Your Thoughts: Iraq and war.

[MaineExport]

Originally posted by VimyJ "]Maine, Maine, Maine.... Another country is foreign by definition.

Ah... so in the context of us both being in the US, you are from a country. I too am from a country... this is so much more clear now... thanks.

How could you have a "domestic country"? Foriegn refers to something not domestic which is what another country already is.

We are both 'here' right now, I am from 'here' originally... as in, I am from THIS country. You are from a different country... or a foriegn country. It is how the word is used to establish a relation to the subject... you freaking idiot. (oops... name calling is immature... sorry it just slipped)

There are a few hoser's<-- (oh, never mind.. I see you resort to name calling as well) that use this term after watching a life time of US sitcoms but it is a fact that the US is the only English speaking country where the redundant and revealing phrase "foreign country" is continally abused.

Again with the arrogance... do you feel better after a day of this nonsense?

Fact, baby! By your standards.... no doubt. The rest of us will continue to believe that our opinions (as misguided as they may be) are just that.... opinions.

[Mayhem_J30]

Jeeze wouldn't you know it. As soon as the $100 billion cost of a favourable war is posed another figure of $1.9 trillion or 20% of the US GDP is likely if things go badly. Then, add on the cost of the alienation of allies with their invaluable inteligence for the war on terror and further polarization of the Islamic world because of a war on Muslims and you have a ruinous scenario for the standard of living in the US.

A small price to pay to prevent future loss of life due to senseless acts of terrorism. Our allies are apparently fairys anyway, screw em.

[VimyJ]

A small price to pay to prevent future loss of life due to senseless acts of terrorism. Our allies are apparently fairys anyway, screw em.

That's the point. Terrorism. This war could set back the war on terrorism by straining relations with allied (Western) nations and stir up more sympathy terrorlst acts. There has been no proof of a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq. We may view the terrorists atrocities as senseless but unfortunately the motivated enemy does not. There's the rub. The allies have their own agenda (just like the US) and were probably calling to US fairies for coming late to the world wars. But there was too much money to be made playing both sides so the US had to be dragged into the war by FDR. It was a stupid move by Hitler to declare war on the US after Pearl Harbour. The US might never have gotten involved in Europe if that hadn't happened.

BTW, Blair survived a crucial vote in parliament today by changing the wording of the proposed legislation so that it doesn't include war.

[FrEaK]

Mayhem that may be exactly what Bush is thinking.. however im just wondering what it feels like to have a puppet owned by your phamaceutical companies running the country... apparently the US was the only coutry who voted against giving medicines at lower cost to 3rd world countries... explain to me why he didn't spend the little extra cash to save those lives?

[MaineExport]

explain to me why he didn't spend the little extra cash to save those lives?

Because sometimes what is in the best interest of an entire nation and its economy (and very survival) is not what's best for a FOREIGN country. Sometimes we must consider our own interests instead of handing out even MORE humanitarian aid to the latest trendy cause.

There are a million questions like that... hell, why don't we just hand over everthing we've got so that less developed nations may thrive while we systematically destroy ourselves.

Why has it become so unpopular to take care of your own?

[FrEaK]

Well the way i see it... 144 other nations didn't have a problem doing it... are you saying that their lives are worth less than an Americans.... Bush wasn't even thinking about his nation, he was thinking about the 50 million dollars the major phamaceutical companies donated to his party in the close congressional races....Those companies were never happy about this endeavor because they're greedy bastards... Bush was manipulated into screwing a poor country out of much needed medicines... and yes it was only him that screwed them out because the Bush aministration was the only one opposing the act.

[89sxRCR]

Quote »Read in the Chicago Tribune ths morning that a war and six month occupation of Iraq is going to cost $100 billion. This is double the price tag Rumsfeld quoted just weeks ago. We all know from experience that the latest figure is probably low as well.[/quote] speaking of bumped up, so are the number of people who demonstrated in the U.S against the war. The numbers released by san fransisco were approximately 200 thousand protesters. A new more acurate tally using satellite pictures and various other means was performed, and it turns out the number is actually 60 thousand. A large protest, for sure, but no where near the size originally reported.

[MaineExport]

Originally posted by FrEaK "]Well the way i see it... 144 other nations didn't have a problem doing it... are you saying that their lives are worth less than an Americans....

Nope... but I AM saying that their lives are not worth MORE than ours. I'm all for helping out those in need, but then again the old argument about taking care of our OWN sick and dying could be made.

Bush wasn't even thinking about his nation,

Sweet dude, you can read minds? Is that something you could teach me or is i just a natural gift?

he was thinking about the 50 million dollars the major phamaceutical companies donated to his party in the close congressional races

We'd be foolish to think that those donations don't have an impact... but I would suggest that if Bush (or ANY politician) thought that his decisions were NOT in the best interest of his country... he wouldn't make said decision. Reasoning; if he makes a decision based only upon a donation of funds... that decision could be devastating and completely ruin his chances for re-election... making any donated money useless.

Yes donations can influence political behavior, but NO effective politician would let it make their decisions for them. We don't have a perfect system... but it has worked for longer than any other government in existence right now. This is at least partially attributable to the fact that it is in constant evolution.... hopefully for the better. The founding fathers had some amazing foresight.

[FrEaK]

No i cant read minds, but i can put 2 and 2 together....

There are far less of your sick and then those in the 3rd world countries who really do need this medicine.. at least take some of the money you guys pour into lifestyle drugs like viagra and use it to produce cheaper vaccinations...

Bush isn't really doing a stellar job of convincing people to vote him back in... there are probably more people who dislikehim now then there was during the election...

There have been more people killed in 3rd world countries by malnutrition, disease, and crappy living conditions each year, then the WTC disaster... and it happens every year.... this was finally a chance to cut back those numbers... but your fearless leader decided it made more sense to side with those who fill his wallet instead of making the right choice...

[deesolballs]

Well the way i see it... 144 other nations didn't have a problem doing it... are you saying that their lives are worth less than an Americans.... Bush wasn't even thinking about his nation, he was thinking about the 50 million dollars the major phamaceutical companies donated to his party in the close congressional races....Those companies were never happy about this endeavor because they're greedy bastards... Bush was manipulated into screwing a poor country out of much needed medicines... and yes it was only him that screwed them out because the Bush aministration was the only one opposing the act.

What is it with you angry militant canucky sons-o-beatches!!

So frustrated and misguided. So upset with the superior nation that carries you on its shoulders, literally.

Freaky Deaky,Are we talking about the Doha agremment?? I believe the US had agreed to support giving generic drugs to impoverished countries for the treatment of HIV/AIDS, TB, malaria, chlorea and some other diseases. The boohooing was about the US not wanting to allow copyright infringement on All drugs (I could be wrong). We have to draw the line somewhere IMHO. Giving away intellectual property will hurt us in the long run. It takes money to develop new and improved drugs. If we give away patents on cancer medicine, liver and heart disease medicine, etc so cheap generics can be made we will eventually hear boohooing about free ridlin, lipitor, prozac, etc. Next they will want to get free viagra, a bottle of Courvosier and a back rub by a Dallas Cowboy Cheerleader dressed in a red, white and blue thong. In the mean time we are left years behind in the development of new drugs.

If you foreigners don't like it then buy the drugs at full price and donate them to the needy countries, pull your fangs out of the jugular of the US for once. Begging Bastards!!

[AZhitman]

OR, perhaps they could field their own team of world-class researchers, scientists and chemists and develop medications, machinery and technology that would put them on a par with the US.

What's that you say? They already HAVE such people?

Yep - You're right - And most of them have moved to the States. Imagine that.