This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
QuoteA final decision on whether to take action or not has not been finished, but Bush has made it clear that UN or no UN, the US will attack Iraq.Aye, Panda's prediction happened.
QuoteBut the bottom line is that diplomacy failed. The U.N. failed.And yet the US is returning (nay, sucking up) to the same organisation that has "failed".
QuoteOr you think Bush said to the people in Iraq "just don't blow up your oil resources" because he is thinking about the ambiental consequences it would have?Funny how the coalition destroyed most of the hospitals and schools in Iraq, but left the oilfields.
QuotePro War argument #1:I especially liked how post-war the Iraqi people started looting the country.
We are liberating Iraqis from an evil power. They will be happy once he's gone and they will have democracy. Assuming the majority of Iraqis wish for democracy- that sounds fine and dandy.
QuoteWhy has the prime minister of our country (being the UK) risked his job, his cabinet members, diplomatic relations with the rest of Europe, and general political disaster to go above the UN's head and go to war with Iraq, knowing full well all the consiquences good and bad of such a major decision?One defense expert is dead, a spin doctor resigns, an inqury is launched and Blair is up shit creek!
QuoteWe had/have evidence people. For the love of God open your eyes (and your minds).And now the CIA has spoken up and disproven most of the "evidence", especially the African urianium link that Bush mentioned very promiently in his State of the Union address.
QuoteThe UN failed. Actually, I don't really blame the UN. I blame France. I'm disgusted by France's unwillingness to help the US. The 56,681 Americans who died liberating France in World Wars I and II are rolling over in their graves.
QuoteFirst of all they say 'Saddam might have weapons of mass destruction and must be disarmed' - but North Korea does have nuclear missiles, so why aren't we attacking them?Funny, they've still got nukes and no one's attacked them yet.
QuoteThere's no global counterpoint to the US. imperialistic aggresiveness, since the UN has been to indecisive and not cohesive enough to act as such. This has resulted in wars in bosnia, serbia, afghanistan and now iraq (again). And in none of those countries, has there been eshtablished anything else than an 'fake' goverment after the US. intervention. Certainly no freedom has been given to the people. Merely a switch of the power structure so it's controlled by the US.And still are.
QuoteWho said we were done with Osama? We're still looking for him, but it's just that we don't need a large-scale military operation just to get him.And a fine job they did too.
QuoteLet's think for a moment what exactly this war is going to achieve.
So lets suppose that the US charges in, and does manage to kill Saddam. Then what?
The Iraqi people are brainwashed with propoganda to such an extent that they hate the West, and are hardly likely to hail the invading troops with party poppers and champagne.
Iraq is a very unstable country. Saddam has, by his stern harsh leadership, kept it all together because people are afraid of him. If he is removed, the country will most likely descend into civil war, killing many thousands of innocent people.
And finally, if this attack goes ahead, it will only be a reason for Al-Qaeda to launch more terrorist attacks against the Western world.
] 
)
