MR fraudia
syria has gassed its own people america has nuked and gassed several countries britain first used chemical weapons against the kurds during churchills time.
Your argument does'nt hold any weight because there are several regimes including israel that commits human rights abuses daily including bombing its neighbours i.e lebanon and syria on routine basis!
from the link by 1eyed
In Lebanon, you have to remember, 150,000 men, women and children were killed in 16 years; 17,500 of them – almost six times the total of dead of September 11, and almost all of them civilians – were killed in just the summer of 1982, during Israel's bloody invasion of their little country, an invasion to which the US had given a green light.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ak47: *
MR fraudia
syria has gassed its own people america has nuked and gassed several countries britain first used chemical weapons against the kurds during churchills time.
Your argument does'nt hold any weight because there are several regimes including israel that commits human rights abuses daily including bombing its neighbours i.e lebanon and syria on routine basis!
[/QUOTE]
ak47
if you had been reading all along what I say, its that life is unfair...you have to make do with what you can and do the best with it. Do I think that the whole deal with Iraq was handfled appropriately, no. But can you change it..no.
There is a difference between an optimal solution and a practical or feasible one. You guys can cry about the optimal solution all you want, its not happening. the sooner that country decides to follow a practical solution to get beoynd this the better for them.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
Military action could be avoided if Saddam allowed inspectors inside Iraq with unrestricted access.
UnderTheDome, but hasn't Bush stated that even if Hussein allows inspectors, he will still attack Iraq?
[/QUOTE]
The speech to the U.N. on Thursday by Bush will call for them (the U.N.) to enforce post-Gulf War resolutions, if not then consequences will be imposed upon Iraq by the U.S.
The ball is in Saddams court and the clock is ticking.
Consequences will be imposed upon Iraq by the US if it does not obey post-Gulf war UN resolutions. May i expect consequences to be imposed on Israel as well for not obeying UN resolutions?
Hello all...
First, let's not imagine that Saddam operates in a vaccum. He is ably assited by the Baath Party and the Military. Whether it is fear, greed, sadism, a complete lack of values or some cult of personality, it is not just Saddam that controls Iraq. Without minions to obey his commands, Saddam could not exist. A government with this degree of moral decay will undoubtedly let the poor and helpless suffer while attempting to blame others for their plight.
I think that the focus of the US campaign is badly aimed. While everyone chirps about "gassing the Kurds", the ugly truth is that the Anfal campaigns are one of the true "genocides" of our times. Over 100,000 Kurds were marched off to concentration camps with only 7,000 known survivors. Saddams butt should have been dragged infront of the Hague a decade ago. Unfortunately the UN mandate was to liberate Kuwait, not to depose Saddam. Saddam has invaded his neighbors, has launched scud missles in every known compass direction, has maintained the worlds fifth largest army, and runs a country based on torture, intimidation, summary executition, and no less than four separate intelligence services all watching the populice and each other.
Given this profile, what is to prevent Saddam from using any and all weapons within his reach to destroy whatever he could before his demise. And what if he dies? Anybody read about his sons? even worse...
So what is the end game for Iraq? Twenty more years of chaos living as an outcast in the world society? Does this help the children? What remnants of a normal society will be left after 20 more years under the thumb of an egomaniacal dictator?
I am not completely buying the Bush program. I think dealing with Saddam is a regional problem, not one of the US. But some risk to the US does exist. There is no rush in taking out Saddam, and some of the Arab leadership is simply more patient than the US, but with common aims. On the other hand, what will become of Iraq IF someday an American city is coated in botulism, courtesy of Saddam or some expendible third party? Would you trust YOUR children to the good nature of Saddam?
Saddam does indeed have rivals in terms of despotic rulers. But none who have his combination of aggression and destructive know how. Despite people who claim that Saddam was disarmed, a bioweapons program is quick and easy to reinvigorate. The first batch of botulism would be cooking before the inspectors left Iraqi airspace. So what IS to prevent Saddam from becoming the Drug dealer of choice for bioweapons? absolutely nothing. Completely untraceable, totally deniable, and by using radical extremists, he can separate himself from the act.... Once that Genie is out of the bottle, the world will never be the same. Who needs missles when radicals can be your "delivery systems"? That is what has changed.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
The speech to the U.N. on Thursday by Bush will call for them (the U.N.) to enforce post-Gulf War resolutions, if not then consequences will be imposed upon Iraq by the U.S.
The ball is in Saddams court and the clock is ticking.
[/QUOTE]
In another word US runs the UN!