sparky
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2008
- Messages
- 1,429
Continued from here...
We won't attack Iran because that's when WW3 really begins, and we can't chew that much of a bite at once.
North Korea has fired a few missles, and we could care less.
Sad part is that less than a month before we invaded Iraq... Saddam agreed to let weapons inspectors come in after months of saying no, no, no. That's how I knew something was wrong with the whole thing from the get go. The second you see progress with a tyrant, and shortly after a "free" country decides *that* is the best time to attack... something's definitely wrong with the picture.
Wars will prolly not start because of religion ever again. First two world wars started for political reasons, and other countries hopped in because they wanted more resources. The third world war has already started... for political reasons. Bush knew that Iraq had nothing to do with Al Qaeda, and there were tons of people in his cabinet who came out and said that Bush wanted them to find anything that could link Iraq to terrorism. All of the stuff his cabinet members came up with are now known to be lies. Our CIA is not that dumb.
Of course... just like Bush will be labeled the guy who thinks starting pre-emptive war is a good idea. Remember the "Axis of Evil"? Why are we not attacking Iran or North Korea who were 5 to 10 times more of a threat than Iraq?? 'Cause it was an embarrassment to Bush's family that Saddam wasn't assassinated... that was priority one for him. Oil was a plus, tho... and Haliburton sure likes their no-bid contracts. If I knew there was going to be a major war... I woulda put all my money into private security companies. Well, I woulda put it into one of my best friend's accounts, who woulda put it into the private security companies. Step 3: Profit! $$$
We won't attack Iran because that's when WW3 really begins, and we can't chew that much of a bite at once.
North Korea has fired a few missles, and we could care less.
Sad part is that less than a month before we invaded Iraq... Saddam agreed to let weapons inspectors come in after months of saying no, no, no. That's how I knew something was wrong with the whole thing from the get go. The second you see progress with a tyrant, and shortly after a "free" country decides *that* is the best time to attack... something's definitely wrong with the picture.
Why not? Using Ron Paul's reasoning here... but we did it in Vietnam, and now we're trading with them. We don't need to tell people how to operate. Democracy CANNOT exist without compromise. If you go into someone else's country and say, "Become Democratic now or I'll blow your brains out!" You'd be thinking that Democracy is pretty crappy. Democracy must begin with the people inside the country, just like our forefathers showed us long ago. If the people aren't willing to fight, and we throw in a leader for them... what's to prevent another general of their military to take control of these weak-minded people & overthrow the leader we think is best??? Democracy is best led thru example, like everything else.
Could be... but the point is that the people themselves will never take responsibility into their own hands unless they have to. Nothing America does anymore is responsible anyway. Wasting oil, starting pre-emptive wars based on lies, ignoring its own citizens in New Orleans, not punishing the parents who choose to buy things that aren't as important as health care for their children, etc. We definitely do not need to be helping others when we can't help ourselves. If somebody in the next stall asked me for some toilet paper... I'm gonna wipe my own *** first.
Last edited:
