Psycho Pixie>
I think it is good that you involved yourself in the topic.
Perhaps we can get a new start with your post and keep from just insulting eachother.
~~~>> I involved myself because this discussion had gotten out of hand and was beginning to hurt friendships. I dont perticularly like debates of this nature, hense why I did NOT persue a life in politics.
Here is my reply...
Quote:
As the fight on terror is often placed in cities and around civilians a lot of innocent people will be caught in the crossfire and these people's relatives might start hating America.
~~>> uh, most people hate americans anyway, but thats a stereotype isn't it?
Quote:
We went to war with much of the middle east because we were attacked, blatantly and outright, by one if not more terrorist organizations based in the Middle east. No, I am not trying to give a history lesson, just give you a fact from which I base my feelings.
But is that a fair reaction?
Saddam Hussein has in no way been linked to Al-Queda, and no reports indicated that he was preparing to wage war against any other countries.
Before 9/11 USA showed little interest in removing Saddam Hussein...apart from Bush, who had very personal interests in removing Hussein from power.
~~>> given point. taken point.
Quote:
Something else to realize, America has always been considered a pretty safe country, safe in that "terrorists" would never hit us. Other countrys have their share of bombings and attacks every year, we did not make it any worse, we simply brought the worlds attention to it.
I don't believe that is true.
By waging war on terrorism they will become desperate, and thus want to strike back while they can.
~~>> you didnt completely quote me up there... the records show it, there has NOT been an increase in terrorism. its just more in the spotlight. which actually in the long run will make terrorism worse too because now there will be more glory hounds out for 15 minutes of fame.
Quote:
Saddam could not have physically harmed America, no.... But he could have politically and economically destroyed America if he had been allowed to take over Saudi Arabia years ago. More recently he could have easily Destroyed much of the worlds oil source, let alone forcefully taken most of the middle east, with the bombs and weapons he had in his posession.
The situation was very different then.
A war against Iraq would have been justified, and we could have removed Saddam Hussein from power with a stable coalition and support of the UN.
As I have pointed out earlier, this makes an ethical dilemma.
In the same way as you and I can't take the law into our own hands and kill a criminal, coutries have to follow international laws.
Since USA has shown little respect for these laws there is a risk that they will become worthless...and I don't think anyone would want a lawless world, right?
~~>> um, lawless world, do you know how many rediculous laws the U.S. has? disregarding a few laws has not turned the U.S. into a chaos filled nightmare, I doubt that the U.S. going against UN policy will make that big a difference at this point.
Quote:
The same bombs and Weapons he refused to admit he had and were violations of the UN treaty. Those Weapons, along with other things led the U.S. to attack Iraq and remove him from power. NOT because Bush felt like it, not because America wanted more blood for the attack in 2001.
First of all, no such weapons have been found.
Until they are we must consider the fact that Saddam might have been honest when saying that they were destroyed.
But sure, Saddam Hussein didn't follow the UN regulations...
USA on the other hand doesn't follow the regulations either. The way you made up the term "non-combatant" to deprive the captives from the Afghanistan war from their human rights would have never been tolerated if another country than America did it.
~~>> I do believe they did find alot of weapons, just no "mass destruction" weapons and what they did find was enough to take over the middle east easy.
Quote:
But the situation in Iraq is handled in a very poor manner from my view, and that is what I'm critizising. And I also think it is important that the Americans who supports the war must understand that just because America CAN behave pretty much as you want, doesn't make it right.
I agree the war in Iraq could be handled differently, but I am not in charge, Bush is. America on the whole can operate how it wants because at the moment, it is THE world power. Can any other country dispute that? But it doesnt mean we are always right....
King Aurthur legends, Camelot: "Might doesn't make right."
Psycho Pixie.
I think we have successfully drawn this topic to a close. Your point has been made, other peoples points have been made. shall we see if the PD can lock it? many of the forum folks seem to be all for shutting down this topic.
Here I am. BITE ME. or not, in fact, never mind, dont want some wacko taking me up on the offer. Only non wacko's may apply for bite allowance.. no garentee that you will be granted said allowance, but you can try.
