agreed to brian and to sassan, it seems you still havent seen the video showing american helicopter gunners shooting iraqi civilians.
you claim god like knowledge concerning how many people saddam wud have killed. fyi saddam is dead. what i am against is terror inflicted by my government. i dont care how many are killed one is enuff, altho we have killed many more. my reason is that i live in a democracy, and in a democracy i am responsible for the actions of my government.
When we commit war crimes, our troops are prosecuted. In war, there are always unfortunate circumstances such as the rape incident and Abu Gharib. In situations like those, we prosecute those involved; such events are the endorsed or systematically practiced by our military.
And again, you have no clue what oppression and terror is. Only can people who have no idea what terror truly is, call our nation "terrorists". It is a shameful, shameless, and self-denigrating act that doesn't reflect very much of you. The vast majority of the Afghani and Iraqi people are grateful for our assistance in their liberations. We have learned our lesson and stayed the course instead of cutting and running like we did after the Soviets were forced out of Afghanistan; in turn, the Taliban were able to flourish and Al Qaeda were able to create safe havens in Afghanistan. We have sacrificed our young men and women for a better Afghanistan, Iraq, and most importantly free world. We have killed Bin Laden and either killed or captured most of the top Al Qaeda operatives, and haven't had a terrorist attack on our soil since 9/11. Not to forget, we have created regional stability and the sentiment of the Arab world compared to pre-9/11 is much more favorable upon us. Before 9/11, Bin Laden and Al Qaeda were fairly popular in the Arab-Islamic world; now they are shunned upon. The freedom movement in the Middle East is a direct result of the liberations of Afghanistan and Iraq. Ghaddafi gave up his nuclear and biological program after Saddam was captured thinking he was next. Do you think the liberation of Libya would have been possible if Ghaddafi had nuclear and biological weapons? Of course not...; people have seen that the tyrants they once thought were untouchable are now all touchable with persistence and in fact, the time for tyrants and terrorist world leaders is nearing its end.
again sassan makes claim to knowledge it is impossible to have. we do not know how many people saddam wud have killed
you just said you were iranian, yet you use we and our to refer to american actions. i am aware that some people have dual nationality, which is fine with me, but your use of the plural pronoun is confusing untill you give us more info.
i have defined terror as indiscriminate force. you say i have no clue. well, what's your definition?
then you claim that the iraqis and afgans are happy to have us in their countries. yes every day they show their love for us by trying to kill us.
then you claim we ran when the soviets were forced out of afganistan. where did we run?
regional stability???? the whole of north africa was in arms until very recently, we have no idea what kind of governments will rise up there, and certainly even you must admit that iraq and afganistan arent stable nations today.
then you ask us for god like knowledge with your strange query, "do you think the liberation of libya wud have been possible if ghaddafi had biological and nuclear weapons?" and you have the nerve to answer your question. ok i get it you have a major delusional problem sassan, i hate to tell you this, but you are not god. the only rational answer to your question is, "I Don't know"
its a bit quick to state that the time for tyrants is over, the nations of north africa have a hard task ahead of them and i wish them well.
Oh please. That was clearly a typo; I of course meant hundreds of thousands.
The fact that you have to pretend that blatantly obvious typos are intentional statements of facts in order to discredit my position, speaks volumes.
actually, i'd like to discuss the topic, will secularization reduce our militarization.
yes sweden is secular, and yes they prolly have a powerful military for their size.
it seems to me that the number of troops that america has is small, considering our power and our military budget. the number of troops is important as is our economy. seems to me, whoever is in power, we will have a period of no military intervention after the present debacle is over
no i believe and hope that if we were a secular nation we wud not have gotten involved in iraq. we wouldn't have attacked granada or panama either, but we might have put troops in rwanda and bosnia to attempt to stop the genocide there, and who knows where that wud have led us.
on the other hand if we had been secular, when we attacked iraq the first time with good reason, we might have gone the whole way, and then once again, we are in the realm of speculation.