Syria

[texan]

Originally posted by Milliardo
So war=prevention then? If that is so, then with other countries named by Bush to be like Iraq, we will see war with them as well? You said in another thread that you don't think there will be war with Syria, and yet Bush is "reminding" Syria to desist from activities. So, what you said, that there won't be war with Syria, contradicts with your statement above.

War with Iraq was a last resort as seen by most people in America. It was a response to the twelve years of Saddam not complying with UN sanctions, which themselves proved useless in this case. The UN wasn't willing to do anything about it militarily, so we did. Syria and others in the region should be able to be dealt with in a combination of pressure and incentives for mass regional disarmarment, which hopefully will become a model for the rest of the world (including us).

War is not the first answer to any problem, but sometimes it is the last. And unfortunately in the world we live in, every once in awhile also the best answer.

[taranaki]

Originally posted by texan


War with Iraq was a last resort as seen by most people in America.

The general public of America were herded into this opinion by George Bush and his advisors.If you were to ask the average American about the stituation in,say,Tibet,they'd either say"what situation?",or "yes,it's dreadful isn't it?".But they wouldn't say,"well it's terribly wrong and we should send our troops in to take over the country and put it right"

This whole war has been engineered by George Bush.The blame for the death of every civilian,every Marine,and every Iraqi defender lies squarely at his feet.The claims that have been used to justify this war have proven to be at best one-eyed,and at worst totally baseless.The U.N. was right not to intervene in Iraq over matters of security,as yet there has been not one single shred of evidence to indicate that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States.The sooner Bush is exposed for the warmonger that he is and kicked out of office,the safer the world will be.

[TexasF355F1]

I just heard on the news about an hour ago that Germany and Italy both believe that Syria have some sort of chemical weapons.

[taranaki]

Originally posted by TexasF355F1
I just heard on the news about an hour ago that Germany and Italy both believe that Syria have some sort of chemical weapons.

Do they have any evidence,or is it going to be another Iraq scenario,where the principal reason for invasion was found to be baseless?

[TexasF355F1]

At this point I'm not quite sure, I happen to be walking out the door to go to class at the time. But I think they were just making a statement. I'm trying to locate an article but of course it was a rather new story so it may be a day or two until I can find something.
Actually I need to correct myself, I didn't mean chemical weapons, I meant they believe Syria has ties to terrorism and is a future threat.

[Pick]

Originally posted by texan


If you believe that, then you'd better hand down indictments to every President for the last 25 years. Go ahead and throw in several current key cabinet members too.

I was referring to when Clinton had the chance to capture Bin Laden for the first WTC bombings, but never did. They knew where he was nad even had intelligence on how to capture him but didn't.

[Pick]

Originally posted by taranaki


The general public of America were herded into this opinion by George Bush and his advisors.If you were to ask the average American about the stituation in,say,Tibet,they'd either say"what situation?",or "yes,it's dreadful isn't it?".But they wouldn't say,"well it's terribly wrong and we should send our troops in to take over the country and put it right"

This whole war has been engineered by George Bush.The blame for the death of every civilian,every Marine,and every Iraqi defender lies squarely at his feet.The claims that have been used to justify this war have proven to be at best one-eyed,and at worst totally baseless.The U.N. was right not to intervene in Iraq over matters of security,as yet there has been not one single shred of evidence to indicate that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States.The sooner Bush is exposed for the warmonger that he is and kicked out of office,the safer the world will be.

Don't tell us Americans what we would think. I really despise when people put words in our mouths. You don't know public opinion until you have lived here and heard what is being said. And for god's sake, lay off of Bush. And I'm going to laugh when the next election rolls around. We'll see who is president and then assess the world situation.

[texan]

Originally posted by taranaki


Do they have any evidence,or is it going to be another Iraq scenario,where the principal reason for invasion was found to be baseless?

What do you mean, found to be baseless? Jesus, give the soldiers more than a few days to search around before passing judgement.

[Pick]

Originally posted by texan


What do you mean, found to be baseless? Jesus, give the soldiers more than a few days to search around before passing judgement.

According to everybody against this war, we have had our chance and have found nothing. War is supposed to be fast I mean seriously, we are fast, but war takes time

[taranaki]

Originally posted by texan


What do you mean, found to be baseless? Jesus, give the soldiers more than a few days to search around before passing judgement.

Iraq has been under scrutiny for years.It seems very convenient that the invasion happened after the U.N. weapons inspectors confirmed that they could find no WMD's.

[Milliardo]

Originally posted by taranaki
The general public of America were herded into this opinion by George Bush and his advisors.If you were to ask the average American about the stituation in,say,Tibet,they'd either say"what situation?",or "yes,it's dreadful isn't it?".But they wouldn't say,"well it's terribly wrong and we should send our troops in to take over the country and put it right"

I actually agree with tara here. Why did not Bush send troops to Venezuela? Hugo there seems to be not in friendly terms with the U.S. government. But the shock effect would be lost on the average American, since Venezuela and Hugo doesn't capture the American public's ire as much as Iraq and Saddam.

This whole war has been engineered by George Bush.The blame for the death of every civilian,every Marine,and every Iraqi defender lies squarely at his feet.The claims that have been used to justify this war have proven to be at best one-eyed,and at worst totally baseless.

Again, I agree. Why is it that when it comes to Saddam, these very same charges apply to him, yet now that Bush has done the same thing, suddenly his defenders here say that it doesn't apply to him, when he actually started this war, wanted to have it, and had no intention of stopping it?

The U.N. was right not to intervene in Iraq over matters of security,as yet there has been not one single shred of evidence to indicate that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States.The sooner Bush is exposed for the warmonger that he is and kicked out of office,the safer the world will be.

Even Nelson Mandela thought the biggest threat to world peace is the U.S. Bishop Desmond Tutu thinks so as well. And yes, it's been almost a month, and no solid evidence of WMD yet? And forgive me if I am mistaken, but it seems that suddenly this issue has become almost secondary, if not actually taken out of the public's memory? Has anyone noticed that they're slowly killing that issue of the WMDs over at Washington by having the public's focus shift on Syria and whatever else the U.S. military might be doing in Iraq, except look for the WMDs?

[TexasF355F1]

Rummsfeld said today, that he believes that we(the U.S.) will not find anything on our own. We will instead be lead to them by those Iraqis who know.

[texan]

Originally posted by taranaki
Iraq has been under scrutiny for years.It seems very convenient that the invasion happened after the U.N. weapons inspectors confirmed that they could find no WMD's.

It's not just scrutiny Iraq has been under, it's sanctions. Sanctions leveled against Iraq for having weapons of mass destruction, which required proof from them that they had destroyed. The chief UN inspector has said on many occasions that their weapons declaration "incomplete and not creditable".

If everyone was so sure they had disarmed, why didn't the anti-war nations go ahead and put lifting the sanctions out for a vote???? Because they didn't believe it anymore than we did.

And as I've said before, the inspection teams weren't there to be detectives. They were there to help oversee the safe destruction of banned weapons to which Iraq had already admitting to posessing.

[NSX-R-SSJ20K]

Originally posted by TexasF355F1
I just heard on the news about an hour ago that Germany and Italy both believe that Syria have some sort of chemical weapons.

interesting that Germany would say it since they were against any sort of policing

I thought the government were supposed to leave the people as naive or something :o they can't prove it anyway

unless they started another war

[TexasF355F1]

NSX-R, I actually corrected my mistake a few posts under that one. It wasnt the chemicals it was that they(Germany) believe Syria to have ties to terrorism and could pose a future threat. Sorry for the misunderstanding.