Impeach Bush?

[Plano Skywalker]

besides, the whole WMD thing is way overblown.  that was only one of a dozen or so reasons we went to war... also, there's more and more evidence showing up that there really were WMDs, but he moved them out by the time we invaded.

 

taks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

exactly...that was the main reason we advanced to the U.N. but the politicos in the U.S. (on both sides of the aisle) pointed also to the nastiness of the regime and the need for regime change....and how this was really an ongoing war (the No Fly Zone was still in effect and coalition planes were frequently fired upon).

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Maybe they will find them in Syria.

[taks]

The only reason to invade another country is if that country attacked us first.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

in your fantasy world, yes. in the real world, when we sit around and wait we end up with boznia, cambodia, etc... it's nice to paint the world in such broad, rose colored brush strokes, but it isn't always that simple. had we not invaded iraq, saddam would still be killing his own people, the corruption in the oil for food program would still be going on, and eventually, one of the most despotic tyrants of the 20th century would have gotten ahold of nuclear weapons.

 

taks

[taks]

There I'm going to have to disagree with you.  This line of reasoning has been used a lot recently, but I'm afraid that the war really was sold to the American public as necessary due to the threat to national security posed by Iraqi nuclear/chemical/biological weapons.

actually, it was the media that hyped it that way.

 

There has been a great deal of backpeddling since the whole WMD thing went down the tubes, but that's the reason we went in.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

one reason, yes, and certainly expounded upon by the media. i can't say the white house didn't roll with it, but in bush's initial speech justifying the impending war, he only mentioned WMDs once.

 

taks

[taks]

Maybe they will find them in Syria.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i tell you what, if mr. bush decides to invade syria to find them, he'll not get my support. we're too thin as it is and we need to lay off the expenses. of course, sitting around and hoping the UN's "strong condemnations" will work is a pipe dream.

 

taks

[Judge Hades]

How is Bosnia and Cambodia the problem of the U.S.? Are they threatening our borders? Are these countries killing US citizens on US soil? If not, not our problem. We aren't the nursemaids of the world. If countries and people can't take care of themselves then they need to go the way of the dodo.

 

If Saddam wanted to kill his own people and they let him, more power to him. I don't care. I also don't think he had the funds and the resources to gain nuclear weapons in the first place. If that was such a major concern we would have invaded North Korea before Iraq.

[Laozi]

The only reason to invade another country is if that country attacked us first.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

in your fantasy world, yes. in the real world, when we sit around and wait we end up with boznia, cambodia, etc... it's nice to paint the world in such broad, rose colored brush strokes, but it isn't always that simple. had we not invaded iraq, saddam would still be killing his own people, the corruption in the oil for food program would still be going on, and eventually, one of the most despotic tyrants of the 20th century would have gotten ahold of nuclear weapons.

 

taks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

Ya, thats why we went after North Korea, a country we actually know has the ability to make weapons grade plutonium, oh wait we didn't do that. Instead we chose a country that we were infinitely familiar with by means of war, has oil resources that insure our ability to make war into the next hundred years or so, and took down someone we put into power, but had the ability to get rid of during the Gulf War but then we might have had to share the conquered resources with other nations in the U.N.

[Judge Hades]

Well said, Laozi.

[taks]

If not, not our problem.  We aren't the nursemaids of the world.  If countries and people can't take care of themselves then they need to go the way of the dodo.

uh, sorry, i don't buy that. mass murder is mass murder. there is no reason, nor excuse, to allow such crimes to be committed. sorry, but if anybody wants to claim a moral high ground on human rights, permitting such atrocities to happen unchecked is not the way to do it.

 

If Saddam wanted to kill his own people and they let him, more power to him.  I don't care.  I also don't think he had the funds and the resources to gain nuclear weapons in the first place.  If that was such a major concern we would have invaded North Korea before Iraq.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

he had billions, so that statement is flat out false. we haven't invaded NK for many reasons, not the least of which is a million man army. different story there, so a false analogy. also, sorry, you may not care, but what these leaders do impacts us all in the end.

 

taks

[taks]

Ya, thats why we went after North Korea, a country we actually know has the ability to make weapons grade plutonium, oh wait we didn't do that.

again, false analogy. NK is a completely different ball of wax. also, NK wasn't making quite as much fuss then as now.

 

so no, hades, not very well said.

 

taks

[Laozi]

uh, sorry, i don't buy that.  mass murder is mass murder.  there is no reason, nor excuse, to allow such crimes to be committed.  sorry, but if anybody wants to claim a moral high ground on human rights, permitting such atrocities to happen unchecked is not the way to do it.

taks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

Well, even if you really beleive that, you'd have to admitt that America does seem to look the other way a whole lot

[Laozi]

Ya, thats why we went after North Korea, a country we actually know has the ability to make weapons grade plutonium, oh wait we didn't do that.

again, false analogy. NK is a completely different ball of wax. also, NK wasn't making quite as much fuss then as now.

