Should britain of gone to war with america

geordieboy12

i must say that Tony Blair should not of went to war with Iraq alongside USA the reason being for that Iraq did'nt bomb our contry they bombed america so why should we go into war alongside america when they are the worlds strongest army to date, when it is causing Iraqs to go out and kidnap our citizens and kill them live on the internet. It is wrong!!!!

tntcheats

Guess what, it would have been wrong no matter what.

At least countries are taking an effort to get that damn country under control.

daboss

I think that's bigotry. You think the Iraqis are happier now? Everyone involved has an agenda - including the Brits.

I've travelled more than 20 countries in the world (both work and leisure) and I can tell you that not every country in the world has America's values. They need to realized that fast.

pfgannon

geordieboy12 wrote:

i must say that Tony Blair should not of went to war with Iraq alongside USA the reason being for that Iraq did'nt bomb our contry they bombed america so why should we go into war alongside america when they are the worlds strongest army to date, when it is causing Iraqs to go out and kidnap our citizens and kill them live on the internet. It is wrong!!!!

1st off there were no bombs involved in 9/11/01
And Tony Blair decided that Britian should fight with us because he knows damn well we would do the same for him.
(Lots of respect for Blair and Bush)

daboss

The relationship is enviable. If America is at war, then Britain would stand alongside America - OK.

But is the war in Iraq justifiable? The suffering in Iraq is BIG time.

Dan

fourtone87 wrote:

1st off there were no bombs involved in 9/11/01
And Tony Blair decided that Britian should fight with us because he knows damn well we would do the same for him.
(Lots of respect for Blair and Bush)

Agreed 100%

tony

also it wasnt iraq that bombed america, it was al queda (who were based in afghanistan) Iraq just had links to alqaeda, as to most countries from around that area.

Personally i dont think they should have gone to war for a lot of reasons, but i dont think any of us know the whole truth behind the war and probably never will, as someone else said a lot of people had agendas in that war.

daboss

America believes that the Iraqis would be happy to be rid of Saddam (which is true to some extent) but the war has gone horribly wrong (not a fast and quick one). At the end the Iraqis are suffering. If I were an Iraqi, I'd rather have Saddam than all the chaos there.

America is too proud to admit it cannot win and the British are standing up for a wrong cause just to be America's best buddy.

CannonBallGuy

This is how I understand the situation;
Al Queda attacked the US, so the US should have gone to war agains them. Not the iraqis in general. A hell of a lot of people have died, basically becuase Bush doesn't understand politics and war. I don't think anyone 'mis-under-estimated him' as he put it.
Blair went to war alongside the US because all hell would have broken loose if we hadnt.

But, basically, everything is far to complicated for us teenagers to understand. Politics is deep. So many twists and turns. So much backstabbing. I don't think even blair, bush and all their spin-doc's know exactly whats going on. Everything is so twisted, 'were we really friends with the, or were we just pretending to be to get something out of them?' is the message I tend to get. lol.

pfgannon

Well we did "goto war with Al Queda" and we are still pursing them in Afganistan(some what unsuccessfuly). I dont really know why Bush wanted to goto war Iraq and get rid of Saddam and set up a democracy. And dont tell me its because of oil because we havent taken any.

CBG is right theres no way for us to know whats really going on with International diplomacy.

I agree with going into Iraq becuase in the end Iraq will turn out better than it did. I dont really think that fighting terrorism was the reason for going into Iraq. As much as the news likes to show the bad side of this war (mainly because no one likes the US), there is so much good happening in Iraq.

And Bush is not dumb hes just not articulate.

daboss

There's nothing to understand. Whenever there's as much suffering as there are in Iraq and Afganistan, such a war is never worth it. The situation would be different if it was a proper war - but the one in Iraq, America just invaded them. This is not a war, this is oppression.

You guys are just 15 year olds living comfortably with enough to eat and have a great future. Just imagine yourselves living in a war-torn country.

I think America sucked BIG time in this one. I have lots of friends (even a sister) in UK. Most of them do not like this war too.

angrylizard

fourtone87 wrote:

And dont tell me its because of oil because we havent taken any.

No, we've just setup Shell and BP executives as heads of the northern and southern field in Iraq. How do I know? They said so in a White House press conference.

We (the us Govt) are not taking the oil, the corporations that run the us govt are.

Also, until the war in Afghanistan, we were unable to build the asian pipeline (huge payoff for oil corps in the west who can stand to make an assload off of china, who are in a serious energy crisis right now) because afghanistan said no. Now that we smacked the afghans down, construction is under way.

look at the bigger picture and realize that us and british foreign policy is all motivated by economics. it's all about the new imperialism of economic dominance.

pfgannon

Actually we didnt go to war with afganistan. We went to war with a militant group that is located in afganistan and many other nations worldwide. But Al Queda is not affiliated with the Afgani Gov't.

angrylizard

Well Al Queda used to be the ruling body of well over 50% of afghanistan so in essense we did go to war with afghanistan and either way, what can be said about the asian pipeline? it's all money at the core.

gdawg1881

i must say that Tony Blair should not of went to war with Iraq alongside USA the reason being for that Iraq did'nt bomb our contry they bombed america so why should we go into war alongside america when they are the worlds strongest army to date, when it is causing Iraqs to go out and kidnap our citizens and kill them live on the internet. It is wrong!!!!

