The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness
Latest Article

The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness

It’s no secret that when people contradict themselves, it has the effect of making the flaws in their actions or statements seem glaringly obvious. But what about when WE ourselves get caught contradicting ourselves by someone else?

By: Nick Tumminello Added: January 6th, 2014
More Recent Articles
Contrast Training for Size
By: Lee Boyce
An Interview with Marianne Kane of Girls Gone Strong
By: Jordan Syatt
What Supplements Should I be Taking? By: Jay Wainwright
Bench Like a Girl By: Julia Ladewski
Some Thoughts on Building a Big Pull By: Christopher Mason

Facebook Join Facebook Group       Twitter Follow on Twitter       rss Subscribe via RSS
Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 130
  1. #1
    Senior Member hemants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,569

    Iraq war - the real reason, the right reason, the moral reason, and the stated reason

    If the only thing you are holding is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

  2.    Support Wannabebig and use AtLarge Nutrition Supplements!


  3. #2
    bone crusher
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    0
    yeah Tom Freidman is extremely knowledgable on this subject

  4. #3
    Simplistic
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    2,179
    Interesting.

    I don't think Bush would have won public support without using WMD's as a threat.

  5. #4
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    no points. some serious guts to even go there

  6. #5
    Jack's Utter Surprise Saturday Fever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Chico
    Posts
    3,691

  7. #6
    is numero uno Saint Patrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    6,557
    this thread is just asking for trouble.
    Age:30
    Height: 5'7"
    Weight: Not Big Enough
    ______________________

    “Take things as they are. Punch when you have to punch. Kick when you have to kick.” — Bruce Lee

  8. #7
    Senior Member hemants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,569
    The truth is always more troubling than the embelished story that covers it up
    If the only thing you are holding is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

  9. #8
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    The failure of the Bush team to produce any weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq is becoming a big, big story. But is it the real story we should be concerned with? No. It was the wrong issue before the war, and it's the wrong issue now.
    Why? Because there were actually four reasons for this war: the real reason, the right reason, the moral reason and the stated reason.

    The "real reason" for this war, which was never stated, was that after Sept. 11 America needed to hit someone in the Arab-Muslim world. Afghanistan wasn't enough. Because a terrorism bubble had built up over there - a bubble that posed a real threat to the open societies

    **the open societies. we live in utopia, and theyre all wrong

    of the West and needed to be punctured. This terrorism bubble said that plowing airplanes into the World Trade Center was OK, having Muslim preachers say it was OK was OK, having state-run newspapers call people who did such things "martyrs" was OK and allowing Muslim charities to raise money for such "martyrs" was OK.

    **this is a major underestimation of the strength of the Al Qaeda network and other likeminded organisations outside the Middle East

    Not only was all this seen as OK, there was a feeling among radical Muslims that suicide bombing would level the balance of power between the Arab world and the West, because we had gone soft and their activists were ready to die.

    The only way to puncture that bubble was for American soldiers, men and women, to go into the heart of the Arab-Muslim world, house to house, and make clear that we are ready to kill, and to die, to prevent our open society from being undermined by this terrorism bubble. Smashing Saudi Arabia or Syria would have been fine. But we hit Saddam for one simple reason: because we could, and because he deserved it and because he was right in the heart of that world.

    And don't believe the nonsense that this had no effect. Every neighboring government - and 98 percent of terrorism is about what governments let happen - got the message.
    The "right reason" for this war was the need to partner with Iraqis, post-Saddam, to build a progressive Arab regime.

    **This is not true. Americans get shot daily now in Iraq. They
    were never welcome, and will never be.


    Because the real weapons of mass destruction that threaten us were never Saddam's missiles. The real weapons that threaten us are the growing number of angry, humiliated young Arabs and Muslims, who are produced by failed or failing Arab states - young people who hate America more than they love life.

    **Why did Iraq fail? Before US intervention, before Saddam that is (yes, you remember?) Iraq was one of the wealthiest countries in the Middle East. But since they were building WMD`s with the money they made off it they could no longer trade many things. They couldnt even sell their oil. They couldn`t even import pencils, because they contain pure carbon which could be used to make more WMDs.

    BUT THERE ARE NO WMDs ARE THERE? but that doesn`t matter apparently...


    Helping to build a decent Iraq as a model for others and solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are the necessary steps for defusing the ideas of mass destruction, which are what really threaten us.
    The "moral reason" for the war was that Saddam's regime was an engine of mass destruction and genocide that had killed thousands of his own people, and neighbors, and needed to be stopped.

