Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
If that is the case, then I am disgusted beyond words.
Iraqi crisis explained...
- Thread starter Jake the Dog
- Start date
jtr1962
Storage? I am Storage!
I was disgusted beyond words when this whole thing started, and I was a staunch supporter of the attacks on Afghanistan. The war with Iraq is something the US cannot afford now, either financially or politically. It simply wasn't as pressing a national security concern as it was made out to be.
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
I don't understand the bold word in that sentence. There is no if. Some of your leaders (D. Rumsfell at least) have even brag about lying to the international community months ago in interviews that were, of course, boycotted by the U.S. medias due to the onmipresent pressures from the White House.Mercutio said:
The only journalists still using "if" are those from U.S. and perhaps Britain. The rest of the world already had the confirmation months ago. There's even a TV actuality show about Bush's administration lies this week (Thursday, 19h00) on the national channel here.
Mercutio
Fatwah on Western Digital
I should amend my comment: I am disgusted on a whole new level.
The US had no right to invade Iraq. We were the aggressor and the conqueror. But, we rationalized that Saddam was lying about his weapons and he was a cretin to his people.
Except, he (apparently) wasn't lying.
So he was a cretin.
15 years ago, we didn't care that he was a cretin. We didn't care that Saddam or bin Laden or Pinochet or Noriega or Marcos or the Contras were cretins. Cretinism has not ever been a valid reason for the US to invade another country. In fact, we have a history of getting along just fine with cretins.
In the US, when cops catch a murdering drug dealer scumbag, he goes to trial, and is found innocent, he is allowed to go free, his property returned etc. That guy can go right on being a murdering scumbag.
And, for me, that's fine. We tried to apply justice. It didn't hold up to the standards of our laws. The bad guy got away, but if he does anything else, there's every chance he'll be arrested and subjected to the same thing.
Now apply that to Iraq.
That certainly is ugly, isn't it?
We've spent umpteen billion dollars to get a guy who to this point (and according to Hans Blix, in actuality) is innocent of the things that we might actually judge him for.
The US has no right to say "We don't like the way you treat your citizens". That's a matter for the UN - the legal body representing, in essence, all nations - and international law.
So we broke international law in invading. The reason we gave for invading was unjust and untrue, and to my way of thinking, we have done a real wrong and set a terrible precedent for the future.
Hence an even greater level of disgust.
The US had no right to invade Iraq. We were the aggressor and the conqueror. But, we rationalized that Saddam was lying about his weapons and he was a cretin to his people.
Except, he (apparently) wasn't lying.
So he was a cretin.
15 years ago, we didn't care that he was a cretin. We didn't care that Saddam or bin Laden or Pinochet or Noriega or Marcos or the Contras were cretins. Cretinism has not ever been a valid reason for the US to invade another country. In fact, we have a history of getting along just fine with cretins.
In the US, when cops catch a murdering drug dealer scumbag, he goes to trial, and is found innocent, he is allowed to go free, his property returned etc. That guy can go right on being a murdering scumbag.
And, for me, that's fine. We tried to apply justice. It didn't hold up to the standards of our laws. The bad guy got away, but if he does anything else, there's every chance he'll be arrested and subjected to the same thing.
Now apply that to Iraq.
That certainly is ugly, isn't it?
We've spent umpteen billion dollars to get a guy who to this point (and according to Hans Blix, in actuality) is innocent of the things that we might actually judge him for.
The US has no right to say "We don't like the way you treat your citizens". That's a matter for the UN - the legal body representing, in essence, all nations - and international law.
So we broke international law in invading. The reason we gave for invading was unjust and untrue, and to my way of thinking, we have done a real wrong and set a terrible precedent for the future.
Hence an even greater level of disgust.
CougTek
Hairy Aussie
In fact, US did to Iraq what Iraq did to Koweit in August 1990. Kinda Lame, isn't it?
So, hum..who volunteers to invade US to prevent them to invade other countries? If we can find five or six persons, maybe we can form a coalition to divide the expenses of the war and call us "The Allies"? Or maybe "The Coalition"? My personal sophisticated weapons are an Easton bat, an aluminum shovel and a hand axe. Not quite mass destruction devices (you would surprised), but hey, that's a start.
So, hum..who volunteers to invade US to prevent them to invade other countries? If we can find five or six persons, maybe we can form a coalition to divide the expenses of the war and call us "The Allies"? Or maybe "The Coalition"? My personal sophisticated weapons are an Easton bat, an aluminum shovel and a hand axe. Not quite mass destruction devices (you would surprised), but hey, that's a start.
Jake the Dog
Storage is cool
invade the U.S.? where the oil that that?