U.S. soldiers' bodies mutilated, booby-trapped - Fantasy Baseball Cafe 2014 Fantasy Baseball Cafe
100% Deposit Bonus for Cafe Members!

Return to General Talk

U.S. soldiers' bodies mutilated, booby-trapped

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby Dan Lambskin » Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:37 pm

Coppermine wrote:
Omaha Red Sox wrote:
davidmarver wrote:
AA wrote:1. We have tortured them. That does not excuse what they did - of course not. But when I look at the situation in Ireland, for instance, each side claims the other started it. Neither has the moral authority to be considered the side I'd want to join because both factions are doing terrible things. We are in that same boat.

So sitting on our thumbs while 27,800,000 Iraqis suffer and starve under tyrannical rule would show more moral authority? Wouldn't that show a reluctance to act on our moral values and, for that matter, a lack of authority?

I'm really not sure what you want in the world AA. There's really no way around the atrocities committed in the world daily. There has to be a starting point somewhere. As much as you'd like to run away ;-) from the problems in the world, you can't do that and simultaneously claim that neither side has "moral authority". It's the chickens that lack the morals to use their authority that have allowed these human right crimes and torture to exist for the past few decades.

You can't leave Earth.


This is a great post david. Probably one of my favorites. I think I'm going to print this out, frame it and put it in my office. Awesome.


That is an excellent point and I agree, but is Iraq really the starting point, or the end? Do you know how many countries have citizens, millions, in some cases billions, of citizens starving and dying under tyrannical rule.

Once we're done with Iraq, does that mean that we must also invade North Korea, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Haiti, Cuba, Angola, Tajikstan, Albania, Iran, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Cote d'Ivory and the Congo? How about huge countries with human rights violations like China and Pakistan? Singapore? India is a damn democracy with millions of people dying each year. Bangladesh? Myanmar? Meanwhile, millions die of AIDS in Africa and global poverty is the single most destructive force on the planet.

I'm just trying to keep this in a global perspective and using the excuse of "we're helping them" is a sad one for invading Iraq in my opinion. The world is a tough place. Again, there's more than two sides to every situation.


;-D

Edit: instead of just putting the thumbs up since i agree with what CU is saying, my questions is, why Iraq? why are we liberating Iraq just for the good of the common Iraqi's and not any of these other countries?
Image
Dan Lambskin
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeLucky Ladders ChampionPick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorTrivia Time Trial Monthly Winner
Posts: 10225
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Omaha Red Sox » Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:42 pm

Dan Lambskin wrote:
Coppermine wrote:
Omaha Red Sox wrote:
davidmarver wrote:
AA wrote:1. We have tortured them. That does not excuse what they did - of course not. But when I look at the situation in Ireland, for instance, each side claims the other started it. Neither has the moral authority to be considered the side I'd want to join because both factions are doing terrible things. We are in that same boat.

So sitting on our thumbs while 27,800,000 Iraqis suffer and starve under tyrannical rule would show more moral authority? Wouldn't that show a reluctance to act on our moral values and, for that matter, a lack of authority?

I'm really not sure what you want in the world AA. There's really no way around the atrocities committed in the world daily. There has to be a starting point somewhere. As much as you'd like to run away ;-) from the problems in the world, you can't do that and simultaneously claim that neither side has "moral authority". It's the chickens that lack the morals to use their authority that have allowed these human right crimes and torture to exist for the past few decades.

You can't leave Earth.


This is a great post david. Probably one of my favorites. I think I'm going to print this out, frame it and put it in my office. Awesome.


That is an excellent point and I agree, but is Iraq really the starting point, or the end? Do you know how many countries have citizens, millions, in some cases billions, of citizens starving and dying under tyrannical rule.

Once we're done with Iraq, does that mean that we must also invade North Korea, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Haiti, Cuba, Angola, Tajikstan, Albania, Iran, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Cote d'Ivory and the Congo? How about huge countries with human rights violations like China and Pakistan? Singapore? India is a damn democracy with millions of people dying each year. Bangladesh? Myanmar? Meanwhile, millions die of AIDS in Africa and global poverty is the single most destructive force on the planet.

I'm just trying to keep this in a global perspective and using the excuse of "we're helping them" is a sad one for invading Iraq in my opinion. The world is a tough place. Again, there's more than two sides to every situation.


;-D

Edit: instead of just putting the thumbs up since i agree with what CU is saying, my questions is, why Iraq? why are we liberating Iraq just for the good of the common Iraqi's and not any of these other countries?


When is someone going to say 'oil'?
Omaha Red Sox
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle Eye
Posts: 11420
(Past Year: 6)
Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Probably over there

Postby chadlincoln » Thu Jun 22, 2006 1:56 pm

Omaha Red Sox wrote:
Dan Lambskin wrote:
Coppermine wrote:
Omaha Red Sox wrote:
davidmarver wrote:
AA wrote:1. We have tortured them. That does not excuse what they did - of course not. But when I look at the situation in Ireland, for instance, each side claims the other started it. Neither has the moral authority to be considered the side I'd want to join because both factions are doing terrible things. We are in that same boat.