 

so no, hades, not very well said.

 

taks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Oh ya the 'another ball of wax' arguement, thats a good one.

 

And North Korea had only made the threat of producing the plutonium 4-5 times before the Occupation of Iraq

[taks]

again, a different country, different problems, different approach. you must've missed the million man army comment, too? or just intentionally being obtuse?

 

just because you can't get your head around that doesn't change the fact that our policy towards different countries is, well, different. nothing new there.

 

taks

[Judge Hades]

uh, sorry, i don't buy that.  mass murder is mass murder.  there is no reason, nor excuse, to allow such crimes to be committed.  sorry, but if anybody wants to claim a moral high ground on human rights, permitting such atrocities to happen unchecked is not the way to do it.

 

Moral high ground? You're joking right? WHo the frak cares about moral high ground? I most certainly do not. I am only concerned with what goes on here in the US and making sure US citizens are taken care of. The rest of the world can go in the sh**ter because they are not my problem nor should they be any one's problem but their own.

 

A country that cannot support and create stability within its own border by itself does not need to exist because it is weak.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Well, even if you really beleive that, you'd have to admitt that America does seem to look the other way a whole lot

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There is only so much you can do at the end of the day.

 

I doubt they could take NK without using nukes and no one really wants that.

[Commissar]

uh, sorry, i don't buy that.  mass murder is mass murder.  there is no reason, nor excuse, to allow such crimes to be committed.  sorry, but if anybody wants to claim a moral high ground on human rights, permitting such atrocities to happen unchecked is not the way to do it.

 

Moral high ground? You're joking right? WHo the frak cares about moral high ground? I most certainly do not. I am only concerned with what goes on here in the US and making sure US citizens are taken care of. The rest of the world can go in the sh**ter because they are not my problem nor should they be any one's problem but their own.

 

A country that cannot support and create stability within its own border by itself does not need to exist because it is weak.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think you'd be singing a different tune had you been a Jew in Germany in 1939.

[Laozi]

again, a different country, different problems, different approach.  you must've missed the million man army comment, too?  or just intentionally being obtuse?

 

just because you can't get your head around that doesn't change the fact that our policy towards different countries is, well, different.  nothing new there.

 

taks

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I have a pretty good understanding of our policies, if a country doesn't pose a threat, we invade them, if they do, we sit on our hands and do nothing, but then different countries different policies

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I am only concerned with what goes on here in the US and making sure US citizens are taken care of.  The rest of the world can go in the sh**ter because they are not my problem nor should they be any one's problem but their own.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think that was something similiar to what Bush was saying prior to 9/11. Although not quite so bluntly. "

[Laozi]

Well, even if you really beleive that, you'd have to admitt that America does seem to look the other way a whole lot

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

There is only so much you can do at the end of the day.

 

I doubt they could take NK without using nukes and no one really wants that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

O.k then what about ethnic cleansing in Sudan?

[Judge Hades]

I think that was something similiar to what Bush was saying prior to 9/11. Although not quite so bluntly. "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I would have handled 9/11 a little differently. I would have wiped out the Taliban and Al Qaeda to a person, staying focused till the job was done and over where Osama Bin Ladin would be in a shallow grave, then left Afganistan to its own devices.

[taks]

I am only concerned with what goes on here in the US and making sure US citizens are taken care of.  The rest of the world can go in the sh**ter because they are not my problem nor should they be any one's problem but their own.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

there ya go, true colors and all. let 'em all die. that's why i did not argue when commissar said go ahead and leave. people like you are the reason we have a lot of these problems now as is. whether you like it or not, we are a single world, and everything, in the end, affects everyone.

 

taks

[Judge Hades]

Yes we are one world with over 6 billion humans vying for space and resources. If a country dies as with its people the resources, whatever they were, are now available to those who survived. Checks and balances, taks.

 

Every species on this planet has a balancer, to make sure overpopulation occurs or if it does makes sure the weak die to let the strong live. The human race's balancer is ourselves. So far we haven't done a good job of it.

[Diamond]

Global economy is very sensitive to political environment, so that's why you should care what is happening outside of the country.

 

Your picture of the world seems a bit simplistic.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

O.k then what about ethnic cleansing in Sudan?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

One war at a time perhaps?

 

It's kind of funny everyone wants them to be the worlds policement when it's in their interest but when it's not they want them to mind their own business.

[Judge Hades]

Why? All the necessities I have can be fulfilled locally. Water, power, food, and the such. There is nothing in Bosnia, Somalia, Iraq, or any other country that holds what I need to survive.