“Of course people have reservations about war. However, this administration has presented evidence about Iraq that any true American would find reasonable. Those who naively choose not to believe are not as true.”
-Donald Rumsfeld

“Naturally the common people don’t want war... But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament or a communist dictatorship... All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”
- Hermann Goering, Adolf Hitler’s second in command.


I'll not comment because the parallels are scary and obvious.

Completely different. There are parallels, but this war is just and will not lead to global destruction, unless Saddam prefers it that way.

Hitler 'n Co. wanted to take over the world, and kill all living Jews.

America wants to defend itself, as well as it's allies.

I see a big difference here.

--cheers

America is "defending" itself against what?

let's make this very simple so we don't have to get off into every lastannoying argument.

What is Iraq doing that North korea is not? Why Iraq and not North Korea?

I'm all for going into Iraq (I'll be back in active duty in about 8 months) but WHY? Why Iraq? Why now?

Defending itself against what you ask? Ummm...how about future 9-11's for starters.

*****************************

My only thought about that, is that Iraq is further along than North Korea. Perhaps CIA feels Iraq would be more willing to use those weapons than North Korea.

But again, I don't know the answer to that. I wish I did though.

--cheers

While the N. Korea argument is good (and one that gets brought up in my political science classes a lot) there is one difference, N. Korea is trying to normalize relations, they allow people to inspect, they reduce their armament when asked to do so, and they make NO out right threats against us.

What I’m concerned with is the continuous comparison of Hitler and his band of fascists, and the Bush Administration.... Either you leftist...anti stability...afraid of France not liking you...pacifists are grasping for any straws you can, or you have just been so pathetically taught in our educational system that you don’t really know who the Nazi’s were.

I, too, am curious as to what America is defending itself against. I think a "9-11" is more likely if we have this war than if we don't. Do people really think if we declare war on a country that they will magically submit to us? If we were (stupidly) worried Iraq would give weapons to Al-Quaeda before, then what would stop him? We are not going to instantly kill Saddam once war is declared. His weapons are not going to instantly disappear once war is declared. More likely, he will launch his weapons at Israel or Saudi Arabia or another country. Those countries will retaliate, and boom, there goes the Middle East's chance at stability. Let's just think for a second. If Iraq uses these weapons before a war, they are mincemeat. All of those countries that supported us on 9-11 will again support us here. Is Saddam really that stupid?

There has been no proof that Iraq had ANYTHING to do with 9-11. Even the early reports that one of the hijackers met with and Iraqi offical has been proven false.

This will stop another 9-11 just like Israel's invasions of Palestine has stopped suicide bombers. That rational is completely illogical.

North Korea has tried to "normalize" relations? I lived on the DMZ for almost 2 years and I didn't see any of this.

WHEN HAVE THEY ALLOWED INSPECTORS IN?

There's a massive underground complex being constructed in 3-6 seperate mountains and we've NEVER gotten a look at it.

MANY, MANY, MANY official threats have come from Pyong Yang.

I don't think you know what you are talking about. I myself have read NK letters (that float accross the DMZ on balloons) threatening retalliation against America for their support of the ROK.

Every year the north mobilizes it's entire army and presses it against the border. Normalizing relations?

I suppose that the 5 thwarted attempts of landing NK commandos on ROK beaches last year were gestures of good faith?

I'd like to know where you are comming from with this.

NK has fired a very accurate ICBM over Japan. A Scud missle is nothing to this. Iraq is far from NK's technological ability to wage war because they've been getting aid from China for decades.

WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION is the reason? Let's go get Iran. They're a much greater threat if you want to talk about capability.

That WMD argument is ########.


Edited by Admin for profanity.

I'm a little late getting in here but I had to jump in. My post is in direct response to Political Katana's clever manipulation of history.

If one spends enough time studying the subject, one learns that history can be manipulated to prove any opinion one has, no matter how bizarre.

Don't believe me? Compare these quotations of various 20th century world leaders.

-- Vladimir Lenin, on the eve of the October Revolution

-- FDR, State of the Union Address, 1945

Don't like that one? How about these:

-- Adolf Hitler, September 1, 1939 (that date mean anything to any of you folks?)

-- JFK, Delivered in person before a joint session of Congress, May 25, 1961

See how EASY that was? I could do this all day. It doesn't take much to surf around, find full text speeches of just about anyone who's ever made a speech and point out similarities between them.

Well letting iraq nuke us first wont help more than invading before he does so, now will it?

SD- when did this topic become about "nuking Iraq"? I do not believe that was the intention of Political Katana when s/he started this line of thought. Let's stay on topic, please.

Iraq is far from splitting an atom. Iraq sooo veeery faaar from EVER having the means to hit the US with any conventional weapon Sir Deemin.

STAY ON TOPIC!!!! This is NOT a debate about Iraq.

Oh yea, sorry.

North Korea is more of a threat and Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11.

Just to reiterate the topic at hand:

Compare our leaders to Hitler's leaders.

No Iraq. No North Korea.

Thanks,

Mike

Hey, Little Bush DOES have dark hair and he DOES own dogs.
So does Rummy... just like Hitler.

Trying to make that comparison is like well... George Bush helped feed the starving Afgan people HE'S LIKE JESUS!

Remember, the Nazis seized power by posturing as peace makers and victims. Remind you of anybody?

Yeah, sounds alot like Jesse Jackass.

Darcaine

Hey tell me what you all think of this one - it was on the campaign posters for the Garfield/Roosevelt ticket of 1900: Check out this actual poster:Garfield Campaign Poster

The U.S. has been spouting off imperialistic rhetoric for over a century now. Rumsfeld's comments are really nothing new.

