Is America blind ??

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: Bluga
Well knowing whats going on at the moment in this messed up world, the United States is continuing to press on a move to outbreak a war. Although the inspectors are still checking for weapons in Iraq, the U.S. continues to say that it has solid proof about secret destructive weapons (read: WMD, not ordinary missles) the inspectors dont know about. It seems that the U.S. knows everything but stay quiet until a certain time where it just cant take it anymore (how convenient). A war is definately not the only alternative, but it seems America thinks war is the only choice and it must happen NOW. Most countries disagree on this including many superpowers except for some followers who dont have their own opinion and by themselves couldnt take themselves into war. Major damage is on the line and minimal benefit as seen now. Why war? Whats in it for America? And why is it the only one pressing? Is America blind??

wow what an "unbiased" opinion. The countries that do agree with the war "don't have their own opinion and by themselves couldn't take themselves into war." ?
Apparently you are the blind one

 

[KGB1]

I really don't know myself. But I am sure, if and WHEN Ameica decides to start a war with Iraq. Major Metropolitan cities are in GRAVE danger. I'm in a big city, so I'm pretty considered collateral damage to the big leaders in washington. So if al-quada manages to do harm to our own cities. American will not stop, they will keep fighting. Too bad a bunch of innocent Americans will DIE in the process. But it adds fuel to te fire for America to root out terrorism. Look at Washington DC, they have set up portable SAM sites so no more planes come there. Think al quada gonna go THAT route AGAIN? No I think not, this time I'm sure they'll use their chemical and biological diseases and kill the masses that way.

I mean look at Britain, they're ridden with fear. American's don't know it yet, but will understand when suicide bombers are getting on buses and all. You guys in the midwest and canada don't have anything to worry about nothing..since I'm pretty sure where you guys live, is most likely NOT a target.

 

[Matt]

The question isn't whether Iraq is in violation of resolution 1441 or not. Most countries agree on that Iraq hasn't fulfilled the resolution to satisfactorily. The question is rather whether it is enough reason to invade Iraq or not. On that account most Russia,China, most of Europe today feel that an invasion is supposed to be a last measure. US on the other hand seems to have decided to invade regardless of what the inspectors find. Their reason for this military action is hollow at best.

What if find interesting is that so many americans blindly accept whatever doctrin or statement emanetad from George W Bush.

What about critically reviewing information and THEN making up your mind?

How about actually being a bit interested in what is happening in the US with the adoption of "USA patriot act" which imposes restrictions to your constitutional rights or the coming proposal "patriot act II" which will even further limit you democratic freedom.
The essense of these two acts are scaringly similar to the "fire act" adopted by the german congress in 1933.

/Matt

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Bluga

Originally posted by: ElFenix
maybe america sees and the rest are blind?


what other alternatives do you propose?

Let inspector FINISH the job and U.N reaches an agreement.

Well, the inspectors were supposed to be done earlier this month as part of the last UN resolution. This was supposed to be Saddam's last last last last last last last last last last last last last last last last last chance to get his act straight after the Gulf War. He still hasn't. How are more inspections going to help?

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: KGB
I really don't know myself. But I am sure, if and WHEN Ameica decides to start a war with Iraq. Major Metropolitan cities are in GRAVE danger. I'm in a big city, so I'm pretty considered collateral damage to the big leaders in washington. So if al-quada manages to do harm to our own cities. American will not stop, they will keep fighting. Too bad a bunch of innocent Americans will DIE in the process. But it adds fuel to te fire for America to root out terrorism. Look at Washington DC, they have set up portable SAM sites so no more planes come there. Think al quada gonna go THAT route AGAIN? No I think not, this time I'm sure they'll use their chemical and biological diseases and kill the masses that way.

I mean look at Britain, they're ridden with fear. American's don't know it yet, but will understand when suicide bombers are getting on buses and all. You guys in the midwest and canada don't have anything to worry about nothing..since I'm pretty sure where you guys live, is most likely NOT a target.

hell, i live and work in DC. And yes i'm worried about potential attacks. But I still support the war because I know this problem will not go away which is what most of the pacifists are hoping for.

 

[ToBeMe]

Nope sorry, the USA are not the blind ones. They have pushed to reinstall the inspectors since '99 it's only since Bush took a hard line toward Saddam that he even considered allowing them back in and is now playing a cat and mouse game as expected.

If you actually can bribe yourself into believing there are no Chem/bio weapons in Iraq, then you are either great at lying to yourself or very naive! They were there when the inspectors left in '98 and Iraq never claimed to destroy them. There are still WMD thereand Iraq has simply taken the years since '98 to assure finding them would be nearly immpossible!

Leaving Saddam and his family and associates in power in Iraq will result in more long term death and destruction than any war in Iraq at this point. 5 years down the road when Usay nukes another country THEN Germany, France, and whomever else will be saying "Why didn't the superpower USA take care of this?" having completely forgotten what is going on now!

