Somewhat war related..but not really..bear with me.....

This could go in OT, but there is alot of ethical and political discussion that can come up.


Anywho......


Whether or not we all agree or disagree about the war and certain things that have gone on concerning the war, we all seem to agree that saddam needs to go for a better Iraq.


That being said....what we are doing is no different than everyday ppl and thei everday lives.

Here is what I mean.

Let\'s take unicorn or clowd for pure example only.

They both seem to be the most radical in terms of thought and or reasoning in here.

So here is the question.

Would it be ok to storm their homes and kill them and anyone that fought for them?


Discuss........

[videoholic]

No.  that would be like going and killing Jesse Jackson.  Views are skewed, yet they haven\'t done anything to harm anyone.

Now if Clowd dropped gas all over a bunch of people and wiped out entire cities to the tunes of 100\'s of thousands of people, well I think the dude should be popped.

I guess it is different when within our boundries. But it is really none of our business.

Terrible as it maybe, it just isnt.

Do you constantly patrol to prevent burgularies, rapes and home invasions? No.

If Clowd had chemical weapons and missiles in his backyard then yes we should send a tomahawk through his front door.

Ace

Im also starting to believe that you guys are missing my point.

We are invading Iraq b/c we feel the need to.

Just b/c you feel the need to doesnt mean you can. Nor does it make it right or ok.

luckee,

If someone is a threat to you or your family, are you going to be proactive in protecting them or are you going to wait until someone in your family is slaughtered?

Ace

Ahhh..but this is the twist we are with in Iraq.

A threat or a perceived threat is the true question.

For the war or against the war..we all know saddam isnt and hasnt been a threat to any of the coalition countries involved in this war except for the kurds and other groups, WITHIN iraq, with exception to the Isrealis which arent involved.

everyone wants to speculate about what he has done that indirectly affects us.

IE..paying the family members of suicide bombers and allowing al qaeda members to resid ein his country.

How often have the saudis\' funded terrorism, yet we dont fight them. How cruel is the royal saudi government to its ppl, yet we dont attack them. How many UN resolutions has Isreal broken(67) but we dont attack them. How many ppl involved in 9/11 were saudis..yet we dont attack them.

[videoholic]

The Saudi government bugs the hell out of me.  I don\'t completely understand why we stand by that country.  Although I have heard they are a good source of intelligence info.

Honestly, their are a huge ammount of other countries that have the same problems as Iraq, but we don\'t attack them - now, i don\'t think its for the oil, because if that were the case, we\'d go into Saudi Arabia instead...

Anyone have any thoughts on why we seem to ignore other countries that do the same stuff as Iraq?

Thats what I would like to know.

Well, one thought I have is, Iraq has always caused problems, and really isn\'t one of our allies, while on the other hand, Saudi Arabia and Israel are somewhat allies of ours, not Saudi Arabia much, but they still have let us use their bases in the past....

A region of the world i think is greatly ignored are many countries in Africa, Africa is really a poor poor continent, suffering from aids, wars between militant groups, and that murdering of many people. We don\'t try and go liberate anyone in Africa.....

So yeah, I don\'t think a war with any small country in Africa would gain much support, but in Iraqs case a somewhat small link to terrorisim can be established, and may be seen as an easier place to get support for a war.

Originally posted by videoholic
The Saudi government bugs the hell out of me.  I don\'t completely understand why we stand by that country.  Although I have heard they are a good source of intelligence info.

Hello. Oil?

Luckee, this very question was debated in The UN. If it were any other country, The US and Britain wouldn\'t be able to do shit. This action was taken under Security Council resolutions which provided for the use of force, given a certain level of compliance, or lack there of. If it were purely about terrorism or weapons of mass distruction, Iran or North Korea would\'ve been better targets.

Just wait...

They may be next...