quote:
This one time, at Kegwen camp:
Is your leader killing innocents in large amounts for no good reason? I know our's isn't...
I think she means that every country has its oppressed, its ignorant, and its starving, and that we should introvert and focus on changing that rather than attack Iraq.
Not my opinion, just my interpretation.
But that also means we're not home if anyone comes knocking for help, either. Can't go both ways.
Lyinar Ka`Bael, Piney Fresh Druidess - Luclin
quote:
A sleep deprived Maradon XP stammered:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There was much rejoicing when Dr. Pvednes, PhD said this:
[QB]there is zero evidence of any link between Saddam's regime and terrorist group Al Qaeda
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've read this article before. However, the validity of it leaves much to be desired. November 11, 2001. Try a bit more in the way of recent news. British and US intelligence agents say little evidence of link Even Johnny lying son of a bitch Howard admits they're pretty tenuous links. Also, please read the entirety of my post.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.Weapons of Mass Destruction. Any country, that uses these things will be turned apon by all other countries, and will be turned into a country shaped glass plate. This is fairly straightforward. It is argued that the risk is in terrorist groups getting their hands on them that is the problem. I agree with this; I think that in the deposing of Saddam, the various biological and chemical agents that he most likely has hidden away -might not- be in the control of the Iraqi government when it is being replaced over several years. Who'd be getting their paws on them during this time?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------The most dangerous weapon Iraq has IS the Hussein regime. Give a man a nuke and you kill a few million, teach an ambitious madman who's demonstrated hostile expansionism and a complete disregard for human life how to build a nuke, and the sky's the limit.
Saddam Hussein isn't mad enough to use a nuke under normal circumstances, and especially not against a country with enough of them to wipe out a good proportion of the life on this planet. He is NOT STUPID. See what I wrote: "Any country, that uses these things will be turned apon by all other countries, and will be turned into a country shaped glass plate. This is fairly straightforward."
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. More pressing issues to attend to. North Korea rattling the saber over there needs more attention.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------It's getting it and will continue getting it during the war with Iraq.
Good.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So does the US economy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------It's been doing fine, which isn't surprising given that all through the history of American economics, tax cuts have never failed to increase government revenue.
Doing fine aside from the recession of course. Did you know the Aussie dollar is now over 60 US cents? hasn't been there for a while, and we're in the middle of a very nasty economy stabbing drought.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
health system, education system and social welfare system.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Safety takes priority over comfort. A fat lot of good a sparkling health system will do for dead people.
A good health system IS safety, not comfort, and is much more important to your people than a currently unnessicary war.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. The alliances. Mister Bush is not on speaking terms with Jacques Chirac (not that that one matters much) or Gerhard Schröder (The last time this happened on the case of Germany was with herr Hitler.). Also Russia is kinda irritated with the decision as well as France and Germany. This is tugging on things a bit with the alliances.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Nobody cares. After the war, everybody will pretend they were all for it.
Will I get rich and famous, Maradon? Do a tarot reading possibly or maybe you don't need the cards.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Finally there's the whole moral thing. All wars are a fundamentally evil act, no matter how noble the premise
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------But you'll sit back in relax in the peace brought to you by previous wars. How morally superior you are!
Australia won it's independence peacefully. Probably why we can't remember a lot of our past Prime Minister's names. And I would be happy to serve in the military in defence (not offence) of my country, if it weren't for the fact that they'd have no use whatsoever for me there. I am vastly better suited for civilian requirements. And yes, wars are wrong. They are the willful cause of many many deaths, many more injuries, and the lowering of Quality of Life for ALL INVOLVED, for nothing but a political difference. That fits all the criteria for an evil act.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
or how necissary the war is. It should always be a last resort, and the peaceful options have not yet been exhausted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------You sound like you have a long list of other ideas. Perhaps you should share them?
No long list I'm afraid. Just one. Continue with the peaceful process. This has a few benefits. It keeps the allies happy. It doesn't defy international law. It searches and has the Iraqi government destroy the weapons they may have that are found. It doesn't destroy civilian infrastructure. The one big drawback is that it leaves the big S in power. Again, please don't butcher my words.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This war is NOT good versus evil. It is Them versus Us. Saddam is most definatly evil, yes, but George W. Bush is no shining tower of rightiousness either.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------This is not George Bush VS Saddam Hussein either, it's "America and every country who values human life, peace, and safety and has the stones to stand up for themselves" VS Saddam Hussein.
So yes, it very much is good VS. evil.
Gave my little footnote it's own response.. lovely. No, it's America, Britain and Australia, the latter two with heavy objection from within their own government. It is NOT every country with a backbone. It is NOT every country that values human life, peace and safety. It is NOT good vs evil. It is three countries that are going against international law. It is Them (government of Iraq) vs Us. (Government of USA, Britain, and Australia.)
"currently unnecessary"
Please state why you believe it's better to wait til something happens rather than hope it doesn't. (edit: When there's sufficient evidence to believe something might)
This isn't an attack, but rather a plea for further insight into your point of view. [ 03-16-2003: Message edited by: Kegwen ]
quote:
Kegwen attempted to be funny by writing:
One thing bothered me about your post, Pved..."currently unnecessary"
Please state why you believe it's better to wait til something happens rather than hope it doesn't. (edit: When there's sufficient evidence to believe something might)
This isn't an attack, but rather a plea for further insight into your point of view.
