No, I *won't* stop it.

Post #95,811 by cwbrenn 4/10/03 2:42:32 PM Reply	No, I won't stop it. Quite apart from his state of the union address, which says "things will be done," GB has given many reasons for why we're actually in Iraq: 1. He has weapons of mass destruction (UN inspections didn't find any. "Doesn't matter! He still has 'em, and we know it! We don't need to prove it to you!") 2. We're there to liberate the Iraqi people ("It's not about weapons of mass destruction! It's because Saddam is a bad man!") 3. Saddam has ties with Al Qeuda ("His father in law met with a guy one time.") 4. Iraq may be a direct threat to us in the future, someday. ("His missiles can't reach us... yet.") 1, 2, 3, and 4 get alternated. Whenever someone raises an objection to one, one of the other three gets pulled out and dusted off. That's what I'm talking about. The administration has made little or no attempt to flesh out the reasons behind each of these beyond Colin Powell's slide show, which may have had data that could be interpreted in a certain way if you were already looking for it. Rumsfeld attacks journalists who ask probing questions. Active attempts to explore the issue are discouraged. So sure... they have an overall goal, outlined in his state of the union address. And meanwhile, they keep flip-flopping on what argument to use to support specific parts of that goal, because they keep falling over. And, finally, the issue you've decided to respond to is one of the smallest parts of my post. Hell, it's not even the point. It's background. And yet, strangely enough, it seems to have the longest sub-thread of the lot. Bait, switch, match. "We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?" - Edward Young
Post #95,816 by screamer 4/10/03 2:50:22 PM Reply	At the risk of being redundant... please look here : [link\|http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html\|http://www.whitehous.../20020129-11.html] specifically here: Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens -- leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections -- then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world. States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic. He made the only case he needed to make right here. The rest has been the media selling media, IMNSHO. Just a few thoughts, Screamer Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see, it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out it doesn't matter much to me J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
Post #95,837 by screamer 4/10/03 3:59:37 PM Reply	Sincere apology as well... You write: "And, finally, the issue you've decided to respond to is one of the smallest parts of my post. Hell, it's not even the point. It's background. And yet, strangely enough, it seems to have the longest sub-thread of the lot. Bait, switch, match." Although I do not think it was "one of the smallest parts of (your) post" (obviously), you have valid concerns such as what precedence this could possibly set for future wars. Upon rereading, I did gloss over some of your better points. I apologize. I have not concerned myself with this question so much insofar as all wars start pretty much this way... "i.e. we really think we should, and we have good reasons" and leave it at that". Very few nations ask UN permission to go to war. What was unprecedented, IMHO, was how much discussion occurred before we went into Iraq. When, in your original post, you state: "That doesn't shake my belief that the US is forming the beginnings of a foreign policy stance that should not be taken. And I've never believed the ends justify the means." I do not share the premise that "we are forming the beginnings of a foreign policy stance that should not be taken." Because of this, I do not share your fears. I believe that in the context of 9/11 and as outlined by Bush's State of the Union speech, that the foreign policy stance we are taking is necessary for the reasons he outlined. I therefor do not have the dichotomy of emotions you have. AND I do not believe the "ends justifies the means" every time, but I believe it does sometimes...YMMV. I truly am hopeful for Iraq's people. As the world keeps populating, we are going to have to find ways to live and work together as individuals and nations. The US is in a unique position (other than being the sole remaining superpower) in that much of our strength truly is from our diversity. We have found ways to live and work together already, people of differing ethnic, religious, racial backgrounds (although it ain't always painless or pretty). For most nations of the world, this is only an intellectual excercise as their populations are homogenous. My point being - this gives me hope. And because this is a democracy, WTFpeople can change our direction every November, if we get "inspired". Just a few thoughts, Screamer Living is easy with eyes closed misunderstanding all you see, it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out it doesn't matter much to me J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
Post #95,884 by cwbrenn 4/10/03 5:32:43 PM Reply	I appreciate that I can get rather cynical in these kinds of discussions, because all too often I find people putting words in my mouth, or focusing on a lesser issue that they can attack more throughly instead of my main point. I confess I was starting to get my dander up, because I thought it was going that way again. Your observation that the part of my post that you originally responded to was not as small as I make it out to be is a fair one -- to me it is, because it was "buildup" to what I was really going on about, but I did spend a fair amount of time on it -- but I also appreciate your taking the time to respond to my other point. I can understand why you wouldn't share my premise, and thus my concern... but your stance requires a certain amount of confidence in the responsibility of people who wield power that I don't have. Not because I necessarily think they are "evil" people, but because immense power is very easy to wield badly. The US is staggeringly powerful. Therefore (in my opinion) the power it can bring to bear must be made very difficult to actually use. The way things are going, the power to wage war is being made easier and that makes me uneasy. Uneasy is too mild a word, I suppose. "We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?" - Edward Young
Post #95,939 by Ashton 4/10/03 11:08:14 PM Reply	There's further and ominous indication of the agenda of this unelected cabal, now in power: Some months ago reported: the intention to make "smaller, more compact battlefield nukes". Period. No prior debate, discussion - rationale OR even rationalization. Nada. Just another 'announcement'. Commissioning new nukes of this description is the obv. First Step in attempting a major propaganda coup regarding the entire world's attitude towards all such weapons: that they be used only as last resort, as in averting an attack by another upon one's country. This is G\ufffdbbelsian-scale mind fuck IMhO: it is no less than the subtle addition of such munitions to the category of "ordinary weapons" / nothing to see here: Move On. Slipped in as stealthily as the anti-Constitutional PATRIOT abomination. Combine this factoid with the Project for the New American Century material (linked in several posts here) - whose authors ARE the current US CABINET! and I see considerable cause for a vote of NO CONFIDENCE in the perilous course these obsessed ones have evidently embarked (Us All) upon. We shall see.. if we get a chance! even - to "vote them out" before irreversible mischief is in full delicto flagrante. How soon -?- will the next member of The Massively-flexible Axis of Evil be summarily attacked 'for our comfort and security'. Ashton
Post #95,855 by Another Scott 4/10/03 4:32:01 PM Reply	Franks restates Rumsfeld's 8 goals. [link\|http://www.centcom.mil/CENTCOMNews/News_Release.asp?NewsRelease=20030344.txt\|Here], from March 22: You know, Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld, my boss, yesterday outlined the military objectives of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Let me review them with you. First, end the regime of Saddam Hussein. Second, to identify, isolate and eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Third, to search for, to capture and to drive out terrorists from that country. Fourth, to collect such intelligence as we can related to terrorist networks. Fifth, to collect such intelligence as we can related to the global network of illicit weapons of mass destruction. Sixth, to end sanctions and to immediately deliver humanitarian support to the displaced and to many needy Iraqi citizens. Seventh, to secure Iraq's oil fields and resources, which belong to the Iraqi people. And last, to help the Iraqi people create conditions for a transition to a representative self-government. Regards, Scott.

Welcome to IWETHEY!