View Single Post
Old April 1st, 2005, 07:43 AM  
Awesome Poster
Join Date: March 21, 2004
Location: England - United Kingdom

Yes, but the whole reasoning behind the war was faulty to begin with.

Countries like the USA and UK are expected to defend international security. That is true. Yet there are many dictated countries that were more of a threat, a much larger threat than the one Iraq was.

It doesn't matter about the progress in Iraq, people have died and much damage to their society has taken place. How excellent that the US is attempting (not as you over emphasize) to rebuild Iraq. But before hte war there weer NOT daily skirmishs, terrorist suicide attacks on their OWN people, looting, dead children.

Is that justified?

Do you not remember the press. The US Gvt made it appear to be a huge alarming threat coming from Iraq, using words like terrorism, and weapons of MASS! DESTRUCTION! SHOCK HORROR!

In reality, and in the evidence they had from UN weapons inspectors, Iraq has no capabilitity to build (or possess) a weapon of mass destruction.

The US has thousands of nuclear missiles, what makes this justified?

Are you so childish as to glorify war? War should never take place, only in the most dire situations is war ever used.

How do you think Americans would feel if another country was threatning war on them if they didn't give up their Nuclear Weapons, used to protect their country. You didn't think about that did you. Iraq had no 'beef' with the US, infact the US was supplying biochemical weapons to Iraq only 10 years before they invaded Kuwait. Was Kuwait the USA? No. That war was completly justified, the US came i as a hero and protected the underdog, but invading another country is not protecting the under dog, most Iraqis supported Saddam and the batth party.

Cultures are not all the same!

If anyone wants immediate advice don\'t hestitate to contact to me on AIM (AOL instant messenger) - aim: vodkasmodka

Eccentric! Not egocentric!
Shaolin is offline   Reply With Quote