So the US can go to war over another countries potential to develop “Weapons of Mass Destruction” AKA “Weapons of Mass Distraction” while at the same time it develops all the chemical and biological weapons it wants. How can the rest of the world take the US seriously?
I agree that [the weapons included under the propaganda term] WMD are a threat to the safety of the world and should be reduced, but I believe this applies to the whole world, not just those countries that the US and UK decide are hostile. Even if those ‘hostile’ countries change so rapidly. The US was helping Saddam develop his WMD capabilities just 15 years ago and completely ignored his use of them until recently.
“Research by the Defence Intelligence Agency into the possibility of genetically engineering a new strain of antibiotic-resistant anthrax.“
“CIA efforts to copy a Soviet cluster bomb designed to disperse biological weapons.“
What the Fuck? (apparently) Breaking conventions on biological weapons, basically ignoring the UN, working to destroy the ICC….Why doesn’t the US just come out and say “Look everyone, were in fucking charge here and there’s nothing you can do about it. You do this, you do that and we’ll continue to do whatever the fuck we like, OK?”
The arrogance of the Bush Administration is astounding, and matched only by the Bullshit that comes out of W’s mouth.
Oh well, with Howards head so far up Bushs arse anyway, looks like I’m gonna be protected by these weapons as well. Thank God… no… thank the United Stated of America.
It really is a simple economic problem. If everyone can create their own bio/chem warfare agents, then no-one is going to BUY them from the US. It is less for world peace and more for maintaining an economic monopoly that the US desires Mr. Saddam et al to relinquish their weapons…IMHO of course!.
You answered your own question: the rest of the world takes the U.S. seriosuly because the U.S. has weapons of mass destruction, though the extent of their chemical/biological programs are in doubt. Actually, cold-war stockpiles of chemical weapons are becoming a major hassle because the decades-old containers are starting to fail. Even putting those aside, American nuclear weapons alone put them in a position to dictate terms.
Trouble is, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. The Americans have an elected government and a free press and if their president engaged in blatant WMD saber-rattling, he’d have reporters and opposing politicians jumpnig all over him. The Yanks were willing to impeach a president over some pissant sex scandal, what do you think they’ll to do to one who unleashes mustard gas?
As for stopping Iraq and North Korea, consider this: neither of those countries has a free press or a political opposition. In both cases there is a single head of state (Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong Il) who kills political opponents. If one of these nations had nukes, they would be deployed at the whim of that one individual, who doesn’t need to care how his citizens react, since he can kill them with impunity. The question isn’t “can we let Iraq have the a-bomb?”, it’s “can we let Saddam have the a-bomb?”
As for the Americans, they’re in fucking charge here and there’s nothing you can do about it. You do this, they’ll do that and they’ll continue to do whatever the fuck they like, OK? And you should be glad they won the cold war instead of the Soviets, because being on that piddly isolated continent of yours doesn’t offer absolute protection: it’s just that nobody has bothered to go kick your asses yet. There isn’t anything you have that’s worth the trouble of sailing down there and taking. The Americans, by contrast, have lots of things people want, and by protecting themselves, they indirectly protect you, you ungrateful pommy bastard.
Ah, that felt good, especially with Remembrance Day coming up.
My hat’s off to you Bryan. We Yanks might not have the best track record around, but we’re no Saddam. We could have nuked Afghanistan within hours of the attacks on 9/11, but we didn’t. Anyone here want to argue that Saddam would be as restrained as the US if the Kurds were to pull something similar in Iraq? (Not that I think the Kurds would, but I’m using them as an example of a group that’s suffered Saddam’s wrath in the past.)
I feel a particular patriotism on military matters, and pride on the record of my own country, Canada. As Remembrance Day approaches, I think of Canadian contributions in the 20th century, especially when Canadian soldiers managed to accomplish tasks that had defied British and French troops (i.e. Vimy Ridge). The major upshot, though, is that Canada didn’t have to send troops, since Canadian territory was never threatened, but they did anyway (over some strong opposition, incidentally). Since WW2, Canadian peacekeepers have been all over the place, trying to stop locals from killing each other, and occasionally they die in the attempt.
As a result, if a Canadian soldier dies, it’s my hope that it was for a good reason. A casual reading of WW2 histories shows moments in 1938 and early 1939 when Germany could have been stopped, but a strategy of appeasement was used instead. The kicker is: when a political system is founded on ruthlessness, no amount of appeasement can ensure a lasting peace. Saddam Hussein rose to power not through free and fair elections, but because he (like the Nazi party members) was willing and happy to murder his political opponents. Murder wasn’t even an unfortunate byproduct of his rise, it was a critical factor. Saddam answers to no-one within Iraq; no system of checks and balances exists to limit his power. If he gets control of nuclear weapons, there is literally nothing to stop him from threatening his neighbors, including Israel who already has nukes.
When I see pictures of a Canadian WW2 graveyard, I have to consider that earlier action would have made these sacrifices unnecessary. When I contemplate the Middle East in the year 2010 after a future Iraqi nuclear test, I can picture the need for many more graveyards, though vaporized populations may need no burial. Is it wrong to take steps to prevent this future? It would be more wrong to do nothing.
