Registered: Jul 2000
Incidentally, I do not have the materials to make napalm in my garage...
quote:Ahh...so we don't want to speak plainly. We only want to proselytize. *shrug* OK.
Originally posted by ToolkiT
without going into all the sense and nonsense that has been said in this thread I'll post my personal views:
-Saddam is a bad man who should be handled with.
How is this possible in a world of grays? Perhaps he wasn't bad, but only mischaracterized. Maybe the media's been lying all along.
-So should a lot of other dictators
What's a dictator in this context?
-this should be done by an organization like the UN who has the support of the majority of countries
If the UN can't get the support with someone like Saddam, what makes you think that they'll be able to do anything about anything? Why would a new organization do any better?
-UN should be reformed to a more usefull organisation
Useful to whom? Reformed how?
-US should comply to the ICC in the hague
We'll get to that right after that effective reincarnation of the UN is done.
-Bush has a hidden agenda
-Bush manipulates the public opinion
And people think he's stupid...he's obviously a mastermind.
-WMD probably will never be found in Iraq
If they don't find a bomb, but find all the materials and instructions to make one, is that OK? If they don't find any barrels of chemicals, but find mobile labs and paperwork showing the know-how to cook up VX, sarin, etc. in short order, is that OK? All that gray seems to be making things hazy over here. To me, it's pretty simple. If I've got the materials to make napalm (or a reasonable facsimile thereof) in my garage, that doesn't necessarily mean I'm a threat to anyone. If I've got the knowledge on how to make that napalm (or reasonable facsimile) from the materials, that doesn't necessarily mean I'm a threat to anyone. But let's say that you're my neighbor, and you see me lighting a cat afire with gasoline. How safe do you feel?
-People who complained about the slowness of the weapon inspectors should by now tone down, the US has had full control of Iraq for how long? what did they find? nothing substancial.
Seems to me that the US still doesn't have full control of Iraq. Don't start the timers yet.
-Iraq is no direct thread to the US
No, and I'm no direct threat to you because of that cat, but the guy that lives on the other side of you really doesn't like you, and he's really interested in the stuff that's in my garage. I don't particularly like him much, but my son knows a lot too, and he and I aren't getting along too well right now. He thinks I'm too dictatorial, and we don't always agree on religion.
-There is no black and white, but many tones of gray, if you dont think so you are even more naive then I, where 2 people fight, 2 people are wrong... it is all about perception...
Then how can you say Saddam is a bad man? Maybe your perception has been wrongly influenced.
there are good and evil deeds, but nobody is 100% good or 100% evil...
This came out of left field.
-US is not the police of the world, even though the have the biggest army...
Actually, I'm 99.99999% sure that China's army is substantially bigger, but number of troops don't always mean much.
-US needs to open its eyes and start to wonder why so many people hate them (hint: jealousy is not the correct answer)
How would you know? I'm sure it's one of many answers.
-Attacking iraq has not made the US a safer place
The jury's still out on this one. Much like all the prep that went into Y2K, you can view it multiple ways.
-unilateral attacks are bad, they are a sign of aggression regardless of the motivation behind it.
That's a pretty black and white statement. What happened to the world of a thousand grays?