a small correction because it was deleted as I was writting it by mistake and I noticed it afterwards ... war is NOT the answer

Paxx, I guess you didn't realize that I was supporting what you were saying about the resources.

I was just also saying that it was not intended to be evil. Using "cheap labor" in other countries is a different topic, but that is also a different debate all together.

You also can not lump what Canada and the US do together. We have much different trade models and government of that trade.

yvonne2222, please debate your point of view with facts not with emotional images. And, please give examples of where your stories come from.

Also, please explain how oppressed people with no might can overthrow a dictator who hand picks his judiciary system?

or backs his position with ak47's and a number of people who are more than ready to cut someones throat at the flick of a dictators hand...

Children and women are casualties of war. Another word for "necessary evil".
There is another thread where that concept was discussed...

you mention chidreen born with "Birth Defects""due to the biological war" I am confused... their own leader is doing that to them, not us. We don't use biological weapons, he does. That's why he's being removed from power. We are saving them, because he will use those weapons on them.

dave...dave...dave...

Of course I can't read. I'z uh American, I keep an impoverished street urchin here on my desk who reads to me, and then a shadowy goverment figure comes in once a day to tell me how to reply. My window is actually a flat-screen set to CNN. I have to swat at the urchin from time to time because he sneaks my pringles...

Anyway. What you are saying isn't bad, or wrong, it is just, well, 'saying'. When we pull out of Saudi Arabia, what is left? To say we wouldn't be weakened by it is just wrong.

You know how international law works. When the time comes to make a new law or treaty, the officials of various governments make a list of those they wanna 'stick it to' and then they figure out how to make the laws as punitive as possible. We've had an evil time with the EU in the past couple of years, and we can't seem to keep Japan out of the whaling business, for which they like to poke us with little trading sticks. If you take a good hard look at the governments of these nations you are trusting you'll see they ar as bad or worse than we. Japan has that wonderful 99% convicction-rate, guilty until proven innocent judicial system. Lets not even get into Interpol.

As for all the electing new officials and doing away with government agencies, you embrace the concept of conspiracy enough to know that the same people who are responsible for these institutions will be the ones who are responsible for reforming them. So how exactly do you think the new ones will be free of corruption?

Government without corruption is like Paxx's world without war. Corruption has ben a factor of government since the beginning. Pretending it can suddenly be done away with is dismissing all of recorded human history as a foible. What you insist upon wouldn't just require a decision by the government, it would require a totally new government, who would be sanitized on its way in by some method I am unsure of... maybe brainwashing. Wait, wrong country...

Anyhoo, I'm not saying i don't agree with ya on most of your points. I'm just saying that, with the exeption of hamstringing American intellegence-gathering and military presense, you arent'explaining *how* to change things, you're just describing how the world would be once they are changed.

An 80 year old Veteran, who was in the Korean War and World War II gave a little history lesson and his thoughts today on War.
It is a different look at the War.
Thoughts to think about:
........................

I'm not going to get into a history lesson. The short, short version is that the League of Nations (established after WW I to prevent wars) failed to stop Mussolini's Italy from invading and conquering Ethiopia. It failed to stop Japan from invading and conquering Manchuria and much of China. Their committees wrung their hands spoke in platitudes but did absolutely nothing to stop war.

At France's coaxing Britain's prime minister Nevil Chamberlain met with Adolph Hitler in Munich and surrendered the Sudetenland to Nazi Germany in the interest of "peace in our time." The French and British watched as Germany took Austria, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia. They all had committee meetings and wrung their hands and talked of peace.

World War II erupted when Nazi Germany invaded Poland. Britain had a mutual defense treaty with Poland so they couldn't escape. They declared war on Germany. Germany had a mutual defense treaty with Japan so Japan declared war on Britain. France wet their pants and surrendered to Germany as fast as they could and gleefully shipped all the Jews they could find to death camps in Germany to prove to Adolph that they really were on the side of Germany.

Japan attacked the United States and, because of Japan's mutual defense treaty with Germany, Germany declared war on the United States.

Up until December 7th and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, a large number of our people were wringing their hands and saying, "Appease Hitler. He is really a good guy who just needed a little more land for his expanding population. The dear man just wants peace. And World War II was in full swing leaving better than 50,000,000 people dead including about 450,000 American soldiers and sailors.

Three cheers for the League of Nations!


After World War II it was decided to do the whole thing all over again. This time we would call it the United Nations and we will have committee meetings and hand wringing parties and make sure peace prevails throughout the land.

While that august body wrung hands the Soviet Union split Germany, invaded Poland and Yugoslavia, Rumania, Hungary and Bulgaria along with Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. The peaceful world saw Korea with 37,000 American soldiers killed, over 1,000,000 South Korean soldiers and civilians killed and the country nearly destroyed.

Since then we have had over 50,000 American soldiers killed in Vietnam and have fought wars in Somalia, Herzegovenia, Panama, Granada,plus the Gulf War when Iraq invaded Kuwait.

We should have gone into Baghdad and taken out that evil regime then but the United Nations would have no part of that. All they would allow was for us to chase the Iraqis out of Kuwait, then peace would prevail.

Now, here we are with Saddam violating all 17 United Nations resolutions while he has massed poison gas and bio weapons.

He is frantically trying to develop a nuke and his buddy, Kim Jong-Il of North Korea may give him a few. (It was the United Nations who prevented us from taking North Korea when the war was hot and we had the means to do it.)
Peace!!!!!!!! Sure.

France is wetting their collective pants in fear that the United States will take Saddam out and along with him, France's 60 billion dollar contracts with Iraq. Russia hedges because Iraq owes them 6 billion dollars that they sorely need.

In answer to your question....... hell yes we should go to war with Iraq. We should have done it six months ago. We should also get out of the United Nations. Can you believe that the United Nations has appointed Iraq and Syria to head up the United Nations Disarmament Committee? Can you believe they have appointed Libya to head up the Human Rights Committee?


All three of these countries are on the UN List of Terrorist States..........Absolutely unbelievable.

Just don't get me going. Throughout recorded history the only time peace has prevailed is when the good guys have militarily whipped the bad guys. Who are our best friends in the world? Japan because we whipped them. Germany because we whipped them. Italy because we whipped them. Britain because we whipped them.

This is one opinion, on the War but this is the eyes, ears and heart of an American Veteran...

Yvonne, Iraq wasn't disarmed when the UN inspectors left in '98 after 7 years of inspections. How do we know that? The UN inspectors said so when they were not allowed back into Iraq by Saddam in '98. Not allowing UN inspections in Iraq in itself was a violation of the cease fire agreement. When the new round of inspections started recently, they found arms that had been scheduled for destruction in '98 but still hadn't been destroyed. How do we know that? The UN inspectors recently said so.

Disarmament of proscribed weapons was one of the terms of the cease fire of the Gulf War. Violation of a cease fire agreement opens the possibility of a resumption of hostilities, since it is only a cease fire, not a concluded peace agreement. Technically the war in '91 was paused as long as the terms of the cease fire were honored. What happened in '98 was that no one apparently was interested in following through with the consequences of Iraq's violations of the UN cease fire resolution. All the recent hooha in the UN obscures that.

Internal revolts against Saddam's government after the Gulf War were ruthlessly put down since they didn't have external military support to back them up.

Saddam easily could have complied with the UN resolutions, eased or had the UN sanctions removed entirely and not give anyone an excuse to take military action against Iraq. But he did not. Don't know if that was a miscalculation or just meglomania.

Left out of Paxx's list of countries providing support in some fashion to the US now: Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jordan.

da_zman20: perhaps Yvonne is referring to the use of depleted uranium in artillery shells used by the US in the Gulf War.

"I'm not going to get into a history lesson. " woooops. lol

I do agree with much of it, though. I think 'getting our of the UN' is a bit much. I think staying in and doing what we wanna do is fine. The problem is allowing ourselve to be talked out of finishing wars. Making war palatable is like insisting on bloodless surgury. If you reach the point where something has to be done militarily, you have to accept the fact that an awful thing has to be done. Making it less awful usually just leaves the original problem where it was.

Paxx:

You are in error about your statement regarding the US economy. The US produces about half its oil domestically. The half it does import mostly comes from Canada, Mexico, and South America. Not very much comes from the Middle East.

While the US does surely do some trade with contemptible countries, it is relatively small. There is no equivalent to France's Total oil company deal in Iraq. $60 billion is 8% of the French GNP. There is nothing remotely similar in the United States.

