What do you think of Bush administration¡¯s rule to Iraq Stop the war , all the people loved peace cry! For it will bring distress to people over the world.
do all the peace loving people cry for the civilians he is killing and the distress they are going through? do all the peace loving people have another solution to stop saddam and his desire to acquire weapons of mass destruction? do all the peace loving people realize that saddam is only destroying a few weapons now because we have 300,000 troops about to remove him? do all the peace loving people realize that if those 300,000 troops lwere not there then saddam would continue to ignore the UN? do all of the peace loving people think about the next generation that will be saved if saddam is removed and democracy is installed?
I just want to say we can not judge one nation by the weapons they have! if this works. what about your country?
Civilians get killed all the time in the Middle East. By both sides. The best solution is for US to get out of the region entirely. It's not our responsiblity to police the world; if the people want to rise up against Saddam, all it takes is one well-trained Kurdish sniper's bullet. Ha. Funny. Especially since Saddam has the "desire" to acquire WMD, while North Korea has nukes for a FACT and is all but waving them in our face. Also, I didn't see a huge cry for war when Pakistan and India started building nuclear arsenals. These nations are all inches away from global first-strike capability; Saddam has a couple of decrepit SCUDs that could maybe reach Israel if they were lucky, and few cans of poison. Good for him. Our boys should be back home, anyway. I repeat: Saddam is not our problem. He has no nukes, and the danger posed by chemical and biological weapons are greatly exaggerated. At least Iraq is *attempting* to comply with the UN. Bush has said point-blank he intends to have his war no matter what the Security Council says. So who's the mad warmongerer ignoring international law again? Oh, that's right, since we're powerful, we're above the law. My bad. Just like all those people in South Vietnam were saved when we decided to go to war there, eh? An installed democracy is a contradiction in terms. It's got to be "of the people, by the people, and for the people", not "of the disgraced generals, by the hegemonic superpower, for the special-interest oil companies to get cheap crude." They've gotta do it themselves.
Well , i dunt think this big headed bush will learn, let him go to war in iraq, hope the iraqis fight strong, let him see the diaster after the war, let him see the anti-americanism growing bigger than ever, let him see how much he is hatred in this world properly as much or more people hate him aftre the war than people hate saddam! this is a no victory for american anyway excpet maybe for a few oil company! more troops will stay in the middle east much longer , means more hatre , a new generation of terrorism. pretty soon if bush keep doing things only his way i can see 1 day the ruusian , germany, france and china n other country team up to defend a country from american invasion! american like bush will not learn until they see the failure!
Yes, it is ALL ABOUT BUSH. Bush doesn't have any advisors or anything who are allowed to disagree with him. Bush haters will always b**** about anything Bush does. If he were anti-war, then Bush haters would be talking about how Iraq must be prevented from becoming a greater power.
So the best idea you have is to just leave completely? You are too simplistic here. Lets say we did leave completely and stop patrolling Iraq. What exactly do you think Saddam would do? Do you think he would suddenly become peaceful and not try to take over Kuwait again? Do you think he would become more responsive to UN resolutions if we just left? Would it have been a good idea to just not get involved when Iraq first invaded Kuwait? Also since you want us to just leave the region and not police the world any should we pull out of the UN as well? Well we are trying to deal with North Korea and we tried to deal with them back in 1994. North Korea is completely different from Iraq. We have tried to use diplomacy with Iraq...it has completely failed. We are still trying to use diplomacy with North Korea it is currently failing. Also, I don't know where you were but there was a huge cry when Pakistan and India started building nukes and started trying to nuke each other. I have no clue where you get your information, but even the nations opposed to war don't disagree on the amount of chemical and biological weapons that Saddam has. This guy has tons and tons of the stuff. Saddam became our problem after he invaded Kuwait and even more so after 9/11. Militaristic dictators who have chemical and biological weapons and that fund terriorism, like Saddam are a threat to national security since they only try to gain power through war and not other means, such as economic ones. Who are you Tariq Aziz(sp?)? You don't really get it do you? Iraq is not attempted to comply with the UN. They are only doing anything because we are over in their backyard attempting to enforce what the UN has told him to do. Bush has said that this war would not happen if Saddam came forth and followed the UN resolution, but he has not. What about that is so hard to understand? He was supposed to state exactly what he has and then give it to the UN so they can start destroying his chemical and biological weapons. There were not supposed to be inspections to go around looking for the chem and bio weapons. Does that make any sense to you? Vietnam is a completely different situation. We got involved there for all the wrong reasons and we have no clue what the hell we were doing. Saddam's regime is not a popular regime. The people of Iraq do not want Saddam in power. Installing democracy was not the best phrase. I should have said getting rid of Saddam so the people of Iraq can create democracy.
chinawang, fatfatcow, you should realize that at least 1/3 of Americans are against this war. Many Americans also see the hypocrisy of trying to have more and more weapons of mass destruction for us and our friends, but insisting on an absolute right to preemptorily attack anyone who we don't like who tries to acqurie these weapons. Our policy and our invasion might stop Sadam and Iraq, but it has caused both N. Korea and Iran to speed up their weapons systems development in order to keep the US from attacking, with or without the "Coalition of the Coerced". Thanks to Bush and his supporters it looks like we will soon have two more countires with nuclear weapons. CNN: Nuclear N. Korea in months Iran
Both sides of the war equation want to make like a rock and make it seem their way to go is the best way to go. In reality, I'm not convinced by either side. How can one be? We are literally entering into something now which we haven't really seen or experienced before. The potential future is clouded with a dictator who willingly attacks his neighbors, has shown a propensity to use WoMD against his neighbors and his own people, has shown willful defiance of the UN and UN resolutions, and has shown a propensity to proliferate all WoMD programs. So, when someone tells me we should just mind our own business, then I don't feel we can really do that. We are opening ourselves up to Saddam's version of the future of not only the ME but possibly our own future by minding our own business. Who is going to guarantee our security and future? Is Saddam remaining in power really going to help the Israelis and Palestinians achieve peace? On the other hand, I can see the argument against defeating and occupying Iraq. Defeating may incur US casualties and kill innocent Iraqis. That is no fun for either side. War sucks. However, the real question is the cost and how we are going to occupy Iraq while trying to implement a democracy. That has worked oh so well in Afghanistan with our half-hearted efforts there. Bush has stated we our not nation builders but that is in fact what we are doing with one and a second country now. The costs of this endeavor to the US is outrageously high and we have no idea how long such an occupation will last or how it will go. So, it really boils down to damned if we do and damned if we don't. We have to take the lesser of two evils and I'll be damned if I know what that is. I'm leaning toward war because this is Saddam. He has done everything in his power to ridicule the UN by playing hide and seek, presenting flaky evidence only when he needs to, and playing countries against each other. He calls us arrogant? He is as arrogant as they come. The worst part is how the Iraqis are caught in the middle of all this. They are at the mercy of this person's rule. We know all about his murderous ways when it comes to silencing uprisings and his own people. As much as I don't want war, I don't see how you can leave this tyrant in power. You leave this tyrant in power and you may just be deciding the future of the ME and possibly the entire world. If he hasn't shown he is disarming and giving up WoMD, then you can damn sure bet he still has goals to acquire nukes. Then what? Blackmail? Drop one on Israel in the name of Allah? What for crying out f*ckin loud? Tell me you know the future. B*llsh*t!
Everybody needs parents or they get out of control. It is as simple as that when you boil it down. The Middle east needs us to police or they will destroy themselves. They may hates us now, but they will thanks us later. Just like a child thanks their parents.
u just show that u hate america n u want china to be the greatest, i think u dont care about america. but if u hate america so much why do you post on an AMERICAN website?
. Funny stuff!!! Also - to chinawang - We aren't judging Iraq based on the weapons they have. 14 UN resolutions have done that already, and it is Iraq's responsibilty to disarm. If not, we'll do the job.
What do YOU think of China giving materials to help North Korea build nuclear bombs. All the people of South Korea who love peace DIE if they bomb them. That would bring a little more "distress" don't ya think? China ships North Korea ingredient for nuclear arms By Bill Gertz THE WASHINGTON TIMES €€€€€North Korea has purchased a large shipment of chemicals from China that can be used to make nuclear-weapons fuel, U.S. intelligence officials say. rest of the story here...