    **As if any government cares

    But because the Bush team never dared to spell out the real reason for the war and (wrongly) felt that it could never win public or world support for the right reasons and the moral reasons, it opted for the "stated reason": the notion that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction that posed an immediate threat to America.

    **And we are all totally cool with being lied to by our government

    I argued before the war that Saddam posed no such threat to America, and had no links with al-Qaida, and that we couldn't take the nation to war "on the wings of a lie." I argued that Bush should fight this war for the right reasons and the moral reasons. But he stuck with this WMD argument for PR reasons.
    Once the war was over, and I saw the mass graves and the true extent of Saddam's genocidal evil, my view was that Bush did not need to find any WMDs to justify the war for me. I still feel that way. But I have to admit that I've always been fighting my own war in Iraq. Bush took the country into his war. And if it turns out that he fabricated the evidence for his war (which I wouldn't conclude yet), that would badly damage America and be a very serious matter.

    But my ultimate point is this: Finding Iraq's WMDs is necessary to preserve the credibility of the Bush team, the neocons, Tony Blair and the CIA. But rebuilding Iraq is necessary to win the war. I won't feel one whit more secure if we find Saddam's WMDs, because I never felt he would use them on us. But I will feel terribly insecure if we fail to put Iraq onto a progressive path. Because if that doesn't happen, the terrorism bubble will reinflate and bad things will follow.

    **Has it occurred to you that the USA is still not welcome in Iraq

    Bush's credibility rides on finding WMDs, but America's future, and the future of the Mideast, rides on our building a different Iraq. We must not forget that.

    ***The world oil was not mentioned once in this entire article.........
    Last edited by Reinier; 06-17-2003 at 09:15 AM.

  10. #9
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    Who is this author? can you tell me some more about him?

  11. #10
    MulletII - AKA Ninja Boner Gyno Rhino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    FFFA Headquarters
    Posts
    11,468
    I just don't understand why people look at me so strangely when I justify the war by saying that it is simply one facet of the inevitable domination of the white race and extermination of all the inferiors.

    Duh.
    Founding Member and CEO of the FFFA

    "All that matters is beauty on the inside! Outside beauty doesn't matter!"
    ~This is something ugly people say to feel better about themselves...

    "Strength and size don't matter! It's not fair to judge training knowledge based on strength and size!"
    ~This is something wussy people say to feel better about themselves...

    Pearls of Wisdom...


    Resident Ninja Demon (with a pet Radioactive Sloth) and SchlonkeyMaster of WBB!

    Rock is my 'Big Viking Brother', and not in a homo-esque way.

    And no COLON jokes, bastards!

  12. #11
    Party of "No." Tryska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    23,191
    *kills gyno on principle*
    A little learning is a dangerous thing...

    Live Dangerously! Learn a Little!


    Dude, did Doogie Howser just steal my fucking car?

  13. #12
    Senior Member hemants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,569
    Friedman is a NY Times columnist. He's pretty middle of the road from what I can tell.

    You make many good points, here's my take:

    1. The real reasons

    - strategic interests (oil)
    - serve notice to terrorist harbouring nations with a show of shock and awe
    - Saddam *might* have had nuclear technology and *might* have sold this to the wrong people at some point
    - American people needed to see a can of whoop ass opened

    2. The right reasons

    - democracy for Iraqi people (didn't stop the Americans from helping the Baath party for 30 years though)
    - an end to sanctions which were killing people daily

    3. The moral reason

    - rid the world of a murderous dictator (again, hardly a moral claim that the Americans can make given that they helped the Baathists gain power in the first place and also turned a blind eye to Saddam for many years)

    4. The stated reasons

    - WMD and Al Quaida (lies although probably not the impeachable type)

    I guess the reason I liked the article is that you seldom find commentary that isn't extremely one sided (either left or right).
    Last edited by hemants; 06-17-2003 at 11:02 AM.
    If the only thing you are holding is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

  14. #13
    Gonnabebig Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    IL, usa
    Posts
    284
    It was a good article.

  15. #14
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    I dont see what left or right has to do with anything BTW.

    If this is what seems unbiased to you, than you must have never seen american critical journalism other than some shouting suckers that push one loose idea for a page.

    The sanctions on Iraq were put up by the USA. stopping them is a silly reason to attack...

    The stated reasons are lies,

    The real reasons are not justifying of a war

    The moral reasons dont cut wood, because for a 1/1000 of the cost you could save 1000 times more lives...

    Democracy for the Iraqi people... Nobody but Iraqis care. not the US either. Also Democracy will come down to doing exactly what money tells you, so being another facet of the western system.

