The war on "Terror"
- Thread starter Cardinal Ape
- Start date
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
No problem, but maybe you shouldn't dismiss all his thoughts so easily and sometimes also question your own view. For example: Is Jordan less a dictatorship than Iraq or do you just like it better because it is more friendly to Israel?
I have to say I'm not sure, but therefore I wouldn't pick one side...
I have to say I'm not sure, but therefore I wouldn't pick one side...
Cardinal Ape
Chieftain
Thanks for the support here Hitro. It seems that people like Iceblaze believe the west is a perfect democracy. It is a falsehood. There will always exsit elements of corruption. Power attracts the corruptable. If you think the western world is so perfectly governed then you believe to much of the rubbish that 'your supposed to believe'.
I can hardly see when my comments became so funny. This is a serious matter. If America punishes Iraq for breaching resolutions then they would just be selectively ignoring other breaches. In which case people should not say my stance against an attack on Iraq is not without reason. There is no proof to show that Arafat supports the terrorist attacks at all. Besides how can he coordinate any of these attacks when the Israeli army pretty much have put him on 'house arrest'? I have not taken any side on this conflict as of yet as it is pretty hard to establish any clear group on the moral high ground. What I do condem is the repeated assults on urban areas with airstrikes and rocketry that are creating thousands of Palistinian refugees. I know of the casulties on both sides and neither impress me but the amount of refugees right now is quite ridiculous.
As far as resolution 242 goes it stretches the whole way. It may be war but then again the resolution was passed by an external body.
On a side note technically Azerbaijan is a Muslim Democracyand what of Turkey?
I can hardly see when my comments became so funny. This is a serious matter. If America punishes Iraq for breaching resolutions then they would just be selectively ignoring other breaches. In which case people should not say my stance against an attack on Iraq is not without reason. There is no proof to show that Arafat supports the terrorist attacks at all. Besides how can he coordinate any of these attacks when the Israeli army pretty much have put him on 'house arrest'? I have not taken any side on this conflict as of yet as it is pretty hard to establish any clear group on the moral high ground. What I do condem is the repeated assults on urban areas with airstrikes and rocketry that are creating thousands of Palistinian refugees. I know of the casulties on both sides and neither impress me but the amount of refugees right now is quite ridiculous.
As far as resolution 242 goes it stretches the whole way. It may be war but then again the resolution was passed by an external body.
On a side note technically Azerbaijan is a Muslim Democracyand what of Turkey?
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
Cardinal Ape, why do you blame the West for all of the world's problems? Are you applying for a columnist position at the Pyongyang Post?
Greadius
:yeah:
A borderline democracy maybe. Turkey is pretty good, and Indonesia is a decent example of establishing democratic systems. Pakistan used to be a decent example.
If it were only that simple...
UN Resolutions carry no force of law. Enforcement is basically a matter of a nation taking up the mantle and sticking its neck out to enforce them; if they do, they get to have the support of the blue hats.
You can't reasonable expect the United States to begin enforcing all U.N. resolutions as if they were law. The reason we take so much interest in Iraq is because Saddam Hussein posses a realistic security threat to Middle East stability which is a vital national interest to the United States.
The fact that the man is a scumbag, runs an dispicable dictatorship, and that the U.N. 'supports' the action is just a happy convenience. The action will be taken with SUPPORT of the resolution, not taken to ENFORCE the resolution.
Simon Darkshade
Mysterious City of Gold
Legal, Smeagol. It comes down to whether you do the Pharisee act, and interpret the strict letter of the law all the time, or if you stick to its spirit.
Israel has a right to exist. To do this, it needs to defend itself.
For the moment, this means keeping the West Bank.
This is understood and accepted by most in the West, apart th few who think Arafat is a lovely freedom fighter who can do no wrong.
On the matter of a natter about Yasser, he is a proven terrorist, he supports terrorism, he fails to suppress terrorism, and is surrounded and served by terrorists. He does not have to be physically mobile in order to coordinate terrorist action, nor does he need mobility in order to stop them.
But he does not, unless under extreme duress, arrest known terrorists, and use his security forces to prevent such action.
The limited IDF airstrikes are not causing thousands of refugees, unless thousands of people were somehow dwelling in the Palestinian Authority Security buildings that have been hit. Or maybe they all bedded down in the television building... Great lengths are gone to in order to ensure the buildings hit are empty, or nearly so, which does frustrate a lot of Israelis who are looking for more decisive action.
States have been operating selectively, and in accordance with their own national interests from time immemorial. That is objective fact.
Israel has a right to exist. To do this, it needs to defend itself.
For the moment, this means keeping the West Bank.
This is understood and accepted by most in the West, apart th few who think Arafat is a lovely freedom fighter who can do no wrong.
On the matter of a natter about Yasser, he is a proven terrorist, he supports terrorism, he fails to suppress terrorism, and is surrounded and served by terrorists. He does not have to be physically mobile in order to coordinate terrorist action, nor does he need mobility in order to stop them.
But he does not, unless under extreme duress, arrest known terrorists, and use his security forces to prevent such action.
The limited IDF airstrikes are not causing thousands of refugees, unless thousands of people were somehow dwelling in the Palestinian Authority Security buildings that have been hit. Or maybe they all bedded down in the television building... Great lengths are gone to in order to ensure the buildings hit are empty, or nearly so, which does frustrate a lot of Israelis who are looking for more decisive action.
States have been operating selectively, and in accordance with their own national interests from time immemorial. That is objective fact.
Panda
Metal head
After reading through the thread, I can't help but wonder why people like Cardinal Ape are being accused of sympathizing Hussein or even labeled as communists 
Their writing clearly indicates that they do not support neither Saddam nor his regime, and that they (like tens of millions of other people on this planet) have a very hard time seeing the legitimacy and justification in the almost imminent attack on Iraq.
I guess that some posters have an even narrower view on the rest of the world as well as an even smaller tolerance for different opinions than I suspected
Their writing clearly indicates that they do not support neither Saddam nor his regime, and that they (like tens of millions of other people on this planet) have a very hard time seeing the legitimacy and justification in the almost imminent attack on Iraq.
I guess that some posters have an even narrower view on the rest of the world as well as an even smaller tolerance for different opinions than I suspected
Whats the point in saying you dont want an attack on iraq because it will cause casualties while Saddam tortures and kills people every day in iraq, while threatening the lives of thousands of other people in countries like Israel and USA any moment he and his regime exists.
http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/iraq99a.htm
of course it could all be america trying to manipulate us against iraq...
of course it could all be america trying to manipulate us against iraq...
G-Man
A One Man's War
Illegal? That means breaking the law. However, there is no law against taking over areas in war, especially when you were the side that was attacked. The only thing that says this is wrong is a UN resolution that was decided by the majority of countries. Now I ask you, in a democracy, do the majority have the right to tell each individual whethere he is guilty or not? No. You can do it through laws but not in a specific case.
Israel isn't bulldozing or destroying random houses. Only houses used by terrorists and their PA supporters are attacked.
And that 242 resolution you keep on using isn't even effective anymore
Jordan and Egypt already gave up these areas and Israel commited to negotiate about them with the Palestinians. Not to give them up, not to withdraw from them, just to negotiate about them and this is something we did as long as the Palestinians followed most the agreements. Today, according to international law, we have every right to kick Arafat along with all other Palestinian citizens out. The deal was land for peace. If there is no peace they don't deserve no land. So please don't rely on laws that work against you
PS
If you think the US can make Israel withdraw without an agreement you can try it and see what will happen (or, more correctly, won't happen)
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
Couldn't it be? I don't say it is manipulation but giving a source from the US government to prove the US government is a weird idea, don't you think?Originally posted by IceBlaze
http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/iraq/iraq99a.htm
of course it could all be america trying to manipulate us against iraq...
here is another one
http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/countries/iraq?OpenView&Start=1&Count=30&Expandall
http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/countries/iraq?OpenView&Start=1&Count=30&Expandall
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
At least not the US government...
So Iraq abuses human rights. What a surprise
Your country
My country
The US of A
Our Turkish allies
I don't say these countries abuse human rights more than Iraq or just as much. But shouldn't you first look at your own faults and THEN at the other's?
P.S.: Let's not talk about Amnesty's legitimacy, correctness, etc.
After all you brought them up.
So Iraq abuses human rights. What a surprise
Your country
My country
The US of A
Our Turkish allies
I don't say these countries abuse human rights more than Iraq or just as much. But shouldn't you first look at your own faults and THEN at the other's?
P.S.: Let's not talk about Amnesty's legitimacy, correctness, etc.
After all you brought them up.
Greadius
:yeah:
How about international expert consensus? Try reading any books/testimony/reports from the INTERNATIONAL weapons inspectors; one of whom was American the entire time. Read what they had to say...Originally posted by Hitro
Couldn't it be? I don't say it is manipulation but giving a source from the US government to prove the US government is a weird idea, don't you think?
Better yet, read what Iraqi General Hussein Kamel had to say before Saddam had him murdered. His defection provided a lot of the (confirmable by inspectors) information we have about Iraq weapons programs and intent to use them. He was, afterall, one of the 10 most powerful men in Iraq. Or perhaps read what Dr. Hussain al-Shahristani, one of the scientists who used to work on the Iraqi nuclear program, had to say.
The U.S. government source presented was just a synthesis on what these other sources from inside Iraq have said.
Priorities, priorities. We know our own faults, but we're not about to retreat into isolationism until we have a perfect nation. Iraq poses a much greater threat to American lives and vital national interests than the (rarely used) death penalty or suspected terrorist detainment.
Plus there is also this thing called multitasking... we CAN try and take care of both problems at once, ya know?
Hitro
Feistus Raclettus
Greadius I'm neither questioning that Iraq abuses human rights etc. nor that Saddam is a ruthless dictator.
The comment was directed at IceBlaze picking at manipulation claims while giving "evidence" from the side he wanted to prove right.
EDIT: (You're too fast )
The comment was directed at IceBlaze picking at manipulation claims while giving "evidence" from the side he wanted to prove right.
EDIT: (You're too fast
)Well I simply hold a different opinion on this, which doesn't necessarily mean yours is wrong though.
You could. But you (or rather the Bush administration but also other administrations and other countries) simply don't do it.
Actually we (Israel) are...
We only exist for less than 54 years, and we have some new rule or rule modification every few months.
The only subject that is not taken care of intendedly as of now is the 'Shabak law' (a law that lets the GSS (General Security Services) squeeze out info of terrorists using torture)).
We are a very new country, and we are facing more problems than any other country for the last 50 years. give us time
We only exist for less than 54 years, and we have some new rule or rule modification every few months.
The only subject that is not taken care of intendedly as of now is the 'Shabak law' (a law that lets the GSS (General Security Services) squeeze out info of terrorists using torture)).
We are a very new country, and we are facing more problems than any other country for the last 50 years. give us time
