Originally posted by Lordathestrings
'Popular Opinion' is not inherently correct. It is simply a position embraced by many people. People who may all be getting their guidance from various branches of the same source. People who instinctively prefer to belive tales that fit teir notions of how things should be. The only protection available to an individual who wishes to avoid being overwhelmed by propoganda, is the skill of clear, analytical thought.

The world is not right; it is merely very vocal about being wrong.

I agree it’s an opinion, I clearly stated this in my previous posts. Why go in circles with this?? Ok now if the world says that bombing Iraq is wrong, it’s the same as saying it’s WRONG to kill innocent people. So if your saying that the world is [u]not[/u] right, wouldn’t you be saying that it is OK for the world to believe in killing innocent people??? I hope I’m wrong. When I say world, I mean the majority population of the world. You could say the same thing about a lot of similar incidents, take the concentration camps of WWII. In your opinion where they right or wrong by killing those people?? Same thing with 9/11, we’re the actions of the terrorists right or wrong?? You don’t need guidance, a source, tales, or propaganda to make a decision. Yeah it is an opinion, and most of the world shares the same opinion. My post stats in my opinion (along with the world), it is wrong!

Originally posted by Raskolnikov

Originally posted by noticingthemistake
I think your right Rask, but dropping a few hundred bombs over baghdad isnt going to change Saddam's mind.

Of course it isn't going to change his mind. It's going to remove him from power. After that, what's on his mind doesn't matter.

How?? By killing off the entire population of Iraq, so he would have no country left?? Yeah that's humane.

Originally posted by Raskolnikov

And who do you think is going to die when we drop bombs?? The innocents Iraqis, which have done NOTHING to us.

Many, many more innocent people are likely to die if we do nothing, but that's OK because starvation's quiet, right?

No it’s not right, but its not our fight. I know we wish to do something about it and that is all good. But killing doesn’t make killing ok. Another point, do you remember the incident in Somalia in 1992. Would you like that to happen again?? Same circumstance. We’re going into a hostile country, with a starving population but they also doesn’t want us there, to remove a leader from office. If you don’t understand, watch the movie Black Hawk Down. I think you’ll soon change your mind. Pressing forth the actions we have been threatening on taking is walking into the same crisis. Is our government brain-dead???

Originally posted by Raskolnikov

Outside of Iraq's Ba'ath party (a minority group within a minority group), Saddam doesn't have supporters. bin Laden's supporters point to the plight of Iraqi civillians starving under sanctions and the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia (stationed there since Iraq invaded Kuwait to keep Saddam in line) as some of their key greivances.

I personally believe Saddam has a lot more supporters than we know about. The way we are approaching this situation makes me believe this. Here’s why, Iraq by itself is not a true threat even with the weapons they were making. They have had 12 years to destroy the weapons but it wasn’t a big deal until recently, why??? Why do we still push for war when the very reason for war is being taken care of??Why is Iraq such a focus point when they’re are more formidable enemies out there? Take the Bin Laden and guys like that, they hurt us. The Iraqis haven’t done crap, so why has bin laden been taken off the majority radar and been replaced by Saddam. Plus, our government is willing to put forth billions of dollars to support these actions when our own economy is in a slump. There is a lot of things that just don’t add up. A very common quote I follow on this is, “believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see.” I believe we only know half the truth, and until someone gives me a DARN GOOD REASON, I believe these actions are wrong.

On the point that Bin Laden and Saddam could never be allies. That’s naive, I’m sorry but it is. Take the WWII again, the nazis and the Japanese. Both countries ideals contradict each others but yet they were still able to forge an alliance. You don’t think it can happen again?? They both could benefit very well from a coalition and they both share a hatred for the US. Why is that so hard to believe?? Is it because we now trust the words of BIN LADEN?? Open your eyes...

Originally posted by Raskolnikov

How does removing Saddam from power make any of those problems worse?

A lot of ways such as your relationship with the UN. If we go against the UN support and attack Iraq, I’m sure that’s going tick some people off in the UN. The UN is a big part of our position and power in the world, such actions are not going to benefit our relations with the UN (countries against these actions).

Second, your ticking off a lot of people in the middle east. They don’t want us there, yet we stick our nose in at every chance we get. Look at Vietnam and the Korean war, it’s the same actions that started those wars and what did we accomplish??

Third, the majority of the people of our nation DO NOT support it. War is not a good thing for any nation for it crunches the economy. With our economy suffering as it is, it’s not a good idea to flush a couple of billion dollars to a war. We need that money more here than there. There are a few other reasons how it will hurt our mainland.

There are many more but this post is long enough...

[Edited by noticingthemistake on 03-06-2003 at 05:43 PM]