No WMD!

[Qilue]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski
What is the real reaon we went into war with iraq.... Bush wante to make history nd thought he was saving the world please im not laughing. The world needs not the likes of an anus like gw bush.... However something needed tobe done in iraq that should have been handled in that country.

I normally don't get involved in these debates since everyone as a rule excludes our involvement ('our' = Australia).

I believe the reason was to send a message to the Middle East. No so much to the fundamentalists but rather to the governments. The message being that if they aren't going to clean up their act, the west will do it for them. I could be wrong though.

What I am disgusted with was outlined by Lawrence of Arabia which can be distilled down to "If you have no economic value, we don't care what you do.".

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

How much are you worth Qilue? Aahh nevermind I'll just put you on ignore on general principles instead.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Qilue


I normally don't get involved in these debates since everyone as a rule excludes our involvement ('our' = Australia).

I believe the reason was to send a message to the Middle East. No so much to the fundamentalists but rather to the governments. The message being that if they aren't going to clean up their act, the west will do it for them. I could be wrong though.

What I am disgusted with was outlined by Lawrence of Arabia which can be distilled down to "If you have no economic value, we don't care what you do.".

To put fear into the people of the Middle East with death and torment. Also known as terrorism...quite ironic really isn't it?

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison


To put fear into the people of the Middle East with death and torment. Also known as terrorism...quite ironic really isn't it?

I think the irony is that you read what you want to see instead of what is actually written.

[Ned]

Agathon, it is refreshing for someone from the anti-war camp to actually declare, in writing, what they believe the "real" reason is for the Iraq war:

American Imperialism.

All else was pretext.

WMDs were not the real reason.

Saddam's tryanny was not the real reason.

Israel was not the real reason.

American strategic interests in power projection into a vital region was the real reason.

Which, of course, must be opposed by all good enemies of the United States.

And, who, pray tell, are enemies of the United States?

Well, commies certainly are, for one.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Agathon
(3) The whole thing is an attempt to extend US power into central Asia and provide military dominance over the world's most economically important resource. Why? Because China is on course to outpace the US and the Bush administration has made it a national policy that the US should be militarily dominant until the end of time (they've said this ? join the dots, dude).

You could have just said this at the begining and I would have known that the entire post wasn't worth reading.

[Agathon]

You could have just said this at the begining and I would have known that the entire post wasn't worth reading.

I didn't know you could read.

But I can't see what the problem is: Bush's advisers have made it plain in public declarations and in policy that this is their aim. Do you deny that they've said this?

And calling it imperialism is a bit misleading, as is ascribing to them wholly evil motives. Hubris is probably a better description.

Frankly, at least this makes some sort of sense, whereas the other "motives" (oil greed, etc.) do not.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Agathon
But I can't see what the problem is:

It flies in the face of logic if that were the reason.

[Agathon]

It flies in the face of logic if that were the reason.

Hardly. It's about the only reason that makes any sense at all, given that the people responsible for the policy have been saying the same for up to 12-13 years now.

All the other reasons involve obvious absurdities (like Saddam being in league with the Islamists).

[Ned]

Originally posted by Agathon

You could have just said this at the begining and I would have known that the entire post wasn't worth reading.

I didn't know you could read.

But I can't see what the problem is: Bush's advisers have made it plain in public declarations and in policy that this is their aim. Do you deny that they've said this?

And calling it imperialism is a bit misleading, as is ascribing to them wholly evil motives. Hubris is probably a better description.

Frankly, at least this makes some sort of sense, whereas the other "motives" (oil greed, etc.) do not.

Well, Agathon, most of the left calls it American Imperialism precisely to inspire hatred in people who oppose all forms of imperialiam. If they called it "spreading democracy" or some new coined term for that concept, most of the world would join with America, and not oppose it.

[Agathon]

If they called it "spreading democracy" or some new coined term for that concept, most of the world would join with America, and not oppose it.

Spreading manure is more like it.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Agathon
Hardly.

The case you lay out makes absolutely no sense for the realist perspective in which you attempt to cast it. If Bush were the uber-realist you seem to think he is, we wouldn't be in Iraq.

[Agathon]

The case you lay out makes absolutely no sense for the realist perspective in which you attempt to cast it. If Bush were the uber-realist you seem to think he is, we wouldn't be in Iraq.

If he and his cohorts weren't certifiable idiots, you wouldn't be in Iraq.

[Agathon]

Oh and this "realist" vs. "anti-realist" thing is a load of hooey invented by people with nothing better to do.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Agathon

The case you lay out makes absolutely no sense for the realist perspective in which you attempt to cast it. If Bush were the uber-realist you seem to think he is, we wouldn't be in Iraq.

If he and his cohorts weren't certifiable idiots, you wouldn't be in Iraq.

It's because of such utterly stupid comments, that it is very difficult to take anything you state seriously.