POLL: The repercussions of a US attack on Iraq
- Thread starter candletrader
- Start date
candletrader sez:
Let us begin with the assumption that Iraq is cleared by the majority of the Security Council of the possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs).
Pretty unlikely assumption, but okay, let's run with that for a second or two.
Then he goes on to say:
Let us also assume that the majority of the civilized world holds out its hand to Iraq, welcoming it back into the embrace of the international community.
I'm getting warm and fuzzy all over, and I actually detect the beginning of goosebumps.
Let's see . . . the majority of the civilized world (or at least 3 of 5 members, some of which are even alleged to be at least semi-civilized, or who were indeed civilized thousands of years ago but who have had really serious recent lapses, such as Tien An Men Square, the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, the war in Chechnya, or terror in Algeria, or sinking Greenpeace boats in New Zealand) is going to embrace Saddam Hussein, the man who, like it or not, is the personification of Iraq.
I'm touched by this civility.
It would indeed be a wondrous moment in world history when these civilized people can show the U.S. how barbaric it is. Yes, we can see the cultural and moral superiority of this new elite from both its deeds and its words, and we can even see its good business sense at having billions of dollars of oil contracts at stake in all of this. Of course, these contracts still leave that moral elite free to accuse the U.S. of having oil as its basic motivation, but when you are truly morally superior you can get away with this kind of honest, inadvertent contradiction.
I'm always touched by hypocrisy when I see it, too, especially when it is apparently accompanied by a total lack of either awareness or shame.
The (civilized?) world is going to demonstrate the supremacy of its high moral principles, not to mention its raw intelligence, by embracing a guy who:
1) invaded Iran and wasted a generation of his country's youth(not to mention Iranian youth) getting his butt kicked in a futile and needless war
2) a guy who seriously tried to ERASE a MEMBER STATE of the United Nations (you know, part of that allegedly civilized world) from the map of the earth
3) a guy who without any inhibitions employed chemical weapons against a backward village in his own country
4) a guy who, it is widely held, likes to listen to soundtracks of his rack and thumbscrew artists torturing anyone in his citizenry bold enough (or stupid enough) to speak out even mildly in dissent against him, as he nods off to sleep at night or while reading his government controlled fishwrap.
Yes brothers and sisters, this is a man I want to embrace. How the (civilized?) world will demonstrate its wisdom, and its compassion for all people, victims and victimizers alike, with this warm embrace. Let us welcome him home. Let us set a table for him. Let us purify him with a ritual bath of petrodollars.
Yes, brethren, let us indeed take this man into our hearts, for surely he is simply misunderstood. At his core, he is likely to be just a regular guy next door, a guy who was probably actually cajoled into doing all those nasty things by that terrible Great Satan, the United States. Let us embrace him, so that we can demonstrate our superior moral principles, and let us be a role model for him. Surely there is no such thing as an evil person. Let's roundly condemn the United States for wanting to rid Iraq of this "leader" who literally shot his way into power, who maintains his power only through terror and the barrels of many guns, and who rather constantly demonstrates designs on his neighbors' real estate. Let us show the United States our moral superiority with this embrace. Now, let us all pray.
Amen
Let us begin with the assumption that Iraq is cleared by the majority of the Security Council of the possession of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs).
Pretty unlikely assumption, but okay, let's run with that for a second or two.
Then he goes on to say:
Let us also assume that the majority of the civilized world holds out its hand to Iraq, welcoming it back into the embrace of the international community.
I'm getting warm and fuzzy all over, and I actually detect the beginning of goosebumps.
Let's see . . . the majority of the civilized world (or at least 3 of 5 members, some of which are even alleged to be at least semi-civilized, or who were indeed civilized thousands of years ago but who have had really serious recent lapses, such as Tien An Men Square, the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, the war in Chechnya, or terror in Algeria, or sinking Greenpeace boats in New Zealand) is going to embrace Saddam Hussein, the man who, like it or not, is the personification of Iraq.
I'm touched by this civility.
It would indeed be a wondrous moment in world history when these civilized people can show the U.S. how barbaric it is. Yes, we can see the cultural and moral superiority of this new elite from both its deeds and its words, and we can even see its good business sense at having billions of dollars of oil contracts at stake in all of this. Of course, these contracts still leave that moral elite free to accuse the U.S. of having oil as its basic motivation, but when you are truly morally superior you can get away with this kind of honest, inadvertent contradiction.
I'm always touched by hypocrisy when I see it, too, especially when it is apparently accompanied by a total lack of either awareness or shame.
The (civilized?) world is going to demonstrate the supremacy of its high moral principles, not to mention its raw intelligence, by embracing a guy who:
1) invaded Iran and wasted a generation of his country's youth(not to mention Iranian youth) getting his butt kicked in a futile and needless war
2) a guy who seriously tried to ERASE a MEMBER STATE of the United Nations (you know, part of that allegedly civilized world) from the map of the earth
3) a guy who without any inhibitions employed chemical weapons against a backward village in his own country
4) a guy who, it is widely held, likes to listen to soundtracks of his rack and thumbscrew artists torturing anyone in his citizenry bold enough (or stupid enough) to speak out even mildly in dissent against him, as he nods off to sleep at night or while reading his government controlled fishwrap.
