Uday and Qusai.......Buh-Bye.....
Ok guys here's my 2 cents....
(1) Chaz: The war was over WMD. Just b/c we have not founf them yet doesn't mean they don't exist OR plans to implement prosuction were not on the table. IF Sadam had/was going to have WMD it would de-stabilize the entire region. He has already shown what he is made of when ivaded Kuwait. Now, fast forward 15yrs and he has a nuc? He could take several countries witout a fight and then ONE man, a crazy SOB at that, would controll the world's (not just the U.S) power source i.e oil. Or how about this scenario, he gets the bomb, and one day decides he wants to earn a place in heaven and launches it straight at Israil. It lands, kills 210K or more.....you think that for one second Israil would stand for that. They would have their birds in the air faster than you can say "shalom". Then what happens? Well, since Israil is DESPISED in the region, they would be blammed by all the Islamic countries, and the next thing ya know we have a real Jihad. I'm talking several Arab nations against Israil. Since we have a powerfull Jewish PAC in this country, we'd have to jump in and that would be a big mess. In addition, Sadam had 12yrs! (thanks to spinless Bill CLinton) to hide his weapons, not to mention almost a year since the US starting warning him. That is pleanty of time to hide things....you really think they are going to be found in several months?
James: I can't beliueve your bagging on Blair. Don't you remember the last time GB practiced appeasement. It was with that little known guy named Hitler. Chamberlin decided that he could have eastern Europe, so long as he left England alone? Churchill called him and parliment a bunch of idiots. He was labled a warmonger and exiled from the British political arena. But wait, Hitler didn't keep his word, the bombs started flying towards England and who did they turn to.....Churchill. The same man they hated only a short time before.
Bush and Blair are of the same cloth. They don't want to wait till its too late. I think Bush learned a valuable lesson about waiting from 911. They had intelligence on Osama since the Cliton administation, but never acted on it. They thought it was too far fetched....he was local only, small potatoes. He showed them. Bush is smart enough to learn from his mistakes and I'll bet that was a major factor in his decision to invade. One last thing, even if you don't like Bush nor Blair, you have to admire their conviction. The went against the naysayers and did what they felt was right for their countries.....despite the politcal consequences. History will judge them....remember, hindsight is always 20/20
(1) Chaz: The war was over WMD. Just b/c we have not founf them yet doesn't mean they don't exist OR plans to implement prosuction were not on the table. IF Sadam had/was going to have WMD it would de-stabilize the entire region. He has already shown what he is made of when ivaded Kuwait. Now, fast forward 15yrs and he has a nuc? He could take several countries witout a fight and then ONE man, a crazy SOB at that, would controll the world's (not just the U.S) power source i.e oil. Or how about this scenario, he gets the bomb, and one day decides he wants to earn a place in heaven and launches it straight at Israil. It lands, kills 210K or more.....you think that for one second Israil would stand for that. They would have their birds in the air faster than you can say "shalom". Then what happens? Well, since Israil is DESPISED in the region, they would be blammed by all the Islamic countries, and the next thing ya know we have a real Jihad. I'm talking several Arab nations against Israil. Since we have a powerfull Jewish PAC in this country, we'd have to jump in and that would be a big mess. In addition, Sadam had 12yrs! (thanks to spinless Bill CLinton) to hide his weapons, not to mention almost a year since the US starting warning him. That is pleanty of time to hide things....you really think they are going to be found in several months?
James: I can't beliueve your bagging on Blair. Don't you remember the last time GB practiced appeasement. It was with that little known guy named Hitler. Chamberlin decided that he could have eastern Europe, so long as he left England alone? Churchill called him and parliment a bunch of idiots. He was labled a warmonger and exiled from the British political arena. But wait, Hitler didn't keep his word, the bombs started flying towards England and who did they turn to.....Churchill. The same man they hated only a short time before.
Bush and Blair are of the same cloth. They don't want to wait till its too late. I think Bush learned a valuable lesson about waiting from 911. They had intelligence on Osama since the Cliton administation, but never acted on it. They thought it was too far fetched....he was local only, small potatoes. He showed them. Bush is smart enough to learn from his mistakes and I'll bet that was a major factor in his decision to invade. One last thing, even if you don't like Bush nor Blair, you have to admire their conviction. The went against the naysayers and did what they felt was right for their countries.....despite the politcal consequences. History will judge them....remember, hindsight is always 20/20
Well of course the war couldn't be about maintaining a foothold in a valuable resource-rich region, could it? I mean, our government wouldn't really spend all of that money and sacrifice all of those lives for economic power and the wealth of our higher-ups and thier wealthy friends and campaign contributors? Naww......
Well, ten, we'll have to agree to disagree on this. I used to trust our leaders, but I believe our government(s) is involved in a smokescreen.
If folks want to keep discussing this, I think the point I'd like to focus on is what the role of the Capitalist superpower(s) should be in this world.
I've said before that I had no issues with storming into Afghanistan, and then Iraq when the justification behind it was chasing after the folks who brought us 9/11. But, it's a very different story when you start talking strategic intervention -- along the lines of the Israel/Arab conflict that you mentioned. N. Korea is also in that category.
You brought Hitler into this conversation, ten, and I'd like to ask you to temper that a little. Our government fosters fear by comparing world dicators to Hitler, and it's simply not justified.
I'm glad you're still comfortable with our government's position. I'm not.
If folks want to keep discussing this, I think the point I'd like to focus on is what the role of the Capitalist superpower(s) should be in this world.
I've said before that I had no issues with storming into Afghanistan, and then Iraq when the justification behind it was chasing after the folks who brought us 9/11. But, it's a very different story when you start talking strategic intervention -- along the lines of the Israel/Arab conflict that you mentioned. N. Korea is also in that category.
You brought Hitler into this conversation, ten, and I'd like to ask you to temper that a little. Our government fosters fear by comparing world dicators to Hitler, and it's simply not justified.
I'm glad you're still comfortable with our government's position. I'm not.
HAHAHA, you're right of course. I really should pay attention occasionally.
Let's try this again...
I simply can't imagine... I dunno. I'm trying to zing you, dude, but I can't think of anything good.
Let's try this again...
I simply can't imagine... I dunno. I'm trying to zing you, dude, but I can't think of anything good.







