sonsofwashington Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Painkiller The Iraqis need to overcome their fears, and take control of their country. More Iraqis are dying then American soldiers. It's time for them to take their country back. I believe they will. What if democracy fails in Iraq? What if corruption is so prominent in the Iraqi government that it undermines all democracy stands for. Do you believe that this Iraqi administration will repel corruption? Honest question. I think corruption is going to spoil the democratic dream we have for Iraq. Hopefully I'm wrong. If we can change Iraq, we can change the world. BTW - I don't think we can change the world. When I say "change" I mean manipulate the world the way we want as opposed to "making a difference" in peoples lives. Just because democracy worked in America does not mean it will work in Iraq. Democracy does not guarantee success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Painkiller Saddam would have killed many more than that if left in power, just over a longer period of time. Civlian casualties occur in war. It can't be helped. Germany and Japan seem to have forgiven us. Why can't democracy live happily ever after in Iraq? The fact that you and I can sit here and debate at all, shows the greatness of democracy. Atleast here, guys won't show up at your door and cart you off to a prison, because you speak ill of Bush. alright dude, you're freaking out alittle. Saddam was bad, but I don't know if he'd of killed many more than 100K since 2002 in his own country. To assume that every culture is going to take to democracy as well as we did is crazy. They are occupied by us right now. Red and Green zones......rules that they didn't vote on....yet. Its a wait and see situation. But assuming the best is even more foolish than assuming the worst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by sonsofwashington What if democracy fails in Iraq? What if corruption is so prominent in the Iraqi government that it undermines all democracy stands for. Do you believe that this Iraqi administration will repel corruption? Honest question. I think corruption is going to spoil the democratic dream we have for Iraq. Hopefully I'm wrong. If we can change Iraq, we can change the world. BTW - I don't think we can change the world. When I say "change" I mean manipulate the world the way we want as opposed to "making a difference" in peoples lives. Just because democracy worked in America does not mean it will work in Iraq. Democracy does not guarantee success. Well, maybe we should just let Saddam out of prison, return him to power, and roll on out, because democracy MIGHT not work in Iraq. Do you think the majority of the Iraqi people want that? I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonsofwashington Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by KevinthePRF Right now it just depends on who you ask Kilmer: http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/iraq.deaths/ I think what Kilmer meant is that those civilians are really insurgents. I gotcha Kilmer. But realiatically they are not all insurgents. We killed innocent people on a mass scale. Even if 80% of those people insurgents that is still 7 times the number of peope who dies in the World Trade. We all know how devastating that was to our people. 20% = 14 towers. Imagine if similar towers had been hit in: Chicago Los Angelas Houston Miami San Fran. Philly Still only talkin 20% here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 "There has been no official figure for the number of Iraqis killed since the conflict began 18 months ago, but some non-government estimates have ranged from 10,000 to 30,000." It's unfortunate that ANY civilian loses a life. But that's an unfortunate side affect of war. We killed hundreds of thousands of civilians defeating Hitler. It sucks, but it's reality. My point is that the 100k number is way overstated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford alright dude, you're freaking out alittle. Saddam was bad, but I don't know if he'd of killed many more than 100K since 2002 in his own country. Buford, how am I freaking out? What difference does it make whether he killed them in 2002 or 1975? He still killed them, and was always capable of killing them Maybe you should go to rotten.com and take a look at some of the mass grave exhumation pictures they have there, and then come back to talk to me about whether things are worse in Iraq now then before. Whether their future looks brighter then their past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinthePRF Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Painkiller Saddam would have killed many more than that if left in power, just over a longer period of time. Civlian casualties occur in war. It can't be helped. Germany and Japan seem to have forgiven us. Why can't democracy live happily ever after in Iraq? The fact that you and I can sit here and debate at all, shows the greatness of democracy. Atleast here, guys won't show up at your door and cart you off to a prison, because you speak ill of Bush. You will though, be investigated by the FBI if they find out. See Patriot Act. Also Iraqi democracy might work in the long run, but history has proven otherwise. Take the Peoples Republic of Congo/Zaire for example, we basically assassinated its dictator, handpicked our own government and leader for that country and 40 years later the country is still a corruptive mess we intended to remove for the sake and good name of democracy. Changing a government is the easy part, changing a culture, that's a ball game no one should tread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonsofwashington Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 I believe that 100 percent of our actions have good intentions behind them. I used to do the same thing when I would talk with a foreigner from another country. I would claim that United States always acted with good intentions till one