I do not think it is better to wait untill something happens, I think it is better to wait untill there is evidence that something is going to happen rather than a suspicion. For example, there was evidence of a terrorist attack being planned on the US interests regarding hijacking of civilian aircraft and crashing into key structures by Al Qaeda well before 9/11/01. I say it should have been acted on then, not waiting untill afterwards. I think that US military action is unnecessary at present, because I have not seen any genuine evidence of a threat posed by Iraq against the USA. This opinion is subject to change should clear evidence of Iraq planning an attack on our interests. [ 03-16-2003: Message edited by: Dr. Pvednes, PhD ]
See how quick this:
quote:
FBI, CIA both reject Iraq-Al Qaeda link
Turned into this?
quote:
Some analysts at the Central Intelligence Agency have complained that senior administration officials have exaggerated the significance of some intelligence reports about Iraq
Right.
Even in the extraordinarily unlikely event that Iraq doesn't have a link to Al-Qaeda, it doesn't change the nature of the situation. A terrorist regime is no better than a terrorist network.
quote:
Australia won it's independence peacefully. Probably why we can't remember a lot of our past Prime Minister's names. And I would be happy to serve in the military in defence (not offence) of my country, if it weren't for the fact that they'd have no use whatsoever for me there. I am vastly better suited for civilian requirements. And yes, wars are wrong. They are the willful cause of many many deaths, many more injuries, and the lowering of Quality of Life for ALL INVOLVED, for nothing but a political difference.
Maybe you've seen me post this quote before:
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more mportant than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
--John Stuart Mill
It's nice to hear that you don't believe in anything, but the fact of the matter is that the Hussein regime is not only a demonstrable threat to everything around it, but also a brutal and oppressive dictatorship that butchers it's own people and is only interested in expansion and subjugation.
They are the definition of evil, and they're the very picture of a threat to international safety.
Assured destruction keeps nobody safe. Did fear of a massive military retaliation stay the hand of the 9/11 hijackers? How hard would it be to detonate a nuke in such a way that no conclusive evidence could be found linking it to you? The fact that the UN is even now standing around with thier respective thumbs up thier asses illustrates that anything can be done with impunity, if it's done by proxy.
quote:
Doing fine aside from the recession of course. Did you know the Aussie dollar is now over 60 US cents? hasn't been there for a while, and we're in the middle of a very nasty economy stabbing drought.
Save water, shower with a friend!
I love austrailian ads.
sigpic courtesy of This Guy, original modified by me
quote:
We were all impressed when Kinanik wrote:
Save water, shower with a friend!
Okay!
quote:
Australia won it's independence peacefully. Probably why we can't remember a lot of our past Prime Minister's names. And I would be happy to serve in the military in defence (not offence) of my country, if it weren't for the fact that they'd have no use whatsoever for me there. I am vastly better suited for civilian requirements. And yes, wars are wrong. They are the willful cause of many many deaths, many more injuries, and the lowering of Quality of Life for ALL INVOLVED, for nothing but a political difference. That fits all the criteria for an evil act.
I'm very happy you were able to get your independence peacefully, Pved. That wasn't an option for America. England wasn't willing to let her colonies go. We had to fight for what we got, because we wanted the freedom to live as we chose, not under the thumb of a distant monarchy.
Many people died, yes, because they willfully put themselves in danger for freedom. Many people were injured, and much property was destroyed. However, it is incorrect to say our war for independence left us at a lower quality of life. We rebuilt, our economy recovered, and we were free, which was the point. We improved our way of life by fighting that war.
So I disagree. War is not always an evil act. Many times it is necessary.
Lyinar Ka`Bael, Piney Fresh Druidess - Luclin
quote:
Lyinar Ka`Bael had this to say about pies:
So I disagree. War is not always an evil act. Many times it is necessary.
I have to agree with Lyinar here. War is allways an awful act, but not allways evil.
quote:
Lyinar Ka`Bael had this to say about pies:
My point wasn't that war without UN approval wouldn't be disrespecting the UN. It was that disrespecting the UN is a reason I've heard batted around to be against the war, and I find it pretty stupid to hide behind something so flimsy. Because the one they're saying to give more chances to is openly flouting the UN's dictates and demands.If people want to oppose war, that's fine. If they think it's not necessary, or they think Saddam could be reasoned with or whatever, no problem with that. But a really idiotic reason like it's disrespecting the UN is just laughable when they're supporting someone doing the same thing.
Well I agree with you in part, the UN in its current form isn't capable of executing the tasks it was created to do, they're doomed if they die, doomed if they don't, I don't believe that weakeing the only forum we have for solving global problems is the way to go.
A rogue dictator noone in the world really likes defying the will of the UN in not destroying a bunch of missiles is much less damaging for the organisation itself than a superpower launching an offensive war against the will of the UN. Look at it this way, what would hurt the UN more, Russia leaving it, or the Kingom of Butan leaving?
