Iran photoshops missiles into picture to appear powerful

[KillerGremlin]

Originally Posted by KillerGremlin

My point is this: There is good evidence that suggests that the motivation to go to war with Iraq was for oil. At the beginning, the Bush campaign downplayed the Iraq war as the United States doing Iraq a wonderful favor by riding it of its horrible dictator. That was a truth stretched in favor of the administration. It wasn't Bush's main motivation for invading Iraq. And, regardless if there is some truth to it, it's still not accurate of why we decided to go to war with Iraq in the first place.

And to further elaborate on this point, when the Bush administration decided to go to war with Iraq, it was on the heels of 9/11. Couple that with the argument that getting Saddam out of there was in the best interest of everyone, and you have an administration that appears to be pulling some manipulative strings. This country is built upon democracy, yes? The decision to go to war should not be in Bush's hands, it should be in the hands of the country. And, it should be in the best interest of this country. So, again, this is hard to argue because we now know just how taxing this war has been, but I wonder if most Americans at the time of declaring war on Iraq really wanted to go to war. And, we will see if the overall outcome of the Iraq War is in anyway positive for this country.

[Professor S]

Originally Posted by KillerGremlin

And to further elaborate on this point, when the Bush administration decided to go to war with Iraq, it was on the heels of 9/11. Couple that with the argument that getting Saddam out of there was in the best interest of everyone, and you have an administration that appears to be pulling some manipulative strings. This country is built upon democracy, yes? The decision to go to war should not be in Bush's hands, it should be in the hands of the country. And, it should be in the best interest of this country. So, again, this is hard to argue because we now know just how taxing this war has been, but I wonder if most Americans at the time of declaring war on Iraq really wanted to go to war. And, we will see if the overall outcome of the Iraq War is in anyway positive for this country.

Did Bush manipulate a bit and pull strings? Yes. So did Roosevelt to get us into WW2. The congree manipulates and pulls strings on every bill that passes, adding bridge building to farm bills for example. You act as if this is something new in politics. But the premise was based on the idea that iraq was a threat and the strings were pulled and info tweaked to promote that belief.

And NO, the people do NOT decide who goes to war in the US. The presidient is the Commander in Chief. We elect the person who we trust to make those decisions. Now you can argue whether or not we made the right decision, but decsions to go to war certainly are not to be decisded by referendum.

And yes, I can absolutely say that 90% of the American people, if not more, were very much behind the Iraq war. Thats not even a question, really.

But the argument is whether or not Bush went to war for oil. Nothing in any argument you have made has had anything to do with oil. Attempting to debunk stated US motivations for the war does not prove your theory. A lack of evidence, in your opinion, is not evidence for your opinion about "war for oil". if you want to argue the point that we went to war for oil, then make that argument.

And I started talking about Iran because that is what this thread is actually about (see the title)

But I guess we've moved on it topics

Good discussions all around. I hope I have been more civil that usual, I've been working on that.

[KillerGremlin]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Good discussions all around. I hope I have been more civil that usual, I've been working on that.

You have.

I just assumed that it was because I'm not Typhoid.

[Professor S]

I think I was even civil with Typhoid this round. I do have to say the temptation was horrible...

[Bube]

Too lazy (and in too much of a hurry) to quote right now, so I'll just say what I have to say

First of all, yes, this has been a very civil discussion. And I sincerely hope that there are no hard feelings from anyone.

Now, about the subject. Well, it's gone on for too long, and it probably won't go anywhere, as this is what the whole world is talking about and nobody has gone anywhere with it. So I'll just state my primary concern - the policing of the world, as Prof put it. I just don't feel it's right. It may be what the world wants, but I don't think it should be like that.

Oh and I of course don't have any evidence to prove that Iraq wants the US out of their business. I should have stated that that was my opinion.

But I do have to say, on the topic of the "nanny state", I didn't mean the government should look after everybody in need. I meant that the US should first sort out their more obvious internal security issues.

And that's that..