Seasons
This is a forum or general chit-chat, small talk, a "hey, how ya doing?" and such. Or hell, get crazy deep on something. Whatever you like.
Posts 2,002 - 2,013 of 6,170
Posts 2,002 - 2,013 of 6,170
If Bush had conducted the war better, there would be no question. But with 100,000 Iraqis dead and continuing opposition years later that we cant quell.. well it's not so clear. The US left a long gulf of chaos that should have been immediately filled with a new leader.
Why do we keep putting leaders in countries and then having them screw up? Why is it any of our business who rules them, for that matter? Sure Saddam was a bad guy and all, but what gives us the right to go around saying "your leader is evil, let's kill him"? Especially when if given free choice, they probably would've put a guy exactly like him into power anyway. They're so used to that kind of life that I don't know if they know how to live in a democracy...or if they even want to.
What gives us the right to say that just because WE think democracy is cool, everyone else ought to think it's cool too? That's a little bit like saying "having blond hair and blue eyes is cool, you'd all better think it's cool too or else"...hmmm, that's a scary thought... O.o
What gives us the right to say that just because WE think democracy is cool, everyone else ought to think it's cool too? That's a little bit like saying "having blond hair and blue eyes is cool, you'd all better think it's cool too or else"...hmmm, that's a scary thought... O.o
You can only take cultural relativism so far. What about WWII? What business of ours was it if the Germans wanted to exterminate a bunch of Jews? According to the dominant German culture, that was the right thing to do, and who are we to judge... Yeah.
However much I might favor peace, certain circumstances require action. I don't think Iraq was one of those cirumstances. Bush manipulated information so that he'd have an excuse to invade. The good part? One fewer bloodthirsty dictator in the world. The bad? Read the body count, on both<0> sides. We won't know the overall effect for several years, but I would not say that the world is a "safer place" because of this war.
However much I might favor peace, certain circumstances require action. I don't think Iraq was one of those cirumstances. Bush manipulated information so that he'd have an excuse to invade. The good part? One fewer bloodthirsty dictator in the world. The bad? Read the body count, on both<0> sides. We won't know the overall effect for several years, but I would not say that the world is a "safer place" because of this war.
Well, except that even a corrupt and deceptive democracy is better than most totalitarian regimes.
On the other hand, maybe I'm wrong about that.
On the other hand, maybe I'm wrong about that.
It's really hard to draw the line as far as who needs to be attacked and who doesn't. However, no leader should lie to his people to get them to approve of a war he wants to start. Especially when his real concern probably isn't safety or the well-being of the country in question at all.
Doubtless, our primary reason for taking out Hussein was our own security; you'll notice we haven't attacked communist China yet. But what did Bush lie about? Did he somehow have information about Iraq that the best American and British intelligence did not?
It's been stated (repeatedly) that there was no hard evidence that Iraq had WMD's prior to the invasion. Definitely nothing strong enough to act on. Now Bush may have convinced himself that the evidence was strong enough, since he was looking for an excuse anyway, but it was actually quite weak. So either Bush lied to himself to get the country to go to war, or Bush realized the evidence was weak and lied to the country. Take your pick.
One member of the CIA who appeared on the Daily Show interview portion after quitting his job and writing a book said that Bush came to the CIA at the beginning of his term saying that he wanted them to come up with a reason to attack Iraq. He apparently wanted that from the beginning.
And why Iraq and not Iran, Saudi Arabia (where most of the terrorists came from), China, North Korea, and the other threats? a) Iraq was weak, and b) it had oil.
And why Iraq and not Iran, Saudi Arabia (where most of the terrorists came from), China, North Korea, and the other threats? a) Iraq was weak, and b) it had oil.
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar