You who support the war seem to ignore the fact that it would be absolute suicide for Saddam to actually use the tattered renmants of his WMD arsenal, asssuming he actually has any. Then the US would actually have a half-non-crap reason to invade. Yes, Saddam is ruthless, agressive, etc. (sort of like the dictators we supported in the Cold War), but he is by no means insane. If he was he'd be dead long before this.
It would also be "absolute suicide" for Hussein not to have left the nation long ago, and yet he has not done that; many of his actions show that he is not overly concerned with his own life as long as his objectives are met. He is not insane, but simply stupid, since even I could have done things much better than he has if I was in his position with his goals.
And how can you people be so eager to go to war? Inspection can work. Yes, it is slow, but it if saves as much as one life than it should be used instead of war. And please don't tell me this is a last resort, I don't see how anyone on this forum can think that.
Read my earlier posts in this thread on why inspection most certainly cannot work, even if it is given a million years and everyone on the planet to do its work. Inspections are nothing more than a charade planned by the rest of the world to delay the US and everyone knows it well, which is why everyone was pushing for it before.
Ok...In your view, what is the point of having power?
You live.
seriously though, the alternative is to let someone else have power, so you live in repression. The international system (and even human nature, to some extent) works in such a way that a situation in which everyone has equal power is inherently unstable and the distribution of power will gradually change to become more concentrated in some direction, so you can either be at the top end or the bottom end, which is a rather simple choice.
But grow up- really. The US is selfish and violent, not necessarily evil. This country has accomplished good things as well as bad, just like any person. It's the vaunted images of the US as God and Jesus and Mom baking apple pie that's annoying. The US isn't the Antichrist, but it isn't the ****ing savior of the world, either, and until most of the country recognizes that we're going to go on doing horrible things, over and over and over again.
Even after all of the countries recognize that (actually, they already have), it still will not matter, because "horrible things" is exactly what all countries do.
Alright, time to deal with you again...
Sorry to everyone who is American and doesnt support these actions, I'm just pissed at all the **** that people can get away with.
Well, since you cannot do crap about it, it doesn't matter.
This is how the universe works; get used to it, since there is really no choice.
-The "will of the people": If the VAST majority of the people want something, its is contradictory to everything that the US claims to hold dear to go against it. If there were 15 or 20 or however many factions all yelling about different things, then yes, listening to them all would be chaos. But when the world is united in its stance, when the PEOPLE of the entire world (90+%) say "We do not want this war", then you cannot pretend that the politicians are doing it for anyone but themselves. The basis of democracy is to do what the people want, and in this case it is clear what they want.
Those are people of the
world. The US government only listens to the American people, of which a considerable majority is still for the war.
-I have as of yet seen NO proof, nor any arguement from you, that would make me believe that Iraq is linked to any terrorist organization. You may think thats its "likely" and that it fits in with Saddam's pattern of behaviour, but in order to make this legal, to make this just, you need proof.
It is likely simply because both Iraq and al Qaeda will benefit from such a partnership, so if they have half the brains I give them credit for, the two would certainly be cooperating. Since all alliances in the world between any two parties form out of a common interest (in this case, destruction of the US), there is every reason to think that they would helping each other out to some extent, especially since they have nothing to lose if they keep things secret. Besides, the US is not at all under attack by just a single united enemy, but rather by many disparate groups that are bound only by their objective of taking down the US, so even if there was no alliance at all, everything would still be "justified."
Also, I already told you that this whole legal thing is without a doubt the silliest part of the whole anti-war argument. The world has no laws except those which are enforced by the ones with the power to do so, and in this case it is the US; they say it is legal, and so it is. If Iraq was the superpower here, then their stance would be accepted as to what is legal.
-You are working under the asumption that the governement tells the complete truth, even when its against them. That the media reports things unbiased. That things are black and white. If you believe these things, its shows your naivete.
My point is that even if all these things that the government is telling us are lies, everything is
still justified, just by other reasons. Besides, you have absolutely no room to talk about naivete; some of your earlier posts here have redefined the meaning of that word.
-If the task of disarmament fell solely on Iraq, then why were the inspectors even there. If you think that they have no duties, then why did you put them there. The fact is, that the inspectors WERE there to check around for WMD. Iraqis were to show them around, and the inspectors were to judge. If they werent there to inspect, then why did the US demand that Iraqis show them weapons factories, etc etc?? They were there to inspect, plain and simple.
For the third time, the inspectors were put there
to waste time, and every country knew this well when they were sent there (including the US, but at that point they could not do anything about it). The whole idea of the inspections was to hinder US operations by causing delays, and the effects are beginning to show now. If the US had attacked back in November as they wanted to, there would have been fewer dust storms and Hussein would not have gotten any time to prepare for an onslaught, so the task, while still fairly simple, has become more difficult for the US than it could have been, which was the whole idea of it all. And supposing that Iraq did possess WMDs, do you really think that the Iraqi officials would "show them around" to those places? As far as actual "inspecting" goes, the inspectors are a complete joke (not really their fault, since the task is an impossible one), but they have other uses.
-You must make a CLEAR distinction between Saddam and the PEOPLE of Iraq. You quest to take out Saddam, to disarm Saddam, etc etc, must have NO negative influence on the people of Iraq. Sanctions DO NOT prevent weaponry from entiering the country, since it would probably be shipped seceretly anyways. What sanctions did do, is starve the people of Iraq and destroy their economy. The people were guiltless, and yet they suffered. How is that justice?
Perhaps it isn't, but that is not the American government's problem; as any sensible national govenment would so, it is doing what is best for its own people, not those of other nations. Anyway the sanctions are a UN thing; the war is the US idea. However, this particular operation will probably benefit the Iraqi people in the whole as a side effect for the reasons I gave earlier in the thread; it is just that this is not the main objective.
- Saddam killed civilians. The US is killing civilians. You say his actions were "acts of terror", but yours are "acts of liberation". If its the same result, its the same thing. Intentional or not, its the same result.
That is one of the advantages of being the more powerful competitor; you can get away with things that the weaker parties cannot.
-You have so far found NO WMD, nor any factroy that manufactured them. You found an abandoned chemical plant. Chemicals are 90% of the time used for peacful purposes. The UN inspectors didnt tell you that the factory existed because it wasnt doing anything illegal. Did you want them to report every factory in Iraq? Did you want them to say "ok here are 56 factories. The first one is used for making diapers. The second one is used for making plastic. etc etc" They did not report it because in their EXPERT opinion (these guys are among the most qualified experts in this field), there was nothing happening in that factory that was in violation of UN agreements.
I already told you that whether or not Iraq has WMDs right now is not so important, but rather that it potentially could have them in the future. The idea is to eliminate an emerging threat
before it fully forms. There is no point in waiting until they do have them, since at that point nobody will be able to do anything about it. For example, if Iraq still had that reactor that Israel destroyed several years ago, nobody would dare to touch Hussein today, and the results would be that there would be neither war nor inspections and Saudia Arabia and Kuwait would be Iraqi territory, allowing Hussein to control most of the world's oil and giving him the capabilility to wreck the US economy at will. Then that stuff about experts is just ridiculous; as far as playing these hide-and-seek games goes, the FS2 fighter AI could do about as well.
Poll
