Author Topic: Bush and his advisors are really smart  (Read 1628 times)

Offline SaburoS

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2986
Bush and his advisors are really smart
« Reply #60 on: March 20, 2003, 07:50:22 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by BGBMAW
thougth your were going to say PETA and Greenpeace..lolo

And no was to both your questions..

BiGB


LOL, sorry to disappoint you but I don't read reports from Peta (hey, I like meat, beef, pork, chicken, fish, etc. I don't consider my food as pets.) Besides I presume PETA to not be a good source of info on things other than the treatment of animals. I'm more interested in the human condition.
I don't read much from Greenpeace either. I am more concerned with things other than how many dolphins are included with tuna. Don't get me wrong, as they seem to be worthwhile causes, just I am concerned with more important things to me.

You see the double standard I am talking about?
You said both the US and Iraq should not be held to international laws. Then why is the argument against Saddam using those same int'l laws (UN resolution to prove disarmament) as reasons against him? Kind of hypocritical to hold the rule of international law against those you disagree with, but to ignore international laws when it suits us. Either we all follow international laws or lets not even have them (welcome to global chaos).
Men fear thought as they fear nothing else on earth -- more than ruin -- more even than death.... Thought is subversive and revolutionary, destructive and terrible, thought is merciless to privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. ... Bertrand Russell

Offline Slash27

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12795
Bush and his advisors are really smart
« Reply #61 on: March 20, 2003, 07:50:23 PM »
Give'em hell BGBMAW <> :D

Offline AKS\/\/ulfe

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4287
Bush and his advisors are really smart
« Reply #62 on: March 20, 2003, 07:51:02 PM »
Sorry, but I guess we'll never find out if diplomacy would have worked or not. In the last few months through tremendous pressure by the US and Great Britain, we were going in the right direction.

Sorry for what? Please, tell me.

Face it, it's been 12 years. Diplomacy isn't an action of giving more time, and not getting anything in return. Which is EXACTLY what happened in Iraq. UN kept on giving more time, Saddam kept on kicking UN inspectors out, and when they did get in- guess who got him in? That's right, threat of force by the US. Months later, they were back out again, or they were simply told they could not enter this facility or that facility. OR the UN inspectors were given death threats and told to leave the region.

We were never going in the right direction, even with the threat of _WAR_ (that's not tremendous pressure, that's do obey now, or we'll be on your bellybutton like white on rice very soon) Saddam was not providing us with the weapons he had in stock, and destroying them underneath the supervision of UN inspectors.

If we were moving in the right direction, Saddam would of told us "Hey, I got these missles I'm not supposed to have. Watch me destroy them!" Instead, the inspectors had to find them and then Saddam got to play the false cooperation card. "Hey, you found them... now watch me destroy them."

That's NOT how this deal works. It even says so in the resolutions.

We weren't going in the right direction at all, it was simply proven evident to those who have been paying attention for the past 12 years that Saddam is still playing games.

Our motives have been shifting up to our invasion. Our demands kept changing.

The invasion has been imminent for a year now. Saddam is a dictator, he knows damn well a massing of troops in his region indicates war. This began a year ago. He had a year to comply with past resolutions- he did not. OUR demands did not change, they have been the same for 12 years- Show us a list of your weapons, and destroy them under UN weapons inspectors supervision. He hadn't accomplished this up to the point he was given an ultimatum. He did not comply with the ultimatum either, he brought this on himself.

If after the invasion is over and Saddam is gone, and Iraq has free elections, civil rights, freedom of the media, trade unions, liberties, and dissidents allowed to protest (no one being thrown in jail, tortured, killed because of their political beliefs), then I'll admit I was completely wrong. I hope I am wrong.

Hey, if 12 years hadn't passed and Saddam complied from the getgo, we wouldn't be where we are today.

We can play the what-if game till the cows come home, we are where we are because Saddam brought us here.

BTW, I'm still waiting for that to happen in Afghanistan.

Red herring.

As for Vietnam- Vietnam was a no win from the getgo, we were there to keep the South Vietnamese from being taken over by North Vietnam. If we had taken over North Vietnam, then it would of been a win... for the S. Vietnamese. But of course, we'd be the same as the Romans or Germans(in WWII). Invade and conquer. A lot of that stuff you threw in there, such as the 2 million dead (the South Vietnamese kept fighting after we left, that shows you how much they didn't want to be taken over by the North) is a side issue. The war was fought to prevent South Vietnam to be taken over by the North. Yes, it was a means to shove toejam in the face of the USSR. Nevertheless, you ask any S. Vietnamese person (assuming we could go back in time) while our forces were there- they were happy to have the US fighting on their side. They did _NOT_ want to be taken over. We found out that the North wanted the South so bad, they were willing to just keep on dying to get it.

Point still stands- Vietnam is a different issue than Iraq, and the South Vietnamese were extremely happy to have the US there preventing them from being taken over.

We could still be there today, and the US body count would be in the millions. Hindsight is always 20/20... I'd like to see the decisions you make in the same position.

It's easy to criticize, it's never easy to be the decision maker.

EDIT for spelling, it may not be perfect, had a lil to drink.
-SW
« Last Edit: March 20, 2003, 08:01:40 PM by AKS\/\/ulfe »

Offline BGBMAW

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2288
Bush and his advisors are really smart
« Reply #63 on: March 20, 2003, 08:24:49 PM »
there may be double standards...

To me its kind of like..

Nuclear weapons..WHY CANT we all have them!!

Why can only some have them...?

Is this a double standard..?

Hell yes..you know why Saburo?..Let me here you on this one..

Im sure you know..there are humans in this world that cant run their own lives let alone a Gov'


SO.....

Saburo...my virtual friend.. Double Standards will always be needed...Because not all "humans" have the same logic and common sense as the rest of"us"

Love-Hate

BiGB
xoxo