day I questioned a certain action. What I realized has made me a smarter person. The point is you have to evaluate every action we take with a clean slate. Assume we are acting with good intentions and you leave the door open for bad intentions. You can't assume anything. Don't let your own patriotism allow you to take things for granted. We always need to be questioning ourselves. I am sure you have a good heart, but there may come a time where you should consider questioning our good intentions. Try it. You will only give yourself more perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by KevinthePRF You will though, be investigated by the FBI if they find out. See Patriot Act. Also Iraqi democracy might work in the long run, but history has proven otherwise. Take the Peoples Republic of Congo/Zaire for example, we basically assassinated its dictator, handpicked our own government and leader for that country and 40 years later the country is still a corruptive mess we intended to remove for the sake and good name of democracy. A couple of key points in there. 1st, WE handpicked the leader. In Iraq, the people are doing so. 2nd, there are many many examples where this HAS worked. Japan and Germany are the most glaring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonsofwashington Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Painkiller Saddam would have killed many more than that if left in power, just over a longer period of time. Civlian casualties occur in war. It can't be helped. Germany and Japan seem to have forgiven us. Why can't democracy live happily ever after in Iraq? The fact that you and I can sit here and debate at all, shows the greatness of democracy. Atleast here, guys won't show up at your door and cart you off to a prison, because you speak ill of Bush. In a word......Corruption. But I can't say for sure if it will work or not. I just can't think of 1 country that converted to democracy, from a dictatorship or communism, that isn't riddled with corruption. I know it sounds weird, but corruption in many govenrments and societies is a way of life. In most cases these goverments don't want corruption to cease because it works in their favor. So really they behave just as bad as they always did, but now they have a nice title to hide behind...."Democracy". EDIT: Japan, Germany. OK, I'll give ya that Kilmer. But why do I see Iraq being a different sort of beast. Maybe I underestimate the Iraqi's. Maybe they can make it work. Naaaaaaaaah...j/k i needed to lighten up a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by KevinthePRF You will though, be investigated by the FBI if they find out. See Patriot Act. Investigated is one thing. We are also talking about degree here. Do you think 49% of the country right now is being investigated for voting against Bush? Charged for some B.S. crime, and thrown in jail, beaten, tortured, and then buried in a mass grave with the others who dared to speak out is entirely another. Originally posted by KevinthePRF Also Iraqi democracy might work in the long run, but history has proven otherwise. Take the Peoples Republic of Congo/Zaire for example, we basically assassinated its dictator, handpicked our own government and leader for that country and 40 years later the country is still a corruptive mess we intended to remove for the sake and good name of democracy. Changing a government is the easy part, changing a culture, that's a ball game no one should tread. Your right. This notion has failed in the past, but was that because the idea was bad, or that we made mistakes in the process? Did we stay involved? Or did we just let them fend for themselves and hope for the best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by sonsofwashington In a word......Corruption. But I can't say for sure if it will work or not. I just can't think of 1 country that converted to democracy, from a dictatorship or communism, that isn't riddled with corruption. I know it sounds weird, but corruption in many govenrments and societies is a way of life. In most cases these goverments don't want corruption to cease because it works in their favor. So really they behave just as bad as they always did, but know they have a nice title to hide behind...."Democracy". See Japan, then Germany. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonsofwashington Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 "There has been no official figure for the number of Iraqis killed since the conflict began 18 months ago, but some non-government estimates have ranged from 10,000 to 30,000." It's unfortunate that ANY civilian loses a life. But that's an unfortunate side affect of war. We killed hundreds of thousands of civilians defeating Hitler. It sucks, but it's reality. My point is that the 100k number is way overstated. Sorry but without a reference I have no choice but to see that quote as merely a phrase concocted by you with quotation marks around it. I think that is fair? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 It's from the CNN article linked by Kevin. http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/iraq.deaths/ 2nd paragraph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinthePRF Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Painkiller Investigated is one thing. We are also talking about degree here. Do you think 49% of the country right now is being investigated for voting against Bush? Charged for some B.S. crime, and thrown in jail, beaten, tortured, and then buried in a mass grave with the others who dared to speak out is entirely another. You don't need to pursue this I was being a bit sarcastic, there is no comparison. Your right. This notion has failed in the past, but was that because the idea was bad, or that we made mistakes in the process? Did we stay involved? Or did we just let them fend for themselves and hope for the best. The mistake was believing a culture would change just because the government had been changed. So how long are we