by JH 131 Replies latest jw friends
crazy,
i have never been on acid...from your years of expirience can you recommend it?
i don't see why it is so urgent to get rid of hussein with a war...why not get 100 or more additional weapons inspectors into iraq and keep hussein under control in a peaceful way?
Edited by - realist on 23 January 2003 12:53:27
Vietnam ring any bells? Or, do we have to only account for the last 20 years, 30 years back too far?
I hardly consider Agent Orange gassing anyone. Yes it turned out that it caused cancer but it was designed to be a Defoliant, not a Nerve GAS or MUstard GAS. Apples and Oranges Xandar, Apples and Oranges.......next you'll complain that we kill the Viet Cong.
Realist,
All the inspectors in the world wont make a difference. You give a guy 10 years to hide things....................................... The whole thing is just one big game that Allows Saddam more time to prepare for the inevitable.
crazy,
ok wait a second...you consider burning people with napalm and phosphor bombs better than gassing? how so?
with the US stationed around him and weapons inspectors controlling the country what are you afraid is hussein gonna do? rebuilt his gigantic army in his gigantic underground facilities and then launch a gigantic attack against his neighbors?
I hardly consider Agent Orange gassing anyone.
Oh, really? Volunteering, then?
And I notice you dodged the use of the atom bombs on Japan. We not only hold the monopoly on nukes used in warfare, last I checked, we were the only nation to engage in biological warfare, as well (smallpox + Indians, anyone?). So, what, we get to use WMDs whenever we feel we need to, against OUR own natives, if needed, but no other country is allowed?
(And as to the inevitable 'Well, that was a different time, we matured since then' argument - yes, it was. And yes, arguably we have - a little bit. Surely we must allow other countries to do the same? Doesn't bombing someone back to the stone age for committing 'crimes' WE ALREADY COMMITTED just seem a *tiny* bit wrong to you?)
--------------------------
Perhaps what pisses me off the most about most arguments against Iraq boils down more to what is said by implication that by words.
What most of you are arguing - by implication, mind you - I'm not saying anyone says this directly is:
"We are oh-so-pure with lily-white hands, clean, holy, and righteous in every action we take against the unwashed heathens! Woe to them! For we alone are fit to judge the world in our wholesome purity, having never experienced the stain of sin and never a misguided action taken!"
It's that "We're always right, you're always wrong, do what we say or else" attitude that makes me ill. And, who is it even to say that it is our duty to force democracy on other countries? (If, indeed, that was the US motive here - it is obviously not) The people CAN choose their government. When the 13 colonies had enough of dictatorship, they revolted to form what would become the US - fighting against the (then) most powerful nation on earth. Who is Saddam and his cronies compared to the might of the Brittish Empire at the height of its power?
Xander,
WRONG, once again.
JAPAN killed over a MILLION Chinese with Biological Warfare!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Ohhh and we are sooo bad for dropping a Nuke on them...........)
Also,
Agent Orange is a DEFOILIANT, it DOES NOT kill you on Contact like Nerve Gas. Would I like some sprayed on me NO. If I had the choice between Agent Orange and Nerve Gas I would take Agent Orange in a HEART BEAT. Agent Orange was not DESIGNED to be a weapon, Whereas Mustard Gas, Sarin, etc..etc.. IS. Agent Orange was meant to get rid of the plants. Thats it. You make it sound like we wanted to kill VietCong with it. If you look at the History of the War you will find that MANY of our troops where sprayed with it. Obviously if it was DESIGNED to be a weapon we would not have done it.
REALIST,
Agent Orange is in no way even comparible to Napalm or White Phosphorus. Either way, you cannot compare Napalm to Chemical or Biological warfare, there are NO SiMULARITIES. Chem+ Biological Weapons can kill Thousands with a single warhead, Napalm cannot. Napalm is a nasty son-of-a-bitch and so is White Phosphorus but does that mean we should get rid of it??? Would you rather have us drop some 1,000lb bombs on them?? Either way people die.
we are sooo bad for dropping a Nuke on them
And, again, you neglect to read my whole post. I'll try and keep this one short so you don't miss anything again.
What I object to is us taking this 'holier-than-thou' attitude with Iraq. HE USED NBC WEAPONS. SO WHAT. SO DID WE. Why is it 'okay' for us to when it suits us, but not him?
If he attacked us, fine, retaliate. HE HASN'T.
xander,
well put.
crazy,
i agree.....it doens't matter if you use one warhead with nerve gas or thousand b52 bombers to carpet bomb an area...the outcome is the same.
So I take it you let your engine explode before you change the oil.
And NO we havnt used Biological weapons. Agent Orange was NOT a biological weapon. Smallpox against the indians?? That like saying the Chinese where responsible for killing millions in Europe with the Plague.
well the europeans gave infected clothing and blankets to the indians intentionally infecting them.
by the way...it were between 3000 and 270.000 chinese not millions killed by bio weapons.
If he attacked us, fine, retaliate. HE HASN'T
So let me get this straight, you want someone to attack us before we do anything about them???
So I guess we were wrong during the Cuban Missle Crises. Shit, let the Russians build all the Silos in the world in Cuba! In fact, lets allow someone to NUKE US and who ever is left alive can Nuke them back......
GET HELP
