Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Cried about the carpet bombing of civilians

  1. Apr 9, 2003 #1
    You cried about the carpet bombing of civilians that you were sure would happen. It didn't.
    You cried about the thousands of coalition soldiers that were sure to die. Very few have died. Nearly half were accidents.
    You cried about the fact that the Iraqi's didn't want this war. Yet now they dance in the streets with glee at Saddams destruction.

    Now you complain. You say, "Oh yeah, big deal, the coalition steamrolled right over a defenseless country." Wait a minute, three days into the war you complained about how it wasn't going to be as easy as everyone said it would be. When victory came swift, you complained it was too swift. Face it, you just want to be on the other side of George Bush. Well guess what? George Bush is being celebrated by the Iraqi people. How ya like them apples? I guess that means your on the opposite side of the Iraqi people. Of course, I always knew you were.

    Regardless of your opinions, the Iraqi people are happy we did what we did. You'll never, ever, live that down. Happy days.

    ADMIN EDIT: Profane innuendo
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 9, 2003
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 9, 2003 #2


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor


    Hippies around the world are saddened by our success. Liberals in the US are disheartened by Bush's success (so much for 2004).
  4. Apr 9, 2003 #3
    *In voice of Darth Vadar*
    Don't be too proud of this technological terror you have constructed. The ability to destroy a life is insignificant in comparison to the power which creates it.

    Methinks you seek to lump everyone together in one tightly knit ball and bounce this ball off the wall.
  5. Apr 9, 2003 #4
    Not really.

    The ones I can't lump into a racket, I lump into a ball. It makes for better sports.
  6. Apr 9, 2003 #5


    User Avatar

    We did? That's news to me.
    1. I never mentioned it. But the US army did threaten to do so... I guess we should have cried more about their lies, no?
    2. Hmm? Really? I thought the consensus was that we should win easily?
    3. Note "at Saddam's destruction". Not at the declaration of war. Most of it is relief the war is over. And the point was at the start of the war we DIDN'T know.

    Clean out your brain Alias. There seems to be an army of radical ignorants hiding in the part we call your IMAGINATION. Or maybe these are messages from posters in a parallel universe? Hmm...

    Erm... when? We worried it was going to take a long time, but we are happy it's finally (hopefully) over. IMHO, it shouldn't have happened in the first place, but it's better than expected. But the real test will come in the months/years ahead.

    Sweet and fresh, please.
    I always thought of Bush as an dimensional character. So any side I take is on the Iraqi people's side. Unless... how many sides do the Iraqis have?

    Damn. I missed it.

    Now that's just a straw man argument.
    But you needn't bathe yourself in glory quite that much, you know...
  7. Apr 9, 2003 #6


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

  8. Apr 9, 2003 #7
    If the shoe doesn't fit, don't wear it.

    This is obviously not the end of problems in Iraq, by a long shot. But it is a significant turning point. That's what I'm celebrating.

    My main beef is that the "anti war-give inspections more time" crowd was horribly wrong in their assesment of the problem.

    Examples of this are pouring in as Iraqi testimonials about the brutality and torture by Saddam's Regime. Weapons inspections would never, ever have stopped the torture. Yet, the 'give inspections a chance crowd' had no answer for this problem. Their unwillingness to take responsibility for shedding a small amount of blood to save a lot underscores their complete wussification.

    Again, this buttresses my contention that 'those not politically similar to myself' don't know how to troubleshoot or effectively solve problems. And even when they are faced with the scary cliff of viable solutions, they chicken out and refuse to jump. Leaving the problem unsolved.
  9. Apr 9, 2003 #8


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    "Nobody could possibly lose an election after such a resounding military victory. Right dad?"

  10. Apr 9, 2003 #9
  11. Apr 9, 2003 #10
    why dont you read the papers. or turn on the news. if you had you would see that we HAVE bombed civilians. We have killed innocent iraqis. Granted this happens in war, I just thought you should know.

