Ender wrote:You're right. But calling somebody Frenchie is crossing from "I have my own opinions, u have ures, leave it at that," to "STFU, you're wrong, I'm right, and the US is justified in everything they do"
LOL, sometimes I get carried away, but its not to be ment harmfully, as I said be4, I don't agree w/ this operation Iraqi freedom, just to prove my point, here is a paper I wrote for skool:
Operation ?Iraqi Freedom??
This attack on the country of Iraqi is completely pointless and unnecessary. This war was started because of many senseless motives. One of these reasons was for money. Bush is in this war to get some cash. He will get this money from the oil we will get. This money will basically compensate us for the cost of the war, among other things. Another reason this war was waged was because Bush wants to get Saddam bad, because his father didn?t. Also, Bush is trying to do a deed that will make him a hero, so that people have some reason to vote for him next election. The final reasons are supposedly that Saddam has weapons of ?mass destruction? and that the US wants to change the Iraqi regime.
To me, none of these reasons are good enough for us, the United States of America to attack Iraq. First off, though, we have virtually no support from many of our biggest allies. This is reason enough not to go to war, half of the world is against our ?cause?, including the UN. And since countries are not supporting us in this war, which they are by no means obligated to, we have acted foolishly. For example, we have renamed French Fries, Freedom Fries. That?s a great way to keep allies, isn?t it??
Also, two of the main reasons for this war, Bush?s personal vendetta and his quest for reelection, are sad excuses for going to war. Bush wants revenge, because his father didn?t get him during his presidential term. Yea well, b-o-o h-o-o, this is a disgraceful reason to even considering waging war with Iraq. Also, Bush couldn?t get the ever-elusive Osama, who is most likely dead or in such poor health he can?t do much. Now he feels he needs a head to mount to help him get reelected. Remember how quickly the accusations of Iraq were given after the search for Osama had died down in the media? This, I believe, is an unworthy cause for putting countless numbers of lives on the line.
One of my biggest problems with this war is that there is no concrete cause for the war itself. First it was the weapons of mass destruction. Well, after about 3 months of inspecting without any uncovering of weapons that were in extreme violation of anything, Bush became a little impatient. So he decided to bring up the topic of regime change out of nowhere. Since when are we the rulers of the world that make sure everything is right and just in the world? Now is about when the war started. After we started fighting, our objective was changed, it was to free the people of Iraq now. I?m sure Bush really cares about the Iraqi people a whole lot. When your gonna lie, you should stick to your lie and be consistent?
Don?t get me wrong, I?m not the anti-war hippie type. I believe there is a time and place for war. The time is not now, and the place is not Iraq. Saddam is no imminent danger to us or any of our allies. There is no proof that he is or will be. It?s not like our last war with Iraq when Saddam was actually attacking other countries. This is different; there is not one major reason for this war.
The most significant reason this war upsets me is because we have to send our troops, our friends and relatives, into danger. And why do we have to send them far away into the desert, where they are constantly infiltrated by cumbersome sandstorms and bombarded by hostile fire? For all of the frivolous reasons already mentioned, the money, the fame and the revenge for Bush. I regard these things as petty when compared to the value of a human life. This is why this war is totally unessential and trivial.
gehy boomspeed... any1 wanna host it? where could i host it?
