I've been having a debate with Jovi2003 about this sort of stuff for a couple of weeks and so I'll share my opinion......brace yourselves, this could be long!!!
As a British person, I say we should not attack Iraq. Not even if a UN second resolution is passed allowing us to take military action. As KRB said, military action against Iraq, or N Korea for that matter will just enrage terrorist groups like Al Queada even more. Not because they are allied with Saddam, but because this type of action is exactly the sort of thing that they don't tolerate - the Western world imposing their rules and lifestyles upon other countries. If the USA wants to go to war, then thats up to them. I don't support it, I don't tolerate it and I don't like it, but I hope to god that the UK doesn't get lumped in as the puppet to an already corrupt US leadership.
But to save any more posts, because i know Joviscout will probably disagree with me and want to know my reasons, here are my reasons for opposition to war. If anyone else here has watched the new episodes of Bremner Bird and Fortune, they'll probably understand where I'm coming from!!
Firstly, and above all else to be honest, I am totally disgusted by the hipocracy of the west. Actually just Britain and the USA. These are the countries that gave Saddam Hussain chemical and biological weapons, as well as the capability to start a nuclear program. The USA gave him millions of pounds of funding to help them in their war against Iran. They gave him all sorts of weapons and the money to build an army and start war. Britain supllied chemical weapons which Saddam then used to kill a huge amount of his own population. Now the USA and UK have decided that they don't like him owning all of these weapons, so what do they do?? They try to kill him. Is this really the way we want history to remember our countries, our families our friends?? Its just pure hypocracy.
Secondly, looking at Bush and Blair's reasons for going to war with Iraq, you can quite clearly see that they are nothing short of rediculous. They say that he is affiliated with Al Queada. Really?? In fact Al Queada is as apposed to Saddam as the US is. They don't believe in or like the way that Iraq s governed. They believe that a King should be installed as the leader of Iraq because this falls in line with their religious beliefs.
They also say that he has the capability to make Nuclear and chemical weapons. Really?? Fair enough, we know they have chemical weapons because we gave them to him, but most of those have surely now been used attacking his own people!! UN weapons inspectors have been searching for months. They have found nothing but the same old empty missile warheads that were given to Iraq by the USA over 20 years ago. They have found no evidence of any way in which Iraq could run a nuclear program.
OK, so it may well be very easy to hide nuclear weapons in a country the size of France, so what if he does have them?? Well, this is where the funny bit starts. Because even if he did have these weapons, or the technology to make them, and he did decide he wanted to attack somebody, lets say the USA, then he could quite easily launch them. Unfortunately for him, he can't fire them further than 800 miles, and only a little further if he breaks international law and drives his lauching vehicles into the demilitarized zones in the North and South of the country. This gives him a range long enough to attack anybody as far away as Turkey!! When did we ever like Turkey that much?? Or are America just scared that he'll attack their friends over in Israel?! So this obviously can't be the reason why we want to bomb him. There must be another reason.
Well, Bush and Blair continue to preach about the danger of Saddam hussain. Fair enough, he did bomb and gas his own people, he did murder his own son, and he has rigged elections to keep himself in power. But I would like to preach about Saddam Hussains intelligence. He is not stupid enough to attack the USA or UK. What would happen if he did, and could?! Well, I'd imagine there'd be a few bombs dropped on his country. Probably enough to kill him and the entire population of Iraq. Is that really what he wants?? Saddam Hussain doesn't want a war. I believe that as much as anybody. Are there any other reasons?
OIL?? Lets see......Bush used to be, and maybe still is high up in one if the largest oil companies in the USA I believe. There is a huge shortage of Oil in the world. Only enough supply for the next 25 years. So it is quite feasible that Bush would want this. But then again, there's plenty of other Oil sources in the world. Russia has more untapped resources than the rest of the world put together. Why not just ask them for some?? Or bomb them all!!! Or is that country just too big?! But no, I honestly don't believe that this is the reason. Why would the UK be so involved if it were??
The only logical reason that I can think of is that the US and UK just want to take the focus away from the flailing economies. But I really do hope that this isn't the case. There's much better ways of doing it than attacking a whole country. And even so, its not working!!!
Now I understand that the USA and UK have a "dossier" of evidence against Iraq. But I for one would like to see this evidence before sending 35,000 troops, including maybe my own Brother into war. Then of course there's the aga old problem of the equipment failures the British Army is so good at!! But I won't go into them!! There's just not enough time right now!!!!
I'd just like to make one last point...The governments of the USA and UK obviously believe that Saddam has weapons and is a danger to us. They therefore want to stop any pre-emptive attacks on our countries and our people. How do they go about doing this?? By launching a pre-emptive attack on a country who they think may have the power to create nuclear weapons sometime in the future. And they'll do this backed with nuclear, chemical and biological weapons a hundred times the number of what Iraq MAY have. Oh the hypocracy!!
I can't think of anymore reasons now, if you have any, then please let me know. I'd be happy to carry on this debate if anyone would like to PM me. I'm sorry its so long, and well done if you read it all. As you can probably tell, I've talked a lot about this issue, and have quite a bit of interest in it!!
Dave.
__________________
"Per Ferrum, Ad Astra" - Dr Mel Siff
|
01-28-2003, 02:05 AM
