|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
|
 |
|
Author
|
Topic: WAR (Read 20986 times)
|
GermanNightmare
*Smell* controller
 Offline
Gender: 
Posts: 311
Eddie wants Ur-Quan Trophies!
|
 |
Re: WAR
« Reply #15 on: February 28, 2003, 09:52:01 am » |
|
As for the 10th post (EL)
The proposed regime change in Iraq à la Americaine is definitely NOT what the region needs.
Let me explain, but first this: If you haven't watched Michael Moore's documentary "Bowling for Columbine" yet - please do so. It will explain a lot of things and give you background knowledge you might not have been aware of.
The U.S. have enforced regime changes all over the world in the name of "freedom & democracy". Strangly enough, most regimes were not changed into a democracy but into dictatorship! Need examples? Let's start with the beginning of the 20th century:
1917: U.S. enter WWI as allies to the French & British to prevent defeat and therefore losing all the money and not-yet-payed weapons they gave to the British.
1918: Germany/Austria-Hungary loses eventually. German revolution, the German Empire becomes the German Weimar Republic.
1919: The U.S. were not involved in that process - their support of the Versaille treaty increased tensions in Europe rather than solving any.
1933: After being becoming democratically elected chancellor of the German Republic, Adolph Hitler seizes power.
1936-1938: Germany's Legion Condor helps Spain's fascists to power, Franco stays neutral later on - the U.S. do not really support the Republicans who want a democracy, or did they?
1938: Appeasement in Europe fails - but it was not backed up by any "or else". The "or else" was on the Germans side - they were willing to use force to incorporate parts of Poland (Danzig) & Tchechoslovakia.
1939: The results are well known and the 3rd Reich starts a "pre-emptive" war against Poland. The war against France is welcome to settle old resentments, the war against Great Britain happens because they were allied with Poland.
The U.S. stay neutral and their military is far from being prepared or superior.
1941: 2nd "pre-emptive" attack by the Germans on their allies, the USSR (another dictatorship).
1942: The attack on Pearl Harbor - historians argue whether the U.S. did know about it coming. Since the Empire of Japan is allied with the 3rd Reich, Germany declares war on the U.S. as well.
Before that, the neutral U.S. were supporting the British in their own interest, to keep Europe small (and not united under German rule).
1944: D-Day, invading the invaders. Justified? Yes.
1945: War against civilians at its peak. The Germans bombed Britain, the British and U.S. bomb German cities (best example is Dresden). Civilian casulties are not "collateral damage" but "primary target". To save U.S. lives (not at home but on the front) they bomb the world into the atomic age.
Shortly after the war, the alliance between the East and West falls apart.
1949: The Federal Republic of Germany (West) is founded as a true democracy, the German Democratic Rebublic (East) is not a real democracy.
1950: Korea. The "Red Flood" must be stopped, the U.S. are paranoid about communism. The western countries fight along the South against the North backed up by China.
1953: Korea is divided into the Communist North (East Germany?) and the Democratic South (West Germany?).
1954: Vietnam. French controlled Indochina falls apart into Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam. Dien Bien Phu and the French pull out.
1959: The U.S. take over with military advisors to counter the threat of more communist countries developing.
1961-1964: U.S. support grows stronger.
1963: Who killed J.F.K. and why are those documents sealed, huh? Shouldn't a citizen of the democratic U.S. be able to take a look? Smells fishy again, here...
1964: Look up U.S.S. Maddox - the Tonkin incident. The ship is supposedly attacked, resulting in massive retaliation. Later on, the captain admits that there was no such attack - oops!
In the 60s, the militaristic government in South Vietnam changes fairly often, one of their presidents is even assassinated, backed up by the U.S.
1965-1972: The Vietname "Conflict" takes place - a full scale war never officially declared, causing 2 million dead on Vietnamese side, 57 thousand on U.S.
1973: U.S. withdraws all combat personnal from Vietnam after cease fire.
1975: The U.S. abandon their embassy and thousands of their allied South Vietnamese.
