View post (a moral dilemma)

View thread

SLY
Un-Registered User
Joined: 08/08/02
Posts: 1,613
SLY
Un-Registered User
Joined: 08/08/02
Posts: 1,613
01/28/2003 10:12 pm
Originally posted by Raskolnikov
Trying to link Saddam Hussein to Osama bin Laden is outlandish. I've said that already. The "Preemptive Strike" plan was just dumb. Bush has completely screwed his credibility here. As for Iraq's WMD programs, they're very real, and Saddam is insisting on keeping them for a very specific reason - to bully and/or conquer his neigbors. If you happened to pay attention to Hans Blix' report to the UN yesterday, you will have noticed the Iraq isn't complying fully, has a ton of holes in their reports, isn't allowing reconosance flights over Iraq, etc, etc, etc. The same old game. Why? They're hiding something. Any pshycologist could tell you that in a second.



Psychology has got nothing to do here , we're talking about countries not individuals !

And for Blix' report , it's realy obvious to any dumba$$ that he was pushed by the U.S. to say few lines against Iraq , that the expect more co-operation , blah blah blah ... You can see this in Baradey's report too , they were both afraid to say a nice report about full Iraqi co-operation with the inspections not to make the U.S. government angry.

And till the inspectors find real weapons that violates international treaties in Iraq , U.S. should never strike ... For God Sake, you don't put someone in prison without real evidence . That would be terribly Injustice !

Frankly I think the U.S. is sure that there isn't any dangerous weapons in Iraq ... That's why they are so sure that such a war would be easy , and that's why they don't speak sh*t about striking N Korea , cuz the U.S. is pretty sure that N Korea got weapons that's can cause seriously painful casualties to the U.S.