    An Iranian told me the Iranian and Iraqi governments are the way they are to stay out of corruption and really want the best for their people. I`m willing to believe more freedom would indeed lead to corruption and with it becoming another biatch of the EU/US

    im sure people will in some time, if iraq is lucky, see their life standard has risen, and praise the US. they however forget that before the US got into the area in the first place, Iraq was a good working country. And without what is in my opinion western oppression, Iraq could have done even much better recently, than it will with this new US puppet government
    Last edited by Reinier; 06-17-2003 at 11:14 AM.

  16. #15
    A$$hole detector RoidRage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    469
    yeah i can agree with most of your points hemants except the oil. So far it seems the oil has been mainly salvaged for the people of Iraq, since thats really there only economic contribution to the world. It seems France has more interest in there oil than anyone else. Of course we'll get oil from them, thats a no brainer, but I wouldn't call it the sole purpose on ther agenda. But I do believe there are WMD, like the senate inteligence committee does. Whether they destroyed them all prior to invasion, hid them, or moved them they'll find them.

  17. #16
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    Governments dont do things for other than economical reasons

  18. #17
    Simplistic
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    2,179
    Reinier, you are my favorite foreign policy expert.

  19. #18
    Senior Member hemants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,569
    The oil isn't the only reason and probably not the biggest one but the fact remains that it is far more important to American economic interests who is running an oil rich Iraq than say, the Congo.

    To say the oil was not a major factor is not correct IMO.
    If the only thing you are holding is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

  20. #19
    Senior Member hemants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,569
    "Democracy for the Iraqi people... Nobody but Iraqis care. not the US either. Also Democracy will come down to doing exactly what money tells you, so being another facet of the western system"

    You bring up an interesting tangent but in a somewhat contradictory way don't you think? If a democracy in Iraq would give a rich America hegemony over Iraq then they SHOULD care right?

    And I'm not entirely sure that your thesis is correct. In fact, in the short term, the democracy may be one which elects an angry islamo-fascist government.

    It will be interesting to see if the Americans allow true democracy to exist there (Shia majority just like Iran).

    I hope they do because like Iran where the majority of youth are rejecting dogmatic rule, a fundamentalist government in Iraq wouldn't last very long.

    We live in interesting times and of course, we are all priviledged to be the ones chatting about it as opposed to hearing the bombs fall...
    If the only thing you are holding is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

  21. #20
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    Originally posted by Neil
    Reinier, you are my favorite foreign policy expert.
    Your my favourite person

  22. #21
    Senior Member hemants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    1,569
    Gay marriages are now legal in Ontario.

    If the only thing you are holding is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

  23. #22
    MACHINE
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    on the short bus
    Posts
    0
    Reinier is extremely unbiased, as he proves with every post.

    I can find good and bad with most points of that article. Very refreshing, if you ask me - not someone whining about Bush being a war loving oil freak, nor is it someone saying if we didn't take action, Iraq was going to blow a country off the map via WMDs. I liked it.

    Note: at no place did he say we were "wanted" or "welcome" in Iraq, only that Iraq had the potential to be a better place with our assistance, and yes, force.
    "He's the best damn rollerskater that ever lived...probably in the whole town" - Chris Pontius

    If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with.

    5'10" 215 lbs
    Personal Bests:
    Bench 355
    Squat 505
    Deadlift 560

  24. #23
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    I dont think there will be a true democracy in Iraq, that serves the Iraqi people.

    In fact i dont think there ever was a true democracy or a ruling that was truely trying to help its people... but what i mean is I do think it will be a gov that wants to help the Us economy more than the Iraqi people or economy

  25. #24
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    Originally posted by gino
    Reinier is extremely unbiased, as he proves with every post.

    I can find good and bad with most points of that article. Very refreshing, if you ask me - not someone whining about Bush being a war loving oil freak, nor is it someone saying if we didn't take action, Iraq was going to blow a country off the map via WMDs. I liked it.

    Note: at no place did he say we were "wanted" or "welcome" in Iraq, only that Iraq had the potential to be a better place with our assistance, and yes, force.
    I`m not biased. I`m cynical and realist. and I know that people do whatever serves them best. Many of the things I sayd in threads prior to and during the war which nobody believed then have come true.

  26. #25
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    because of WMD iraq got sanctioned, because of the sanctions they got/stayed poor, this caused all the problems in iraq after,
    and now the WMD that were supposed to justify war arent there,

    and it turns out this whole thing was nonsense from the start... and now somebody just says it doesn`t matter.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •