Jump to content


Photo

It is unfair to blame US government for War in Iraq


  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#31 legendsofaranna

legendsofaranna

    Wowow! BoA is awesome!

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 25 November 2007 - 11:19 AM

Okay, I have to amend my argument at this point. People actually don't really need to be educated in terms of formal education in order to be politically aware. Me being slightly comatose whenever I debate these days overlooked the fact that my very parents are fairly politically aware --even though they aren't necessarily well educated --lol hence rendering alot of my argument sort of redundant at this point.

I maintain, however, that in this case, considering the timing of the propaganda in regards to 9/11, the inability of some americans so see past the manipulations of the government wasn't entirely their fault. In my opinion --they really didn't stand much of chance really. In regards to blaming the people for being unable to remove the blindfold themselves (in reference to that analogy we were discussing earlier) --how can they when they lack the resources to do so?

I agree that education is an important part of nurturing political awareness and interest --but then if we look at it that way --considering so many americans were unable to see past propaganda, if it were not based mostly on psychological manipulation, then there must be something wrong with the education system right?
It's all nice to condemn them and say that it's bad to be so politically ignorant --but how should they fix it? Your examples on how to be more politically aware are effective --BUT it doesnt take into account that some people just don't want to read anything politically related. What then?


Psychological manipulation can be avoided through independent thinking. Not always but most of the time, it can be avoided through methods like questioning authority. Who else can they blame for not questioning authority other than themselves? What sort of resources do they lack? The resources are there. If they do not want to be politically aware then it's not anyone else's fault but themselves. Americans have the opportunity to take political and history courses. Americans have access to political books in their local books. If they do not want to read anything politically related then they have to blame themselves for not being interested. If they were interested and politically aware, a majority of Americans would've opposed the war before the invasion began. What Americans think have a direct influence on the decisions made from the US government. Yes, the US government made wrong claims but Americans did not oppose nor correct the US government's mistakes. So now that I think about it, both the US government and the American people are to blame.
Even if you do not know a lot about politics, you still have the ability to question authority until you have the evidence to their claims. In schools, you are always practicing the questioning of authority by asking what you don't understand or things that don't make a lot of sense. Americans clearly have the resources to be politically aware and if their choice is to not use them then they can only blame themselves for the decisions they made. Even this thread is a resource for Americans. They can read my thread and understand more about politics. But if they choose not to read my thread, then they can't blame anyone else except themselves right? Even if their family is not politically aware, they can still gain information from other communities they join like forum for example. This thread is not the only thread about politics. There are a lot more in this forum. Youths can also join political school clubs and discuss politics. Then, they can teach their parents about it.
As you can see, Americans have the resources but they can only blame themselves for not using it.
What if people don't want to read anything politically related? Well, then there is no way for them to be politically aware. I mean, I can't force them to be politically aware. Their interest has to come from the inside. Though, I'd have to say that the War on Terrorism have made a lot of Americans more politically aware than before 9/11 happened. Of course, the invasion already started so it's too late to go back.

#32 Dracover

Dracover

    I'm an official BoA fan!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 105 posts

Posted 27 November 2007 - 12:27 AM

spring sakura: kewl all a misunderstanding. i got nothing else to add to this debate seems mostly it's already been said.

#33 kireisnowtenshi

kireisnowtenshi

    My girlfriend just dumped me. -_-

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,185 posts

Posted 27 November 2007 - 04:59 PM

...going back to that whole military thing...my whole comment wasnt geared toward anything military just based soley on economic purposes. Therefore Im sure if California wanted to have its own military Im pretty sure we'd be able to afford it.

Thats all I got.

#34 legendsofaranna

legendsofaranna

    Wowow! BoA is awesome!

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 27 November 2007 - 05:40 PM

...going back to that whole military thing...my whole comment wasnt geared toward anything military just based soley on economic purposes. Therefore Im sure if California wanted to have its own military Im pretty sure we'd be able to afford it.

Thats all I got.

Too bad California is also suffering the subprime mortgage crisis and credit crunch just like the rest of America.