I realize you are convinced that the US is an evil, corrupt vile country, as least in terms of corporate and foreign policies, but the facts do not support your opinion. I am sure one could come upw ith a laundry list of bad deeds by US companies, but equating any petty or sleazy deal to the oil deal France's oil companies have signed with Iraq just damages the credibility of whoever would suggest that.

The US economy is big. I mean REALLY big. Bigger than the rest of the G7 combined. It doesn't need to make sleazy side deals because it would be a waste of effort. The US's vested interest is a stable world overall. A stable world allowing for the free flow of capital and trade.

BTW, one of the things I keep seeing here is those who oppose war never seem to be able to put forth a concrete alternative.

An alternative that would actually work in the real world as opposed to Utopia.

Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.
It has a history of using them.
It brutalizes its people with most estimates showing that over a million Iraqi's have died in the last 12 years.
It supports terrorism in Israel
It has growing connections with other terrorist organizations.

In a post 9/11 world, *something* has to be done. Something that is going to produce results. From the safety of our homes we can be idealogues all day. But our elected leaders can't be. They have to actually deliver real results.

War is never a pleasant thing. But history has shown war is sometimes necessary. Anyone who says differently has simply not informed themsleves of basic history.

There is a reason why Poland is sending troops to Iraq. They have seen what happens when evil tyrants are allowed to bide their time.

treetog - your english is great. my spanish and portuguese is almost nonexistent.

Stand Up for America Speech
By: Beth Chapman, Alabama State Auditor

I’m here tonight because men and women of the United States military have given their lives for my freedom. I am not here tonight because Sheryl Crowe, Rosie O’Donnell, Jane Fonda, Martin Sheen, the Dixie Chicks, Barbra Streisand, the Beastie Boys, George Clooney or Phil Donahue, sacrificed their lives for me.

If my memory serves me correctly, it was not movie stars or musicians, but the United States Military who fought on the shores of Iwo Jima the jungles of Vietnam , and the beaches of Normandy .

Tonight, I say we should support the President of the United States and the U.S. military and tell the liberal, tree-hugging, hippy, Birkenstock wearing, tie-dyed liberals to go make their movies and music and whine somewhere else.

After all, if they lived in Iraq , they wouldn’t be allowed the freedom of speech they’re being given here today - - ironically, they would be put to death at the hands of Sadam Husssein or Osama Bin Laden.

I want to know how the very people who are against war because of the loss of life, can possibly be the same people who are for abortion?

They are the same people who are for animal rights but against the rights of the unborn.

The movie stars say they want to go to Iraq and serve as human shields for the Iraqis, I say let them buy a one-way ticket and go.

No one likes war, I hate war. But the one thing I hate more is the fact that this country has been forced into war—innocent people have lost their lives - - and there but for the grace of God, it could have been my brother, my husband, or even worse my own son.

On December 7, 1941 , there are no records of movie stars treading the blazing waters of Pearl Harbor .

On September 11, 2001 ; there are no photos of movie stars standing as human shields against the debris and falling bodies ascending from the World Trade Center . There were only policemen and firemen - -underpaid civil servants who gave their all with nothing expected in return.

When the USS Cole was bombed, there were no movie stars guarding the ship - - where were the human shields then?

If America’s movie stars want to be human shields, let them shield the gang-ridden streets of Los Angeles, or New York City, let them shield the lives of the children of North Birmingham whose mothers lay them down to sleep on the floor each night to shelter them from stray bullets.

If they want to be human shields, I say let them shield the men and women of honesty and integrity who epitomize courage and embody the spirit of freedom by wearing the proud uniforms of the United States Military. Those are the people who have earned and deserve shielding.

Throughout the course of history, this country has remained free, not because of movie stars and liberal activists but because of brave men and women who hated war too - - but lay down their lives so that we all may live in freedom. After all – What greater love hath no man, that he lay down his life for his friend,” but in this case a country.

We should give our military honor and acknowledgement and not let their lives be in vain. If you want to see true human shields, walk through Arlington Cemetery . There lies human shields, heroes, and the BRAVE Americans who didn’t get on television and talk about being a human shields, they were human shields.

