Right on target Bubba.
Right on target Bubba.
I'll agree with some of the points made above, but want to introduce a few more points.
First, there are a lot of dictators in the world with ties to terrorism that are also seeking weapons of mass destruction. How about North Korea? How about Iran? Why is that Iraq, poor bedraggled, bombed out, destroyed Iraq deserves our wrath? One word and one phrase:
OIL and "It's the economy, stupid".
OIL: Poor, gluttonous America, we never did learn our lesson from the 1970's oil shortages, did we? Had we kept up with the innovation and conservation then, we'd all be driving cars that got 50+ mpg, and we could forget about countries like Iraq and Saudi Arabia, they'd have no power over us. But no, we have to be tremendous assholes who drive "Ford Expeditions" that get 10mpg, which means that our government has to kowtow to the Saudis, protect Kuwait, and make Iraq into a bad boy.
"It's the economy, stupid": Nothing jumpstarts an economy like a war. Times are tough, eh? How about a little war to get things moving again?? One need only look at history to see that this is a way to pull us out of recession, folks.
Look, I'm not going to say I think getting rid of Saddam Hussein is a bad thing. I don't like the guy. But realize what those actions will do in a very unstable region where America isn't real popular. Not good. I tend to think the Iraqi people have suffered enough. If we're going to use this tired "weapons of mass destruction" agenda, then we better start worrying about North Korea and a few other "rogues" who are a lot worse than Iraq.
I could go on forever, but that's enough for now...
Indy - good points.
We somehow survived the Soviet Union having WMD.
A perceived threat in an oil rich land during a time when the rest of the country is falling all around him wouldn't make anyone look at the President somewhat skeptically now would it.
Your viewpoint in this situation really lies in who you believe.
What's Scott Ritter's 10K PR?
Quoted by IndyRunner
I tend to think the Iraqi people have suffered enough
_________________________________________________________
Exactly, all under the regime of Saddam. Most Iraqis do not like him, but can't do anything about it as he has kept them hungry and dumb for a reason.
Lets see Saddam has a long war with Iran, invades Kuwait, sends skuds at Israel, kills his own citizens with chemical weapons. He has shown little value to human life.
While getting his butt kicked in the Gulf War for invading Kuwait, he makes an agreement to have inspectors. He has been dicking around and not letting the inspectors do their job and hasn't allowed inspectors to go in at all for the past 4 years or so.
Bush points out that Saddam is a threat to the international community. He is violating something like 16 UN Resolutions.
But somehow Bush is seen as the bully in this.
Loudly applauding Knower.
Indy, I am with you on the notion that we need to end our dependence on oil. But the fact is that we cannot let some crazy ass bitch to have too much control of it. We need to look at the situation at hand, not what we wish we should have done.
Once there is a regime change in Iraq, the US won't need as strong military force in Saudi Arabia since one of the biggest reasons we have troops there is to protect Saudi Arabia from an attack from Iraq. With the US out of SA, the oppressed people there will take out the royal family. The royal family is in real trouble there as it is and the oppressed masses in SA blame the US for propping up the royal family.
Unless you're Bubbah Clinton and you have a dangerous pill factory you need to take out to divert attention away from your numerous scandals.
Why do we care what this sit-com actor (3s Company, 8 Rules for My Teenage Daughter) thinks about Iraq or what his 10K time is? Regardless, both Webb and Ritz could kick his butt over any distance, except maybe the 24hr run. What does Kourus think about all this?
Indy Runner,
You are right about some things, and wrong about most.
1) It it not about the economy - that is a tired argument.
2) Regarding "poor bedraggled, bombed out, destroyed Iraq" - you have got to be kidding me. Sure the people there have suffered - because of their president who gasses his own people and executes political opponents and doesn't adhere to rules that he agreed to. Iraq has shown that it is willing to put so much of its money into developing weapons and its army. In 1991 they had the 4th biggest military in the world, and Saddam said he would open the fires of hell on the American soldiers and all who supported us. Well, invade a small country like Kuwait, and you'd better be able to open those fires of hell, because you'll have to answer to Uncle Sam.
3) You say you don't like Saddam? Well, he not only would crush your skull and piss on your brain if given the chance, but he would glady see the end of America as we know it if it were up to him.
4) The Iraqi people will be dancing in the street when Saddam falls - just as the Afghanistan people were when the Taliban was overthrown - people were lined up at the barbershop to get their hair cut.
5) It will be SO easy for the Iraqi soldiers to surrender this time, because they know that we won't just execute them. Last time they put their hands up and kissed the feet of US soldiers begging for their lives. Now they know that we are not monsters, and their hands will go up so fast you'll hear a sonic boom.
6) No one said things will go perfectly smoothly after Saddam is out, but the problems in that region of the world will pale in comparison to the problems that would exist there if an atomic bomb were exploded in the US or Isreal or any other country.
7) Democracy is a good thing. When our government took hold in the 1700s, look at the other world powers at the time and see if their form of government is still in existence. Britain? Nope. France? Nope. Spain? Nope. Russia? Nope.
8) As far as worrying about North Korea and Iran, who says we aren't? Bush put those three in the Axis of Evil. Someone has to be the first to get it. Iraq has given us the reason to do so, and it is a valid reason - they are the ones most in violation of UN sanctions, and they are the ones who pose the most immediate threat. Who said we need to stop there? If North Korea and Iran don't toe the UN and US line after we rid Iraq of Saddam, then they will be next. I'm not saying that we should go take over every country that poses a threat, but Iraq not only poses a threat, but they have refused what the international community required of them. Once some of those other countries see that we mean business, perhaps they will start to play within the rules. Cuba is still a communist country, but are they currently a threat? No.
9) You say "it's the economy stupid" well of course some of it is economy related, but no one is starting a war to pull us out of a recession - that's lunacy, and if you believe that you are simple minded. Here's the economy part I will agree with - Kuwait is a big oil producer and of course we don't want that land taken over and controlled by Saddam Hussein - what the hell is so wrong with that? First of all, the fact that we Americans want to drive gass guzzlers only BENEFITS those Arab oil-producing nations, because we then buy more of their oil. That should make us look GOOD in their eyes. If we are so evil, then why do they want to do business with us?
10) We didn't make Iraq into a bad boy. They made themselves into one when they tried to take over another country. Are you mentally challenged?
11) We should never do things to be popular. Can't please everyone anyway. I couldn't care less if we are popular in the Arab world. I only care that we do what is right and just.
12) Yes, you could go on forever, but then I would have to rebutt your arguments a second time.
Bill Clinton 1998:
"A failure to respond could embolden Saddam to act recklessly, signaling to him that he can, with impunity, develop these weapons of mass destruction or threaten his neighbors... And it would permanently damage the credibility of the United Nations Security Council to act as a force for promoting international peace and security. We continue to hope - indeed, pray - that Saddam will comply, but we must be prepared to act if he does not."
He also said,
"This [Hussein] regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region, and the security of all the rest of us. Someday, some way, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal. Let there be no doubt, we are prepared to act. I know that the people we may call upon in uniform are ready. The American people have to be ready as well."
And what did Daschle say in 1998? He said, "Now the question is, will Saddam Hussein be willing to live by his word? Will he provide the access that is clarified in this language? If not, it's back to business. It's the use of force. It is a swift response - militarily and by whatever other means may be necessary." Months after Clinton and Daschle spoke these words, Hussein kicked the UN inspectors out for good. They have never been allowed to return. Funny how there was an immediate threat in 1998 but not now. Or is it playing politics with national security?
Politically Correct,
You would be applauding the one with the correct stance on this issue then. Good for you.
JEH wrote:
Why do we care what this sit-com actor (3s Company, 8 Rules for My Teenage Daughter) thinks about Iraq or what his 10K time is? Regardless, both Webb and Ritz could kick his butt over any distance, except maybe the 24hr run. What does Kourus think about all this?
Uh, that's John Ritter the sitcom actor.
John Ritter is also the voice of Clifford The Big Red Dog.
The question you need to ask yourself in these situations, is how do you know what you know?
When I lived in Russia I was told that Russia invented the light bulb, the telephone, the modern truck, air travel, the cotton ginn, atomic energy, etc.
Seemed like a good story at the time.
So get rid of Saddam Hussein [please], just ensure that there is some transparency to the process to ensure your Patriotism is justified.
Oh... Thanks for the clarification.
John is also a traithlete / click below to see his Ironman Florida performance 2001
This is why chicks should be banned, no sense of sarcasm. Get with the community flow, babe! If you've read JEH's posts you know that he is smart enough to know the obvious, he's just trying to lighten up a very heavy, and mis-placed topic. Foriegn policy DOES NOT belong on this board. Should be deleted. I am trying to escape by visiting this board, a topic like this kills my buzz, man.
Have a Nice Day!
Again, you have Bushman to thank for that. I'd rather talk running too, but when someone makes such a statement, they get what they deserve.