KRamsauer
TreoCentral Staff

Registered: Apr 2002
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 734 |
Re: a European (and personal) view
quote: Originally posted by treopolis
It's not about the oil, huh? Well, maybe it's all about reelection. Maybe it's all about the son finishing his dad's unfinished buisness. It's about a 'new regime' (quote G.W.Bush) and not about letting the people of Iraq decide (e.g. democracy)
I don't think anyone here has really said that oil doesn't play a part in it. That's a very mypoic view. I can tell you certainly it isn't about some family feud with the Bush clan. Bush isn't the brightest bulb in the chandelier (sp?) but he isn't some bloodthirsty freak out to avenge the political death of his father.
quote: Look at Afgahnistan. They had to go there, I agree. But isn't it surprising that the current president Karzai has tight contact to the current US legislation (Karzai has worked with some of them in earlier projects). You can't tell me that the US didn't have their hands in that.
No one claims the US had no hand in the new Afgahn regime. It's fairly clear we had a lot to do with their present situation. I think it's funny when people take things that are perfectly obvious and pretend they are fighting some incorrect perception.
quote: As far as terrorism goes: Israel started attacking Palestinians a couple of days after 9/11 harder than before because of 'terrorism'. So did the russians in "Tschetschenien". All acts of war seem to be justified with terrorism nowadays.
That's because someone had the guts to stand up and say the murder of innocent civilians is a horrible horrible crime and needs to be stopped. As in any reasoning, it may be innaccurately applied, but there was a time when a king throwing innocents in jail for life was not seen as a reason to launch a war. These days, we try to stop genocide and oppression. Terrorism is one more offense to add to the list.
quote: Did you know that they threatend to attack the Netherlands (Den Haag, Netherlands) if they tried to prosecute amarican citizens. They wanted to invade an allied country and get their people out if we (the rest of the world) tried something stupid. Excuse me, but that is fu**ed up! How come the whole world has to obey laws except the US?
I personally think the international criminal court is a good idea, but I understand the concern. Now about invading the Haag, you have to be kidding. There is no way that would ever happen, and I'd be willing to go out on a limb that your source for that information is wrong.
quote: It's about securing the oil flow. It's about supporting the arms and energy industry where almost all of the current legislation came from. It's about
being in a better situation for the reelection in 2004. I stronly believe that if GWBush would have been in his second term already there would be no talks about attacking anyone whatsoever. He doens't want to be a one termer like his dad.
Oil does play a part in it. It's a vital part of our economy and I don't think we should be ashamed of trying to protect our sources. Think of the effect of having no oil on a modern society. It isn't much better than a bunch of nuclear bombs in terms of infrastructure desctruction. The American arms industry is already supplying more than half of the worlds arms. A war isn't needed to support them. I'm sure there are some political considerations, but it's not as cut and dry as you think. If anything, wouldn't he learn that his father's triumph doesn't necessarily translate into success at the polls? Remember, Bush 1 had huge approval ratings after the war, and lost the election a year and half later. If anyone knows a victory would leave him vulnerable, it would be Bush 2. Indeed, Bush 1 has been rumoured to be urging caution to his son.
quote: And wasn't even Bin Laden on the payroll of the CIA at one point in history? Didn't he learn what he does now from the best: the US military? He's just a pissed employee getting back at the company that laid him off.
So you don't do anything? That's a stupid view, if you ask me. That's like saying because as a kid you ate all you wanted, whenever you wanted, that you cannot eat less right now. To say you cannot change your reasons or opinion is to commit yourself to a lifetime of bad choices and horrible consequences. Moreover, no one is perfect. After using reason you do things you think are best for you right now. Sometimes that hurts you. Just because you tried something else (helping Iraq against Iran, for instance) you can't go back and try to fix it? That view won't get you far, my friend.
quote: Right now the European governments and the union are mostly against supporting a war and that's good. I don't see the need for a war against Iraq.
AH!!!! People, people people, the bombs are not dropping. What do you think the US is doing at this very minute. We are making the case for an Iraqi war. We are doing exactly what you say needs to be done. You can disagree with the reasoning, but until we actually do something, please resist saying how we never listened to anyone in this case.
quote: Let me close by saying that I dearly hope a war againt Iraq will not start. In my opinion the reason for such actions are too shallow. And comparing Hussein with Hitler is nothing but a joke. Whoever does that should get them history books back oud and take a closer look!
My reasoning on Hitler is not to compare their acts or potential for evil, but merely as a justification for preemptive strikes instead of delayed containment.
A question: if Hussein had nuclear weapons, or chemical-tipped scuds, would you favor a strike? Or would you prefer to see the blood in the streets of Tel Aviv / New York first? Are you categorically rulling out a removal of Sadam or are you just saying you haven't seen enough evidence yet?
quote: just my two euro cents on a very important and yet difficult issue
Your euro cents are almost worth as much as two American cents, though a lot more than they were a few months ago. :-)
|