I thank God tonight for freedom - - those who bought and paid for it with their lives in the past - - those who will protect it in the present and defend it in the future.

America has remained silent too long. God-fearing people have remained silent too long.

We must lift our voices united in a humble prayer to God for guidance and the strength and courage to sustain us throughout whatever the future may hold.

After the tragic events of Sept. 11th, my then eleven -year-old son said terrorism is a war against us and them and if you’re not one of us, then you’re one of them.

So in closing tonight, let us be of one accord, let us stand proud, and let us be the human shields of prayer, encouragement and support for the President, our troops and their families and our country.

May God bless America , the land of the free, the home of the brave and the greatest country on the face of this earth!

Why is it that if you do not buy into one person or groups certain perspective of things you are not Standing up for America, or you are in fact stating that our service women and men die in vain?

Geesh, guess if you don't buy the specified point of view your less than, what? something? not sure what... but thats about as real as anything I guess...

Jane Fonda is and was a witch... and I personally feel should have been offered a little plot of mud in some rice paddy in Vietnam...

please don't bring up the "F word" (Fonda).

BkB my bad :oP now a I got to go wash my hands 50 times with Lava Soap and a Brass Brush !

In my previous post I meant in NO way to say that Mr. Bush is a dictator. I just was trying to point out demonstarting against the war is not going to stop it. I do not think Bush will listen to those people.

kona, no he won't... but he will make notice of them and take notes...

thanks bakerstreet.

I'm still waiting for my questions to be answered too. I don't want the war and I can find many dumb*ss mistakes the US made.

I even hear in some posts that the US would be or is just as bad as Saddam. One evil guy being replaced by another one.


I don't agree with Bushes policies, but I am pretty sure if Bush was anywhere near close to Saddam and his government, he would have been empeached becasue the people of this country as well as other officals would have called for it.

By the way, all governments have corruption in it.

Allot of policies and laws are wrong in the US.

Many acts can be put under suspition.

I don't trust the goverment as far as I can throw it... literally.


Nevertheless

____________________________
(you can skip this is you read this before)con't below

As many times as I have read this thread (and I quite enjoyed it; I think debates and understanding other poeple thoughts on a subject is always interesting and enlightenint) I have yet to here the asnwers to the fundemental quetsion. I have herd "one liners", statement that are true but pushed to be associated with why the US actions is bad, and so on.

I think we all can agree that:

a)

War is bad and no one wins; you just have one loser gets beat up more


Wanting to avoid war at all costs can empower the one you wish to contain

c)
The cost of war always takes lives of those in it.

d)
When it is agreed that war will happen, it is now BOTH parties fault for the deaths of those involved

With all this said and all the 'truths" that can be written on this (from war is for oil to fighting for freedom) it still comes back to this bottom line that eventually is where the choice to go to war or not is made; in this situation at least.


World politics is not easy. There are and will be interests other than what appears. I don't agree with Bush or with his tactics. Nevertheless, I have yet to here anything that says that Saddam has disarmed.

"Give him 30 more days." That's fine with me, but what happens when those 30 days are up? We know it happened before.

"America is only interested in oil".
Just oil? Not just from Iraq I hope because it is not worth it. We would spend more than the oil they have just fighting the war. I guess Iraq could become a launch pad for 'conquering' other oil rich places. The cost for doing so? More money than most of the oil in the region. Good investment? NO.


Why is the USA friends with China? They do the same thing as Iraq... Iraq has oil to fund its weapons production, China has a struggleing economy. The chinese soldier is more loyal. I doubt they would sell weapons to those who would later use them against themselves.


People, people ,poeple!!! It is not just about this country does the same thing or hey you have them too... it is about location, location, location, economy, additudes, stability, population comfort level (food, shelter, education, jobs)

When you include all of those factors who is more dangerous? Iraq or Argentina? Iran or Canada? North Korea or China? Serbia or Seria?


Is Saddam in breach of the agreement???

Does he have loads of money???

How loyal is his army???

Population comfort level???

How many resolutions for disarmerment????

How many years under said resolutions???????


Please, no one liners... "America wants oil!!!" "Bush is Evil!!!"

con't
______________________________

I know alo, I asked those question before.

Hey why don't you read the "Good Vs. Evil" thread. Its a 'Good' read.