#35 kireisnowtenshi

kireisnowtenshi

    My girlfriend just dumped me. -_-

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,185 posts

Posted 28 November 2007 - 11:20 AM

Yea I know right...like out of all the home forclosures in America like Cali had the most cities in the top 10...sucks to be people who are buying their homes now.

#36 Eddie Z

Eddie Z

    mmm... BoA's cute

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 73 posts

Posted 28 November 2007 - 10:23 PM

YOU ARE FULL OF CRAP!! You can twist the words around any way you want. Just about every single article YOU linked to concludes that the administration lied to the American public. There is absolutly NO proof that your lies are true. RE-READ the articles. They all STATE that BUSH and Blair made those assumptions, and mislead the public into beleaving that war was needed. Most Americans were NOT for the war. Those articles actually make no mention of the American or English public being aware of the true facts. That is why Bush has lost the support of his own party, and lost much needed seats in Congress. That is also why Blair lost his position as PM! Get off your soapbox and go back to the hole you came out of. I am a proud American who has fought in TWO wars. I support our troops, but not the war. I think Bush has gone off the deep end with power, just behind putin.

Edited by Eddie Z, 28 November 2007 - 10:24 PM.


#37 legendsofaranna

legendsofaranna

    Wowow! BoA is awesome!

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 01:14 PM

Yes, indeed, every article does say that the Administration lied to the public. This concludes that the media did do the job they were supposed to do to inform the American people. But the American people still believed Bush before the war before questioning him and thus, it's their fault for not having independent thinking. Therefore, I haven't lied anything since I basically agree with you on what the articles were saying. However, as the poll indicated, a lot of Americans supported the war before the invasion began. Mr. Blair got re-elected 2 times so he was quite popular within his country. Mr. Bush also got re-elected and that was after the Iraqi invasion. This indicates that the American people still supported him a year after the invasion of Iraq. As for Mr. Putin, a lot of Russians support him. He's quite popular in Russia. May I ask which two wars you fought?
I am also quite impressed as to the amount of emotional control you have. I've seen tons of people who use name-calling when they don't have an effective counter. It really shows how mature they are during discussions. :lol:

Edited by legendsofaranna, 29 November 2007 - 01:44 PM.


#38 Eddie Z

Eddie Z

    mmm... BoA's cute

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 73 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 04:10 PM

Sorry for getting a little hot about the issue. The point I was trying to make, but didn't do too well, is that the themselves may be a little misleading. However it is said, our government screwed up. Americans never knew the full scope of the deception until long after the start of the war. Those publications, articles,and the ones only available online, are not known let alone read by 99% of Americans. Not only is It the first time I had seen them, everyone I sent the links to had never heard of them. Many Americans don't even have time to read, and get their news on the TV. It was the media that finally exposed the turth after Bush's re-election. That disclosure led to his loss in popularity, and Blair's as well. I hope this has helped to explain why Americans were "left in the dark".

#39 legendsofaranna

legendsofaranna

    Wowow! BoA is awesome!

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 04:15 PM

I have a question. Why didn't Americans ask for proof from Mr. Bush claims before the Iraqi Invasion?

#40 Kudaranai

Kudaranai

    humany wumany

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,080 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 04:52 PM

I have a question. Why didn't Americans ask for proof from Mr. Bush claims before the Iraqi Invasion?


You're assuming all Americans think like you, which it isn't true. When you're being force-fed information, the majority do not stop and think. Sure there are some people who asks, argue, and demand answers. But they were either getting a brush off or ignored. The government used the fear during that time and manipulated people, it was clever. But now everything's backfiring on them..~ Still there are MANY who will support the war mainly because they were fed these 'thoughts'. Where was a documentary (not related about wars or anything like that, but intelligence) were they asked a question of "where should America invade next?" Most people say countries in the middle east, or Korea - with the reason given that they were 'dangerous' (Which is quite stupid if you ponder upon it)

#41 legendsofaranna

legendsofaranna

    Wowow! BoA is awesome!

