Should American help tsunami victims or keep fighting in the war?

[NaomiMcCartney]

I was watching the news with my mother this morning and something just clicked in our brains. We both feel that troops in Iraq should be helping those countries that are suffering from the earth quack rather than fighting in this war! It nearly got me in tears to all those who lost their children, all those children who lost their parents, and all those who lost their friends or loved ones all because of this horrible tragedy. Those people must be terrified! President Bush hasn't even made much comment on the matter. The only thing that I heard him say was that it's a tragedy ! That's about it! I think this whole war business should end now! We need to help those poor countries that are truly in trouble rather than fighting in this war. What is everyone elses opinion of this matter?

[Cecilia]

It shocks me that USA spends an amazing amount of money in the war, and gives only $200 million dollars (more or less) to help those affected by the earthquake.

[Clark Kent]

Iraq is our cause now and we can't walk away from it, anymore than we can walk away from the victims of the tsunami. I don't think it's a fair point to try and put the two issues up against each other.

[AnyRoad69]

Help is important

[chaitanya]

Saddam was a bloody dictator.
US are helping Iraqi people anyway,fighting terrorists,and US Marines are moving to the tsunami affected areas to help the survivors,where's the problem ?.

[twovirgins]

well i think the 200 BILLION and growing dollars our corrupt regime is spending on war and killing (aproximatly 100k Iraqis including children killed untold numbers injured, 1331 U.S troops killed 30k to 40 k injured and maimed for life) its a man made disaster almost as bad as the earthquake I would much rather have 200 Billion dollars to help feed and clothe and give shelter and education .So my answer is I wish we used that $$ for good instead of death and distruction I mean i hear USA has offered a measly 35 million so far I mean what a backwards way to do things

[FPSHOT]

Naomi, that is a very good thought, and I think all of us have comparable feelings when we watch the happenings in the Asian region..

I believe we should not mix money and war with the Asian tragedy though..

I also know that when we start involving politics here, we will end up in discussions we can not have now...

if not only out of respect for all those involved in the Asian disaster..

[Maggie Mae]

As strongly as I am against the current war in Iraq, I have to agree with Clark Kent -- the United States is in Iraq now whether they want to be or not, and there is really no way to back out of it. I think it's tremendously sad that billions of dollars is tied up in this war and only a few million is being sent to the tsunami ravaged area (although a few million isn't anything to sneeze at). Unfortunately that's the way it is.

It's a lofty thought and it's one I would very much like to see -- thousands of soldiers laying down their weapons and going off to help those who need it most right now. I'm sure a lot of those soldiers would agree. But I sincerely doubt that it's even possible for that to happen.

~Mags

[mccartneymaniac]

we should never have gone to iraq,hussein is acreep but he was bothering nobody and if it wernt for oil we would never have bothered.bin laden should be our target and him since we cant seem to find him is no longer a priority if we would stop beinf the a bully and threating and attacking everyone and reach out wee might actually bring some good as antion as for now it is a shame to say you are american we blew up acountry and now we will spend billions and debts and lives to do nothing really helpful the time to have gotten hussein was 10 years back since he was contained we should have let him alone the world is full of creeps we cant chase them all away we need to spend our wealth to do good and destroy too bad we learned so little from vietnam we really ought to give peace a chance but as long as bush is there forget that thought.i hope we get someone who really leads next time

[beatlemad]

[ QUOTE ]
mccartneymaniac Posted:
we should never have gone to iraq,hussein is acreep but he was bothering nobody

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you'll find he was bothering a huge amount of Iraqi's with torture and murder!

[erinluv182]

Enter the conservative nut.

I think the Tsunami is terrible, and I hope it is true (whoever said it up there) that there are Marines on their way to assist in Asia. I agree that it is unfair to pit these two world issues against one another. Of course it seems much more desirable for us to go help victims of a national distater rather than to fight in a war! No one would dare question any person who wanted to aid natural disaster victims. But a war is a waaay more touchy issue. My personal take on the Iraqi war is that we ARE trying to help people in Iraq. That's part of the point of us being there (the other point being to protect ourselves). Michael Moore's happy little pictures of children playing in the streets pre-war are misleading to everyone, and the truth needs to be out: Saddam is a sociopathic dictator who encouraged GENOCIDE. Genocide, people! That is plain wrong, and y'all know it, and any leader in power who has committed such heinous crimes against humanity should be ousted, period.

And another small rave from my perspective as a historian. Number one: we as Americans are a nation who demands instant gratification. Well, we need to get used to not being instantly gratified all the time. Helping a nation to rebuild after such trauma is not going to happen overnight, or even over several years. It takes a lot of time, and a lot of work. Number two: we cannot pull out of this war, for our own protection as a nation. Do you know what message this sends to the world? Besides; I know we're constantly hearing about supposed attacks that terrorists are planning on us, but they aren't having such an easy time executing them, apparently. I think terrorists are a bit scared of us now, and good! Look at it, Americans: do you think that avoiding war by not going on the offensive ever is going to help us to avoid war always? You need to face facts: there will always be someone willing and wanting to drag us into war. Whether that be Japan, or Germany, or the USSR, or terrorists, justs depends on what point in history you're talking about. There's a reason that most of the politicians agreed with the Iraqi war until it got close to election time and they needed SOMETHING to pick a bone with Pres. Bush about. They all recognize the importance of this war, and the need for it, even though we all hate war, and don't want it.

[FPSHOT]

Ohnonotthatagain http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif http://www.beatlelinks.net/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[NaomiMcCartney]

[ QUOTE ]
mccartneymaniac Posted:
we should never have gone to iraq,hussein is acreep but he was bothering nobody and if it wernt for oil we would never have bothered.bin laden should be our target and him since we cant seem to find him is no longer a priority if we would stop beinf the a bully and threating and attacking everyone and reach out wee might actually bring some good as antion as for now it is a shame to say you are american we blew up acountry and now we will spend billions and debts and lives to do nothing really helpful the time to have gotten hussein was 10 years back since he was contained we should have let him alone the world is full of creeps we cant chase them all away we need to spend our wealth to do good and destroy too bad we learned so little from vietnam we really ought to give peace a chance but as long as bush is there forget that thought.i hope we get someone who really leads next time

[/ QUOTE ] I tend to agree with you! It wasn't Iraq that attacked America in the first place, so we should of fault in Afganistane before Iraq in the first place. American troops are in Afganistane yes but there are a lot more troops in Iraq! President Bush didn't seem to take the attack serious enough so we went to Iraq for his fathers sake. Sadam threatened his father, so that's why we went to Iraq. I understand that Sadam was harming his people, but at the same time Bin Ladin was harming us. The first thing we should of done was capture Bin Ladin. It might of took months or years, but it would of been worth capturing that man before any more damage gets done to America. Bin Ladin already has made a few more threats and President Bush yet again doesn't seem to take them serius enough. It makes me sad! That to me was the stupidest moves ever done by a President! It would be like back in World War two if we went and attacked China after Japan bombed pearl harber just because that country is right near Japan.

[erinluv182]

The thing is: you can look at Vietnam (which I agree, was a bad war, and one that is mostly Kennedy's not LBJ's fault) and say "haven't we learned from our mistakes?". But the same thing can be said on the other side of the argument. For me, I look at Hitler, compare it to Saddam, and say "Oh good..... finally a president with the guts to get rid of this jerk. I'm glad we've learned from history".