One Hitlers many excuses for invading other countries was stated in his book "Mein Kampf" the main one being "Liebenstraum" which roughly translates into Living Room or room to move.

Although America has not been seen to practice Empire Building it's forces of occupation remain in many territories long after the initial threat has gone.
These bases have always been American Soveriegn Territory.
These are all part of the far reaching tentacles that enable it to have strategic jumping off points outside of Mainland America.
It can be loosly likened to "Liebenstraum" room to move.

The present administrations rhetoric does smack a little of dictatorship.
"We will do it alone" which can be interpreted as meaning "We will appear to be diplomatic but this is what we are going to do anyway".
"You are either with us or against us"...funny that is how the Axis saw things during WW11.

Of course I'm worried, for my country my kids and my way of life and it is not Saddam that worries me.

Regards.........Alan

"You are with us or you are with the terrorists" what a sweeping, stupid thing to say but come on... HITLER?

just for the record:
"Post" or "Fort" = Army
"Camp" = Marines (or temporary joint station)
"Base" = Airforce
"Station" = Navy
...but I'll use the term "base(s)" generally

Yes, we've maintained military bases in areas long after they were "needed" but what's to say they won't be needed in the future?

Someone complained of the bases throughout Europe in another thread. These bases were used to stop Milosevic and his troop violations of human rights and horrrible acts of violence against women and children. Excuse me, "ethnic cleansing"... what a nice way to put it.

It was these bases tha enabled us to rapidly deploy to Kuwait to stop the looting, civillian murder and vandalism.

These bases are used to enforce no fly zones and patrol the skies to keep an eye on what Saddam is doing.

If not for the 37,500 troops stationed on the CAMPS and 2 air bases in South Korea there would be war there.

Bases in Japan are used to fly missions to keep an eye on China.

ALL of these are bases have been used (in "peace" time) to provide humanitarian aid to needy areas. Whether it's floods in the Phillipines or hunger in Afghanistan.

We've been the "world police" for a long time now, it should be no surprise that we need global police response stations. What's wrong with this?

Roy.
Lets have some fun.

The dictionary definitions.
POST...A military station with permenant buildings.
FORT....Any armed place surrounded by defensive works and occupied by troops.
CAMP....A site wher soldiers are housed in structures originally intended to be temporary.
BASE...A fortified or protected area or place used by any of the armed services.
STATION....A place or region where a warship is assigned for duty.

Your present administration, unfortunately, does remind me a little of hitleristic rhetoric.

Milosevic and his henchmen are now being tried for war crimes.
Are you still there?.
Kuwait has been freed and is back to normal.
Are you still there?.
Nato bases in Germany are no longer required since the fall of the Soviets.
Are you still there?.
WW11 is finished, the Soviets are no more so American bases in the UK are no longer required.
Are you still there?.

Yes you have policed the world for a long time and like all police forces you have got some things right and some things wrong.
That will always be a problem with 'Tall Poppys' and their effect on history.

Time to go home and look after America and do what you do best...sell yourself to the world and let the world sort its own problems out.

Regards.Alan

Let me explain my definitions to you. Your dictionary has nothing to do with what I 'm saying. In the military a "Base" belongs to the airfore
like "Patricks Air Force Base" you will never see "United States Army Base"
"Base" is a term for a AIRFORCE installation.

"Fort" is a term for ARMY installations, like Ft. Campbell or Ft Hood. While on this installation you are "on post" not "on base". If you were "on base" you would be on an Airforce installation like Osan Airbase in the ROK.

Camp Lejune, there are Marines here. It is a military installation for MARINES, it is a camp.

Camp, Casey, Camp Hovey, Camp Long, Camp Decatur, Camp Walker, Camp Laguarda, Camp Castle are all temporary joint installations in South Korea, 2 of which are no longer active.

I don't care what a dictionary says, I'm speaking in military terms. You call it a "gun" and we call it a "weapon".

"Milosevic and his henchmen are now being tried for war crimes.
Are you still there?."

I believe that those trials are above the US. We ARE still in Bosnia on regular peace keeping patrols and there are occasional disputes.
A couple of weeks ago Serbian boys threw rocks at an Albanian bus and the US investigated the incident.

"Kuwait has been freed and is back to normal.
Are you still there?."

Yes, the Iraqi threat remains. The prepositioned equipment there was used in Afghanistan and we've never been asked to leave.

"Nato bases in Germany are no longer required since the fall of the Soviets.
Are you still there?."

The units in Bosnia are based out of these stations. The "Blue Factory" and various other base camps in Bosnia are supplied primarily by these air bases. You feel they are not "required" but that is just your opinion.

"WW11 is finished, the Soviets are no more so American bases in the UK are no longer required. Are you still there?."

The port access in this country allows ship in supplies intended for our other European stations. It also allows us to service our navy and because it is our "sister" country our sensitive military information and equipment is well protected. Again, the fact that YOU don't feel that American presence is "required" is unimportant.

There are more complex justifications for our presence but hese sum it up pretty well.

So we should isolate ourselves and let every one just duke it out huh? We tried doing that before the 2 world wars and were cursed for not involving ourselves sooner.

You're telling the millionaire to stop giving money and food to the homeless people.

Roy.

You put your point of view forward well.


Regards........Alan.

Thank you Alan. It comes down to one very simple thing.

How are we using or GOING TO use these bases.

If we start using them as miniature colonies in places that we do not belong... well.

BUT if we respect our host countries and listen to their opinions as we continue to put a positive foot forward then may the "God" Bless America and the future social freedom.

Thank You Darcaine.