You're right, invading the UK was a real tipping point.
If somebody invaded the United States, they'd be deposing a democratically-elected government. In Iraq, we desposed a military dictatorship. There is a big difference between the two.
Redwolf, your position makes me ask "Who could have asked, and how would they have asked, for it to be legitimate?"
Well then, I don't think it's a legitimate criticism to Sharpe's comment. If you don't think that anybody can legitimately request that someone topple a dictator (who has deliberately arranged society so that only force can depose him), then the absence of askers will occur whether it's wanted or not.
This would actually matter if Iraqi's had ASKED you to topple their government (they did in 91 we're just late) thus unleashing anarchy on their society.There didn't have to be anarchy. they had a chance to choice peace and didn't.
Since they didn't - your troops are an army of occupation and the new government nothing but a puppet.
A democraticly elected government by the Iraqis in free and fair elections is a puppet of only the Iraqis. They could ask at any point for the coalition to leave but chose not to.
Dont want the facts to get in the way.
Oh, you're very right, his point was not really all that contributory; it was meant to villainise people, regardless of their motives.Ok - then nullify his original point based on the same logic as he was trying to claim that "their resistance isn't warranted because we freed them from a dictatorship".
My point stands though - the existence of a democratically elected government (or lack thereof) is irrelevant if you're "invading someone for their own good" without actually knowing what they themselves want. I would think that an occupying army should expected to be attacked regardless of the government type originally in place.
Oh, you're very right, his point was not really all that contributory; it was meant to villainise people, regardless of their motives.
Im into blaming the evil vile idiots who chose to kill each other. You are right you can't counter that because you know the Iraqis are to blame for the actions they chose. Next thing you'll try to tell me the man who shots his wife can blame his doctor. Its called personal responsiblity. The Iraqis have a choice and they took the path of murder. You can try all you want to blame some one other then the actual people killing but you be a fool to do so.
Sad... I would normally tell people to use a search engine for these things, but as it turns out, the last thread about this was created by you and even then there was already a similar threadBefore you respond READ THIS!
Imagine that the iraq war never happened or nevermind it could of happened its irrelevent i suppose.
Heres the scenario:
Whats happened is YOUR country has been invaded by liberators claiming to free from your oppressors, in the case of the U.S for me, that would be Bush.
These occupiers want to model your countries government after THERES. They would install a puppet government for the time being while they get YOU the insurgents under control.
Would you use insurgent and guerrila tactics to drive away the invaders or would you just not care?
I can tell you i would be driving away the foriegn occupiers as best as i could! However i would not target civilians.
Call me a fool if you want - your country has spent 400 billion dollars and over 3000 lives on an unwinable war that most people told you was unwinable. Who's the fool?
The fool is the man who sits and whines in a nation to selfish to risk its treasures and people to free a nation on the other side of the world from an insane mudreous despotic tyrant who filled mass graves with hundreds of thousands of people, a man who had prisons for children of political prisoners, a man whos sons raped little girls for fun and killed for sport, a man who tortured, a man who gased his own citizens. A fool indeed to cry foul about a nation on the side of freedom to sooth his eggo but forgets the evils that no longer run unabashed.
The war was won in an astoundind display of military power. The aftermath could have been avoided or lessened if only the selfish nations who would rather point and complain instead of helping had the balls to back up their holy then thee high horse rhetoric. But actions are hard and talk is cheap.