Yes brothers and sisters, this is a man I want to embrace. How the (civilized?) world will demonstrate its wisdom, and its compassion for all people, victims and victimizers alike, with this warm embrace. Let us welcome him home. Let us set a table for him. Let us purify him with a ritual bath of petrodollars.
Yes, brethren, let us indeed take this man into our hearts, for surely he is simply misunderstood. At his core, he is likely to be just a regular guy next door, a guy who was probably actually cajoled into doing all those nasty things by that terrible Great Satan, the United States. Let us embrace him, so that we can demonstrate our superior moral principles, and let us be a role model for him. Surely there is no such thing as an evil person. Let's roundly condemn the United States for wanting to rid Iraq of this "leader" who literally shot his way into power, who maintains his power only through terror and the barrels of many guns, and who rather constantly demonstrates designs on his neighbors' real estate. Let us show the United States our moral superiority with this embrace. Now, let us all pray.
Amen
Lance, I feel the same way you do. Unfortunately I feel that we are wasting our time trying to talk sense into idits*
Their minds are very much closed.
Now I have a skeleton in my cupboard which I want to tell you about.
We got a call today from a (very) close relative asking whether we want to join in a walk against 'war against Iraq' tomorrow.
Now we have to agree that war is terrible just like all those protestors feel it is.
The one difference is that those protestors have no solutions to offer.
So what is the alternative ? Let the baddies take over the world ?
A couple of years ago the same person expressed concern and compassion for a vagrant who was sleeping in a concrete pipe in a park adjoining her million dollar home.
When I suggested she and her husband offer the man the opportunity to sleep in their sunroom at night out of the rain they did not feel inclined to take up my suggestion.
F#%@*n armchair socialists. These are the kind of do-gooders which are marching. All talk but no solution.
freealways
BTW, * idits (as used above) is one class worse than idiots.
Their minds are very much closed.
Now I have a skeleton in my cupboard which I want to tell you about.
We got a call today from a (very) close relative asking whether we want to join in a walk against 'war against Iraq' tomorrow.
Now we have to agree that war is terrible just like all those protestors feel it is.
The one difference is that those protestors have no solutions to offer.
So what is the alternative ? Let the baddies take over the world ?
A couple of years ago the same person expressed concern and compassion for a vagrant who was sleeping in a concrete pipe in a park adjoining her million dollar home.
When I suggested she and her husband offer the man the opportunity to sleep in their sunroom at night out of the rain they did not feel inclined to take up my suggestion.
F#%@*n armchair socialists. These are the kind of do-gooders which are marching. All talk but no solution.
freealways
BTW, * idits (as used above) is one class worse than idiots.
Just amazes me how many new nick names (e.g. Lance) these crazy idiots have to come up with... if they could stick to one nickname, their credibility would be enehanced, but even then their credibility would be a BIG negative number.... such STUPID people... ROFL.... yeeeehaaaaa!!.... D 
the melbourne, australia cbd was today swamped by the peacenik brigade protesting their concerns over australia's involvement in any potential conflict (and conveniently ignoring security agreements australia has with the US).
thousands of highschool students (cute isn't it) were also allowed a day off from school to demonstrate their protest. one of the students summarized what the entire liberal opposition to the war boils down to, "we think a war is inhumane".
i feel much the same way about going to my dentist.
ps - yeehaa
thousands of highschool students (cute isn't it) were also allowed a day off from school to demonstrate their protest. one of the students summarized what the entire liberal opposition to the war boils down to, "we think a war is inhumane".
i feel much the same way about going to my dentist.
ps - yeehaa
Well said, Saxon... one of the few people on my thread who are rationale...
Yes Saxon... our true threats are Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan... we should get bombing them as soon as possible and quit playing around with a defenseless Iraq...
Best wishes,
Candle
Best wishes,
Candle
Poll Finds Most in U.S. Support Delaying a War
Even after the administration's aggressive case for going to war soon in Iraq, a majority of Americans favor giving United Nations weapons inspectors more time to complete their work so that any military operation wins the support of the Security Council, the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll shows.
With major decisions of war and peace still pending, 59 percent of Americans said they believed the president should give the United Nations more time. Sixty-three percent said Washington should not act without the support of its allies, and 56 percent said Mr. Bush should wait for United Nations approval.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/14/politics/14POLL.html
Even after the administration's aggressive case for going to war soon in Iraq, a majority of Americans favor giving United Nations weapons inspectors more time to complete their work so that any military operation wins the support of the Security Council, the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll shows.
With major decisions of war and peace still pending, 59 percent of Americans said they believed the president should give the United Nations more time. Sixty-three percent said Washington should not act without the support of its allies, and 56 percent said Mr. Bush should wait for United Nations approval.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/14/politics/14POLL.html
Daniel, regarding the protests, a lot of this comes about because the Labour party has a leader called Crean who is trying to make political capital by opposing the Liberals (the party in power at the moment).
The fact is that Crean got 'creamed' by Howard (the Prime Minister) and as a result he is desperately trying to regain ground.
It means, again, that here too there are unscrupulous people who are prepared to put their own selfish interests before the interest of the country.
freealways
The fact is that Crean got 'creamed' by Howard (the Prime Minister) and as a result he is desperately trying to regain ground.
It means, again, that here too there are unscrupulous people who are prepared to put their own selfish interests before the interest of the country.
freealways