Discussion: The Iraq War

[TheSumOfGod]

A patriot is a patriot. If American cities had been bombed and invaded by a foreign army, claiming that it merely intended to "liberate" your country, and some of your friends and members of your family had been injured or killed, and it didn't seem as if the military occupation was going to end anytime soon, wouldn't YOU resort to terrorism?

 

[Carter]

When innocent people are purposefully killed, it's terrorism.
When soldiers kill other soldiers, it's not.

 

[Cho Chang]

That's if you take terrorism to be the narrow definition that has been proliferated out of patriotic sentiment. Strictly speaking, there are plenty of right reasons to be found using the regular definition, "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."

Couldn't have put it better myself. By conventional definition most world governments commit terrorism every time they engage in an altercation of any sort with another country.

 

[Carter]

Couldn't have put it better myself. By conventional definition most world governments commit terrorism every time they engage in an altercation of any sort with another country.

No ****, but nobody said it was right.

 

[TheSumOfGod]

When innocent people are purposefully killed, it's terrorism.
When soldiers kill other soldiers, it's not.

We're talking about Iraq here. The only innocent people being killed in Iraq are Iraqi civilians. The rest are coalition soldiers and Iraqi collaborators trained by them.

 

[Cho Chang]

When innocent people are purposefully killed, it's terrorism.
When soldiers kill other soldiers, it's not.

What makes someone a soldier? Let's say a foreign force invaded your country (which could be considered an act of terrorism) and you, as a citizen took up arms in order to protect your family from the invading force. Have you now become a soldier? Are you a terrorist?

 

[Carter]

What makes someone a soldier? Let's say a foreign force invaded your country (which could be considered an act of terrorism) and you, as a citizen took up arms in order to protect your family from the invading force. Have you now become a soldier? Are you a terrorist?

You are only a terrorist if your goal is to kill innocent people.

 

[Cho Chang]

You are only a terrorist if your goal is to kill innocent people.

I'm sure that killing innocent people is hardly the "goal" of most groups we consider terrorist groups. Innocent people are just people at the wrong place and time who are unfortunate casualties of their war effort which I'm sure has a "goal" other than death. I don't see victims of so called "terrorist" attacks as being any different than civilian casualties resulting from a bomb dropped in Iraq.

 

[Carter]

Al Quaida for example. I know this isn't iraq, but anybody who is willing to kill mass amounts of innocent people (collateral damage, or otherwise) is very dangerous and needs to be taken out.

That's my viewpoint and it even applies to America.

 

[roach]

State Department spokesman Justin Higgins defended the size of the embassy, old and new, saying it's indicative of the work facing the United States here.

"It's somewhat self-evident that there's going to be a fairly sizable commitment to Iraq by the U.S. government in all forms for several years," he said in Washington.

Higgins noted that large numbers of non-diplomats work at the mission  hundreds of military personnel and dozens of FBI agents, for example, along with representatives of the Agriculture, Commerce and other U.S. federal departments.

They sleep in hundreds of trailers or "containerized" quarters scattered around the Green Zone. But next year embassy staff will move into six apartment buildings in the new complex, which has been under construction since mid-2005 with a target completion date of June 2007.

Iraq's interim government transferred the land to U.S. ownership in October 2004, under an agreement whose terms were not disclosed.

 

[Superman4ever]

State Department spokesman Justin Higgins defended the size of the embassy, old and new, saying it's indicative of the work facing the United States here.

"It's somewhat self-evident that there's going to be a fairly sizable commitment to Iraq by the U.S. government in all forms for several years," he said in Washington.

Higgins noted that large numbers of non-diplomats work at the mission  hundreds of military personnel and dozens of FBI agents, for example, along with representatives of the Agriculture, Commerce and other U.S. federal departments.

They sleep in hundreds of trailers or "containerized" quarters scattered around the Green Zone. But next year embassy staff will move into six apartment buildings in the new complex, which has been under construction since mid-2005 with a target completion date of June 2007.

