But Saddam wasn't a symbol of each of those countries 'evil dictators', only of Iraq's. The Berlin Wall symbolized the enemy of an entire block of communist-dictatorship run countries. Not only that, the wall was a physical barrier between democracy and the enemy. That statue was just a big a$$ lifeless hunk of bronze that didn't stop anyone from going anywhere.

 

Can't believe you still believe this. Such a short sighted point of view.

 

Not to mention that the scene was staged. If I remember right hardly anyone really was there.

 

With all due respect I think yours is short-sighted. What do you believe? I bet I know the short-sighted answer already. You see, what you think were the motives for the war have nothing to do with what happened on April 9th. 2003 and how the Iraqi people reacted.

That bigass chunk of bronze represented a lot. It wasn't just a benign piece of steel. It represented oppression, censorship, genocide, human rights etc. The symbolism was as great, if not greater than the Berlin Wall in its numerous respects.

Like I said before... the thing that differentiates them is how it directly effected us (I’ll admit has yet to be determined) and a lot of people's hatred towards Bush.

Consider how it can effect us. The Soviet Union Collapsed along with the Cold War. We can agree on this.

But how isn’t a democratic presence, the elimination of oppression and censorship not good for the area?! Better yet, how is it not good for the world?

For example, children in Iraq are learning what Islam is truly all about among other subjects they never knew under Saddam. A lot of you said terrorism starts in the classroom regarding hatred towards the United States. Why is there suddenly an exception? At least we can say we’ve been hit by terrorism as opposed to a cold war nuke, you see? This is just one piece of the puzzle. I haven't even begun to dwell on how a democratic presence is pressuring other nearby middle eastern nations.

If the fall of the wall represented the fall of Communism in the Soviet Union and a Cold War that never got Hot, why can't this stand for something as equal?

 

During the Cold war there was a threat of our whole existance being wiped out by two countries with fingers twitching over red buttons. That is something that cannot be matched by something like democratic reform.

I agree that taking out saddam and giving iraq back to iraqi's is a great start for the middle east but I just don't see how it can compare to not having a nuclear winter possible everyday.

 

Unregistered,

Well, what is the "long term" view of this???

 

But you fail to see my point on the children. And this is just children I’m talking about here... a lot more has yet to be considered.

A lot of people here suggested that terrorism starts in the educational system. The Sunni communities weren't praising the United States in their textbooks. In fact, they did the exact opposite.

How can you compare a finger over a button to terrorism and it's potential in their youth? Compare the death toll of Americans in the cold war compared to terrorism. Which one effects us again?

Answer this... What form of government did the former USSR practice after it’s collapse?

Was the significance in the collapse of communism OR the rise of democracy thereafter? After all, another threatening form of government could have picked-up the tab after it’s collapse, right?

We wouldn't be doing a jumping heal kick if Stalin V2.0 took the throne now would we?

 

I agree with you of the effect on the children. This will more that likely have a big effect on terrorism. But terrorism doesn't have the potential to wipe out life itself like the cold war did.

There weren't alot of deaths because of the cold war, that is true. But it had the potential to kill everyone.

 

You sure about that?

People thought the world was flat in regard to terrorism on US soil as recent as Sept 10th, 2001.

You are comparing a two things that effected the USA. I’ll agree with that all day long. The major difference is that nobody ever got killed by not pushing the red button. I can stare a pistol on the nightstand like I want to fuck it. Doesn't mean i've committed murder though.

The Cold War was just terror. Terrorism by those that want us dead is terrorism with a record.

 

It does not have the same potential at all. Not even close. And this has not even close taken out terrorist organizations so I still don't see how this was as big of a moment to the wall coming down.

 

How can you possibly justify this without any evidence whatsoever on their arsenal and technological capabilities? You can't

 

You do know that was staged right? So that was a SMALL, and I mean small, minority of how Iraqie people reacted. So I do not judge that motivation as anything but a publicity stunt, which it clearly was. And if April 9th, 2003 had nothing to do with the motives of the war, then why make such a "show" (which is exactly what that was) of taking down the statue?

Then why not let the Iraqie people bring it down themselves? Like the Berlin Wall was? I was there when the Berlin Wall (my father has a masters in history and decide we should take part in history that day.) came down, VERY different from the publicity stunt that this was. It showed if anything else the farce that this war was. While I understand what your saying about symbolism, it just doesn't compare to the Berlin Wall coming down.


No the Cold War is a HUGE chunk of our history and struggle for power in the world. This is just a bleep in history of a President flaunting his powers. You can't compare the two in that sense.

This isn't black and white and you know this. The way this was done was NOT good for the world. If anything it hurt the world and us as a nation. It has changed the playing field and in my point of view negatively.

Since when was Iraq a terrorist nation? When did they send terrorist to the US? I still don't see the connection between Iraq and terrorist that you are trying to portray. If anything we should be going after the Saudi's for that connection to hold true.

Because Iraq was never a hot bed for Terrorism? Never was a MAJOR threat to the US. Not to mention that terrorism is NOT something based in nations at all. (Of course some nations support it.) It is a mentality not a army. You can NOT change a mentality by taking over a nation.

 

Sure I can. I believe Russia, with the nukes that it had, could of BLOWN the **** out of the whole WORLD several times over I believe. A terrorist organization does not have the same potential at all at this time. And I seriously doubt anytime soon. Also a terrorist organization does not have the man power or funds to do this. And I seriously doubt they will anytime soon. You can not compare a NATIONS power vs a organizations.

 

First you must acknowledge that you can NOT win a war on terrorism. Since terrorism can be done by any individual who sets his mind to it. You could for all intensive purposes become one tomorrow if you so choose. It is a battle of the minds not of might. And I think you don't see this and are being short sighted if you believe taking over a country will change the actions of a few. If anything you fuel the fire.

 

How does leaving a brutal dictatorship in place help to "correct the minds" of the terrorists who were doing just fine in the Clinton years? You are dreaming if you think leaving things be in the middle east would've reversed terror all on its own. September 11th, and all the other big attacks America has seen so far, were planned under the Clinton years of general non-intervention and cooperation with the UN on every international crisis. That policy failed.

Now let's look at Iraq today: It has moderate leaders from all of the major religious and ethnic backgrounds, its people are happy to be voting, and they are turning against the terrorists more every day. When the Iraqi government stands on its own two feet (There is now a timeline announced by the President of Iraq), what are the terrorists going to say? "The US is evil...that's why it got rid of that atheist murderer saddam and then left Iraq a democratic government"?

Fuel to the fire would've been letting the middle east go on as a collection of oppressive, murderous states that incite people to desperation and anger. Terrorists recruit hateful people who need someone to blame. If you remove the source of the hatred (oppression and corruption), you remove the motivating factor for terrorism, and you discredit the existing terrorist groups.