And, as Powell now goes from nation to nation with hat in hand asking for financial and military assistance in Iraq before the federal election campaign begins, he's being told we must relinquish military and civil control before any consideration of UN participation in Iraq. Something about Iraqis hating us and little of the rest of the world trusting us. The pathetic coalition grows as fast as we can process direct aid and trade loan gurantees to such UN heavyweights as Bulgaria and Spain.

For those of you professing to 'protect' another country's natural resources due to our dependency on oil by invading them, you might consider re-reading world history of the 1937-1942 era. Hitler didn't invade and occupy much of Europe just to spead **** Socialism, he was after their goodies and said it was done to provide 'security from potential aggression'. That should bring the flames and rationalizations of our actions.

 

And I suppose eradication of jewish people had nothing to with it as well.

 

The Jews were rationalized within his 'perfect solution' with the Aryan race being superior and involved confiscation of personal wealth for personal gain among much of the senior cabinet. The invasions were prompted by the requirement for raw materials to fuel his industrial engine in an economy printing its own money with no reserves and no ability to secure outside financing.

 

My father told me that ignorance is bliss. However, ignorance is not an excuse for inaction. No WMD's. Rubbish. 3500 individuals parished in a fleeting moment. How many people have to die before we consider it "Mass Destruction?" I challenge any one to disagree; If someone breaks into your home and kills half of your family, you will take steps to protect the other half. Period! If not, this this brings a whole other meaning to "turn the other cheek."

In the late 1990's the UN was whining about Iraq having WMD's. That is why they sent in the inspectors. Now you are trying to tell me all these weapons just vanished, dematerialized, got up and walked away.

Next, I will be told that Iraq had no ties to terrorism. I wonder why we are running into the same Al Qaida (those great ambassodors of peace) in Iraq.

Lastly, why is'nt anyone whining about the terrorist and holding them responsible for attacks? Why is there no rally's protesting the people who are trying to kill Americans. Oh! that's right, they are too busy saying we have no business getting involved in this fight. We should stay home. And put more money into failing social programs. 3500 American deaths is not that much, its acceptable. It may be acceptable to some, but not to me.

 

I guess there's no arguing that.

Waxy

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by dakejh
In the late 1990's the UN was whining about Iraq having WMD's. That is why they sent in the inspectors. Now you are trying to tell me all these weapons just vanished, dematerialized, got up and walked away.

Was it the UN or the United States that insisted they had the weapons? I thought it was the United States and the reason for using UN inspectors was for their nuetrallity.

 

"I have a feeling that if we never kicked Huesien out and he eventually did manage to trasfer WMD to terrorsts, those so opposed to this war would be the first to accuse the goverment of not doing it's duty to protect us."

Well said. It doesn't matter how it is said or done. The people who just don't believe in war will find an argument pointing in the direction of their own point of view, no matter which way something goes.

The WMD argument is like the "you stole the election" argument. If it were the other way around and Gore would have been made President, the Dems would be saying just the opposite of what they are saying at this moment. Great spin doctors.

Myself, I hate the prospect of Iraq turning into another Vietnam with troops there for such a long time, but now that we are there, we should do everything we can. The civillians and politicians are the reason we "lost" the war in Vietnam and they will be the reason IF we lose ground in Iraq. I'm surprised that Hanoi Jane isn't over there meeting personally with Saddam or his cronies, so she can come back and put on demonstrations like she did with 'Nam. Oh..I stand corrected.... one or two movie stars have already been there sucking up and telling the Iraqis what bad people we are.

I personally think that WMDs were sent out of country long before we ever got there. They are probably hidden in a neighboring country or France. If we leave Iraq, the WMDs will then be returned to home. Just MHO.

 

I doubt we ever will(or should) pull our troops out of Iraq. When did WW2 end? Like 1945, and to this very day we still have troops in Germany and Japan. Contrary to popular belief, this may be the cheapest war/rebuilding in our history. Although it reachus high up in the billions of dollars, it still only amounts to .5% of our nations economy. Vietnam was 10%. Personally, Im still waiting for my 25cents a gallon super premium gasoline spoils of war.

 

I still think the most logical place to hide embarrassing weaponry would be in the catacombs under mosques.

Since no westerner would ever be allowed in there without an enourmous hoopla over invading/degrading/insulting an entire religion - figure the odds they would ever be found!

From that perspective, chances are they are still in the country.

 

If our pre war intelligence was so sure the weapons existed, sure enough to put thousands of troops in a foreign country, I would have thought they would have a better idea where they were.

 

I think you all are forgetting about IRAQ's ability to hide things. They hid so much from the inspectors for so many years, what is the big deal. Maybe all you nay-sayers need to go live under Sadaam rule for 40+ years and then see what your view on the situation in Iraq is. Fact is the CIGTIZENS welcome us, they are upset that a FULL government hasn't been setup yet, I would be too. However that will come in time. They still haven't grasped the concept of electing people of THIER choice. Before it was elect who Sadam said or watch your family die.

 

In the two years since the attack on the world trade center how many major terrorist attacks has al-qaeda been able to pull off on american soil?

Think about that for a minute. Do you think they just forgot about us? Do you think they've forgiven us and just want to get along? Me neither.

Would you rather the president follow a system similar to our courts in which evidence proving beyond a reasonable doubt be provided before action is taken? Where the guilty are often let off the hook to help ensure that the innocent are not punished. Or would you rather our president err on the side of protecting the AMERICAN people? Especially when it's a regime that is corrupt and evil to begin with. Who cares if we threw an evil man out of power and freed his people from torture and tyranny. I don't.

I for one think the president is doing a fine job keeping us safe. Intelligence is not a perfect science. The president has to act with the best available information in what he believes to be in the country's best interest. If the French or any anti Bush armchair quarterbacks don't like it, they can do their best to elect someone else. You can bet your bottom dollar that in '04 this will be brought to the American people's attention.

 

I dont remember Iraq having the slightest remote connectoin to the Bin-Laden group. You too have fallen for their ploy. (i.e.- middle east=enemy, terrorist) I truly feel sorry for you people. Like you said, ignorance is bliss.

 

Why would Bin Laden or any other anti-US group bother to waste resources on us when we're shooting off our own foot and draining our own treasury in Iraq? We're doing a better job of hurting ourselves than anyone else could.

As Germany discovered during its occupation of countries during WWII, redefined by the US in Viet Nam and Russia in Afghanistan, there is no conventional military solution to armed resistance from the national occupants in any country other than complete extermination. What would US citizens do if the roles were reversed?

What a lot of posters seem to be missing while focusing on a non-existant media promoted connection between 9/11 and Iraq is that this is a religious conflict on a world-wide basis. Iraq was for oil and a personal grudge. The real war is a hatred of US and other countries for exploitation, imagined or real, of Muslim populations. Until the major thorns in the Muslim side, Palistine, the strip between India and Pakistan and parts of the Philipines and Indonesia are at least partially resolved, Muslim extremists are going to react in a historical manner, with death to those they consider to be their enemies being the primary objective.

 

Personally, if we went over there for oil...GO BUSH!! if we went over there because he was bored GO BUSH!!! if we went over there to depose an evil tyrant who kills his own citizens mercilessly and supports terrorism, and whose son who is taking the throne is even more evil...GO BUSH!!! GO BUSH!!! I don't care, it needed to be done for half-a-dozen reasons Granted, if the makor intention of it WAS NOT WMD, I jsut wish he woulda aid the truth. They are also to be used as an example, and a show of force, to many differant countries and orginazations.

It is a job that needed to be done, and I am glad that Bush had the *****.