Posted by Hamster69 at ppp-148-133.liteship.com on March 17, 2003 at 23:14:38:
In Reply to: Times change posted by Barry, Suave MF on March 17, 2003 at 20:57:52:
: How does that not make sense? Take a few basic economic courses in college & see what I mean. The cost of any war would far outweigh the economic benefit of controlling the oil over there.
Over the long run? This war, due to how depleted Iraq is, is going to be quick and that oil is going to last long. This war is an investment.
: Yeah, well if people like Saddam develop & use weapons of mass destruction on us, THERE WILL BE NO PEOPLE LEFT TO STARVE OR WORRY ABOUT HAVING NO HEALTH CARE.
We've been chasing Saddam around so much he can't develop ANYTHING. We don't need to go to war to stop him, we've been stopping him. How can he make more if we're chasing him around the country, and making him destroy shit as he goes? If he's got weapons of mass destruction, where the Hell are they anyway? If he's so good at hiding them, how do we know he has them? And if we know he has them, how come we don't show the UN exactly where they are, since we're so sure? I guarantee that if the US would just share all this intelligence they have about Iraq's weapons with the rest of the UN, Saddam would've been out of Iraq a while ago and all this other crap wouldn't be an issue...
: I just don't understand people like you. An act of war was committed on American soil on 9/11/2001, our leader goes after the people responsible & their ilk, and HE'S a bad guy?? Where do you people get your logic?? Bizarro World?
An act of war committed on US soil by al Queda, not Iraq. An act of war committed by a terrorist group the USA not only financed for a number of years, but actually provided military training to. Then when the Taliban took control of Afghanistan thanks to all the US support, the Taliban threw out the US oil companies. The US immediately withdraws support, calls the Taliban a terrorist group and, lo and behold years later, the Taliban and al Queda live up to it.
: Uh...no we didn't. He murdered his way to the top, and he's been doing so ever since. We merely helped them out in the Iran-Iraq war because Iran was our enemy at the time. I'll give you that we maybe ignored his atrocities then, but we had a different agend back then - to 'bitch slap' Iran. Which we did for almost 2 decades until now their nuclear plants being activated. They'll get theirs soon.
Do you see the pattern here? The US backs groups to serve their agenda and then later on, when loyaties change, the USA gets it in the ass, hard. But the whole time we're supposed to sanction every US action because it would unpatriotic not to? We're supposed to blindly follow because we're unamerican if we don't? Is this the McCarthy era again? Should we start the witch-hunts?
As for Iran getting theirs, what's going to be the excuse for going after them? What UN resolution are they in breach of? We can't just go destroying countries because we don't like them. Eventually, we'll get ours...
: If you're so up for keeping Saddam there 'cause he's such a swell guy, why don't you go live there? Or at least take a holiday there?
Saddam Hussein should not be the leader of Iraq, it's that simple. I don't want to see him there, he's not a good guy, but at the same time we've rendered him completely ineffective for years without war, so why the sudden change? Because of 9/11? Let me tell you, no hidden weapon of mass destruction was used that day, but two planes that were already in the country. You think getting rid of Saddam will make the US safe from another terrorist attack?
But so what, we're going to war, that simple. But to say that oil has nothing to do with it, that Bush's personal feelings have nothing to do with it, and that it's all about mythical weapons of mass destruction is just as ignorant as you're claiming others are behaving.
And remember, of all the nations to have weapons of mass destruction, the USA is the only one to ever use one...
Post a Followup