SAY NO TO WAR!
- Started
- Last post
- 229 Responses
- ********0
AD
good point.
so why do we want to kill each other?if you want to go with the moral and ethical terms and not strategic, what would you do if yuor enxt door neighbour wants yuor car and wants to kill you?
would you defend yuor self or just try to tell him killing is wrong?
- ********0
AD
tell us .. what should we do than?
ok no war.. now what.. what do yuo want to do?
- AD0
Dinky - i said unecessary killing - I'll admit that there times when humans kill humans (a la self defense) and it's not wrong - but to go in a kill thousand upon thousands over oil is unecesarry from my pov
- unknown0
I guess defending myself...
do you suggest then going to his house and kill him?
I though that was attack.. not defense..
- ********0
AD
what proof do you have that US is going after oil?
- unknown0
I wonder if what reasons would keep people to call ME a terrorist ..
after all, I did kill him.. right...?
well the media will take care of it..
- robotron3k0
Sure, yes, death and war sucks and they usually come hand in hand, and at times you need to protect yourself, for right reasons, because there will always be "a bully on the playground..." but for this conflict i think the US is picking on the wrong "bully"...
The real people making money off the war is NOT America... isn't the real country making money off the war the leading oil producing country, Saudi Arabia!? American doesn't make (that much) oil, we just buy tons of it, American companies take a little off the top and pass on the cost to the US citizens... but Saudi Arabia will end up selling even more to the US before, during and after the war... living in NYC and seeing 9/11 go down with my very own eyes, i have lot's of thoughts about the US Governments actions... apart from that, Saudi Arabia provided the majority of the hijackers on the airplanes that started it all, but they have always remained very quiet. But could it be that we are targeting the wrong country and for so many sensitive reasons the US refuses to point any fingers at Saudi Arabia...?
- AD0
draft up a UN agreement that insists that UN inspectors have full access to Iraq permanently
iraq doesn't want war - they been complying with a shitload lately - why not TRY and avoid war
and what are you going to do with N Korea or with any other leader of a country that the US doesn't like -attack them
war is a last and final measure
you pro-war people can't stop talking about why the war needs to happen right away - why does it - do you really think Sadamm is going to be able to attack anyone with all the attention in his country - why rush in to war - why not TRY and not have to go to war - just fucking try at least
GW and his party are losing steam everyday that passes and they are not in conflict - more opposition to the war in the US grows everyday - so the reason war has to be done immediately is political - it's to save face but don't insist on killing people just because your dumb ass president is feeling political pressure and you follow everything the media and the government say like sheep
- unknown0
hippy.
- AD0
dinky,
because why don't they go take over Sierra leone or another similar country - who are really far more corrupt then iraq - no oil - no interest
anyway that's not really any hard evidence - but what's you point - you want me to say I know it's over oil - I don't know shit for 100%
why didn't you worry about Sadam when Clinton was in power?
- AD0
war monger
- unknown0
:oP
- AD0
peace :)
- Bluejam0
"what should we do then?"
First and foremost, stop pussy footing around...a resolution with an ending 'serious consequences' means jack shit. It's like telling a teenager to be home at 12.00 on a saturday night. Resolution 1441 should have ended..."the use of miltary force will commence on x date if all conditions have not been met."
This resolution should have also included unfeted access by the U.N to intelligence reports regarding where these WMD's are, for the inspectors to dismantle and verify the legality of the use of force should all conditions be not met.
Should the use of force be necessary, then U. N peace keepers take an active role as observers and accompany any allied forces into Iraq. Once militray action is over the U.N is given command of Iraq with supprt from it's neighbours.
- unknown0
love <3
- ********0
why should UN have access?
in fact Iraq is still a soverign nation.no body wants war. well except GW.
dont even compare N Korea with Iraq. differnt level of conflict.
and US has gone and taken out military leaders that they dont like,.... Noreaga for example..
In an absence of bi-polar system, Hegemony of US is unstable. US will fight multiple cell structures globally.
While other nations will rise as US loses its grip. Such as China
- robotron3k0
and let's not even begin with China, for they will be the next and greatest super powers we will ever see in our lifetime!
- ********0
i did worry about saddam and bin ladin while clinton was in power..
remember, under clinton, US bombed Al Queda training camp in Afgen.
Clinton let northern kurds die when they asked for US support in their failed over throw attempt. Most of CIA pulled out after that.
Clinton also set up to track Al Queda for terrorism but failed to give significant budget.
- AD0
okay I take it back - pro-war people are super smart
go war - go Bush - YAYYYYYY WAR
out
- Bluejam0
"remember, under clinton, US bombed Al Queda training camp in Afgen. "
Wasn't there a dirty dress, a cigar and brunette involved in that caper?