US Knew Iraq was Using Chemical Weapons Against Iran

Not a bad thing in my book. Respect for military, that is...

I'm Army. (that 'Ho-Ah' thing doesn't actually mean anything, no matter what anyone tells you - definitely not 'heard, understood, will comply'... If anything, it means 'yes' or 'OK, I'll do it'...)

In the Army one just says "Ho-Ah" all the time, and good things happen... Never volunteer for duty, though - you'll end up cleaning latrines...

 

My Dad was in the Air Force. His buddy and him did 2 weeks of KP. When they got back from that their CO said he needed 2 volunteers. My Dad and his buddy looked at each other like anything was better than KP. They both raised their hands. They did 2 more weeks of KP. True story.

 

Like I said, never volunteer. If they need you then they'll select you. Otherwise, don't raise your friggen hand... It all works out, often with alot of new guys cleaning something while the experienced guys get to do more productive tasks.

(as of this month all KP has been turned over to civilian contractors. Armywide. No sh*t - no more Kitchen Patrol for the guys in green. Millions heave a silent *sigh*... The phrase "never again" actually means something to me now )

 

You do realize that those are UN sanctions, right Glynch? How is that relevant to US foreign policy unilateralism or immorality? In fact, don't you continuously argue FOR multilateralism, specifically the UN?

Oops.

 

First of all Treeman, I wish you well in your service, and I hope to see you back in the U.S. safe and sound. While we disagree on these issues, you do always have information and rationale for what you do believe in.

The U.N., and more specifically our other allies throughout the world are the world community I'm referring to. If there is such a compelling reason for the invasion it should be shared with them, and they should be brought on board.

I'm not saying I want to die. I'm saying that striking first, not out of self defense, and not out of aiding others is wrong, and immoral. I don't believe any Americans would die if we didn't invade Iraq at the present time. However rather than attack someone who hasn't attacked anyone else, I would rather not do that.

I've seen the photos. The chemical plants may indeed be making weapons. Simply making weapons is not an excuse for an invasion. If that was the case we would have to invade almost every nation on the planet. I don't think those weapons are enough of a threat to the U.S. to warrant an unprovoked attack.

The U.S. is involved, but most of the troops in the ground in Bosnia are European troops. But I agree the U.S. should be leading the way the U.N. I think a better question would be to show when the U.S. has acted outside the U.N. - were those endeavors worthwhile? I would say definitely not. Mining the harbors in Nicaragua, and funding supporters of the former dictator and tyrant in that country was not worthwhile.

Invading Panama supposedly because of drug traffic etc. through the canal, then installing people who have links to laundering drug money, and watching drug traffic increase through the canal after replacing Noriega is definitely not worthwhile.

In attacking Iraq, I don't think we are defending against anything. We are attacking a country.

It might be true that no one wants to go into combat. But some policy makers obviously don't mind sending others into combat.

My best friend was in the WTC in '93. I definitely remember it. There may have been cooperation from some Iraqi intelligence officials, but it wasn't lead by them. Fortunately justice work in bringing down the 'blind cleric' and his henchmen for that attack.