In saying that "This obviously ultra-conservative board" I didn't mean this political board, since I had never been here before. I meant Tigerforums, the sports board, from reading your views, it is filled with very conservative people, and I stick by that. There is nothing wrong with being conservative, it doesn't mean you are close minded(although if you are far right or far left, it probably does mean that.) or a radical.
I was going to reply to J_Oats but TigerSaint has already said it. Get this through you head J_Oats Muslim terrorists are going to attack us when and where they can whether we terminate Saddam or not. If they have some kind of plot in place to kill a lot of Americans when all hell comes to Iraq they will do it sooner or later anyway if they are able to pull it off If Bush were to go on TV tommorrow and say "I have realized the error of our foreign policy and I am ordering the withdrawal of our troops from the gulf region" That would not make the Muslim world stop their efforts to destroy us. Like it or not since 9-11 the rules have changed. We can no longer afford to back away from pre-emptive first stikes against our sworn enemies just because "America has never done it in the past" The Ante has been raised and the stakes are now too high
Wrong. It was a thought provoking and well written post. I don't agree with any of it, but he laid out his case without any immature name-calling or cute little cartoons lampooning those with another viewpoint. This is far from an ultra-conservative board. Personally, on the issue of protecting America and Americans from foreign threats I am as far to the right as one can be. I perceive Saddam to be a threat and fully support efforts to take him out. On the other hand, however, I am against the death penalty (it only deters the one who gets it), I am pro-life (but how can that be considered bad?) and I believe that all men are equal regardless of race or creed. I have a problem with gays who feel sex is a spectator sport but, hey, I have my limits. I doubt that anyone out there can match my goosebumps every January when I hear MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech. Like Ellis Hugh, I am not a sheep and I am not blind. But I feel strongly about my beliefs and they run both sides of the center line.
Alright, you have convinced me to some extent(I bet you never thought you would hear those words on this board.) Breeding new terroists and triggering new terroists attacks would happen anyway, but I still don't see why Saddam is more of a threat now than he was, 10, 8, 6, 4, or 2 years ago. I also think this is still the thing that will trigger the use of his weapons. But you know what, since the war has started, I'll say, go for it George W, get the son of a bitch
War is just a tool, that is all. My biggest problem leading up to the war was the fact that the U.N could not come up with a majority as for or agaisnt the war. But, since France decided the veto anything put through the U.N, diplomacy was over then and there. Personally, I dont see why we do not have a big build up inear North Korea and all.. you know the whole defy the U.N and U.S, attemp to caputre a US intellegence plane, start up a nuclear reactor.. etc etc. I would be more afraid of them than Iraq..... but I guess one at a time right?
