A question for all of you people against war....

[GoingUp]

When President Clinton attacked and bombed the Serbs during his presidency without congressional approval, did you protest? If you did then I have no qualms with you at all. I just don't like hippocrates who are all of a sudden anti-war based on the political party of the president.

Here are some quotes by Clinton about the Iraq situation that can be found here

"I support the efforts of the prime minister and President Bush to get tougher with Saddam Hussein,"

"We need a strong new resolution calling for unrestricted inspections. The restrictions imposed in 1998 are unacceptable and won't do the job. There should be a deadline and no lack of clarity about what Iraq must do."

"Saddam Hussein as usual is bobbing and weaving. We should call his bluff. The U.N. should call for a complete and unrestricted set of inspections with a new resolution. If the inspections go forward perhaps we can avoid a conflict. "



I tend to agree with him on the last point and inspections should be reconviened after a new resolution, but if Saddam wants to back out then we need to go in. But first we need to try to get Saddam out peacefully and get the inspections going again and if that doesn't work then I don't see any other choice.


I know I'm saying this in vain because people will selectively read the article and turn the thread into a huge flame war; but please try to keep the comments semi on topic and prove that ATers can intelligently debate.

 

[sandorski]

There is a big difference between the actions in Serbia and what is proposed with Iraq. In Serbia there was an ongoing campaign of genocide. In Iraq there is......ummm.....an election coming up?

 

[tweakmm]

Originally posted by: sandorski
In Iraq there is......ummm.....an election coming up?

but... but... but..
Saddam is a bad person!
Bush says so

 

[Spoooon]

When President Clinton attacked and bombed the Serbs during his presidency without congressional approval, did you protest? If you did then I have no qualms with you at all. I just don't like hippocrates who are all of a sudden anti-war based on the political party of the president.

hehe

 

[Pastore]

Originally posted by: Spoooon

When President Clinton attacked and bombed the Serbs during his presidency without congressional approval, did you protest? If you did then I have no qualms with you at all. I just don't like hippocrates who are all of a sudden anti-war based on the political party of the president.

hehe

Who knew a hippopotamus and Socrates had so much in common.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: sandorski
There is a big difference between the actions in Serbia and what is proposed with Iraq. In Serbia there was an ongoing campaign of genocide. In Iraq there is......ummm.....an election coming up?

And there is not genocide in Iraq? Tell that to the Kurds.

 

[StageLeft]

Without a REAL and EFFECTIVE way to enforce its own resolutions the UN is meaningless.

Either:

1) You say "oh well the UN is meaningless then"
or
2) Well they have to put their money where their mouth is.

If you have any hope for the UN you should probably agree that their resolutions need a way to be enforced. All that works with saddamn is military enforcing.

 

[Kadarin]

Originally posted by: Beast1284

Originally posted by: Spoooon

When President Clinton attacked and bombed the Serbs during his presidency without congressional approval, did you protest? If you did then I have no qualms with you at all. I just don't like hippocrates who are all of a sudden anti-war based on the political party of the president.

hehe

Who knew a hippopotamus and Socrates had so much in common.

Actually, I had an image of a large number of hippos in those shipping crates..

 

[Pastore]

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: Beast1284

Originally posted by: Spoooon

When President Clinton attacked and bombed the Serbs during his presidency without congressional approval, did you protest? If you did then I have no qualms with you at all. I just don't like hippocrates who are all of a sudden anti-war based on the political party of the president.

hehe

Who knew a hippopotamus and Socrates had so much in common.

Actually, I had an image of a large number of hippos in those shipping crates..

lol, nice

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: tweakmm

Originally posted by: sandorski
In Iraq there is......ummm.....an election coming up?

but... but... but..
Saddam is a bad person!
Bush says so

Right. The only reason Saddam is a bad man is because Bush says so...

nik

 

[Spoooon]

Originally posted by: Beast1284

Originally posted by: Astaroth33

Originally posted by: Beast1284

Originally posted by: Spoooon

When President Clinton attacked and bombed the Serbs during his presidency without congressional approval, did you protest? If you did then I have no qualms with you at all. I just don't like hippocrates who are all of a sudden anti-war based on the political party of the president.

hehe

Who knew a hippopotamus and Socrates had so much in common.

Actually, I had an image of a large number of hippos in those shipping crates..

lol, nice

When I first read it, I subvocalized it as "hippo crates", as in crates for shipping hippos in.

 

[Kadarin]

But, isn't is a proven fact that:

Saddam's really a nice guy after all
The US kills Iraqi babies
Israel is the only evil country in the mideast
This is all about "Wag the Dog"
This is all about Oil, and we all know Bush is an oil man
Bush is a warmonger
Iraq doesn't have chemical weapons because Scott Ritter says so

?

Oh wait.. I never went to Berkeley, sorry. Iraq must disarm, or else Saddam must go. If Iraq chooses to disarm, this must be backed up by inspectors who can go anywhere, anytime, without prior notice, and be backed up by force and by the united will of the rest of the world. Anything weaker than this would be worse than useless. Saddam cannot be trusted, and the world is better off without him.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

I just don't like hippocrates who are all of a sudden anti-war based on the political party of the president.

You're not looking for flames, eh?

1) Well, your fear of doctors is justified - especially if you are scared of needles.

FYI, the word you're looking for is "hypocrites". Hippocrates was a mythological figure in ancient Greece (known as Esculap by the Romans), and is considered to be the father of medicine.

2) Clinton does nothing more than follow the old "Stand by your leader" doctrine, so dear to Americans (even if the leaders are morons). It can be also argued that he's paying lip service to Bush in order to be left alone (more juicy scandals, anyone?)

3) The bombing of Serbia, although idiotic, had the poor excuse, at least, of taking place while the "poor Kossovars" were "butchered" by the "barbaric Serbs". Right now, nothing happens in Iraq - and the Baghdad authorities are killing anyone. Yes, they are stockpiling weapons - so the U.S. intelligence (?) says - but until they actually use even one single bullet against anyone, the talk of war against Iraq is nothing but political games from Bush and his backers...

 

[Spoooon]

FYI, the word you're looking for is "hypocrites". Hippocrates was a mythological figure in ancient Greece (known as Esculap by the Romans), and is considered to be the father of medicine.

Well, mythological suggests that Hippocrates was imaginary.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Well, mythological suggests that Hippocrates was imaginary.

Say you love Jesus!

Wait... isn't he also a mythological figure?

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

Well, mythological suggests that Hippocrates was imaginary.

Say you love Jesus!

Wait... isn't he also a mythological figure?

Oh god... here we go again...

nik

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: AnitaPeterson

I just don't like hippocrates who are all of a sudden anti-war based on the political party of the president.

Right now, nothing happens in Iraq - and the Baghdad authorities are killing anyone. Yes, they are stockpiling weapons - so the U.S. intelligence (?) says - but until they actually use even one single bullet against anyone, the talk of war against Iraq is nothing but political games from Bush and his backers...

Nice twist on reality. Iraq unconditionally surrendered, if you recall, at the end of the Gulf War. The opinion to go after Saddam and his weapons is not based upon the need to be ducking bullets first; it's based upon inspection and disarmament agreements subsequently broken by Iraq.

 

[aswedc]

And there is not genocide in Iraq? Tell that to the Kurds.

On NBC Nightly News a couple days back they reported how the Kurds now have profitable business deals with the Hussein regime.

Oh wait.. I never went to Berkeley, sorry. Iraq must disarm, or else Saddam must go. If Iraq chooses to disarm, this must be backed up by inspectors who can go anywhere, anytime, without prior notice, and be backed up by force and by the united will of the rest of the world. Anything weaker than this would be worse than useless. Saddam cannot be trusted, and the world is better off without him.

That must be why the Bush administration will "thwart" inspections unless we get our way...