Resistance against US War on Iraqi is on the rise

[Lincoln]

Do you really think Boris that Saddam can be trusted to keep his word? How do you reason with a liar?

[tandeetaylor]

I'm going to quote Dr. Phil, "Now answer MY question."

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Do you really think Boris that Saddam can be trusted to keep his word? How do you reason with a liar?

Yes, Saddam is the only liar with power in the world. And since he keeps trying to attack us....

Lincoln, you've said that you don't want to go to war with Iraq. But you keep making arguments for it. So which is it?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Do you really think Boris that Saddam can be trusted to keep his word? How do you reason with a liar?

I don't think it matters. 1) it's neither our responsibility nor our right to ensure nuclear non-proliferation.

2) Hussein has already lost two wars. His military is a shambles, and doesn't even excecise control over the whole of Iraq.

3) There are plenty of other contries which have violated the will of the UN, including the United States. Any attempt to start enforcing the will of the UN out to start with the US paying all its dues and paying war crimes reparations to Nicaragua. Then we should go in order from first to last of violated UN resolutions. After all, the Israeli violations of the UN are a far more serious threat to peace than Iraq's.

4) This war is about deflecting the public's attention away from domestic problems and Bush's failure in the war on terrorism.

[Lincoln]

I said that if Iraq continues to make a fool of the UN then there should be a real threat of war if he continues to play games. And I don't want to go to war with Iraq in any case. My answer was to Boris about reasoning with fanatics.

[GePap]

First of all: saying that since only a few tens of thousand are protesting mean little because they are only a few out of 280 million, or 6 bilion, is absolutely stupid. The biggest political demonstrations ever had at best 1-2 milion participants. Whens the last time 1 million people marched against abortion? If 1 million don't marhc, do we assume that 279,890,000 thousand Americans are in favor of it? And whats the last time anyone amrhced in SUPPORT of the the president? POr wrote mountains of letters to their congresspeople in support of the war on iraq?

I agree that, if not opposition, doubt grows on Iraq, simply because the story can only be pushed so much. The threat has lost some of its urgency, since we don't have round the clock, 'Iraq poised to nuke Washington, gas NY, infect LA, and install Osama as Emperor' sort of news stories every day in the TV.

I think we are going to war, and that since most people everywhere are essentially apathetic, there might be some more protest, but not much. (I say we go to war because Bush wants not only inspections, but a list of 12 or so demands: basically, if Hussein does not become the leader of a democratic Iraq, ten we will invade, and Hussein won't).

[tandeetaylor]

So you don't believe in war, just in threat of war? Alrighty then....

[chequita guevara]

What about the US and Israel continuing to make fools of the UN. Should we attack them?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by tandeetaylor
So you don't believe in war, just in threat of war? Alrighty then....

"My words are backed by nuclear weapons"

[tandeetaylor]

It's not going to work Che. He doesn't believe in the UN, but continues to use making a fool of them a legitmate reason to create a "real threat of war." Obviously one cannot make this way or that out of his opinions.

[Lincoln]

Well thanks for your opinion Boris but I don't agree with it. Whose responsibility is it to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons? And what should the world do in the event that Saddam sends a biological or chemical weapon into Israel? Have another peace march on Washington? Clinton is out of office now btw. The bombing of aspirin factories in not in vogue anymore.

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Whose responsibility is it to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons?

So you think it IS our responsibilty to make sure that no other country has dangerous weapons? Can you just ****ing say so? You know, have a decisive opinion about SOMETHING?

And what should the world do in the event that Saddam sends a biological or chemical weapon into Israel?

Ummm..... Nothing.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Lincoln
Well thanks for your opinion Boris but I don't agree with it.

I'm not Borris.

Whose responsibility is it to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons?

There are several countries with which the US maintains friendly relations, if not outright alliances, that are violaters of non-proliferation: France, China, Israel, South Africa, India, and Pakistan. Which of these countries should we attack first?

And what should the world do in the event that Saddam sends a biological or chemical weapon into Israel?

Israel's defense is not our responsibility. Furthermore, Israel is exceedingly capable of defending itself, with over two hundred nuclear weapons. Iraq would be committing suicide by attacking Israel with WoMD, and Hussein maybe be stupid, but he isn't suicidal.

[Lincoln]

Why don't you let Boris answer for himself? I did not say the the US was respnsible. If you read the previous page you will see my position (which apparently does not suit you). And your heartless answer concerning the theoretical destruction of Israel says quite a bit about where you stand.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by tandeetaylor


So you think it IS our responsibilty to make sure that no other country has dangerous weapons? Can you just ****ing say so? You know, have a decisive opinion about SOMETHING?

I think we should let the Europeans do it. After all they have a wonderful track record of keeping the world from devasting war.