1979: The Shah of Persia is overthrown by islamic fundamentalists, the Islamic Republic of Iran is founded by Ayatollah Khomeini. Saddam Hussein seizes power in Iraq. The USSR invades Afghanistan.
1980: Saddam attacks Iran, the U.S. & the west support him with weapons "to be used only" against the Iranians - yeah right! Tell the bullet whom to kill...
They also support the Mujahidin ("Warriors of God") in Afghanistan against the communists (Stingers etc.). The U.S. also trains Osama Bin Laden, who receives $ 3 billion in funding and a thorough CIA training.
1988: Cease fire Iran-Iraq conflict, Saddam is still an ally against the fundamentalists.
1989: The USSR pull out of Afghanistan; the U.S. invade Panama to get rid of the CIA trained President Noriega; the Iron Curtain comes down.
1990: Iraq invades the non-democratic Kuwait
1991: The U.N. backs up an allied liberation of Kuwait, mainly by U.S. forces to "free the Kuwaiti people and give them democracy" - their feudal leader is reinstated. In Somalia, the U.S. make their own policies which differ from the U.N. goals to stop the civil war there.
1990s: The U.S. step into the conflict in the Balcan states. Today, the most important U.N. peace-keeping forces are from Europe.
20/01/2001: Everything looked pretty reassuring till that day... But hey, maybe his Dad will help him out?
09/11/2001: -
post 9/11: U.S. and allied troops in Afghanistan, the Phillipines, and all other places those evil communists, oh wait, islamic fundamentalists are active.
2003: The only real communist country North Korea is sable-rattling and threatening to destablize Asia, and who really knows what will be happening in the Middle East in the next few weeks?
I know this is a very long list and most of you will know all of this already - but please consider one thing: how many of these conflicts were willingly supported by the U.S. to serve their own interest? If you asked me - way too many!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Greetings from the German Nightmare - Up the Irons!
|
|
|
GermanNightmare
*Smell* controller
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 311
Eddie wants Ur-Quan Trophies!
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #16 on: February 28, 2003, 10:28:02 am » |
|
As for the 11th post
LP, we don't know what the U.S. have in their war-games drawers in store for a post-Saddam Iraq...
As for the 12th post
D999, true, so true. Extremes, no matter in which direction, never really lead to much. The only thing I'm concerned about is how many doves can a hawk slay before he chokes?
Oh, and one more thought: Why isn't the U.S. glad that Germany has finally learned it's lesson that waging war is NOT an answer to anything, especially not solving problems and conflicts?
No "hey, great, you guys finally got it right!" - Nope, it's more like: "the world is black & white", "you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists" and "we have the power and means, so we can bully you around". Might makes right? Hello?
Makes me wonder whether the U.S. would really implement their new law concerning U.S. military personnal. If any American soldier was ever to be tried at the International Court of Justice in Den Haag, Netherlands, they are willing to free him by force! What the hell? Attacking allies, members of the NATO? More fishy smell around the corner!
As for the 13th (12a) post by LP
Where are the independant American newsletters and TV programs right now, investigating, watergating, revealing?
Oh, I forgot: Critizism is unpatriotic - well, too bad!
One more thing before I await your answers and comments. I am not anti-American, I am pro-peace & anti-war, and I just do not believe in the ability of the Bush administration to do the right thing - for the world, and not American interests that is. America first? This is Earth, for crying out loud!
To come back to SCII-UQM:
Right now, my perception of things goes like this:
The bully Ur-Quan are outfitting their battle thralls with weapons to fight wars for them against the Ur-Quan's enemies. Just like the U.S. gave weapons to their battle thrall Iraq. Now the battle thrall does what he wants, because their leader wants to or he just can 'cause their "masters" were never really in control...
Manufacure a gun, load it and sell it into irresponsible hands, and you will hear a bang sooner or later. If the shot hits you, whose fault is it?
Yours? The shooters? What about innocent by-standers?