Iraq's interim government transferred the land to U.S. ownership in October 2004, under an agreement whose terms were not disclosed.

They sure are working fast though. I just wish they'd work just as hard on the actual country...

 

[Armand Z Trip]

THEY MIGHT AS WELL PAINT A BIG BULLSEYE ON THE SIDE OF THAT THING.

Absolutely. 21 Buildings on 104 acres? Is there going to be a Starbucks and an AMC? Can you say permanent occupation? I thought it was ironic in the story how they said the US Embassy is currently housed in The Republican Palace.

 

[Calvin]

No ****, but nobody said it was right.

Actually, yeah, I said it can be right. Terrorism doesn't just mean killing innocents.

 

[Calvin]

You are only a terrorist if your goal is to kill innocent people.

Not according to the actual definition. You're probably thinking of the revised post 9/11 version of the definition, which, maybe fairly, maybe not, demonized the word "terrorism" beyond its actual meaning.

 

[Carter]

Not according to the actual definition. You're probably thinking of the revised post 9/11 version of the definition, which, maybe fairly, maybe not, demonized the word "terrorism" beyond its actual meaning.

I was only speaking in the context of that post

 

[Carter]

Actually, yeah, I said it can be right. Terrorism doesn't just mean killing innocents.

But it is involved, so it's morally wrong

 

[Calvin]

But it is involved, so it's morally wrong

No, it isn't necessarily involved. Plus, even if some innocents are killed, there are still some situations where it could be seen as " right." If you liberate an entire country by striking a bunch of non-civilians, with a few civilians killed in the crossfire, you would have grounds for labeling your actions as the "right" course, since maybe your people would never be freed, and they'd be opressed forever, losing their lives in the process.

God, I'm gonna get a knock on my door from the FBI or CIA or whatever at some point.

 

[sinewave]

Original cost estimates ranged over $1 billion, but Congress appropriated only $592 million in the emergency Iraq budget adopted last year. Most has gone to a Kuwait builder, First Kuwaiti Trading & Contracting, with the rest awarded to six contractors working on the project's "classified" portion — the actual embassy offices.

Higgins declined to identify those builders, citing security reasons, but said five were American companies.

gee, wonder if haliburton might be one of those companies????

 

[Carter]

No, it isn't necessarily involved. Plus, even if some innocents are killed, there are still some situations where it could be seen as " right." If you liberate an entire country by striking a bunch of non-civilians, with a few civilians killed in the crossfire, you would have grounds for labeling your actions as the "right" course, since maybe your people would never be freed, and they'd be opressed forever, losing their lives in the process.

God, I'm gonna get a knock on my door from the FBI or CIA or whatever at some point.

I'm only speaking of the type of terrorism that solely targets innocents to coerce officials. When targeting military personnel I believe it ceases to be terrorism.

 

[roach]

according to the rules of Engagement the instant you pick up a weapon and attempt to harm a military member you no longer are a civilian

 

[Calvin]

I'm only speaking of the type of terrorism that solely targets innocents to coerce officials. When targeting military personnel I believe it ceases to be terrorism.

Well, it doesn't cease to be terrorism.

 

[Carter]

I disagree.

 

[Cho Chang]

Ok, all this terrorism talk aside (sorry for bringing it up), the United States government should not be building a complex of this size on foreign soil. This act has imperialism written all over it.

 

[sinewave]

Ok, all this terrorism talk aside (sorry for bringing it up), the United States government should not be building a complex of this size on foreign soil. This act has imperialism written all over it.

i'm really not surprised. it's the next logical step in fulfilling PNAC's plan of building up America's global empire. they're just trying to secure their foreign interests.

 

[TheSumOfGod]

Don't blame the US, for the vast majority of the American people are completely clueless, and America itself shall soon be a thing of the past as it's remains become a mere province of the new global Roman Empire. Blame the Illuminati, they're the ones pulling the strings from the shadows.