It wasn't the WsMD
-
Well, if the Washington Post isn't that ultra right-wing-paper owned by that Korean guy (Moon?) than it must be because I'm loosing my mind.
That's the Washington Times. The Post is the good one. -c
Chris Losinger
Smaller Animals Software -
I think comparing the relationship between Amnesty International and Australia or the US and Iraq's relationship with the UN is somewhat misleading. Amnesty International definitely has its place in the world, however, you didn't see them marching in the streets of Baghdad protesting Sadaam Hussein's repression of his own people, or in Afghanistan for that matter. The problem I have in trying to equate the US's reluctance to deal with Amnesty International's claims in Guantanamo with Iraq's dealing with the UN is that people will always be more critical of the US because its easier. For that matter I don't think that the idea of having Libya chairing the UN Human Rights council lends much credibility to the institution. I don't see the US tying to use its power in the destructive way that a lot of people seem to fear. I understand the concern in having to much power in the hands of any one group, but since the start of the 20th century I think the US has shown remarkable restraint in the use of its power. Even after the end of WW2, the US helped in rebuilding its former enemies in contrast to the actions of its Allies in Germany after WW1. And Iraq may not have had armies marching against the US, but I don't think its much of a stretch to see the definite possibility that Saddam may have been helping Arab terrorists. Is it positive proof? No, just a gut feeling, but I think the idea of "better safe than sorry" applies. I think the only way out of the mess of a foreign policy that has evolved over the last 50 years is a combination of deterence and fairness. If the US can pressure both parties in the Israeli / Palestinian conflict into tring to resolve their differences, and at the same time show that it is willing to defend itself and others, who demonstrate reasonable policies, things can only get better. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
Doug Goulden wrote: I don't think its much of a stretch to see the definite possibility that Saddam may have been helping Arab terrorists. Is it positive proof? No, just a gut feeling, but I think the idea of "better safe than sorry" applies. so.. if US has a hunch about something they have the right to invade a country just because US has a feeling that saddam is dangerous? this military invasion was a violation of the international law. rite now US doesnt know how to excuse themselves for this military invasion, Saddam has WMD intelligence reports this, reliable sources. pff.. false, no proof was found. ok, that was lame how do we excuse ourselves? hmmm how about a freedom war? we feed iraqi people how about that? (Freedom is slavery) Iraqi people are soo happy that they are finaly free that they are celebrating all day long the US military invasion. Doug Goulden wrote: If the US can pressure both parties in the Israeli / Palestinian conflict into tring to resolve their differences, and at the same time show that it is willing to defend itself and others, who demonstrate reasonable policies, things can only get better. i'm really curious how US will pressure Israel. it seems that US is more of Israel bodyguard around the world or more like a host for a parasite? :/ (ignorance is strength) there are not charity wars or wars for freedom, all the wars were made for a profit. the reasons that are presented by the media for the war in iraq are jokes. --------------- Horatiu CRISTEA