This world sucks - honestly, and I'm just glad that in a game like SCII things are fairly easy! You cannot really compare things - even though it's tempting, but the game is - as complex as it is - way too simply knit to draw conclusions from it. Rather look at the world and ask yourself why the game is the way it is...
Love and Peace, y'all!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Greetings from the German Nightmare - Up the Irons!
|
|
|
GermanNightmare
*Smell* controller
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 311
Eddie wants Ur-Quan Trophies!
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #17 on: February 28, 2003, 10:55:02 am » |
|
First of all, the quoting didn't really work...
He has funded terrorists?
True, but the U.S. have funded HIM!
I disagree. some of the news papers there are calling for Saddams removal.
Well, I really doubt that a militaristic removal would make the region more stable, or U.S.-friendly or democratic...
I just don't see them sipping Coke while cleaning up their ruined cities - that didn't work in NAM, won't work there either. As for the news papers - which ones?
The same thing can be said about any other country.
Yeah, but we in Europe have had our fair share of conflicts and know exactly what war is all about. There is no justified war. Justified peace, yes. And we don't put it like we're doing everybody else a favor!
Clinton was in office.
Oh yea, the Oral Office... Doesn't really answer my question, does it?
I never mentioned the oil topic. It's not only about the oil... It's more about influence in the region.
Take a look at this link, maybe you can even laugh about it?
http://www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml
Again, what proof?
Oh, we can't see it? Why? Because one or two or ten people sit in Iraq who mailed it to the U.S.?
We're talking 10s of thousands of casulties in the event of a war and all we get are a couple of phone calls and a cheesy slide show?
Sorry, doesn't convince me!
You sure about Saddam not sending a note to Bush after 9/11? What proof? Oh, and you really believe all those countries from the middle east really meant it? I doubt it, they were probably chuckling and saying "serves them right"...
the terrorist issue: REMEMBER IRAQ AND AFGANISTAN WERE THE ONLY CONTRIES THAT DID NOT SEND THEIR REGRETS AND WORDS OF SUPPORT AFTER 9/11. bush has proof he is linked with the terrorists.
he is also a embarresment to the US.
WHO is?
I dont see a better way then war to remove him, that would acualy work.
Remove Saddam? Or remove Bush by not re-electin him after the war back-fires and the first body-bags come home?
BTW the weapon inspectors dont even think the guy is coaperating.
The head-honcho Mr. Blix says he is not cooperating enough. They are cooperating, though.
Well, you hide let's say 20 tanks, a couple of trucks and a bunch of stuff in Nevada and send in 300 people to find those - I bet it'll take them longer than a couple of weeks to find anything! And isn't that what vast deserts (even in the States) are good for? Area54 and such... 
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 28, 2003, 11:07:07 am by German_Nightmare »
|
Logged
|
Greetings from the German Nightmare - Up the Irons!
|
|
|
JonoPorter
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 656
Don't mess with the US.
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #18 on: February 28, 2003, 01:09:02 pm » |
|
well it is quete obvious that arguing with you would be waste of time and only raise tempers so this will be my last post on this subject. but i still think saddam is too dangerous to leave in power.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 28, 2003, 01:09:45 pm by BioSlayer »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Lukipela
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3620
The Ancient One
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #19 on: February 28, 2003, 03:17:22 pm » |
|
Arguing always raises tempers, that's in the definition of the word. However, that doesn't mean that it is a waste of time in any way, new points will always apperar, new thoughts will be hatched, new inspirations found. But if you don't want to argue any more Bioslayer, no worries. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Well, after mine and GM's input on this I suppose that the antiwar side is very well represented here. Anyone else want to take up the pro flag?