    Should we have given the inspectors more time? Well why not, if we had maybe they would have found out -as it would seem obvious now- that Iraq HAS NO weapons of mass destruction. Do you mean to tell me he's hiding them in Baghdad? Please.....
  12. Apr 9, 2003 #11


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    alias, i think you need to find some hobbies away from your computer...
  13. Apr 9, 2003 #12
    Everyone is well aware that we have accidentally bombed civilians. The number of deaths has actually been remarkably low, and the troops deserve congratulating for this. Theres also a good chance that Saddam bombed his own people at least once.

    However, we have also almost definitely saved more Iraqis from Saddam's sword had he been left to stay in power, than we have accidentally killed.

    The UN had 10 years to get Saddam to comply to the agreements of the Gulf War. He didn't. We should have gone back in a year or two after he started his antics again, but that's in the past. We could still have been in the same position in 10 years time as we were 3 weeks ago had we left it to the UN to do something (more than words) against Saddam. In that time, who knows how many more Iraqis would have suffered and been killed at his hands?

    Saddam producing and hiding WMDs WAS NOT the only reason for conflict, although I repeat, for about the hundredth time, there is still a high chance that WMDs will be found - there are so many highlighted sites that haven't even been searched yet!

    And finally, the images of Baghdad today just confirmed that we had made the right choice.
  14. Apr 9, 2003 #13
    lol. I hope for a repeat of '92. Can we have Clinton back? Please?
  15. Apr 9, 2003 #14


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Huh? Do you have a quote on that? Thats absurd.
  16. Apr 9, 2003 #15


    User Avatar

    I think there are some moments where people should just pause and show a bit of grace. I found myself tearing for the sheer joy in their faces but..it's not over...and they've earned their moment, I'm afraid not a one of us arm chair captains have and maybe gloating just isn't appropriate at times like these.
    My two cents.
  17. Apr 9, 2003 #16
  18. Apr 10, 2003 #17
    This is a silly, silly thread. Again, let us thank the protesters, without whom Iraw may well have been carpet bombed.
  19. Apr 10, 2003 #18
    If the intent was to deal with terrorism, how does carpet bombing Iraq fit into the equation.

    You seem to assume that the war is about oil and economics. If it is, why are we not carpet bombing? If it is about money, why don't we just take over the oil fields and blast Saddam and his people if they get to close.

    Why go to all the trouble of engaging in as humane a war as possible? World opinion, and if you listen to the left, the vast majority of the US population are against Bush, so how could it get any worse for Bush and his buddies if they just killed everything in site with a minimum amount of money and coalition lives? Their reputation couldn't possibly get any worse. Why are they conducting themselves in such a respectable way when no one respects them?

    The truth is that the US government is telling the truth, and I admit, as foreign a concept as that sounds, it just happens to be the case this time. We will liberate Iraq. We will find WMDs. We will expose atrocities of Saddam's regime. We will help the Iraqi's restore order. We will help the Iraqi's create a better government. We will leave when these things are accomplished. And the rest of the Arab world is going to have to deal with a very free, and very rich Iraq. That's what I call a huge step in treating the problems that cause terrorism.

    Please wake up and smell the cordite. This is not colonialism. This is not one country conquering another. This is a war on terrorism.

    But then again, maybe we should give inspections more time. Good grief!
  20. Apr 10, 2003 #19
    you mean not brutal enough to hopefuly not turn more people against the ageneda.

    see above.

    it damn well could.

    that might make some sense if it was true.

    you are the one who is obviously sleeping on the job Alias.
  21. Apr 10, 2003 #20
    Hmmmmm...use a made up 'War on Terror'(the dumbest idea since Missle Defense)to secure oil contracts in Iraq. Use teh lack of WMDs as an excuse to attack Syria. This administration hasn't told teh truth sincce they stopped letting Shrub answer questions off the cuff.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook