The long awaited Dossier on Iraq UK Position

by Celtic 73 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Realist

  surprise surprise i have to agree with Logic!

  LDH,

  its funny that you mentioned pol pot. i hope you realize the US has supported this mass murderer.

  also did the US care about the atrocities saddam committed as long as he was their ally? i don't think so.

  did the US bomb panama city and killed 2000 civilians? did the US bomb north vietnam and killed millions of civilians? how about what they did in korea? etc.etc.

  why doesn't the US condemn the actions taken by Isreal? why did they support these religious fanatics in afghanistan during the cold war knowing what kind of nutcases these guys were?

  conclusion...i don't think the US has the moral authority to dictate to the world which governments are ligitimate and which are not.
• 

  Crazy151drinker

  Yes, Realist,

  You and Logic are right. Lets let Saddam have a couple of Nukes. Im sure he would never use them on Isreal or against other people...............

  It comes down to the Age old question- Do the ends Justify the Means.

  Does ending the worst war ever in the history of the world justify 200,000 people dying? YES

  Is the prevention of millions of deaths worth taking out Saddam Hussien? YES

  Realist, no one here is saying that the U.S. is some moral Angel. We are stating that SADDAM is a cruel saddistic SOB who would use WMDs to kill MILLIONS of PEOPLE and he needs to be stopped. The isolationalist views that you and illogical have allowed HITLER to come to power. If we had not been isolationalists there would not have BEEN A WWII! NO Pearl, NO HIroshima, None of the 'Horrible" things that you are so quick to point out. All of the trajedies you speak of are commited when the world sits on its ass and does nothing.
• 

  Realist

  Crazy151drinker,

  how many peopel are you willing to sacrifice for this purpose? if you could get a special force that goes in and takes out saddam hussein without much colateral damage then it could be considered a reasonable thing to do.

  but i am afraid this is not whats gonna happen.

  many thousands of people will die ... and for what? how likely is it that hussein would attack another country with his nukes (if he actually gets them eventually)? why would he do that? how could he occupy lets say saudi arabia with the US troops stationed in this country? its just very unlikely.

  also without the support of the US the second WW would have never started.
• 

  Crazy151drinker

  Realist,

  If it was that easy, Saddam would be dead already! YES he will use his weapons! The point is that once he gets those weapons, there is nothing we will do to stop any of his future agressions. Shit, we pulled out of Somalia after losing 18 people.

  also without the support of the US the second WW would have never started.

  And there would be no Europe or England. All the Jews would be dead. Russia would have probably have been whiped out. Australia would be under Japanese control as would China. Millions more people would have died and would continue to be butchard. All members of the non-ideal master race would be killed. No more Africa.

  There would be no EU, or NATO. No economic trading blocks. Just a Facist Europe, An Emporer in the East, and a smashed russia, hopefully the U.S would still be there.

  Hitler would have developed the first A-Bomb. He already had Rocket technology so he would have developed the first ICBM. Basicly, the world would be fucked.

  Yeah, Realist, we shouldnt have gotten into it.

  In Hindsight, Pearl was a blessing.
• 

  Realist

  quite a scenario !

  let me make clear right away that i am NOT at all sympathetic with fashism!

  but i have to ask you how you came to this conclusion?

  hitler made a couple of reasonable claims that the other european countries would have had to accept without being backed up by the US. granted he might have declared war on poland eventually (which is not proven however) to get back the territory that was taken away from germany after the first war...but there is absolutely no evidence that would suggest that he would have attacked any other countries. russia was attacked after it became obvious that stalin had planned an attack against germany. and a war with the west was never wanted by hitler.

  although it was terrible what happened to jews they were not killed deliberately before the war started...hitler tried to deport them to other countries including palestine.

  from where do you get the idea that japan would have had attacked australia? knowing they would have to declare war on britain in this case? that seems strange. however i have to agree that japan did terrible things to the chinese and koreans. so this might justify taking action against them...although britain and france were not very nice to their colonies either and the question arises why these countries were allowed to occupy 2/3 of the world.
• 

  roybatty

  Here are two examples as to the results when the US i ntervenes: In Korean War the US succeeded in stopping the communists from invading the south. The results? The north became and has remained a third world nation with it's people living in misery while south Korea is an economic power-house with a very high standard of living. In the Vietnam War the US failed to stop the communists from conquering the south. The result? The GNP of Vietnam and the standard of living of it's citizens went down the crapper after the south fell and Vietnam has been a third world shit-hold place of a country. I'm not even going to go into what the US did during WWII because that goes without saying the sacrifices made for other nations.

  Is the US perfect? Nope. But before you imply that the USA as a selfish, war-monger nation think about the conflicts we have been in. Do you know what the countries in the middle-east really fear about the US going to war with Iraq? They worry that a democracy will be set up and this spirit of freedom will spread to other countries in the region.
• 

  roybatty

  russia was attacked after it became obvious that stalin had planned an attack against germany

  Um....excuse me, but didn't Germany sign a non-aggression treaty with the Soviets and then turn around and attack them? What evidence do you have that Stalin planned to attack Germany when much of this army wasn't even in a position to defend "Mother Russia."? Why do you think the Germans drove so deep into Soviet territory so quickly?
• 

  Realist

  north korea and vietnam are indeed shit hole countries...but that is in part a result of the wars. the Us tried to bomb vietnam back into the stone age!

  also do you really think the US interveened in these conflicts in order to protect the people and freedom on these countries? hardly! they did so to protect their influence in the world and don't let the communists take control over the area.
• 

  logical

  FREEDOM DOESNT EXIST, it is an illusion, are we REALLY free? Is it not more like we are trapped within our nations, trapped within a 9-5 mundane work week, we need permission to do most things, its so amazing how people say the west is free but you cant see it for the sugar coated dictatorship it is.

  DEMOCRACY DOESNT EXIST, it is an illusion, the same decisions are made no matter who you elect, and the elections are always rigged to get the desired result.

  FYI this has nothing to do with Japan, this is to do with Iraq. Have Iraq attacked us yet? Well, if Iraq are attacked FIRST, then wouldnt that make the West the like the JAPANESE? Like im sure they had their reasons for attacking america at the time.

  None of you get it, if the west follow their planned course of action then they are inviting destruction upon themselves. They are hypocrites of the highest order. Now if the west were to destroy their WMD's totally before they went into war then they would have more of a right to do what they are doing, but the fact they wont PROVES them to their enemies what their enemies make them out to be, bloodthirsty evil warmongers. The muslim and anti-western sheep see that, and the sheep believe they are in the right. Personally I dont think any nation should possess WMD's but surely they need to make an example by destroying their own before taking action on other countries who possess them or plan to possess them.
• 

  Realist

  yes they had a treaty with russia. however after the cold war was over documents were released that show that stalin (who was at least as nutty as hitler) had planned an attack (Viktor Suworow ,Ice-Breaker). actually only 2 weeks after the day germany attacked.

  germany captured about 4 million red army sodiers within the first weeks of the campain thanks to the surprise effect.