nomme   10 #13 Posted February 12, 2003 So Guest, what is the alternative solution offered by our Anti War demonstrators ????? I haven't heard one yet !  What exactly do you perceive as "the problem"? Please supply evidence/facts to support your proposition.  regards Nomme Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest Guest   #14 Posted February 12, 2003 I, too, have family who serve in the armed forces (including two uncles and a cousin). I very much respect the fact that they risk their lives and I certainly do not think that I am spitting in their faces by arguing that we should not go to war and they should not have to risk their lives.  I used to think that anti-war protesters were missing something vital: that sometimes you do have to fight (physically) to defend yourself. It's difficult because I still believe that on a basic level this may still be true. However, I have increasingly come to understand that most of the time these situations can be avoided and that it is in fact those who argue for war who frequently fail to see the wider picture.  Did you know that America armed and trained Bin Laden (a ruthless terrorist even then) during the 80s so he would fight against Russia? Britain sold arms to Iraq so they would fight Iran. They also armed Iran in return. The West is not an innocent victim of a worldwide Moslem plot - they are powerful and active and have been creating problems in the world for years.  No Iraqis were involved in Sep 11. Saudi Arabians were - shall we bomb them? Iraq isn't going to attack us because if it did, we'd nuke it. Saddam knows this. We are trying to humiliate a country in a way that we would never expect to be humiliated ourselves. All the time, its people suffer and starve and now are about to be bombed. How can this be a solution?  Sorry for the long message, but these are points that need explanation and discussion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Michael_W   11 #15 Posted February 12, 2003 nommedenet wrote: What exactly do you perceive as "the problem"? Please supply evidence/facts to support your proposition  War on Iraq ?  The Problem : Saddam Hussein  Evidence/Facts : Information supplied by US and UK governments, NATO etc..  My postings on here focus on the understanding (or lack of), with the Anti War demonstrators. I may be being unfair and generalising, but I can just picture them now:  Anti US/Bush/UK/Blair slogans etc.. Socialist Workers ????????? Pacifists and 'do gooders' Left Wing MPs and a sprinkling of so called celebs...  I'm sorry but they just make me sick !! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Moon Maiden   10 #16 Posted February 12, 2003 You seriously think that the UK would waste Nuclear bombs on Hussain when the special forces could take him out?  I am seriously supprised at that comment. And that is not taking into account the fact that if either the UK or the US launched nuclear attacks then the leaders of the other countries against this war would have no choice but to launch against us.  Saddam knows this - he isn't afraid of being nuked.  I agree that Bush is most likely using this thing with Iraq and the fact we should have finished him off the first time round to get into a revenge war with whoever it was took out the towers. But I want Saddam out of the picture.  At this precise moment in time (and I shudder saying this) we need 'ole Thatcher back - because our leaders haven't got the ****** to sort this situation out in a peaceful way. She managed it with Gadafi did she not?  My memory may be off as I was in junior school at the time - but I remember alot of worry about war with Gadafi - and the ole battleaxe never did it and put him back in his place.  So if you believe that situation can be sorted out in other ways than combat (which is a view I share too) Give me one for this situation.  Which political figure is going to have enough respect, balls and charisma to convince these religious fanatics and madmen to stand down?  Moon Maiden Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
nomme   10 #17 Posted February 13, 2003 Originally posted by "Michael_W"  War on Iraq ?  The Problem : Saddam Hussein  So are you saying war is justifiable in order to take out just 1 man? Um.. like they tried to with Bin Laden and Castro?  Originally posted by "Michael_W"  Evidence/Facts : Information supplied by US and UK governments, NATO etc..  Oh like that 12 year old cut 'n paste student report - yeah right. Could you quote a few URLs that detail this 'information'?  Originally posted by "Michael_W"  My postings on here focus on the understanding (or lack of), with the Anti War demonstrators. I may be being unfair and generalising, but I can just picture them now:  Anti US/Bush/UK/Blair slogans etc.. Socialist Workers ????????? Pacifists and 'do gooders' Left Wing MPs and a sprinkling of so called celebs...  I'm sorry but they just make me sick !!  Fair enough. It's just that to me if you are so anti -"anti-war" you must be pro war. I'm just interested in your views as to why you think war is justifiable. It's just that I've not seen or heard any decent argument to justify war on Iraq - just a lot of spin doctoring. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Moon Maiden   10 #18 Posted February 13, 2003 So are you saying war is justifiable in order to take out just 1 man? Um.. like they tried to with Bin Laden and Castro?  And Hitler you moron - or have you forgot just what ONE man can accomplish???  Apart from which - as I understand our special forces - that being the United Kingdom - were stopped from going for Bin Laden. The yanks couldn't organise a p*** up in a brewery.  Moon Maiden Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
