Jump to content

Fanpuck33

Member
  • Posts

    12295
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Posts posted by Fanpuck33

  1. Fanpuck, I don't think it's fair to attribute such a nefarious motive to those calling for a pullout from Iraq.

    Voting in the election is not proof that Iraqis are pro-US. If I were an anti-US Iraqi I would go and try to vote in a religious anti-west party... which might be exactly what has happened.

    Perhaps my view is influence by my thoughts on the current US political system. I realize that in a two party system, each side will have its own ideas and that there will be disagreements. On the other hand, lately it seems like the two sides will do anything to make the other side look bad. The Republicans did it to Clinton, and the Democrats are doing it to Bush. I see no civility in politics. It seems like the country is divided right down the middle, and that there is almost no middle ground anymore.

    I'm not quite sure where the second point comes from. I don't recall saying that Iraqis are pro-US because of the election turnout. What I said was that it shows that the spirit of the Iraqi people is stronger than ever. 75% of the Iraqi people voted, despite the fact that the terrorists could very well try to blow them up on their way to vote. I see the voter turnout as a sign of the US and Iraqi forces winning the war on terror in Iraq.

  2. The leap that I have trouble with concerns whether the decision had anything to do with data. I believe the decision was made, and then the Bush administration looked for whatever they had to justify it. In the post-9/11 world, it wasn't hard to justify to an American public looking for a response to the attacks. Let's face it - since Gulf War I, Saddam wasn't doing much, other than within his own country...

    By the way, I am not anti-American. Far from it. And I don't believe that ridiculing Bush serves a purpose. But I can't help being cynical toward the Bush administration, because IMO he's playing politics in a way that is costing thousands of lives. I hope you're right that it will all be worth it in the long term, in terms of increased security for Iraqis. I think there's an equally good chance that the U.S. will pull out hastily, which could lead to civil war, and possibly someone who is similar to Saddam comes to power, except with a slightly more pronounced hatred for the U.S. due to the occupation.

    I still believe that the UN screwed up royally by not going into Iraq at the urging of the US. Iraq clearly broke its agreement with the UN numerous times since the Gulf War, but nothing was ever done. How many times did Saddam refuse to let UN inspectors in? Even when they were let in on occasion, they were not given full access to everything. What was he trying to hide? I honestly think anti-Bush government sentiment influenced the UN's Iraq vote.

    The US pullout of Iraq is a hot button issue with me. I agree that we should not pull out too soon, which based on what the administration says, is something we will not need to worry about. Those who oppose Bush consistently call for him to pull out the troops. They do this under the guise of "getting our boys home." This may be one aspect of their call for a pullout, but I believe their main goal is to get Bush to leave prematurely, so Iraq will struggle, and the Bush administration will be blasted for leaving too early.

    Also, I'd like to thank simonus, Trizzak, revvrob, and Mount Royale for keeping this discussion grounded and respectful. Too often political arguments lead to name calling and harrasment. I appreciate your ability to focus on the issues in a civil manner. :clap:

  3. How long do we have to put up with his tactics?

    How many 3rd period collapses will it take to show the man that you can't succeed if you only roll 3 forward lines and 2 defensive pairings. Hey Julien, guys get tired when they get too much ice time. You have 20 players dressed each game -USE THEM!

    If Streit isn't good enough to be on the team, get him off it. Don't put him on the bench every night and let him just sit there. Same thing with Perezhogin. The kid has shown he can score, but he can't do it with 4 minutes a game.

  4. Sheesh where do i start Rick Nash??? Todd Bertuzzi??? Ryan Smyth???Kris Draper???Shane Doan??? instead of

    Kariya, Shanahan, Crosby, Staal , Spezza

    Adam Slow Foote instead of Dion Phaneuf???

    I agree with the goalies though

    How can you argue with Rick Nash? The man was the co-winner of the Rocket Richard Trophy last season, and he was only 20 years old. Sure, he's been hurt, but the man is an elite power forward. It would have been a travesty if he hadn't been named.

    Bertuzzi, I can see the argument against him. Given his reputation, is he the kind of guy you'd want representing the country? I know I wouldn't mind him on Team USA, but that's because we need to fire power he offers.

    Smyth is another guy who is hard to argue with. He has shown a knack for turning up his game when he's representing his country.

    Draper, well, he's a good character guy, I won't diss him.

    Doan, with his recent comments, makes his selection tough to swallow. He's talented enough to be there, but does he deserve to represent his country?

    And as for Adam Foote, he's been a lot better than his stats might indicate. Face it, he's on the worst offensive team in hockey. It's tough to have a good +/- when your team isn't scoring. I'm from Ohio, so I've seen almost every Blue Jackets game, so I can tell you he's still a great player.

  5. I see no link between Hussein and the terrorist attack on Sept 11. By the way, whatever happened to the "Find Osama" mission? He was the direct mastermind behind the September 11 attacks.

    And yes, while the war on Osama and the attempt to find him was (is?) totally justified, going into Iraq to oust Hussein because of WMD's (that did not/do not exist) is something that shows a blatant misuse of power on Bush's part.

    He didn't ask to start the war on terrorism....but he's certainly manipulated it to fit his own agenda.

    I agree, that in the end, there was not a connection between Saddam and the 9-11 attacks. I am fully aware that the intelligence community blew it big time, when they said there were still WMD in Iraq. Still, I think going into Iraq was justified. This is a war on terror, and Saddam openly supported terrorists. For example, he was known to offer rewards to families of suicide bombers. Terrorist traning camps were also known to exist. While perhaps not related to Al-Qaeda, terrorists are terrorist, and Saddam was not exactly a big fan of the US. Also, I find it absurd that the UN refused to go in, after Iraq had broken their agreements so many times over the years. Clearly, for many years, Saddam was hiding something.

    Aside from that, it will take time, but I fully believe that it was worth. Saddam was a brutal dictator who slaughtered his own people. There is obviously a lot of turmoil there now, but in the end, I am confident Iraq will be a better place for the people. The Iraqi people overwhelming showed their support, as they had around 75% turnout for their recent elections, an astounding percentage.

    As for the search for Osama, the US still has troops in Afgahnistan. They are simply forgotten, because the media insists on concentrating on Iraq, because it makes for better headlines. All I hear about are the negatives in Iraq. You never hear about how well things are going in Afgahnistan. No, they haven't found Osama, but they have set up a stable government and the rebuilding process is going well. I will never understand why the media always concentrates on the negatives, no matter what the situation.

×
×
  • Create New...