 

[Daxxax]

Originally posted by: KGB
I really don't know myself. But I am sure, if and WHEN Ameica decides to start a war with Iraq. Major Metropolitan cities are in GRAVE danger. I'm in a big city, so I'm pretty considered collateral damage to the big leaders in washington. So if al-quada manages to do harm to our own cities. American will not stop, they will keep fighting. Too bad a bunch of innocent Americans will DIE in the process. But it adds fuel to te fire for America to root out terrorism. Look at Washington DC, they have set up portable SAM sites so no more planes come there. Think al quada gonna go THAT route AGAIN? No I think not, this time I'm sure they'll use their chemical and biological diseases and kill the masses that way.

I mean look at Britain, they're ridden with fear. American's don't know it yet, but will understand when suicide bombers are getting on buses and all. You guys in the midwest and canada don't have anything to worry about nothing..since I'm pretty sure where you guys live, is most likely NOT a target.

That is the kind of attitude that will end up causing even more death and destruction down the road. You must of been beatup alot when you were growing up. You don't run and hide when the going gets tuff, you strike back with overwhelming power. You smash this orgainzation with every asset you have (CIA, FBI, Military, Intellegence, etc, etc)

 

[Alistar7]

Bluga, there are some other reasons we are so hot to get him out of power. The WMD are a given, ask the Kurds, his own people. Bin Laden has allied himself with Sadaam, granted its out of convience, but we KNOW he has harbored terrorists, funded them, and probably provided arms, should we let him keep developing WMD and turn those over as well? Our country was attacked, granted other countries have been victims of terrorist attacks, but we reserve the right to defend ourselves, even if it is proactively. Those that have been attacked and done NOTHING should not judge our willingness to fight, they should sit on the sidelines like the cowards that they are and watch it be done in a correct and timely manner. I don't feel we need UN support, I dont care what France, Belgium, and Germany think, I understand the BUSINESS relationships they have with Iraq. Their interests are of no concern to America in this matter. Hopefully I wont have to hear anyone say it will "promote instability in the region" anymore, we dont want to mess up the peace, love, and harmony in the middle east now do we? The simple fact of the matter is we are going to remove Sadaam from power, we will act alone if needed and will certainly not bow down to international pressure. I dont fear huge waves of attacks on our soil either. Perhaps a few small isolated incidents, well worth it considering the alternative. In 5 more years unchecked he may acquire the ability to kill millions at a time, he has already shown he WOULD.

 

[Alistar7]

With Saudi opening the road to a more democratic society, eventually with a completely elected national assembly we need to seize this chance to install a democratic gov in Iraq. This would lead to the fall of the regime in Iran as well, they more so than Saudi or Iraq already have a large youthfull population screaming for reforms. The middle east would be a whole different world then.

 

[Alistar7]

oh no you cant, i change my mind then...........................

 

[achiral]

Originally posted by: Bluga
the U.S. continues to say that it has solid proof about secret destructive weapons (read: WMD, not ordinary missles)

ordinary missiles were part of the original deal made by hussein. there are limits to the length of ballistic missiles that iraq may create and even today we're finding out that iraq has been developing ballistic missiles, which would put them in further breach of every past resolution i think. but hey let's let him play his games. the inspectors have been destroying mustard gas shells that saddam declared in his report to the u n. he has been aware of those weapons all along but claims that he knows nothing. i can't believe so many americans like yourself have bought into the iraqi-bin laden propaganda about the way things are. these people are madmen and you would like to protect them. america has no use for you, go become a human shield.

 

[Matt]

Axiom.

CIA published in november a report that stated that they hadn't seen any recent evidence on WMD-capacity and even if if he has any residual WMD-capacity the likelyhood of him using it or supplying it to international terrorists is highly unlikely UNLESS he is backed up against the wall due to for instance risk of invasion. This is your own intel which at least usually is pretty accurate. MI6 and CIA have both stated that they can't find any links between Iraq and Al-Qaida.

And when it comes to the "patriot act" what matters is how the law will be interpreted. Human rights groups are certainly worried about the possibility that it will be an excuse to impose restrictions on client-lawyer confidentiality, house searches without warrants all in the name of fighting terrorists.

Is it really necessary to sacrifice the most liberal constitution of the western world on the altar of fear??

/Matt

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Bluga

Originally posted by: ElFenix
maybe america sees and the rest are blind?


what other alternatives do you propose?

Let inspector FINISH the job and U.N reaches an agreement.

Let the inspectors finish the job? In what 10 years?

 

[achiral]

Originally posted by: Matt
Axiom.

CIA published in november a report that stated that they hadn't seen any recent evidence on WMD-capacity and even if if he has any reidual WMD-capacity the likelyhood of him using it or supplying it to international terrorists is highly unlikely UNLESS he is backed up against the wall due to for instance risk of invasion. This is your own intel which at least usually is pretty accurate. MI6 and CIA have both stated that they can't find any links between Iraq and Al-Qaida.

And when it comes to the "patriot act" what matters is how the law will be interpreted. Human rights groups are certainly worried about the possibility that it will be an excuse to impose restrictions on client-lawyer confidentiality, house searches without warrants all in the name of fighting terrorists.

Is it really necessary to sacrifice the most liberal constitution of the western world on the altar of fear??

/Matt

care to back up your statements? also in november there were no inspectors in iraq, why would the cia know anything. so this man, who used chemical weapons on his own people, isn't capable of supplying other terrorists with weapons?

 

[StageLeft]

Um most of the "super powers" you're referring to - specifically france and russia - have lucrative oil deals setup with Iraq, so who gives a sh*t what they think.

And you're silly if you think UN inspectors will work do anything else. They've already proven that Iraq is in breach of the latest resolution as it has been for the last 12 years in breach of UN resolutions.

And in regards to war is not the only alternative, everything else has been tried, and yet iraq continues on. Sorry, but saddamn DOES have to go. It's the responsibility of those with the power to do so to take out people like him, or would you rather let him dominate his citizens and threaten the region instead? He has to go - without war it's not appearing to happen is it.

 

[Alistar7]

well if we wipe the stain of terrorism off the face of the planet we will not need the "patriot" acts, you must be incredibly naive to belive Bin Laden and Sadaam have no ties....but I appreciate your understanding of how goverments will attempt to curtail rights and freedoms in the face of public fear, unfortunately people will sacrifice those to feel safe.

 

[Parrotheader]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
With Saudi opening the road to a more democratic society, eventually with a completely elected national assembly we need to seize this chance to install a democratic gov in Iraq. This would lead to the fall of the regime in Iran as well, they more so than Saudi or Iraq already have a large youthfull population screaming for reforms. The middle east would be a whole different world then.

This is the idea underlying all of this I believe. It seems that the vast majority of people who are swept up in the anti-Americanism around the world right now actually are less anti-American than they are anti-Bush - still bitter over the election and normal political disagreements like Kyoto. I can't help but think if we were pursuing these EXACT same policies in the Middle East with a Democrat as president that quite a few of those vehemently opposing US policy right now would suddenly be singing a different tune as its harder to demonize somebody who falls on the same side of the political spectrum that you do.

Like Bush or not, the fact of the matter is that he's NOT coming to these policy decisions on his own. No president ever comes up with a strategy like this completely on their own. It's impossible for anybody to have knowledge on so many areas to make decisions like this on their own. They rely on their advisors just like any other president, CEO, etc would. Bush is no different than any other leader in that respect. I'm sure his Middle Eastern advisors from the start have made him well aware of the long-term benefits this action could have. Yes, the short-term consequences could be messy and stir up some anti-Americanism. But its obvious that liberty and economic progress are not going to come to most countries in the Middle East on their own. An outside impetus is necessary, be it directly or indirectly. We could try the indirect route by aiding reformers in Iran, etc but that would take a long time to see any hope of progress. Toppling one of the region's many repressive governments directly, while messy in the short term, should quickly accelerate the reforms in other countries. Given the propensity for this region to be a perpetual hotspot for fundamentalism that attacks not only internally but across the globe, then anything that could accelerate progress toward a more democratic government and culture (and therefore a more moderate government and culture) is desperately needed.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Parrotheader

Originally posted by: Alistar7
With Saudi opening the road to a more democratic society, eventually with a completely elected national assembly we need to seize this chance to install a democratic gov in Iraq. This would lead to the fall of the regime in Iran as well, they more so than Saudi or Iraq already have a large youthfull population screaming for reforms. The middle east would be a whole different world then.

This is the idea underlying all of this I believe. It seems that the vast majority of people who are swept up in the anti-Americanism around the world right now actually are less anti-American than they are anti-Bush - still bitter over the election and normal political disagreements like Kyoto. I can't help but think if we were pursuing these EXACT same policies in the Middle East with a Democrat as president that quite a few of those vehemently opposing US policy right now would suddenly be singing a different tune as its harder to demonize somebody who falls on the same side of the political spectrum that you do.

Like Bush or not, the fact of the matter is that he's NOT coming to these policy decisions on his own. No president ever comes up with a strategy like this completely on their own. It's impossible for anybody to have knowledge on so many areas to make decisions like this on their own. They rely on their advisors just like any other president, CEO, etc would. Bush is no different than any other leader in that respect. I'm sure his Middle Eastern advisors from the start have made him well aware of the long-term benefits this action could have. Yes, the short-term consequences could be messy and stir up some anti-Americanism. But its obvious that liberty and economic progress are not going to come to most countries in the Middle East on their own. An outside impetus is necessary, be it directly or indirectly. We could try the indirect route by aiding reformers in Iran, etc but that would take a long time to see any hope of progress. Toppling one of the region's many repressive governments directly, while messy in the short term, should quickly accelerate the reforms in other countries. Given the propensity for this region to be a perpetual hotspot for fundamentalism that attacks not only internally but across the globe, then anything that could accelerate progress toward a more democratic government and culture (and therefore a more moderate government and culture) is desperately needed.

Whoo hoo! Yep you're right. If the middle east wasn't run by a-holes who care more about personal power than empowering the people and benefiting the nation they'd all be happier and so would we.