If I understand correctly, Iraq can’t have WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) because of their erratic and abusive behavior in the past. The government can’t be trusted.
While I’m sure the US would love for noone to have these weapons, (well excepting the US probably), would there be any objections if other countries were developing them, as long as they were members in good standing with the United Nations.
As an example, what if Portugal decided to develop WMD? Or Slovakia? Or Iceland? Or Belize? Or Togo? Or the United Arab Emirites? Or Barbados? Or Fiji?
I mean, there are quite a number of countries in the world which are pretty decent and nice places for the most part. They haven’t declared war recently, or abused their citizens. While it would probably make many uneasy, they could develop WMD, right? If not, then what about the US, Russia, China or Britain? Why is it ok for them? If it isnt ok, could the UN send arms inspectors to investigate and disarm these countries, were a future resolution passed?
The issue with Iraq in particular is that we agreed to a cease fire in the Gulf War (which Iraq started by invading Kuwait) with the condition, among others, that Iraq destroy all WMDs it possessed and ceased to develop new ones.
You seem to make all sorts of agreements with all sorts of people when and where it suits you.
Not only are you inconsistent, but you shouldn’t really be meddling in the first place.
Do you really have any idea as to why you are so actively disliked around the world?
Care to enlighten who “you” are referring to? And what is your basis for making such comments? This is a debate forum, ya know. I’m looking for a meal and not just the carrots you toss out.
Yes. Its called bargaining and diplomacy. As in, “They have something we want and vice versa.” Hence, we arrange a trade for it. Fair bargaining.
Where and when? Is there some sort of divine law that we cannot advance our own goals?
Yes, its because people are envious of the US. Or they have an ideological passion against us, or one of a thousand odd-other reaos that boil down to: The US of A is stronger than they.
Tough Noogies. I won’t crawl into a hole and die for their fun and games.
Well its poititics as usual IMO. Myself being an american, i would like to say that the one and only reason for Bush’s push for war is national security and pursuit of peace… But i honestly dont think that its the case.
You never hear anyone say it on the news, but most people know that going to war would likely give a needed boost to the economy. Bush is is probably interested in the oil in Iraq as well. I just wonder how high priority he considers threat from Iraq compared to economic benefit. It seems to me the REAL threat from Iraq will come when we DO attack him. I think Saddam might really do something drastic then, even if it is suicide.
The push for war seems to be going way too fast IMO. We just need to slow down. If we really want to accept a peaceful solution, we should be willing to be patient. And dont be fooled- we still dont have any CONCRETE evidence. Wouldnt we all be dumbfounded if we did invade Iraq, kill many innocent people, take over, scour the country and then find nothing?
Im not saying use of force is out of the question, its just not the right solution at the moment. This rush to war suggests to me that our government has motives aside from security.
I have no idea if african, south american or asian countries are working on WMD. Wouldn’t suprise me.
I don’t know if i’m alone in this, but maybe this will turn out for the good. With 3rd world countries armed with WMD, maybe 1st world countries will be more friendly & less willing to commit terrorism or government destabilization against them. The great equalizer.
I also read in yahoo news that N. Korea was considering a pre-emptive strike against the US.
Thats an interesting notion. Go to war to achieve peace.
I know its not the case, but you must not set yourself up so easily. There be snipers here.
I believe the UN police regarding Weapons of mass destruction is No country that doesnt already have WMD is allowed to make it. Nuclear power is ok. Nuclear weapons not ok.
Ps.- X~slayer(ale), You quoted only part of what what i was saying. If you had read a little further, my meaning becomes something completely different. Did you read the whole post? I think your view might even be parellel with mine.
A metaphor for this whole thing could be America’s 2nd ammendment rights.
Why is the 2nd ammendment so holy? Why do so many Americans go up in arms (so to speak) at the idea of any restriction on gun ownership? Whats the need to have these things?
Self protection. Ive got a gun, so dont mess with me or Ill shoot you.
It would be hypocritical for the US to object to anyone without an international “criminal record” to have some nuclear missiles.
But thats not the agenda here. There are two things a country needs one of to not find themselves in hot water when advancing a nuclear program or possesing WMD:
Alliance with the US (Britain, India, Israel, etc)
The ability to kick serious ass if necessary (Pakistan, China, arguably North Korea)
noy really, It’s been done countless times. Unless you believe the us entered WWII in order to conquer europe. Hell, the first gulf war was entered with the intention of restoring peace(with questoinable success). Conflict simply cannot alway be settled with talk.
I make no bones about being a Realist (with a capital R, the political theory). The U.S. is the biggest and baddest and that’s all the reason we need. Luckily we’re also reasonably benevolent, but eventually we’ll get tired of saving this or that country’s sorry butt from this or that OTHER sorry country. Take the ungrateful we-wouldn’t-be-here-if-you-hadn’t-saved-us-and-rebuilt-our-infrastructure-and-economy French… I truly don’t get a ‘zut’ about what they think.
So Panji, I have a VERY good idea of why we’re so actively disliked around the world. It’s mostly because we’re rich and powerful and don’t roll over (much) and do what we’re told by the rightly-named third world.
What your statement fails to take into account is that I don’t CARE. My attitude is this: we have the best program to date. We have 8 billion % less human suffering in our country than in your dusty, cruddy corner of the world, and sorry but we didn’t DO it to you, you did it to yourself. Get with the program or get stomped. I, and many Americans, are growing weary of this country acting like an effete 8,000 pound gorilla kowtowing to all you little peons.
I think you and your ilk have very nearly “awakened a sleeping giant and have instilled in him a terrible resolve” again, and it’s about damned time too.
We don’t need or want your permission, we don’t need or want your approval, we don’t need or want your liking. And we’re ABOUT to quit seeking all of the above.
DrLizardo, today I watched the mayor of NYC and the governor of New York State on TV. It suddenly dawned on me that I felt the same way about the mayor calling NYC the capital of the world as some people feel about the U.S. Maybe the problem is that they hear more from New Yorkers than from we Americans out here in the hinterlands. Your post is a good example. If someone said the same things in this neck of the woods, I’d think “I wish that redneck would shut-up!”
However, I also support the war and to answer your questions Purplefloyd, refer to my answer in the thread where you asked if I’m willing to serve in the war.
