Black Shuk wrote:dead inside wrote:
Like Mário Soares said, this war is a big cradle of terrorists.
Don't be surprised if one of these kids - now children - is the next to pilot a plane against the Pentagon (let's hope it's only the Pentagon!...).
Then don't come saying "oh lord, why us, what have we done, blah, blah, blah..."
I'm not scared. It's America that should be scared because America is growing TODAY the terrorists of TOMORROW. "Serves you right" explains it better?
Look, a lot of people are pissed off with George Bush right now (I despise the guy) But this attitude that America somehow deserves to be attacked by terrorists, that it will 'reap what it sows' is very frightening- Any one who thinks this has the same mindset as the terrorists themselves.
I knew you'd say that. Anyone who tries to explain why America is the favourite terrorist target is a terrotist too.
"If you're not with us you're against us." I'm so glad I live in a democratic country!
The co-alition forces are not evil, callous baby-killing scum, they are ordinary people no morally inferior to you or me, they are not indiscriminately killing as many civilians as possibe, they are trying to kill as few as possible.
Oh, thank God, I'm so reassured now! "As few as possible"... What about NONE? What about undermining Sadam's regime through diplomatic means? Yes, it takes longer, but democracy takes a long time to grow. Imposed democracy is no less than disguised dictatorship - like what's happening in Afganistan.
Yes, one Iraqi life lost is a tragedy, but thousands are dying every year due to Saddam, for example the marsh Arabs in the south of Iraq who are simply not being given any food by Saddam's regime because he has a grudge against them.
Not to mention the terrible restrictions imposed to Iraq after the first Gulf war, by us "free western countries"...
And you don't seem to mind if the pentagon gets destroyed
No, I really don't. It's a military facility just as important as any of Sadam's palaces although I'm sure Americans think it's more important because it's American, the same way one American life worths how many?... other lives?
- I guess the thousands who earn a **** wage doing admin work in the pentagon don't deserve to live.
Colateral damage is an expression invented by Americans. Let's hope civil losses are "as few as possible", like you said yourself...
Yeah, it doesn't sound so good when "as few as possible" are Americans, does it?
dead inside wrote: You didn't get any of what I've said, did you?
And you didn't get what I said! Bush and Blair are risking the lives of their armed forces to liberate the Iraqis from a despicable man.
What "liberation", gosh, do you really believe it?!
In these times I remember East Timor, a nation repressed by Indonesia for 3 decades and the States not willing to "liberate" s*** because the regime had Australian support, and if it wasn't for Portugal lobbying the United Nations the massacres there would go on today still. When finally the Sates gave their "kind" permission to intervene, Australia became the saviour at the eyes of the world. Big propaganda, you see? We've done the work, they take the glory. The States couldn't care less, that nation of freedom fighters! Oh please!
Nearly every other Arab leader, and most Iraqis, wants this **** to go, he DOES threaten world peace.
You'll see what happens to world peace after this preposterous imposition of the law of the strongest!
We cannot think "Let's just leave the Iraqis to suffer because I am scared of bombs" - that is a bad (but understandable) attitude.
I didn't say that.
And It is true that no-one knows what will happen with regards to terrorism in the future- helping bring stability to the middle east will surely mean less terrorists?
What will happen is the States creating another puppet to rule Iraq (like they supported Sadam at first...) till this new puppet goes out of hand and there it starts again. On to world domination.
One day it has to stop. The United States have to realise no one has given them permission to police the Earth.
Bush and Blair have made it clear that the Israel/Palestine crises is next on their agenda.
So, they'll free Palestine of that awful man Sharon?
dead inside wrote:The reason for not taking action in Iraq should be because all diplomatic ways had not worked - which didn't happen
But they did try! they tried everything they could! If you have a better idea to get rid of Saddam Hussein, I'm sure Bush would love to hear it
That's where you are mistaken. Bush wants to hear "boost the economy" and "the oil guys are happy".