going to have to "stay involved" in Iraq? I already think the cost has outweighed the need if the whole issue was resolved today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 weren't we in Japan as a occupying force into the early 1950's? I think we even wrote their 1st Constitution after the war. and Germany....well, that just split. hmmmm, maybe we can split Iraq in half. Good idea or Bad idea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinthePRF Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 It's from the CNN article linked by Kevin. http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/iraq.deaths/ 2nd paragraph I read it, like I said it depends on who you ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilmer17 Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 I'd be all for splitting Iraq. But that's a choice for them to make. Great points on how long we had to stay in Japan. I usually use it to show people why they are wrong to think we should be out of Iraq by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by sonsofwashington In a word......Corruption. But I can't say for sure if it will work or not. I just can't think of 1 country that converted to democracy, from a dictatorship or communism, that isn't riddled with corruption. I know it sounds weird, but corruption in many govenrments and societies is a way of life. In most cases these goverments don't want corruption to cease because it works in their favor. So really they behave just as bad as they always did, but know they have a nice title to hide behind...."Democracy". There is no form of government that is perfect in it's execution. Man is not perfect. How can even his best form of government be perfect? If the people are allowed to vote and change their government every few years. They have the power, and only so much corruption can exist. If democracy works as it should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
@DCGoldPants Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Japan is just tricky. WWII in generally is trick. Who attacked who 1st....on who's soil. It was just different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnyderShrugged Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 What if the elections are deemed a huge success and say 50% of the elligible voters take part and choose thier leadership? I'm asking because there doesnt seem to be a target for success. We all, as a group here should determine that "target" today and then agree to wear bag head avatars if it goes other that what we predict. I say that I think we will see more than %45 vote and violence dramatically reduced (i'd say by 50% in occurrances) by 04/15/05. Can we start the bargaining at those figures as a "bar" for success? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonsofwashington Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Kilmer17 It's from the CNN article linked by Kevin. http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/iraq.deaths/ 2nd paragraph My bad. And I saw the Japan, Germany references. Good point. Iraq seems like a different beast, but I can't let a feeling like that allow me to take for granted the fact that democracy may work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonsofwashington Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by skin-n-vegas What if the elections are deemed a huge success and say 50% of the elligible voters take part and choose thier leadership? I'm asking because there doesnt seem to be a target for success. We all, as a group here should determine that "target" today and then agree to wear bag head avatars if it goes other that what we predict. I say that I think we will see more than %45 vote and violence dramatically reduced (i'd say by 50% in occurrances) by 04/15/05. Can we start the bargaining at those figures as a "bar" for success? If the election is a success how will that decrease violence? If I was an insurgent and the elections went successfully then I would consider that a personal defeat and step up my violent tactics in order to resist the success of the elections. How do you see it the opposite? EDIT: Looks like we all have more important things to do on Friday afternoon as it appears most of the posters have left. Well, I'll be here for another hour otherwise until we post again. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by KevinthePRF You don't need to pursue this I was being a bit sarcastic, there is no comparison.] O.K. Fair enough. Although there are others who would be dead serious about this comparison. I can see your not one of those. Originally posted by KevinthePRF The mistake was believing a culture would change just because the government had been changed. So how long are we going to have to "stay involved" in Iraq? I already think the cost has outweighed the need if the whole issue was resolved today. Yours is a matter of opinion. Like it's already been stated. It will take years. Does that mean our military needs to stay in Iraq for years. Hopefully not, but if we do. Why don't we just see if Iraq would like to have us there permantly? Why not an American base in Iraq. It's worked for Japan, South Korea, and Germany. Why not Iraq? Kevin, the lesson we need to have learned from 9/11 and prior incidents where a people let it's guard down is that it's better to pay a price today, then pay a larger more significant price tommorrow. I believe that every American soldier's life is sacred, but in the words of Spock The needs of the many outweight the needs of the few. There could have been infinately more loss of life down the road, if we turned a blind eye to Saddam. History has proved this over and over. Why do we need a mushroom cloud, before we act? Have we learned nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Originally posted by Bufford hmmmm, maybe we can split Iraq in half. Good idea or Bad idea? If that's what it takes. Hopefully, it won't come to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.