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 05:12 PM

I wonder why people stop thinking when they're being fed information from fear? I also wonder what Americans need to fear from Iraq. America has the biggest and strongest military in the world. They have the best nuclear arsenal in the world. What do Americans have to fear from tiny Iraq?
Indeed, North Korea is not dangerous to America. But, they are dangerous to South Korea. If they pose a threat to South Korea, America can't just let North Korea take over.
As for Iran, they are not dangerous to America as well. But, America has to defend Israel because Iran has vowed to nuke Israel once Iran possess one. There is indeed evidence that Iran is developing nuclear energy. One of its nuclear reactors is being built by the Russians.

#42 Eddie Z

Eddie Z

    mmm... BoA's cute

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 73 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 07:26 PM

The US is not afraid of any country. The US is afraid of what one nucular explosion would do to the whole world. Small countries have a tendancy to try to flex muscles, especially if run by meatheads. Russia hasn't built that reactor yet. They are still argueing with the US. We do have a president who thinks he is a king, but we also have a congress that is now against most of his policies. Hopefully, some day soon, America will be out of the war and a president.

#43 Kudaranai

Kudaranai

    humany wumany

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,080 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 07:45 PM

I wonder why people stop thinking when they're being fed information from fear? I also wonder what Americans need to fear from Iraq. America has the biggest and strongest military in the world. They have the best nuclear arsenal in the world. What do Americans have to fear from tiny Iraq?
Indeed, North Korea is not dangerous to America. But, they are dangerous to South Korea. If they pose a threat to South Korea, America can't just let North Korea take over.
As for Iran, they are not dangerous to America as well. But, America has to defend Israel because Iran has vowed to nuke Israel once Iran possess one. There is indeed evidence that Iran is developing nuclear energy. One of its nuclear reactors is being built by the Russians.


It's all politics after all..but see the bold part. That's what everyone in America thought, then 9/11 happened. The US has a lot more military resources than someone like Bin Laden, but still, towers came crashing down didn't they?

#44 Rhythum_of_my_heart

Rhythum_of_my_heart

    My girlfriend just dumped me. -_-

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,569 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 07:53 PM

The people here who have said that the American people were "force-fed" information about Iraq by Bush need to think about something. Most of the media has a liberal bias; don't try to deny it. Almost all Americans use/watch some form of this media. If you believe that Bush "force-fed" information to the American people, don't you think that the liberal media have and are doing that now??

Also, recently, the news coming out of Iraq has been pretty good, but of course you don't hear good news in Iraq from the liberal media. Violence has been down DRAMATICALLY in the past 2 months. Think about it, has anyone heard of a major suicide bombing in Iraq recently??

I'm NOT saying the war in Iraq is all sunshine and roses: mistakes have been made, many American and Iraqi lives have been lost, but you can't only look at one side when the other also clearly exists.

PLEASE WATCH THIS (it's short):

#45 legendsofaranna

legendsofaranna

    Wowow! BoA is awesome!

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 29 November 2007 - 08:00 PM

9/11 happened through a lack of security, not because the US military power was diminishing. Ever since 9/11, America have drastically improved its security. They even prevented a number of terrorist acts like the liquid bomb one.

Speaking of nuclear power, perhaps this is an article that you guys might be interested about:

A declassified document from President Gerald Ford's administration, for which Kissinger was Secretary of State, supported Iran's push for nuclear power. The document noted that Tehran should "prepare against the time--about 15 years in the future--when Iranian oil production is expected to decline sharply."1 The United States ultimately planned to sell billions of dollars worth of nuclear reactors, spare parts and nuclear fuel to Iran.

The United States established Iran's first research reactor in 1967 at Tehran University. In November of that year, the U.S. corporation United Nuclear provided Iran with 5.85kg of 93 percent enriched uranium.5

Nuclear expert Sahimi argued that presidents Nixon and Ford "would not have minded if the Shah developed the bomb because the Shah was a close ally of the United States. Remember Iran had a long border with the Soviet Union. If the Shah did make a nuclear bomb, that would have been a big deterrent against the USSR."9


http://www.energypub...le.asp?id=12575

The US government's manipulations does not always work on people who are informed. In the past, the USA actually supported Iran's developing of nuclear energy and nuclear bomb. I hope the resources that I have provided to you guys are helpful.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users