The axis of weasel strikes back

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
WE were attacdked on 9/11. We were certainly not going to wait to respond until we had a post-war plan for afghanistan ready. So we had to do it on the fly.

Okay, I grant you that. But it has been over a year now, and there's still no plan.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

I always find it ironic that the US didn't regard Saddam as a thug before he got the gall to invade Kuwait.

We didn't consider the Chinese to be thugs before Tiananmen Square either. What can I say; we're bad judges of character...

What a joke this is!

The PRC had been a thug, what with embargo during the Korean War and all that jazz, all the way up till some time in the '70s. Then it is no longer a thug, what you said notwithstanding. It'd be rather interesting for W. to shake hands and be friends with thugs.

Wait a minute, didn't Cheney do that?

[Jac de Molay]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

I always find it ironic that the US didn't regard Saddam as a thug before he got the gall to invade Kuwait.

We didn't consider the Chinese to be thugs before Tiananmen Square either. What can I say; we're bad judges of character...

At least we didn't actively support the Chinese like we did Hussein. Even after he gassed the Kurds, we were very chummy with him, and conveniently looked the other way when he did the same to the Iranians.

Jac

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Except for one little detail. The US was not authorized to invade Iraq, replace the regime, nor disarm the country. It was authorized to liberate Kuwait. If the US wants to return to war under the '90 state of hostilities, it must limit itself to the liberation of Kuwait. Once Kuwait is liberated, then the war ends. As Kuwait is already liberated, the war is over already.

Che, simply on legalities, our War on Yugoslavia was not "legal" if "legal" means authorized by the UN SC. However, the West believed that Milosovic was beginning one more ethnic cleansing operation. You debate that. But assuming it was true, did the West have the right to intervene to stop it? After all, ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity - that is a crime against the entire world.

[Dinner]

They were allowed to secure Kuwait using any and all means necisary. If one concludes that Kuwait is still not secure (remembering that just yesterday Saddam's mouth piece said Iraq might invade Kuwait if the U.S. looked ready to attack) then they would still be with in the leater of the U.N. resolution.

[Tripledoc]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
It would help if the Europeans would follow through on their aid commitments, though.

I agree that it is the reponsibility of the EU to clear up the mess afterwards and pay for reconstruction. However, there has to be a political settlement to the issue which takes us beyond the mere installation of a puppet government or the imposition of martial law in Iraq. What we have seen in Afghanistan does not bode well for the future. To my knowledge only Kabul is a safe place for investment at the moment.

Also in Palestine we have seen that the millions of Euros used to help the Palestinian authority in building infrastructure is being destroyed on a continual basis by the order of Sharon.

The regime in Washington must provide the EU with guarantees that there is a political path to peace and stability after the war if they demand that the EU should be responsible for aid and reconstruction.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Che, simply on legalities, our War on Yugoslavia was not "legal" if "legal" means authorized by the UN SC. However, the West believed that Milosovic was beginning one more ethnic cleansing operation. You debate that. But assuming it was true, did the West have the right to intervene to stop it? After all, ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity - that is a crime against the entire world.

Were it the case the the US actually believed that Yugoslavia was waging a war of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo (all historical evidence to the countrary), then yes, I could agree that the West had a duty to intervene. That's why they sold the war this way.

In reality, the war was about Yugoslavia refusing to sign the Ramboulliet Accords. The war finally ended when the West agreed to Yugoslavia's original conditions (which were subsequently ignored), and not because of the bombing.

In every part of the former Yugoslavia that has been occupied by NATO, state property has been forceably sold off, even against the will of the majority of the people. The "free market" market was introduced at gunpoint.