I have no tolerance for dictatorships with relentless lust for power, and it is completely preposterous and asinine to cast the Americans in this light. No matter what your personal feelings for GWB, he is not as bad as Saddam Hussein and the American system is designed to prevent any president from even approaching Saddam’s level of control. If samboy insists that there is even a comparison to be made, then he is an idiot and should try touring some local war cemeteries and ask himself if these deaths would have been necessary if earlier action had been taken.
When I take part in a parade commemorating Remembrance Day and stand in silence before a cenotaph, I know that young men died because compromises were made with evil in the faint hope that evil would magically go away. When the evil didn’t go away, these men went to war and many didn’t come back.
Is samboy under the impression that world will be somehow safer if Iraq goes nuclear? If so, his idiocy is confirmed and I invite him to join the Australian Reserves in anticipation of a future Middle East mission.
As for “pommy,” I thought about various terms like “sot” and “tosser” as a means of expressing my contempt for an idiot Australian (though I have calm respect for the nation as a whole). If “pommy” was used incorrectly, I apologize to any Australians who may be offended and change my assessment of samboy from “pommy” to “asshole,” which at least has the advantage of being culturally generic.
Frist off, I may be an ungrateful bastard but Im not a ** Fucking Pom!** (obligatry aussie comment )
on preview, asshole is OK.
Im pretty fucking glad the US won the cold war as well, but it doesn’t mean Im going to kiss America’s arse for the next fifty years. I was trying to point out the hypocracy of the argument W uses for attacking Iraq, namely that they will (or already have) developed WMD which we cannot let them have for the safety of the planet, but were going nuts ourselves making the stuff and dont give a fuck about other countries having them, and actually sold them to the badies a while ago. If the WMD argument was used accross the globe the US would be starting a new war every few days. Saddam had a lot more power and capabilities and was doing a lot more terrible things in the Bush Snr days but then he was a friend so no one cared.
But going by your last paragraph, I see as a simple Australian I have overstepped the boundaries and should shut the fuck up lest the US slaps me and leaves me out in the cold with the other Non-Merkins. They are in charge, they can tell the world what to do, they dont give a fuck what I think. Got it. Sorry.
Thus explaining why most of the world fucking hate them (the government that is, people are just people).
Accusations of hypocrisy go a little further when your original post doesn’t contain THIS little gem:
My first thought was “Oh, okay, I’ll take care of it. Just give me a minute to pull a magic wand out of my ass!” Wishing for a problem to be solved and them lambasting the people that are willing (aside from the U.S. and U.K., is anyone else even capable?) to take the unpleasant but necessary steps to solve that problem… well, if “hypocrisy” isn’t the word, it’s pretty damn close.
I said your opinions were bullshit, but I wasn’t telling you to shut up. While I personally prefer that you shut up as an alternative to expressing half-assed, dumb-assed, asshole-ish opinions, I’m certainly not prepared to censor or silence you or even slap you around. People who whine that they’re being censored when someone challenges their bullshit observations annoy me, but I’m not gonna get all fascist on them.
Besides, I’m not an American, so even if I was ordering you to shut up, the Americans would have nothing to do with it.
Hey, if you find the Americans so oppressive (if even me, a Canadian, can shoot you down, you must be some kinda major wimp) tell your government to start an nuclear program of its own. That’ll teach those lousy Yanks.
Exactly. And that is why there is increasing resentment and hatred of America from so many other countries in the world - and not just fundamentalist Islamic states, or “rogue” communist nations, but from western nations too.
Because America does do just what the fuck it likes, usually solely in its own interest. It may be that this coincidentally is in the interests of other nations as well, or it may not. The point is that the US does not act altruistically, it acts for itself.
Not to diminish your point here (that these are indeed my personal opinions and you think they are complete bullshit) but I was talking more in the voice of an everyday Australian shouting at the American government not me personally shouting at you.
i.e. America doesn’t care what the fuck the Australian people think and we should shut the fuck up and just be glad they are our friends before they get annoyed with us.
I didn’t mean to imply that I was actually talking directly to you or that you were trying to censor my opinions. Sorry, probably should have made that clearer.
The difference being that the US didn’t try to invade a neighbor, get defeated, and then agree to certain concessions, and THEN violate those concessions.
WOO! I just flushed your ENTIRE argument down the toilet with a single, simple sentence! ::dances:: Go me-e-e, go me-e-e…
Actually, I was just paraphrasing a passage from the original post. samclem said, essentially, “So the Americans are in charge and we just have to take it?” and I wrote, essentially “So the Americans are in charge and you just have to take it.” It was a simple pronoun switch, nothing more.
It’s handy when the op contains the answer to its own question.
Anyhoo…
When was the last time an American tried to shut you up? Just because your opinions are bullshit and irrelevant doesn’t mean they’re out to silence you. Stop using the “poor little old me” line. If you honestly believe Iraq should be allowed to develop WMD, give your reasons. If you more generally believe that the Americans should not interfere in the policies of other nations, give your reasons for that. If all you want to do is make some generalized complaint about the Americans are ruining your life, show some evidence or get some therapy.
)