GM, I seem to recall another quote "War is merely the extension of politics". Of course, this idea died with WWI, but it might go along way to explaining why ppl still think war is acceptable. Also, regarding your comment to having been in war, here's an interesting thought. War resistance is very large in europe. Could it be that it is because we rememebr it so vividly? It's only fifty years since death swept over us last time. On the other hand, while the US has fought in a great deal of different conflicts, they haven't fought on their own ground since the war of independence. I'm sure there are plenty of war veterans in the US who could tell ppl how horrible it is, but most of the population has no experience with that sort of thing, they've only seen it in the movies. And it is QUITE different from that. But, I still disagree with yuo on that I do think that there may be a point where it has to come to war. It's just very far off, hopefully at least. At the very least a stick like that is necessary for compliance.
Bioslayer: Regarding the terrosrist funding. Yes, but is he the only one who has done this? If that is the only threat assesment you need, then I oculd probably give you a couple more states that need to be taken out at the same time. And if we look at it from the adversarys side, then all those CIA agents that've been running around training guerillas to owerthrow regimes probably constitute terrorists as well (See GM's excellent list).
And a few newspapers calling for someones owerthrowal aren't exactly a perfect measurment of the peoples will. Especially since these would probably state controlled newspapers in countries of the region that are still allied to the US. You don't honestly think that if Iraq is ivaded, all the fundamentalists will just ignore it do you?
Oh and I truly hope I've misunderstood the point about emabrassment. You cannot seriously mean that that means you get to invade? You would invade a country because it's leader embrasses you??
And as GM already stated, the weapons inspections are going slowly. Not the same as not working.
IN GENERAL: About the morality issue once more, as I said, it's a tricky one. Technically, none of us have high ground in this conflict, so none of us can judge. But can any of us morally refrain from making some decsion on this matter? wouldn't that be even worse? I think that the US initiative in this is a least a bit of a step towards the right direction. Tehre are a lot fo tyrannies in the world, and people suffering. And I think it's immoral for us just to sit around doing noting about it. However, war, as GM said, is not the way to do it. It'll cause the poor bastaads a lot more trouble.
And while a lot of blaming fingers can be pointed at the US exporting weapons t some of these countries, lets not forget an imoportant fact. They did that to fight communism. Along with the rst of us, they were afraid of Soviet, of what would happen if they won ground. Living on their border, this is something I can sympathize with very easily. Sometimes mistakes are made when one isn't thinking straight. But as i like to think of it "The past is the best place for history". And while we shouldcertainly learn from it, we should not stare us blind at it, and get caught in the assign blame cycle. We should take care of the issue at hand.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What's up doc?
|
|
|
Fsi-Dib
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 182
The Crimson Corporation
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #20 on: February 28, 2003, 03:39:43 pm » |
|
I might put my own seeing of things, since this argument seems to be a lot more ... civilized than elsewhere.
As a finn I hear more speech about Bush and his random ideas of invading some country, and the obvious reason I hear is the oil, and it does make some sense. Of course I'm no person to make these decisions, my age prevents me from affecting the happening of the world. Saddam is evil, which I directly link to being stupid (stupid = evil). I hope that clears things out.
But then again, as a member of a technological society, I hear all the time about different conflicts all over the world. This concern about Iraq really doesn't interest me. Finland is not a member of NATO, and seems like it never will be (15% of people want to join NATO). People suffer, people die, but you cannot make it al perfect.
I'm not sure if you already mentioned religion. Some might see the invasion of Iraq as an attack to their religion, which I still doubt, but stupid people still exist.
And back to the Star Control world. I remember reading about human history on the Pages of Now & Forever, where they tell humans to think, that they are advanced beings, but in fact are primitive with their numeral different cultures, religions, societies and governments. I think that'll figure it out.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The unofficial music critic.
|
|
|
Mormont
*Smell* controller
Offline
Posts: 253
I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #21 on: February 28, 2003, 05:07:17 pm » |
|
Okay, I'm an American. I'm not sure about the war. I do think that there may be sufficient evidence to attack Iraq, but I still feel that Iraq is not enough of a threat to justify war. Just because we can rationalize something and get away with it, doesn't mean we should do it. Saddam is evil, but I believe that the results of attacking would be a lot more disastrous than not attacking.
I also think that government in general is bad. Power generally corrupts because no matter what bull you hear, about mankind bein people are NOT basically good. Unfortunately, anarchy is even worse for the same . I agree with what Churchill (I think it was Churchill) said: "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all the others." I don't like Bush, but I liked Clinton and Gore even less.
Oh, and GermanNightmare, you act like America is the only country that has ever done anything wrong. Most European countries have gone through a stage where they were the main world power and were quite selfish and abusive of that. I am not saying that makes it right because it doesn't. But you're right that the world does suck. I can't even remember when I last saw something positive on the news!
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 28, 2003, 06:13:19 pm by JWJ »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ErekLich
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 247
One Ring to rule them all, eh you know the rest.
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #22 on: February 28, 2003, 05:20:59 pm » |
|
German Nightmare: I have one question for you.
Do you think that Saddam is, in the present, dangerous, to his people and/or to the outside world?
If the answer is yes, it baffles me how you can say war cannot be a resort, not even the last resort. War may be hell, but so is life under a dictator like Saddam.
As I have said repeatedly, I am not strictly pro-war, but I would like to see Saddam out of power if at all possible.
Oh, and on the Clinton thing: That actually does answer your question, albiet indirectly. Clinton had crap foreign policy (typical of a democrat) and took credit for a good economy that wasn't his doing (also typical for a democrat), calling it good domestic policy. Clinton was worse than most democrats about foreign policy. Heck, he tried to win a war with just missiles, which can't work.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Oh God, please don't let me die today! Tomorrow would be SO much better!
|
|
|
GermanNightmare
*Smell* controller
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 311
Eddie wants Ur-Quan Trophies!
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #23 on: February 28, 2003, 06:14:06 pm » |
|
Sorry to hear, Bioslayer, that you consider arguing a waste of time. Without stepping on your feet, way too many people feel that way - and resort to action. A parallel? Maybe. An insult or meant to cause harsh feelings? Not intended!
LP, good points there. One might argue that you have to start somewhere to better the world, why not start with Iraq? Okay, so who's next? Is it ever going to end? I seriously doubt it. Just heard that Bush said "If it (occupation) worked for *evil* countries like Japan or Germany, it might well work in Iraq". It won't. Arabic people are way less forgiving than Europeans (who just won't forget) and the religious conflict arising is way to unpredictable to just "take plan A or B" and we'll manage just fine.
As for EL, I don't consider Saddam a threat to other countries right now (today) since the U.N. inspections are underway and the U.S. built a threat scenario (the "or else").
As for all those people suffering under Saddams reign - I bet that they prefer LIVING under him than being KILLED by U.S. bombs while persuing POLITICAL, ECONOMIC & even RELIGIOUS goals. Life might be hell under dictatorship, but it is life afterall. What good is freedom if you're dead?
You can't honestly tell me that the U.S. want to invade Iraq mainly to free its people from Saddams reign and replace it with their own - then we're looking forward to a century of warfare since there are so many suppressed people all over the world.
And I am convinced that it is possible to remove Saddam from office without a war - maybe not without the threat of war, but what really bothers me is that the average John Q. Public will have to suffer even more when it comes to war. And most those young G.I.s think that war is an adventure and they're fighting for their freedom! Wrong, they are already free and not defending their country but invading a souvereign state.
I recently heard a quote "when the talking stops, the shooting will begin". Of course, you can't take everything said at face value, and yet I resent war.
As LP stated earlier - the average American does not know what war is all about since they haven't had a prolonged military conflict in their country on their own soil for more than 130 years. That makes it easy to raise the public's opinion pro-war.
As for you, JWJ, I know that a lot of people feel that way. That's why it is important not to rush into anything just because it might be patriotic or supposedly the right thing at the moment. Nobody knows what will happen after the first bombs are dropped - but I fear it won't make things better.
And I am definitely not trying to act as if the U.S. are the only one who have made mistakes. The point I'm trying to bring across: Learn from "the old Europe" - we've commited more mistakes than you can count. That is why we want to warn you before commiting a really big mistake that could easily lead to WWIII.
I'm watching a whole spectrum of news-shows from all over the world and all I see right now is warmongery and fear.
Personnal question: Have you seen "Bowling for Columbine"?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 28, 2003, 06:27:05 pm by German_Nightmare »
|
Logged
|
Greetings from the German Nightmare - Up the Irons!
|
|
|
ErekLich
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 247
One Ring to rule them all, eh you know the rest.
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #24 on: February 28, 2003, 07:06:02 pm » |
|
GN: No, I have not seen BFC.
Here's another question: If people truly prefer living under tyrrany to fighting and dying for freedom then what the hell was my country founded for? I cannot honestly tell you that the main goal of invasion would be to free the Iraqi people -- but it is A goal.
Also, I would contend that the GIs think they are fighting for the freedom of Iraq, not for their own freedom.
I do not think we should go to war with every petty dictator in the world. But YES, it's high time the UN, America, The EU, and every country in the world stopped playing ball with dictators and worked to ensure freedom throughout the known world.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Oh God, please don't let me die today! Tomorrow would be SO much better!
|
|
|
GermanNightmare
*Smell* controller
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 311
Eddie wants Ur-Quan Trophies!
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #25 on: February 28, 2003, 09:31:06 pm » |
|
Well, first of all: watch the movie - it is really good made by Michael Moore, an American documentary filmer. Might sound boring, but definitely is not.
As for the freedom issue: I myself would want to fight for my own freedom - if I knew what that is. If people grow up in a dictatorship the system works so much against them, they don't know any different. That's at least what happened to those born 1925 and later in Germany. Your whole perspective is totally screwed.
As for the GIs - a lot of those new recruits joined after 9/11 to defend their country, the U.S., and now they're playing in the biggest sandbox far away from home... guess they didn't see that one coming.
The U.S. were indeed founded as a place to be free - but their idea of freedom seems to differ from the concept of freedom someplaces else on this little planet.
Good talking to you, though, and hopefully we can make this world a little better each day, together.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Greetings from the German Nightmare - Up the Irons!
|
|
|
|
|
Lukipela
Enlightened
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 3620
The Ancient One
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #27 on: March 01, 2003, 05:57:54 pm » |
|
Well, this is certainly getting very intersting, and I must say I'm very impressed with everyone keeping civil so far, unfortunately these things tend to degenerate quite quickly into hippe-hawk arguments. Maybe there is some hope after all....
Well, to start
Fsi-Dib: Stupid is not necessarily evil. That is an oversimplification, and one that may well end us in a lot of trouble if we keep beleiving it. Bullys are stupid and a bit evil, but some people who are evil can be VERY smart. Never underestimate your enemy. Oh, and I am a finn as well. to say that "the present situation doesn't really interst me, because I hear about conflicts all the time anyway, and it's far away". Remember a little while back, when people turned their back at us because our country didn't interest them very much, while our granparents died in the snow? Wouldn't it have been nice if someone had cared, instead of just going about their business saying "yeah well". just because it doesn't affect you directly doesn't mean you can just ignore it.
JWJ: As to your presidents, you may have liked Clinton a lot less, but he was better at dealing with other countries. Your current leader sets everyone's teeth on edge. Also, I agree with GM about us having made more mistakes. Learn form the past, I believe EL said. DOn't make the same mistakes as us. the price is way too high.
EL: you can't really compare the founding of your country to this. The people who emigrated to the US in search of political and religious freedom did just that. Emigrated. They took some risks, sure, but they had no war to fight. Also, they made the choice themselves. They didn't wake up one day to find that half of them had benn bombed to kingdom come, and that the rest of them were no free.You'r country was a refuge, but the risks of moving there were not really comparable to those of living in a warzone. I agree with GM on this topic, it is better to live. Don't believe the lord of the rings too much, very seldom are people really willing to die for their cause. And even when they are, they usually get to make the chocie themselves. But I agree completely that it is time we started taking our responsibilities seriously. We have suffered the dictators long enough. But we need to oust them without war. It is a last resort, a sign that we have failed. Don't kid yourself, noone will thank you for bringing war to their country.
GM: How the heck did I come up with shortening your name GM anyway? Sorry bout that but it's stuck now... Look at it as a pet name.
In general, the conversation seems to be tripping a little mroe into the "What is America" doing rather than "Should there be a war", which I suppose is only natural. However, we should all remember that even though it is easy to blame the US foreign policy (which, admittedly is flawed), the full guilt cannot be placed on them solely. Europe is just as responsible for the situation, and it is our responsibility to help mend what we have broken.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What's up doc?
|
|
|
chrischoo
Zebranky food
Offline
Posts: 4
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #28 on: March 01, 2003, 11:02:07 pm » |
|
Though I'm nowhere near the Middle East or Europe (I'm from Singapore), I find that the American presumption that war is a good way to get rid of a tyrant somewhat misinformed.
While I agree that Saddam is completely unreliable and has a thousand and one nasty ideas up in his mind, I think that a war would probably result in serious side-effects that were not intended to begin with.
Personally, I'd like to believe that Bush is really out there for the oil, but I can't bring myself to cos it's oil and a myriad of other factors, making this war equation very complicated. The main problem I see in this case is that anti-American sentiment is rising throughout the world, and if we do really need to take out Saddam, the last country we would like to invite to take him out would be the US.
I think the US has a reasonable track record when it comes to peacekeeping and related military and political operations, yet invading Iraq at this time would stir up a great deal of extremist Muslim sentiment. It'll likely lead to a rise in terrorism, which would be targetted at the US. It's not exactly the wisest things to do IMO.
Since the Middle East is such an unstable region it's anybody's guess what'll come out of a war - Which is why I think it's not a good idea for the US to think it can go in guns blazing and assume that just because they can get rid of Saddam that their problems won't be compounded in future.
Moral principles do differ greatly from country to country, and I personally find American democracy a bit too righteous for my liking. It's too idealistic and doesn't seem to solve real world problems. Democracy may be good, but applying American democracy to any nation doesn't necessarily result in getting the desired outcome. Not everybody is American.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Azarule
*Many bubbles*
Offline
Gender:
Posts: 114
Andale, Andale, arriba !
|
|
Re: WAR
« Reply #29 on: March 01, 2003, 11:38:19 pm » |
|
I found it interesting earlier that someone mentioned how governments that are installed from outside powers always turn into dictatorships. The sad reality is that any regime change initiated by an outside force will beceome a dictatorial society. Unless the people within a nation are the ones who initiate and control the changes, they will not throw the power of their force behind it, and the new government will have to resort to force/propaganda/etc to remain in place. And since no government in history has been replaced without military conflict (and this is likely to remain the case), revolutionary wars are the only way to genuinly re-form a ruling body.
As far as the Iraqi war goes, I do believe that the conflict is inevitable. One of the harder things to accept in life is that television and movies are lying - you can NOT save everyone every time. And if I have a choice, I would rather save me and mine.
Psychologically, is helps an oppressive government to have a 'Great Enemy' that it can rally it's people against. While many people believe that this is what our own (U.S.) government is attempting to accomplish with the conflict. However, many of the middle eastern countries have been using the U.S. for this purpose for years. The upswell of anti-american sentiment we have seen from these countries is merely the manifestation of several years worth of indoctrination.
Final sidenote : We should remain vigilant in our own country so that we are not deprived of our civil liberties in a time of war (as happens in most cases of historical record). Just looking at the text of the 'Patriot Act' you can see it's beginning. Law enforcement agencies are no longer required to show just cause to obtain a wiretap, and you can be held without legal counsel if they believe it is appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
If these visions have offended, thing but this and all is mended : You have but slumbered here while these visions did appear. And this weak and idling theme, no more yielding than a dream.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
|
|
|
|
|
