I totally agree that he should be removed. And with force if necessary. BUT the way the United States have handled this is just stupid and ignorant. they will lose more then gain.
And if you really believed this, you would not be saying it.
The only way you (and all of the anti-war governments) would be saying such a thing is if you really thought otherwise, for the reasons given earlier.
I am just pointing out that if the US had waited till solid proof was there for weapons and **** then they'd have a legit reason to attack and not causing an international breakdown of security and alliances.
the heck? You just posted this exact same thing in different words and I responded several posts ago.
As I said before, it is not at all undesirable to cause this "international breakdown" because the current axes have outlived their time (WW2 and cold war) and are no longer beneficial to any of the involved parties, so it is time to form new alliances to face new threats. As for proof, once again, see my last response to your stuff. I suppose that when they nuke Washington, it would be solid enough proof, but since the EU wants that, they need to keep us from winning in Iraq, but that means we should do exactly that. We need to do it before there is solid proof, because by then it will be too late.
And Iraq had enough time to prepare before, a few months more wouldn't matter. But they were too impatient. Hence the hostilities towards the United States. They just didn't think when they did this.
Alright, we finally have something new here. A few months more will make all the difference here because for those 12 years he has not been expecting an immediate conflict and has adjusted his operations accordingly. He is not going to spend all those years building up on conventional forces when there is no reason to expect an attack soon; rather, he will build up on his chemical bombs and other things to deal with the then immediate issues at hand. As an analogy, suppose that you are told you have a big final exam in school just the next day, but you are also told that you should not have any trouble because you have gotten the whole year to prepare. That year doesn't mean anything unless you knew that it would be coming very soon, since you spent that time doing other things that required more immediate attention.
But you are right about the last part, for a change. They indeed didn't think when they did this; as I said before, they fell into the trap the Europeans had set for them. It should have been done immediately in November without going to the UN at all; Cheney and Rumsfeld predicted exactly what would happen, but they lost out to the rest. Still, even now is better than later.
Are you normally ignorant ?
I think the answer is yes.
Well, Kazaa isn't illigal, the ones that put in there shared folder are the ones that are performing an illigal act. The program itsself is legit.
What about the ones downloading the stuff? I'm not sure if that is legal, but if it is, then warez is equally legal.
Poll
