I appreciate, and do try to understand your point.What is my point? I understand what you are saying Rat Faced, but I politely disagree. The idea that the arab street will rise up is flawed. Infact, there is unlikely to be much of any regional backlash. Why? Because they hate Saddam as much as they hate us, and when they see liberated Iraqis cheering as American tanks roll by, the arab street will not be able to claim Americans are in the wrong. Really, there is no question about Saddam's hampering of inspections to hide WMD. If you can admit that Saddam will use his chemical weapons, possibly on Israel or American troops, are you not admitting that the inspections failed? That Saddam failed to destroy prohibited weapons, per the peace agreement he signed. The peace agreement that the UN brokered as the solution to the gulf wars finality. Didn't the UN say "riding into bahgdad" was a bad idea. It certainly seems like the UN made a mistake it is unwilling to fix.
The world is at a turning point. The UN: an international body, claims to be a neutrality in international affairs. Yet, in many ways is an insult to international cooperation. What good is an organization that makes rules which it cannot enforce? What good is an organization that claims to support human rights, and than slaps the US in the face by chairing Libya on the human rights commission. And the people responsible for its failures, are infact the same ones who hamper US multilateral action. I might remind you of Bosnia. A human rights catastrophe in your backyard. The UN was so mucked up in politics it couldnt handle a simple, black and white affair. It took the US standing up to the UN to get the right thing done. This is not different in that respect. Iraq has broken resolutions of the peace agreement, and again the US has to stand up for an organization that doesnt appreciate itself. I must ask you, what is the point of the UN? There are indications that it is becoming an organization whose focus is to oppose American action worldwide. The humour lies in the fact that the US shoulders the majority of that bill.
Lastly, rat faced. I think your ideas about terrorism are a bit irrational. By this I mean, you believe they have the capability to do what you spoke of. 20 terrorists in every major city. Well, if they could do it, they would have done it. Al Qaeda has been hurt, it no longer has an openly supportive regime to supply it. The Taliban's power, shattered. Remember the international critisism of US plans to attack Afghanistan? How it would ignite the arab street, be a horribly long war, huge civilian casualties etc.? None of this happened. Those ideas are just tactics of fear mongering by irrelevant political bodies. If you cant understand what the defeat of the Taliban, what the defeat of the Iraq signals to American enemies, I question your ability to debate. No government wants to be associated with terrorism that attacks America. Why? Because it is guaranteed destruction, much like American and Russian nukes deterrence of all out war between two hostile nations. If your government doesnt support military action against terrorism. You (Western countries) really dont understand appeasement is your own peril. Because when september 11th comes to your country, those terrorists will not fear retribution. But they will fear a US reaction, because I promise you this: America will be there to help.
But can i point out I said IF, Iraq does have NBC capability, and that the 20 terrorists in every city would be as a result of an attack....merely because it will, in my opinion, increase Fundamentalism, and the influence of this.
Islam, is not a bad religion...it has much in common with Christianity, they even acknowledge Christ as a prophet. I dont claim to be a christian, however if they acknowledge Christ as a prophet, they must agree, in general with his teachings etc.
Fundamentalism in ANY religion is dangerous...it just so happens that the situation today is a massive increase in Islamic Fundamentalism. Fundamentalist Islam preaches that it is okay to kill anyone that is not Islamic, if they are aware of Islam. In this world of hi tech communications, this can be interpretted as anyone.
I never claimed to be a passifist (its late, forgive my spelling)...but I believe wholeheartedly that this war is not in the best interests of any country. In fact I honestly believe the only ones to benefit (apart from the arms industry obviously) are the oil companies and their shareholders....and the ones that come to mind spend their time in the whitehouse.
Im not antiAmerican by any means and have pointed out a number of positives to come out of the USA in other threads, but living in a country that has lived with terrorism my entire life I honestly predict a huge increase in Terrorism on the US Mainland and here in the UK.
I dont claim to be clever, ambitious, bastard, desperate or a nutter...all of which Hussain is...but if i was him, IF i had NBC they would already be at their point of use and ready to use. And that point of use would NOT be in Iraq. As i said, Biological and Chemical Agents are very easy to smuggle and Transport. A few grams of Ricin (which is what was used in the Tokio Underground a few years ago) has already been discovered on UK soil....how much have we missed? Its not manufactured a few grams at a time.
Bookmarks