face of those who said freedom wasn't for Russians.

    It is amazing the lack of vision some.

    Regarding the Founding Fathers and Freedom and "what does this have to do with today...."Your view of their times is overly simplistic. Not just Britain was involved, but many European Nations hand a hand in the Territory and many agendas where present. The fact is the same virtues for the fight for Freedom that took place then, is as just as powerful and it was for WWII and the Cold War and the present. WWII was really none of our business, however, we understood the desire of peoples everywhere to be free. And the US has born the cost buy substantially funding NATO, UN and the general defense of Europe.

    Again Teddy?s words really speak for some here:

    "...who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat...."

    Many are on the wrong side of History and the Iraq issue. Are there risks? You bet. But I have faith in the President, and all people everywhere who feel freedom is a worthy endeavor.

  • amac
    amac
    It is amazing the lack of vision some.

    LOL!!!

    That is funny! So this war went from being a defensive attack to stop us being attacked with weapons of mass destruction to a "fight for freedom" due to Bush's faith in God???? Talk about lack of vision...

    If you really believe this was about spreading democracy then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

  • ThiChi
    ThiChi

    Out of all the points I provided, this is what you pick apart? You prove my point. The President gave a speech at the UN before we invaded Iraq. The President outlined not only the WMD issue but the Human Right Issue as a reason to go to War. Did you know that?

    Critics like you ignore uncomfortable facts such as this from President Bush's speech to the United Nations on September 12, 2002. Bush mentions weapons of mass destruction briefly, and then cites Iraq's support for terrorism, its persecution of civilians, its failure to obey Security Council resolutions, "release or account for all Gulf War personnel," return the remains and return stolen property, "accept liability for losses resulting from the invasion of Kuwait and fully cooperate with international efforts to resolve these issues, as required by Security Council resolutions." Bush cited the Oil for Food program, which turned out to be Kofi Annan's private Enron.

    You want more? "If the Iraqi regime wishes peace it will immediately end all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. It will accept UN administration of funds from that program to ensure that the money is used fairly and promptly for the benefit of the Iraqi people. If all these steps are taken, it will signal a new openness and accountability in Iraq, and it could open the prospect of the United Nations helping to build a government that represents all Iraqis." On March 17 of 2003, Bush delivered his final ultimatum to Saddam Hussein.

    The president talked a lot about weapons of mass destruction in that speech, but he also addressed all these other concerns from supporting terrorism (Has the left also forgotten the Salmon Pak terrorist training facility?) to repressing the Iraqi people. When the president addressed the Iraqi people, he didn't mention a word about WMD. He talked about freedom. Those focusing exclusively on the WMDs are simply desperate, out-of-power people seeking to inflict any damage they can on Bush. What's shocking is that they're the same people who always honored themselves by speaking out in favor of human rights, yet they would've left the Iraqi people to the tender mercies of Saddam's thugs rather than see them liberated by this president.

  • foreword
    foreword

    ThiChi, now that's all cute and dandy what you've just said. You really took it all, line and sinker did you? Do you sincerely believe that's what George Bush believes?

    There's so much smoke here I can't see no more.......

    ......just a second while I remove those rosy colored sunglasses ThiChi just threw in my face.

    ThiChi, read my lips and repeat after me......"it's all about money".

  • roybatty
    roybatty

    The problem we have today is we live in a "what's in it for me" society. The majority of people who are protesting the war are doing so because they hate Bush's conservative policies. Where were these people when Rwandia was being destroyed? Where were they when Somolia was being decimated? Where were they when the Serbs were commiting geonicide? Where are they now with the crisis in Sudan? It's so easy to point fingers and say "ah ha! you suck!" while not having a solution of your own.

  • roybatty
    roybatty

    The problem we have today is we live in a "what's in it for me" society. The majority of people who are protesting the war are doing so because they hate Bush's conservative policies. Where were these people when Rwandia was being destroyed? Where were they when Somolia was being decimated? Where were they when the Serbs were commiting geonicide? Where are they now with the crisis in Sudan? It's so easy to point fingers and say "ah ha! you suck!" while not having a solution of your own.

  • foreword
    foreword

    Where were you when Saddam was committing genocide?....he was your buddy then....

    Where are you now with the crisis in Sudan?....not worth the dollars invested.....

    and what the hell are doing in Iraq?.....yes, worth it's weight in gold....

  • roybatty
    roybatty
    Where are you now with the crisis in Sudan?....not worth the dollars invested.....

    I'm just asking where are all the protestors? And yes, I think the U.S. should use troops if needed to avoid another Rwanda. But who said Bush or any other politican is a saint and only does things for humanitarian reasons.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit