Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Can we just turn our backs?

  1. #1
    Guest
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Here and there and everywhere
    Posts
    126

    Can we just turn our backs?

    http://www.phrusa.org/research/chemi...miraqgas2.html

    In the midst of all the discussion over WMD's, Oil,WAR, etc....

    We can't forget what saddam did to his own people. The main question in my mind is. At what point do we stop talking and go into action? Or should we go in to action at all?and just turn our backs?
    We are turning our backs today on the Sudan.

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Quebec
    Posts
    155
    You can add Congo (Kinshasa), Thibet, Yemen, Palestine and so many others. Is there really an answer to your question?

    W.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Earth.
    Posts
    146
    Let's nor forget the UN trying to ignore Sudan.
    "I am a kind of paranoiac in reverse. I suspect people of plotting to make me happy." - J. D. Salinger

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    25
    As sad as it is to say, we should not get involved, just look at Iraq, are they really better off, now that they are "liberated"?

    through out history it is shown that the only way a country will change is when the people have had enough and make a change for themselves, its not up to the west to ram our ideologies down their throats, especially when it comes to religious states.

    Regardless of what we think, they will eventually find their own paths.

    But alas its hard not to get invloved when most of these countries at one time or another bought weapons from the western governments to kill each other.

  5. #5
    Guest
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Here and there and everywhere
    Posts
    126
    I wasn't expecting a solution.
    The biggest thing I have learned from this, is that you can't seperate politics from humanity. Maybe i was too blue eyed thinking, that one could.
    The other thing that i Learned is, that most people responding are taking the easy way out and just blame the USA.
    For me that is too easy of a solution, but if it makes you sleep better, who am i to judge.

  6. #6
    Veteran of Misadventures
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    U.S.A.
    Posts
    13,137
    Langeweile,

    That is what everyone does - blame the USA. The USA is blamed by the Palestinians for the continuation of the conflict with Israel. When the USA intervenes it is wrong and when the USA does not intervene the USA is supposedly wrong in not intervening. We are the lightning rod for all of the world's problems. However many of these countries need to stop playing the blame game and take a good look at themselves. Notably the Palestinians who have had inept, disorganized and divided leadership from day 1 which has failed to get anything constructive accomplished. The Palestinians could, should and would have had an independent state of some kind a long time ago were it not for the fact that their leaders are unable to control the radical elements who want to destroy Israel. This is undeniable fact and anyone who thinks otherwise needs to go to Second Cup, order 3 expressos and start getting in touch with reality. However the USA takes the blame anyway. It is very easy to point a finger as SL does but not so easy to create solutions to some of these problems.

  7. #7

    Think about this

    The ambassador from Iran was on the Charlie Rose show last week (PBS in the States). He outright said that Iraq was better off without Saddam and while he though the invasion was "illegal" that it would be better for the Iraqi people. Remember, this is a government that has no relationship with the US, is under US sanctions and is fighting with the US over nuclear power/weapons (depending on who you believe). Not exactly a US lap dog.

    You have to get over it, any way you slice it the world is safer and the people are better off. We're just 200b poorer.

    OTB
    Careful what you wish for.

  8. #8
    Originally posted by curious
    Considering the number of Iranians Saddam killed (the U.S. helped him do it by providing satellite imaging) it's not surprising that he would feel that way. Yes, it was good to get rid of Saddam, but there were other ways to do it. A civil war in Iraq will not improve the quality of life there.

    The world is not safer as North Korea, Iran and possibly others are acquiring nuclear weapons while we are bogged down in Iraq. Military resourses that have been committed to Iraq could be better deployed in homeland defense.
    We're leading the multilateral effort on both North Korea and Iran so I don't understand your point. The administration is proposing to permanently move 70k troops from Europe and Asia back to the US. I don't think we are short of troops in the US for homeland security, we're lacking good intelligence.

    OTB
    Careful what you wish for.

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Nevada USA
    Posts
    51
    There are a lot of situations that should get attention, but there is a limit to resources. Ignoring the situation of the Darfur region is shameful. As far as Iraq goes, its not so much if Iraq would have been better off with out the US invasion. Iraq would've been better off without Saddam and if the vision of a "free and democratic Iraq setting forth a shining example in the Arab world" would materialize. Iraq would have been better off after the US invasion. The Bush Administration bungled the job of securing the country and keeping the peace. The begining of the screwup began about day 4 of the invasion after a gang robbed the Iraqi National Museum. Its been worse off than before the invasion ever since.

  10. #10
    proud infidel
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    from the civilized world
    Posts
    1,983
    Originally posted by StripperLover
    EB,


    "There was no reason to invade Iraq, period ! Only for the oil & the contracts that some could make over the back of the US taxpayer & to think for 1 minute the Bush/Cheney could care less is total and absolute naivitee
    "


    I would add to the above , SL, that another reason why Bush was pressing for war against Saddam was to seek revenge for the "contract" Saddam put on his father's head at the time that he was President. I think that the current mess in Iraq only serves to confirm the fact that G.W. Bush has commited the deadly sin which any head of State is liable to commit: that of mixing his personal hate and resentment toward another head of state, and his intent to settlle scores, with the greater good of that which is in the best and greatest interest of his own people as a whole.

    shemaleluver
    Last edited by femaleluver2; 10-08-2004 at 01:32 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •