After all reading this i came to the conclusion to stop whining about the past, what is happend is happend nothing to change about that. Now lets just look at the future, first of all to stop people from becomming terrorists you need to get rid of the reason they become them(well you can never stop all of them, but you can prevent the largest part). the main reason i think is poverty, BAD education and lack of information.Point 2: Rebuild iraq as fast as possible and get those soldiers out of there, people never like to see their country occupied by other people.(we can know it, Belgium has been occupied by like every great nation in history)Point 3: if nothing of that works, i think build a wall around their territory and forget them, let them fight it out. It is their war, not ours(i am not very proud of my idea). Sometimes i think the israel-palestine conflict will only be solved of one of the parties is gone... it seems like the hate is already there when they are born, although i sometimes wonder of they actualy want peace, Isreal and palestine. Sounds just like the catholics and protestants in Ireland. But i think we should try to solve things trough diplomacy, only fight when there is no other option, or when you are invaded... And comparing Iraq with Nazi Germany in WW2 is to mush honnor fore Iraq, Germany had a great Airforce, tanks, and infantry, their U-boats where great, Iraq hardly had a navy, obsolete plains, demoralised infantry and sucky tanks and other things. Their generals can hardly be compaired with the military genius of some of the German generals. The only thing i can find as a resemblence is Hitler and Sadam, they both have done some horrible things.

yeah but Even there, Hitler was Vegetarian and he was very intelligent. Pennicilin was found by Alexander Flemming, In LONDON. Nothing to do with Us, Sorry :DAnd israel-palestine will never end until one is gone (as the deception said) because israel are occupying regions that was orginally owned by the palestinians, and they still want more territory... so yes it's an invader against an invaded... will never end until one goes.

[Famas is a Assault gun from France ... The HAMAS is a resistance group. It will end up in a war, we know that BUT IT IS(THERE) (WARS.)Vamp please before you correct someone on(THEIR) spelling ,please check your own , or better yet don't even try

The Israeli/Palestinian conflict is a very complicated one. To most of the world the Palestinians are seen as "terrorists." They are just fighting for the land that was historically theirs. They don't have weapons to match the Israeli's so they fight with what they have, themselves. The way I see it it's not much different from the kamakazis of world war 2. The only difference is that civilians have been injured and killed in these attacks. But this is only in retaliation for when the Israeli's kill and injure Palestinians so it's just a circle of hate. The situation will never get any better with the extremists that lead the different parties. If you know anything about Sharon then you know that he is not a very good man.Gator, I agree with everything you said but unfortunately unless the UN commits to rebuilding Iraq (which I don't forsee them doing soon and if they do it will be a long time before they do) our troops are going to be stuck there for a long time. Same with Afghanistan...I really do feel bad for those guys, dying in the desert trying to rebuild a nation whose inhabitants hate the US "occupation."Enormous, your getting kind of rude with your comments...if your not going to comment on the politics of things don't correct people about their spelling (when your's is far from perfect) or call them/us "children who don't know what their talking about."

UnwantedHero, why are you so anti-American?

as Klif said almost directly after you, I'm not Anti-American.

I just believe there are better ways of getting what you want. America is not a flexiable country. It's now or never for them and I really see this as one of their biggest flaws.

 

Hey, wat do you know, I might even start to be Anti-American. Just because they're like the strongest country in the world, doesn't mean I need to respect them.

 

But, as I said, I'm not Anti-American. It's a great country all around, but when it comes to foreign affairs, they do need some touch ups

 

 

Vamp please before you correct someone on(THEIR) spelling ,please check your own , or better yet don't even try

and NORM, I would not be telling other people to check their spelling, it seems you have forgotten to go about your own rule

Yeah Klif, Andrew Jackson was a bastard.America didn't handle the Native Americans well at all, and I don't believe anyone disagrees, but we don't hate Germany because of Hitler anymore, or Russia because of Stalin, or China because of Mao..... well we still don't like China but for different reasons. The point is that all America can do is make good in the future to make up for the past, and thats the major aim of many of our operations overseas in Africa and Asia.And BornToDie, you have it a little wrong. America didn't create smallpox, it was brought over from Europe. But we did give Indians blankets infected with smallpox, not much better. Like Klif said, we were just bastards back then.

USA Iraq attacked becuse they have weapon of massdestruction and they are much weaker then North Korea!!

ugh???

you mean USA attacked Iraq because they have weapons of mass destruction and that they are much weaker than North Korea???

 

well...you know...this is what we've been talking about for the past couple of pages

Iraq doesn't have weapons. Just because Iraq had them like 8 years ago doesn't mean they have them now

maybe, maybe not..but it cannot be proven until evidence is found

But our soldiers have found evidence of chemical weapons buried in scientists' backyards. Its not like the country is clean, its just everyone is expecting us to find a huge warehouse filled with WMD, so they ignore the little things.

yes, but only in very small quantities...not enough to be any threat...

any chemical or biological weapons are "enough to be a threat"

I probably have enough "Chemical agents" in my backyard in Canada to be able to oppose a threat to you by your standart... Chemical agents are everywhere, can't live without them.And saying that they dismantled the chemical facility is speculation, and cannot be hold as truth.don't you like how Bush said today that everyone was going better in IRAK even AFTER he was informed of 5 bomb attacks in irak killing 46 person or so and wounding over 200... gotta figure.*Yeah I am back, school is a bitch*

With how f'd up the Iraqi infrastructure was, and with how ruthless Hussein was and still is, how many civilians would have died each day just from the old regime? I bet its more that the daily rate now. And also keep in mind that terrorists look an awful lot like civilians, and many civilians also still actively support Hussein. Maybe the US had good reason to bomb these buildings, and the civilians were where they shouldn't have been if they were truly innocent. Once again, its all speculation.But what I would really like to know is, for all the people who supported weapons inspections and opposed the war, what was your long-term goal? That Hussein would straighten up and become a fair ruler? A man who dropped chemical weapons on civilians (your precious, 100% innocent, unjustly-killed, battle-flag civilians), murdered his political opposition, and built palaces the likes of which have not been seen since Louis XIV while many of his countrymen starved in the desert? A man with complete, 100% power, who is so egotistical that he insists on holding elections that even the mentally challenged realize are a sham? A man like this will not be able to be controlled, even long tolerated, in a peaceful and just middle east. So what then? Wait him out? First of all, Castro has shown us that waiting out a world leader is not a good idea. Secondly, since scientifically he must die someday, he had not one but two sons ready to take his place, who for all intents and purposes were just as ruthless if not more so than their father. So what then? Just take his weapons and let the Iraqis fare for themsleves? Well, Iraq has plenty of funds from oil that are being hoarded from the Iraqi people. Lets run down a laundry list of their neighbors: Russia, who has nuclear weapons (somewhere) and other good stuff, and who would surely like financial aid and possibly some muslim intervention in chechnya; Iran (the one letter in their name is one of the larger differences between the two countries), they would have no problem helping out their similar muslim neighbor, especially since Iran would be a target once Iraq fell; Syria, come on, everything that was bad in Iraq fled there, they're as big of a target as Iraq, so helping Iraq would keep them from moving up on Bush's to-do list, plus it doesn't hurt to have a big buddy like Iraq on your side; Saudi Arabia, half of them would be helping Iraq, and the other half would be denying it to get money from the US; and this isn't even counting countries like France, that see a profit to be made from the sale of weapons (as long as another country fights the war for them). So now, take Hussein's weapons (the ones that he hasn't moved to his neighbors until the inspectors leave) and the day the inspections end Iraq will be flooded with all the weapons money can buy faster than alcohol hit New York after prohibition. And don't forget, Iraqis have been dying of starvation and injustice this whole time. And not the soldiers either, only the innocent civilians, not one of which can die while another country is earning their freedom. America lost many more people than that during the revolution, and the Iraqis don't even have to fight the war! We're doing it for them! What if during the revolution the colonists had said, "Well France, we really do hate the british rule (the injustices of which pale in comparison to Hussein's injustices), but we may die if we fight in a war, and remember we produce your tobacco (even though after the war we will become our own country and therefore you will get no resources out of it, just more stability in the supply of it). So it would be great if you could fight this war for us, some of us will help, but just as many will oppose you, and your own citizens will complain every time one of us is killed, even though your fighting our war so we don't have to." The Iraqis are getting freedom from a war they don't have to fight, stop complaining every time civilians die that its a great injustice to them. They knew the danger of staying around for the war, they should have left beforehand....... oh wait, Hussein would have killed them if they tried to leave, and theres a good chance he would have killed them eventually anyway, directly or indirectly, if the US hadn't stepped in and said "the only difference between Hussein and Hitler is the size of the army, but both murdered their own countrymen for the smallest of reasons, maybe we should LEARN FROM HISTORY and not appease Hussein by saying 'give us your weapons and you can keep your dictatorship' and instead get rid of one of the biggest war criminals of our time and save the lives of thousands of civilians he would have killed."I'd really like to know that

that's good points...but what'd I'D like to know is this simple thing:Bush declared he would get Osama Bin Laden...just a couple of months after he wins that war, he goes on and says I will get Hussien...I promise you...so what happened to Osama? he's not dead...and he's a MUCH larger threat than Hussien ever was...