Quote:
Originally Posted by Voice_of_the_Soul12,13,01
I'm gonna regret posting here, but what the hell.
I have mixed feelings about the war in Iraq.
As far as war goes, I have no problem with it if;
1. It is to remove a major threat to the world.
2. Conquest for the greater good.
3. Retaliation (ie, 9/11 attack).
I don't support the starting of wars, unless it's unavoidable. I think of war as I do natural disasters; both have their own share of conflict that humans must overcome and both involve not only people but sentient life overall. But while most natural disasters mainly deal with Man Vs. Nature conflict, war goes deeper than that; Man Vs. Man, Man Vs. Machine, and Man Vs. Himself. War is the ultimate, I guess, competition where death cam happen at anytime, and it is just one more way of eliminating the weak and preserving the strong, even though that's not the reason wars are started.
Part of me wishes the War in Iraq hadn't started; it wasn't our place to remove Saddam Hussein from power. We should have been looking for a peaceful solution instead pushing for this war.
The other part of me is glad we started it; No one else had the will to do it, and Saddam Hussein was a dangerous dictator and could have become more dangerous.
I don't think we should be staying in there to try to fix their government and form it into something we want; we don't own the country, so we have no right to regulate what kind of government it becomes
But I don't think we should leave; While we have no right to control what they become, I do think that by leaving, we run the risk of another dictator rising up and taking Saddam's place.
As I said, mixed feelings.
|
You do realize that it was the United States who put Saddam Hussein in power in the 1960's and we were the ones giving him military and monetary aid while he was commiting the atrocities that qualify him as a 'dangerous dictator'.
i guess ill actually reply to each part of this.
1. he was not a threat to the world, polls indicate that he wasn't even a threat to the kuwatis, a people who had already been invaded by him once. he was a fledgling dictator living off of decades old American aid.
2. er, conquest for the greater good? what is the greater good in all of this? 100,000 iraqis dead? increased threat of terrorism? i'm missing this greater good.
3. saddam hussein had no al queda connections, a point which has been conceded by the bush administration, are you still basking in that hollow justification?
About you being glad that we started it because no one else had the will to do it. are you up on your historical facts much? i guess you don't recall the Shi'ite uprising in the early 90's which would have very likey overthrown Saddam from power, but was crushed with US authorization and assistance. I think that those shia muslims had the will to overthrow saddam, the only problem is that the US wouldn't let them do it. so i guess your whole "we were the only ones with the will to do it" argument is kaput. We were the only ones with the will to do it because we were the only ones who were painting him as this grave threat to world security. the rest of the world could see through our bullsh*t, and realized that saddam was not an imminent threat.