by MrMoe 103 Replies latest jw friends
mrmoe,
with all due respect....the kurds used the war with iran to start a war against official iraqi troops. regardless of who is in power or which country it is every state would have retaliated against the kurds (lets take turky for instance....lets look at the US in 1860 etc.pp).
also...may i point out that the US gave a flying shit about the kurds at that time and supported hussein instead.
these double standards are disgusting.
Wow, and what exactly has that got to do with the War on Terror, Mr. Moe? Oh ya absolutely nothing.
To protect Iraqi Kurds and Shi'a Muslims from Saddam's chemical attacks, executions and forced relocations
Yes, because gods forbid we would EVER fight against natives of OUR country, or attack them with biological warfare, or force them relocate to reservations or anything.
And we would certainly, never EVER use WMD in warfare, no sir. In fact, we are so peaceful, we've already disarmed ourselves just like Saddam should!
Or, wait, I forgot, we're members of the "US and Friends" club, we operate by a different set of rules. We're allowed to have NBC weapons. We're allowed to use them when we want to. We're allowed to, even when not using them, intimidate other countries with our military power. 'Cause we're just better than everyone else in the world.
Everybody else is wrong, we're right.
Edited by - Xander on 23 January 2003 18:0:50
BTW for all of your information, my aunt, my moms sister is Married to a Bush, his parents live in Texas, and guess what they're JW's.
- Are we forgetting why weapons of mass destruction...
"...weapons of mass destruction..." it's like a mantra repeated over and over again...
Wow, and what exactly has that got to do with the War on Terror, Mr. Moe? Oh ya absolutely nothing.
TH -- Excuse me? Wow...??? Is that all you can say? The facts I presented show A) he attacks his own people and B) he attacks the US. Your point is what? Either participate in the debate at hand with facts OR AT LEAST a logical argument other than WOW or butt out.
Xander -- The US is not run by psychopaths. Greedy Republicans maybe, but when was the last time the Bush family bombed one of thier own citys or killed people with chemical weapons? Comparing our weapons stash against Saddam's is like comparing 2 apples to oranges, or better yet 2 people, one a diseased criminal and the other an educated doctor. Some people have rights based upon thier actions, Saddam has lost his rights to rule a country due to his actions. He doesn't even care for his own people, what makes you think he gives as rat's azz about American Citizens?
I have to leave work now and my PC at home is screwed up, so I may not post right away to any reponses here. Don't go aroudn ihtnking I cherish the thought of wars. I don't, I hate death, I hate pain, I hate anguish and suffering of any human. But saddly enough, we do not live a perfect little world. If there is an alternative to war, then by all means, I say we do it. But what alternative is there?
Are we forgetting why weapons of mass destruction..."...weapons of mass destruction..." it's like a mantra repeated over and over again...
Ok --
1. NUKES
2. CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Guess what? The above equals weapons that can kill and snuff out life in large quantities. Or in other words Weapons of Mass Destruction.
I am going home folks.
Greedy Republicans maybe, but when was the last time the Bush family bombed one of thier own citys or killed people with chemical weapons?
Is it fair to compare the US of today to the Iraq of today? Iraq is only 70 yrs old as a country. What was the US doing at 70 yrs old?
You can't MAKE a nation grow up faster, or impose your will on them. Their people, while you think they SHOULD appreciate it, won't. They'll just see one government topple in favor of another (if our experience with Iran is any indicator...and another, and another, and....) without them having any control over it. Just throwing out a dictator, telling everyone 'okay, you can vote now', trying to explain what voting MEANS and how it is a POWER for them, etc. just doesn't work.
They have to seize control over their own country themselves to improve their situation.
Hence, my argument that there is no justifiable reason to attack Iraq.
>1. NUKES
>2. CHEMICAL WEAPONS
>Guess what? The above equals weapons that can kill and snuff out life in large quantities.
>Or in other words Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Guess what? Your U.S. of A. has lots of them,much more than Saddam.
I never said they had evidence to prove that Saddam didn't have weapons of mass destruction but the US has not proved to a shadow of doubt that he does have them. Also when your talking about taking Saddam out of power, you are referring to the deaths of innocent men, women and children.
Will