So sitting on our thumbs while 27,800,000 Iraqis suffer and starve under tyrannical rule would show more moral authority? Wouldn't that show a reluctance to act on our moral values and, for that matter, a lack of authority?

I'm really not sure what you want in the world AA. There's really no way around the atrocities committed in the world daily. There has to be a starting point somewhere. As much as you'd like to run away ;-) from the problems in the world, you can't do that and simultaneously claim that neither side has "moral authority". It's the chickens that lack the morals to use their authority that have allowed these human right crimes and torture to exist for the past few decades.

You can't leave Earth.


This is a great post david. Probably one of my favorites. I think I'm going to print this out, frame it and put it in my office. Awesome.


That is an excellent point and I agree, but is Iraq really the starting point, or the end? Do you know how many countries have citizens, millions, in some cases billions, of citizens starving and dying under tyrannical rule.

Once we're done with Iraq, does that mean that we must also invade North Korea, Sudan, Sierra Leone, Haiti, Cuba, Angola, Tajikstan, Albania, Iran, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Cote d'Ivory and the Congo? How about huge countries with human rights violations like China and Pakistan? Singapore? India is a damn democracy with millions of people dying each year. Bangladesh? Myanmar? Meanwhile, millions die of AIDS in Africa and global poverty is the single most destructive force on the planet.

I'm just trying to keep this in a global perspective and using the excuse of "we're helping them" is a sad one for invading Iraq in my opinion. The world is a tough place. Again, there's more than two sides to every situation.


;-D

Edit: instead of just putting the thumbs up since i agree with what CU is saying, my questions is, why Iraq? why are we liberating Iraq just for the good of the common Iraqi's and not any of these other countries?


When is someone going to say 'oil'?
Oil.
7/26 - Cafe goes down:

General Error
SQL ERROR [ mysql4 ]
Table './cafe_forums/baseball_sessions' is marked as crashed and should be repaired [145]
An sql error occurred while fetching this page. Please contact an administrator if this problem persists.
chadlincoln
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeWeb Supporter
Posts: 10983
Joined: 20 Jan 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Bleachers at Wrigley Field

Postby Art Vandelay » Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:00 pm

Omaha Red Sox wrote:When is someone going to say 'oil'?


Do you honestly believe that oil has nothing to do with it? Whether it's Iraq, Iran, Afganistan, or the Balkans, oil has been a factor in every military action we've taken in the last decade, and most likely will continue to do so in the forseable future.
Art Vandelay
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

CafeholicFantasy ExpertPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 5265
Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Coppermine » Thu Jun 22, 2006 2:00 pm

The premise was that we went to Iraq specifically, and ONLY, because Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and, along with his specific ties with Al Qaeda had the propensity, motivation and means for attacking the United States or our allied nations.

Now, in retrospect, I believed this, as did many other nations and it was agreed that Saddam posed a specific threat to its neighbors and us. On that premise, i supported the war and believed that perhaps action was our greatest strategy given how soon after 9/11 we made this decision. Of course we did not have United Nations support, but that's beside the point; it was much more fun to hate the french and rename our fried side dishes.

It was wrong though and instead of pointing fingers and trying to decide who was more wrong (George Tenet called WMD's being in Iraq a "slam dunk" if you recall) we really ought to consider where we go from here. Bush's greatest strength, and one that he and Mr. Rove take an awful lot of pride in, is his resolve and decisiveness. This is not a bad quality for the most part unless it's part of groupthink, which it appears to be at this point. Alternative suggestions to Iraq should not be attacked or embraced without prejudice; but they should certainly be considered. I don't think it's fair to use rhetoric like "cut and run" on those who want to leave Iraq. Then again, Democratic leaders in Iraq are bumbling around and instead of trying to be decisive on a clear alternative to what should be done about the Iraq debacle, they're all just yelling and make accusations and pointing fingers. Where the Republican party has lost support, the Democratic part as not gained; that's pretty sad if you consider it.
Coppermine
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar

Posts: 8840
Joined: 6 Sep 2005
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Pennsyltucky

Postby Omaha Red Sox » Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:10 pm

Art Vandelay wrote:
Omaha Red Sox wrote:When is someone going to say 'oil'?


Do you honestly believe that oil has nothing to do with it? Whether it's Iraq, Iran, Afganistan, or the Balkans, oil has been a factor in every military action we've taken in the last decade, and most likely will continue to do so in the forseable future.


Oh, I definitely believe it has a lot to do with oil. But, unlike most, I don't have a problem with that. Why is it wrong to protect a provider of a service or product? Protect your investment. Money is a factor in basically everything we do, so this does not surprise me, nor does it bother me. We are a rich nation and there is a reason for that. I think we should try to be self-reliant as a nation, when it comes to oil, but what the hell do I know.
Omaha Red Sox
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle Eye
Posts: 11420
(Past Year: 6)
Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Probably over there

Postby Absolutely Adequate » Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:15 pm

I thought this was interesting:

Bill Nelson, a senator, introduced a bill that says we will not support any Iraqi government that would give amnesty to anyone who has "attacked, killed, or wounded" or military men and women.

It passed 79-19. So at least we will not let this go without punishment.
Absolutely Adequate
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 5000
Joined: 6 Jan 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Not here.

Postby bleach168 » Thu Jun 22, 2006 5:54 pm

So sitting on our thumbs while 27,800,000 Iraqis suffer and starve under tyrannical rule would show more moral authority? Wouldn't that show a reluctance to act on our moral values and, for that matter, a lack of authority?

I'm really not sure what you want in the world AA. There's really no way around the atrocities committed in the world daily. There has to be a starting point somewhere. As much as you'd like to run away from the problems in the world, you can't do that and simultaneously claim that neither side has "moral authority". It's the chickens that lack the morals to use their authority that have allowed these human right crimes and torture to exist for the past few decades.

You can't leave Earth.


I've said this before back when we had a political board,

Before invading, if Bush came to the American people and asked them to support him in this war to help the Iraqi people, I would have wholeheartedly supported him. If he said this war was to promote democracy, I would have wholeheartedly supported him and would continue to support him to this day.

However, Bush and his cronies gave us the fear mongering rhetoric about a mushroom cloud on U.S. soil. That's something I couldn't support.

As for wrveres,

Nice of you to come out of your self-imposed retirement. ;-)

Yeah, we spent 620 million on N. Korea over the years. But we have spent 300-400x that in Iraq in just the last 3 years. Estimates have us spending over 1000x that in Iraq.

620 million is a lot of money to you and me, but it is a drop in the bucket for the U.S. govt. Heck, they spent 250 million on a bridge that serves no real purpose.

Really, it's like giving the bum on your street a nickel and patting yourself on the back for being such a samaritan.
bleach168
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 5058
(Past Year: 17)
Joined: 22 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby wrveres » Thu Jun 22, 2006 7:20 pm

bleach168 wrote:
So sitting on our thumbs while 27,800,000 Iraqis suffer and starve under tyrannical rule would show more moral authority? Wouldn't that show a reluctance to act on our moral values and, for that matter, a lack of authority?

I'm really not sure what you want in the world AA. There's really no way around the atrocities committed in the world daily. There has to be a starting point somewhere. As much as you'd like to run away from the problems in the world, you can't do that and simultaneously claim that neither side has "moral authority". It's the chickens that lack the morals to use their authority that have allowed these human right crimes and torture to exist for the past few decades.

You can't leave Earth.


I've said this before back when we had a political board,

Before invading, if Bush came to the American people and asked them to support him in this war to help the Iraqi people, I would have wholeheartedly supported him. If he said this war was to promote democracy, I would have wholeheartedly supported him and would continue to support him to this day.

However, Bush and his cronies gave us the fear mongering rhetoric about a mushroom cloud on U.S. soil. That's something I couldn't support.

As for wrveres,

Nice of you to come out of your self-imposed retirement. ;-)

Yeah, we spent 620 million on N. Korea over the years. But we have spent 300-400x that in Iraq in just the last 3 years. Estimates have us spending over 1000x that in Iraq.

620 million is a lot of money to you and me, but it is a drop in the bucket for the U.S. govt. Heck, they spent 250 million on a bridge that serves no real purpose.

Really, it's like giving the bum on your street a nickel and patting yourself on the back for being such a samaritan.


changed your tune real quik didn't ya ..
Typical
25                "Love the Padres"
Rafael

Dodgers FAIL|Mets FAIL|Canada FAIL
wrveres
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe WriterEagle EyeInnovative MemberCafe Musketeer
Posts: 31775
(Past Year: 758)
Joined: 2 Mar 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby bleach168 » Thu Jun 22, 2006 7:28 pm

changed your tune real quik didn't ya ..
Typical


Post by wrveres that doesn't make any sense to me.
Typical.
bleach168
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy Expert
Posts: 5058
(Past Year: 17)
Joined: 22 Apr 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball

PreviousNext

Return to General Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Today's Games
Wednesday, Aug. 27
(All times are EST, weather icons show forecast for game time)

St. Louis at Pittsburgh
(12:35 pm)
Texas at Seattle
(3:40 pm)
Tampa Bay at Baltimore
(7:05 pm)
Washington at Philadelphia
(7:05 pm)
Boston at Toronto
(7:07 pm)
NY Yankees at Detroit
(7:08 pm)
Atlanta at NY Mets
(7:10 pm)
Chi Cubs at Cincinnati
(7:10 pm)
Cleveland at Chi White Sox
(8:10 pm)
Oakland at Houston
(8:10 pm)
Minnesota at Kansas City
(8:10 pm)
Milwaukee at San Diego
(9:10 pm)
LA Dodgers at Arizona
(9:40 pm)
Miami at LA Angels
(10:05 pm)
Colorado at San Francisco
(10:15 pm)

  • Fantasy Baseball
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact