No humanitarian case for Iraq war, says rights group

[tcsenter]

Your mocking of this obvious conundrum is only relevant when the context is not about war and whether you kill thousands of innocent people who are oppressed but alive in order to free the lucky ones who survive your mass murder. It takes a special kind of elite to say, "Give them liberty or give them death."

A couple thousand innocent Iraqis killed for the freedom of millions.

It takes a special kind of imbecile to say "The polio and smallpox vaccines should never have been released because they killed a few thousand people."

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Your mocking of this obvious conundrum is only relevant when the context is not about war and whether you kill thousands of innocent people who are oppressed but alive in order to free the lucky ones who survive your mass murder. It takes a special kind of elite to say, "Give them liberty or give them death."

A couple thousand innocent Iraqis killed for the freedom of millions.

It takes a special kind of imbecile to say "The polio and smallpox vaccines should never have been released because they killed a few thousand people."

That is a great comparrison.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-kengor040103.asp

 

[Zephyr106]

Most "conservatives" don't really care about human rights, especially non-white human rights, and bring up the issue only to criticize liberals for failing to support wars with "humanitarian purposes."

Zephyr

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Was there anything political is stopping Hitler? (Brought to you by alchemize reality.)

Hitler got politically greedy. He could have gotten away with a lot and avoided conflict. Chamberlain was dense and Roosevelt was in isolation mode as demanded by most Americans so I guess it was all political when the effort to stop him started. Everything is always political, I think.

edit to add.. Same with all wars..

If Hitler had left Russia and England alone, he would have had all of Europe and N Africa.

England was a visible thorn in his side, they were re-armed by the US after Hitler went after them. Same goes with Russia.
Stalin knew that he could not defend against Germany with the current technology and his army was weak due to his purges.
A treaty was a stall for time. Germany to consolidate Europe without worry about the bear, Stalin to try to start a rebuild.
Whether, Stalin would have come after Germany on his own is debateable. The US would not have started the Atlantic conveys to Russia without Russia being attacked.

N Africa was good for the oil. the British armies were unable to stand up to Rommel, it was the politcal control that Hitler imposed on the N African army that started causing problems. He was diverting supplies needed to the European front to worry about England .

Stalin had no intention of ever going after Germany. He didn't make the treaty to buy time, Hitler played him like a fiddle. Stalin had a nervous breakdown when Barbarosa started. He locked himself in a room for over 3 days. It wasn't until after the end of WWII and Stalin had realized the power of his millitary might that his ambitions for world domination started, before that there is every indication he had no interest in world domination through millitary means.

In addition, your post implies that Hitler attacked the UK, in fact the UK and France jointly declared war on Germany when Germany invaded Poland and British troops (if I remember correctly over 60,000) were on the ground in Denmark and France. Hitler was inclined to attack both nations before the French could fully mobilize (as they had the largest army in the world at the time, with the worst general in history).

You are correct though, that if Hitler would have stopped and offered peace to the british AFTER conquering France and made no overt moves to attack the UK he might have been able to consilidate and control all of continental europe. I do not believe the British people would have accepted though, they are a tough group of people with strong moral convictions (it must come from the year round horrible weather).

Also, the N. African war was not lost because of the diversion of reinforcements and supplies from Rommel, the British had cracked enigma secretly and were tracking all supply shipments to Rommel and sinking them in the mediterranian. Had the British not cracked the enigma code Rommel would have wiped out the allied forces in N. Africa.