**
(italics, capitalization, and exclamation points mine).
That sentiment doesn’t seem to go well with owning a car.
Let’s hope that person walks or cycles to the protest marches, at least.
(And thanks to TubaDiva for doing my name change.)
But in focusing on that view, we disregard the fact that Saddam is a very real threat to America and everyone in that region. Should we let the debate over the veracity of this administration get in the way of doing what needs to be done if not sooner then later when it has significantly worsened.
Would it not be better to get rid of this guy when he is going for his gun rather than when he has his gun or worse, have his finger on the trigger?
100% emphatically no. To state this matter simply, that is not how the good guys behave.
The way that I see it, we have two choices. We can take the high road, be honest and stop coming up with the excuse of the day why we want to attack Iraq. This will have a lot of uncertainty, because there is a lot of ill will out there towards the US. It will also be a difficult sustained effort. The other choice is that we can just bomb the crap out of Iraq. This is easier and the short-term results are pretty predictable. We will probably win, and we will almost certainly create a lot more ill will.
I would suggest that the long-term approach is the best. We may not always be the most powerful nation on earth, you know, and it will never hurt to have a lot of good will in the bank.
quote:
Originally posted by X~Slayer(ALE)
… Would it not be better to get rid of this guy when he is going for his gun rather than when he has his gun or worse, have his finger on the trigger?
Funny, thats standard police policy in almost every jurisdiction I know. I thought they were the good guys. Its also a proven legal defense for a private citizen who is threatened with deadly assault. It is madness to wait for the first blow when that first blow can be as devastating as a nerve gas attack, biological terrorism or even a nuke.
A third alternative is not to bomb the heck put of Iraq but concentrate the full and unrelenting devastation to Saddams loyalist forces and to Saddam himself. We’ve used that strategy effectively and successfully in Panama and Afghanistan, why cant we do it in Iraq?
Pardon me if I am under the opinion that any goodwill that is earned by the United States expires the minute it conflicts with the selfish interests of other nations. If you dont think so then explain the actions of France, Germany, Saudi Arabia, and yes even Russia.