First off both countries have both proven no direct correlation with Iraq and Al Queda. If you are going to accuse you might want to try a little better. Before the war in Iraq, Tony Blair had MORE evidence than the US did about weapons in Iraq. The US got alot of intelligance from the Brittish.

My personal opinion is that Saddam would have been a threat to all super powers and the world economy. Since Al Queda was so strong it was only time before Saddam would have started again.

Also almost all of the kidnapping of civilians in Iraq is becuase their country which they are from was supposed to have an escort. The military escorts dont show up when these people are kidnapped!

Almost everything in this world is economically based. The US invaded Afghanistan because they were harbouring the terrorists and Bush said that the country who is harbouring the terrorist and the terrorists themselves would have to face war with Amerca after 9/11. America did Afghanistan a favor.... for the first time ever they had women competing at the olympics this year.

Also look at Iraq. Their soccer team went to finish in in the top four at the olympics also! You cannot say that the Iraqi people are really pissed off with America liberating them when you havent even talked to them. The ones on TV are glad that Saddam is gone. People in Iraq had their hands cut off because of stupid little this. This is what Saddam did to their whole country.

Also I remember around my town everbody never questioned going to war in Iraq. They thought it was ok and everybody I knew said we were going to go in there and kick Iraq @$$. Well..... it is easy after entry to say that it was wrong because of the fatality rate and other stuff, but most people I know against the war now used to be totally for it.

Just like John Kerry, he was totally for the war when he voted on it, and then for it again to pay for it, but just after paying for the war decides to run for President and changes his views on the war to try to recieve positive public opinion!

daboss

It seems good and OK to you because you're American. That's the problem with MOST (I didn't say all) American - you only see things from your perspective.

What if you were an Iraqi? If America can come in swift and quick, it MIGHT (I'm not saying it IS) be OK. If I were an Iraqi, with the benefit of hindsight, I'd think I was dealt a raw deal.

gdawg1881

Iraqi Interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi just gave a speech I think to the UN saying that the world is a safer place now that Saddam is gone. He also added that him and other Iraqis were thankfull to the Americans for saving them from Saddam's tyranny.

pfgannon

Ya im sure the Iraqi people would much rather be killed and live under a dictatorship( who doesnt like not having a choice?) by saddam and his men....

daboss

Man, grow up! An interim Prime Minister? That guy's a crony!

Look, I didn't say Saddam is a good guy. I agree that he is a dictator and I'm definitely for democracy. All I'm saying is that this war is not justified. There must be other much better ways to address whatever needs to be addressed.

Again, if you're Iraqi and you lost your home and half your family in this war, you'd be damned bitter. To make matters worse, this is not even a proper war. It's an invasion.

angrylizard

If the Iraqui people liked us rolling into town, they wouldn't be car-bombing troops all the time. Nuff said.

pfgannon

its not the average iraqi's car bombing.
Can you guess who they are?
Terrorist and Muslim Extremists and supporters of Saddam.

And its Iraqi not Iraqui just ta let ya know

daboss

Doesn't matter who's doing the bombing - the point is that the people are suffering there.

pfgannon

bimmercenter you changed your name again?!?!

back on topic....
suffering temporarly...the outcome however will be very positive.
No gain with out pain.

gdawg1881

Yeah you are right there was a recent study that MANY of the terrorists bombings in Iraq are from outside countries that are against the US because of our support of Isreal. It will be better as time moves on!

daboss

f87, yeah I changed nicks again - courtesy of P.

Anyway, you said: suffering temporarly...the outcome however will be very positive. No gain with out pain.

Yeah, this is easy for the rest of the world to say. I would gladly forgo the gains if it means having half my family to die because of the violence.

pfgannon

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=5773 wrote:

Casualties from Iraq's gulag are harder to estimate. Accounts collected by Western human rights groups from Iraqi émigrés and defectors have suggested that the number of those who have "disappeared" into the hands of the secret police, never to be heard from again, could be 200,000. As long as Mr. Hussein remains in power, figures like these will be uncheckable, but the huge toll is palpable nonetheless.

That is far more deaths than those caused by the war

angrylizard

fourtone87 wrote:

its not the average iraqi's car bombing.
Can you guess who they are?
Terrorist and Muslim Extremists and supporters of Saddam.

And its Iraqi not Iraqui just ta let ya know

Dont typo nit-pick me.

pfgannon

its not like i made a big deal about it...like i said i was just letting you know