Quote from max401:
Well said... by a full blown
grassy-knoll-cia-military-industrial-plot/conspiracy nut case.
This is getting ridiculous. I mean
me and max being in complete agreement?
Candle's arguments are not only over the top, but so oversimplified as to defy any real coherent response. 'Cause how do you respond to madness?
Of COURSE the US will not preclude the use of nuclear weapons. We have them, and the mere threat of this should be enough to discourage any thoughts of using any kinds of weapons of mass destruction by Iraq. Nuclear, biological or chemical. And we know that whatever Saddam has, he will use if he thinks he can.
So it really is not a matter of deterring Saddam. Obviously, he is beyond reason. But he can't push all the buttons himself. He can't personally shoot every soldier that defies his orders that would assure the death and destruction of Iraq. So the threat of the US using nukes is just a tactic. The threat alone has always been enough. It prevented war with the USSR for 50 years.
The "Shock and Awe" tactic is far more likely to be deployed. Not something anyone wants to see, but again, the threat of it may accomplish what we want. Which is simply to get rid of Saddam.
But whatever tactics are used (and I highly doubt that nuclear weapons will be used; the "fallout" both literally and figuratively speaking would just be too risky), it is essential to assure the quick and complete success of any conflict if indeed conflict is unavoidable. I, for one, hope that it IS avoidable. But, if not, the prevention of American casualties should be our first and most important strategic objective.
The prevention of the destruction and killing of non-combatants (the Iraqi people) should also be a top priority. The best way to achieve these results is to disable the leadership. If Baghdad has to be leveled, that would certainly be a shameful scenario. But better Baghdad than New York.
Now Candle says that the "repercussions" of an attack are his concern. And the topic of this thread. And it is understandable to think that if the US were to level Baghdad, then anti- American sentiment will expand, and the "repercussions" could, or would result in more attacks on the US and it's interests.
But there is another side of this issue to think about.
We have seen that the terrorists that perpetrated the horrors of 9/11 were willing to die for their cause. What we have not seen, or heard, is exactly what their cause was. So far, no one, not Bin Laden, NO ONE has stood up and said "WE DID IT" (or even "WHY"). And what did they accomplish? They killed 3000 innocent people trying to provide for their families. There is a lot of empathy for those people. Everyone, no matter what their political or religious beliefs are has this one thing in common. Bring home the bread for yourself and your family. So while surely there are those America haters that may have rejoiced in the devastation in NY of that day, even they, for the most part, can more easily relate to the men or women who were working and died that day than they can to the hijackers who killed them.
So contrary to what Candle may believe, the general population of the world will clearly understand that terrorism will not accomplish any goals. How many virgins are there in Paradise anyway? Enough to go around for everyone? Clearly the masterminds and bankrollers of these terrorists are cowards. They take no credit for what they did. Only the 19 "martyrs" did. But posthumously.
But American soldiers have fought and died for freedom for over 200 years. And they did it without masks and without the objective of destroying civilian targets and innocent people.
This isn't going to stop because we are afraid of "repercussions". Repercussions have always been a risk of any foreign policy. No matter what we do, (or don't do), and no matter where, it will piss off someone. So it goes.
Quote from candletrader:
The only thing at work behind the scenes is a coalition of powerful lobby groups (significantly, the Jewish and Oil lobbies
(snip)
... where the reality is that its actually about oil control and swimming in the gratitude of thankful lobby groups... let's not forget that both lobby groups hold the keys to very significant sources of funds for "helpful" politicians...
Now THIS makes a lot of sense
. I don't know how many Jews are posting to ET. Or how many "oil people". As far as I know for sure, I may be the only Jew here (or the only one to admit it....though I suspect Traderfut2000 may be a closet Jew
)
So, from my personal point of view, as a Jew, let me ask you this:
What the fuck are you talking about?????
Is this supposed to be about Israel? I mean really, what is this about? Israel is our ally in the Middle East. True. And Israel is inhabited mainly by Jews. True. But the religion is a sidebar. Israel is our ally because it is the only democracy in the region. Pure and simple. If Isreal were inhabited my Martians, and they too were the only democracy in the area, they would be our allies as well. Very simple.
As for the "oil people"....well Bush Senior was running the show in '91, and we did not take the the oil then. Israel was running the show in '73, and '67 and '56 and '48, and they didn't take the oil either. What an opportunity missed......a Jewish-Oil Zionist Empire. Just sort of went by the boards though. Guess it didn't occur to them. Or to us in '91 'till it was too late. We weren't thinking fast enough on our feet I guess.
Certainly it is wise to consider "repercussions" of any act. Especially international confrontations. I mean, I worry what the repercussions could be if I beat out someone for a parking spot. Glad I don't have to decide whether to nuke a country.
Concern is one thing. But irrational conclusions based on extremist propaganda, compounded by fear of standing up for what we believe is right (protecting our freedom) is just plain paranoia.
Do I trust Dubya with absolute certainty to make every right decision? No, I can only hope he does. Can I trust his cabinet and other advisors to give him every option? Yes, I can. Because that's their job. And they do it. Between them, yes, they do have the brains and the knowledge to make decisions. They certainly have more facts to work with then we do. We only know what they want us to know. Which is how it should be in times of crisis. I believe in the right to know what's going on (freedom of information). But under these circumstances, it is more important that everyone DOES NOT KNOW all the factors that will figure into a final decision. State security does matter.
Would I be more comfortable with someone else making the final decisions? Maybe, but it's not relevant. Dubya is the Man now. And as goofy as he sometimes appears to be, he is smart enough to know the difference between right and wrong. And that is what this is all about.
The best solution would be to avoid conflict altogether. Absolutely. And I hope it can be achieved. Kennedy managed to do it. The situation was more tense and the stakes higher (on the surface). Right thinking should win out. Saddam is apparently not to be counted on to be "right thinking". But as I said, he can't wage war by himself. And real soldiers (not terrorists) don't want to die. That means they lose. I hope that Saddams real soldiers will realize that they will lose no matter what. Better to lose and live than to die and lose anyway.
My guess is that the point will come where those Iraqi leaders will say "Hey, Saddam....get a grip! Beat feet! We ain't gonna die for you, and we won't let our country be destroyed for you". And so his reign will end with a whimper. Just my guess. But it seems to make sense to me.
This is not a shootout at the OK Corral. This is a potential end of the world scenario. So all we can do is hope that god is on our side. Candle mentions Jesus in his signature. So I have to assume he believes in God. If this is so, then who's side is God on? (of course, this becomes a problem when you have conflicting gods....as the case is.....that's a big part of the problem). But Candle, who is tougher? The Jesus version of God or the Allah of Mohammed?
Glad I'm a Jew. Don't have to discern a difference.
Right Traderfut?
Peace (as long as possible)
rs7