nomme   10 #19 Posted February 13, 2003 Moon Maiden wrote: And Hitler you moron - or have you forgot just what ONE man can accomplish???  Calm down. No need for name calling. I'm quite aware of the second world war thank you. As I recall it, it started with Germany attacking another country. I was merely pointing out that the spectacular failures in the past of going after just ONE man. Now justify your argument for attacking Iraq.  Moon Maiden wrote: Apart from which - as I understand our special forces - that being the United Kingdom - were stopped from going for Bin Laden. The yanks couldn't organise a p*** up in a brewery. Moon Maiden  That's interesting - what was the reason given for that then? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
disillusioned   10 #20 Posted February 13, 2003 Only a fool actually wants war, but surely the people who are currently handwringing and going on marches to protest can see the big picture. Saddam Hussein is a tyrant who actively oppresses his own people and is a danger, not only to the middle east but to the world. I agree with the other posters who say he should have been taken out the first time, but it was the Anti-War brigade who kicked up such a fuss that stopped this occuring. So now 12 years down the line, Saddam is still making a mockery of the UN, see todays news for example, the weapons inspectors have found missiles which contravne UN resolutions! He needs taking out and need now. Lets be honest though, it cannot and will not stop there. North Korea has started up a Nuclear program and has already stated they will fire first if neccessary. Al Qaeda seem to be gearing up to kill more civillians, in our owncountry, we have religious fanatics whose self declared purpose is to destroy us and our way of life. Do these marchers think that sitting round a campfire, holding hands and singing peace songs really think that it is going to change their views and life a nice, orderly peaceful life. Get real, if and when a major terrorist incident happens or should we do nothing about Hussain and Korea, they will have the blood of many thousands of innocent people on their collective hands. Ok, there may well be civillian deaths in a conflict with Iraq, something we should all fear and abhor, but the big difference is the enemys of democracy will actually try to kill civilians, whereas our stated aim is to take out their military and provide stability and peace for future generations. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
lily   10 #21 Posted February 13, 2003 Originally posted by "disillusioned"  whereas our stated aim is to take out their military and provide stability and peace for future generations.  that may be the "stated aim", but the opportunity to control the oil fields of the middle east will have a lot to do with US and Britain's actions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
disillusioned   10 #22 Posted February 13, 2003 Do you honestly believe that our government and the US government would be so stupid to take over the oil fields of Iraq, after the furore caused by those syaing that is the aim? Personally I dont believe that for a second. It would cost them dear come election time. Both the UK and US govenment have stated that the oil belongs to the people of Iraq, therefore the oil fields will be returned to their rightful owners not the mad dictator we have now. I truly hope this is the case. Oil is not worth more than human life, I agree with the stated aims and I trust them to carry it out with the minimum of civilian casualties. I cannot percieve this as a war for oil, a war to remove a dictator hell bent on destruction yes, maybe a way for the US to gain another ally in the middle east by providing a sympathetic gvernment to assit the war on terror possibly. What I fail to understand is the people who believe Hussain should be mollified and allowed to remain in power. A reasonable arguement please! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Michael_W Â Â 11 #23 Posted February 13, 2003 nommedenet wrote: Â Fair enough. It's just that to me if you are so anti -"anti-war" you must be pro war. I'm just interested in your views as to why you think war is justifiable. It's just that I've not seen or heard any decent argument to justify war on Iraq - just a lot of spin doctoring. Â Have I said I am anti -"anti-war" or that I am pro war ???? I have said the "Anti War demonstrators" make me sick ! I see a few postings on here that share my views on this matter so I will not repeat them. I trust the UK and US govts stance on the Iraq situation, and history suggests that miltary action by the UK/US/Allies has been needed and justified ! The UK and the US are not the evil powers that our "Anti War"/ "Muslim Fanatics" portray in their "Spin". Go and have your demonstrations etc....your rights as a UK citizen allow you to do so. Oh and here are a couple of links : http://www.stopwar.org.uk/ http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Moon Maiden   10 #24 Posted February 13, 2003 Basically for those who have called me in challenge - my views are shared with Michael and Disillisioned. PLain and simple - they have both put wonderfully just how I feel about the whole thing.  As I have said before you are entitled to your protests and right to speak out - but I am now 100% of the conclusion that you cannot educate pork!  Moon Maiden Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...