09-08-2005, 08:05 PM
[font "Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"][black][size 1][font "Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"][black][size 1]Hey utfishguy thanks for your comments. You show a lot of class. I haven't seen any personal attacks or crap from you at all. I enjoy political discussions and hearing other people's points of view, it helps me to broaden my understanding and helps us all become more educated I think.
No I do not trust Saddam one bit and I realize he tortured and killed thousands and thousands of his own people. Sick. Twisted. But is he in bed with bin laden just because they are both evil? Not by a long shot. After the first Gulf War, the UN oversaw the destruction of 99% or more of Saddam's Weapons of mass destruction (i.e. chemical and biological weapons such as were used against the Kurds in the 80's by Saddam). Saddam never had nuclear weapons, and it is questionable whether he was trying to get them or not. One thing is clear, at the start of the 2nd gulf war, he had no such weapons. He might have had a very small number of chemical and/or biological weapons left, but nothing that could ever harm the United States. Nothing that can't be produced by any joe blow with a bachelor's in Chemical Engineering and a couple of million dollars.
I'm sure if he had had a surplus of these chemical and biological weapons, he might have tried to sell some of these weapons to terrorists. The problem is, his country was under the watch of the UN at the time (who of course made some of their own mistakes, but that's another topic), and over 99% of his weapons were documented to have been destroyed by the UN, the other 1% or less were thought to have been destroyed by the war itself or it is possible that a few were hidden, buried, or whatever.
So, if a dictator that wants to keep control of his own country has a very limited supply of such weapons, and has to keep those hidden or buried so the UN doesn't confiscate them, then would he really want to sell what few he had left to terrorists? I think not. Money he got by cheating the oil for food program. He didn't need the money from selling weapons. He would rather keep them himself.
It has been well documented (as Bassackwards has mentioned) that Bin Laden and Saddam in fact did not get along or like each other at all. Saddam was not involved in Al Queda, nor would he allow it to exist in his country if he could help it. Saddam is a Sunni arab, which are a more secular and less religious than the other moslim groups such as shiites and kurds. That is the reason that Iraq had better rights for women than pretty much any other muslim country in the mideast. Most others are controlled by their religion, which severely limits women's rights.
Also, not all of the troops want to be there. My wife's cousin is a sniper in Iraq right now (his second tour in as many years) and he can't wait to get it over with. He has fought honorably for his country, but he is sickened by the senseless killing that is going on there. He's only in his early 20s but I'm sure he's seen it all while there. There are plenty other troops and families of troops who do not agree with the war but are still honoring their commitment to their country, and others who are also actively protesting the war as well. Of course lots of others are in full agreement as well.
In regards to your last statement, "[/size][/black][/font][/size][/black][/font][font "Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"][black][size 1]Spreading freedom across the globe helps defeat terrorism."
I agree, the more countries and people that are free, the more terrorism doesn't have ground to stand on. However, the method of obtaining that freedom can sometimes have worse consequences. What if we had done something differently? What if we had used diplomatic methods to bring about the freedom of the Iraqi people? Or, what if we would have left them alone, and instead concetrated on one or more African nations that are also not free, and given them both political and food aid, help in building schools and training teachers. Help in training people for careers that will improve their economies. What if we had done that instead? Why do the people in the mideast hate us so badly? One big reason is because we throw our weight around and meddle in their internal affairs, often against their will. Why do we care so much about the freedom of the Iraqi people but do very little for so many others?
Bassackwards had the anwser: O I L. Oil drives our nation. The people of Africa supposedly have nothing to offer us, so we do not help them except for token donations. If we took all the money spent on the war in Iraq, and instead spent it on aid to countries that needed it, the world view of us would be much better. Many less would hate us. They would see us as saviors instead of rich pushy war mongerers. Whether we are that or not, that is how people see us. We appear very hypocritical when we "Help" the Iraqis by bombing them, and do nothing for many other poor countries. Go and see the movie, "Hotel Rwanda" and you'll see what I mean when I say we ignore and neglect other people, other countries who need us badly.
Sorry my ranting is so long!!!! [blush]
[/size][/black][/font][font "Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"][black][size 1][font "Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"][black][size 1]
[/size][/black][/font][/size][/black][/font]
[signature]
No I do not trust Saddam one bit and I realize he tortured and killed thousands and thousands of his own people. Sick. Twisted. But is he in bed with bin laden just because they are both evil? Not by a long shot. After the first Gulf War, the UN oversaw the destruction of 99% or more of Saddam's Weapons of mass destruction (i.e. chemical and biological weapons such as were used against the Kurds in the 80's by Saddam). Saddam never had nuclear weapons, and it is questionable whether he was trying to get them or not. One thing is clear, at the start of the 2nd gulf war, he had no such weapons. He might have had a very small number of chemical and/or biological weapons left, but nothing that could ever harm the United States. Nothing that can't be produced by any joe blow with a bachelor's in Chemical Engineering and a couple of million dollars.
I'm sure if he had had a surplus of these chemical and biological weapons, he might have tried to sell some of these weapons to terrorists. The problem is, his country was under the watch of the UN at the time (who of course made some of their own mistakes, but that's another topic), and over 99% of his weapons were documented to have been destroyed by the UN, the other 1% or less were thought to have been destroyed by the war itself or it is possible that a few were hidden, buried, or whatever.
So, if a dictator that wants to keep control of his own country has a very limited supply of such weapons, and has to keep those hidden or buried so the UN doesn't confiscate them, then would he really want to sell what few he had left to terrorists? I think not. Money he got by cheating the oil for food program. He didn't need the money from selling weapons. He would rather keep them himself.
It has been well documented (as Bassackwards has mentioned) that Bin Laden and Saddam in fact did not get along or like each other at all. Saddam was not involved in Al Queda, nor would he allow it to exist in his country if he could help it. Saddam is a Sunni arab, which are a more secular and less religious than the other moslim groups such as shiites and kurds. That is the reason that Iraq had better rights for women than pretty much any other muslim country in the mideast. Most others are controlled by their religion, which severely limits women's rights.
Also, not all of the troops want to be there. My wife's cousin is a sniper in Iraq right now (his second tour in as many years) and he can't wait to get it over with. He has fought honorably for his country, but he is sickened by the senseless killing that is going on there. He's only in his early 20s but I'm sure he's seen it all while there. There are plenty other troops and families of troops who do not agree with the war but are still honoring their commitment to their country, and others who are also actively protesting the war as well. Of course lots of others are in full agreement as well.
In regards to your last statement, "[/size][/black][/font][/size][/black][/font][font "Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"][black][size 1]Spreading freedom across the globe helps defeat terrorism."
I agree, the more countries and people that are free, the more terrorism doesn't have ground to stand on. However, the method of obtaining that freedom can sometimes have worse consequences. What if we had done something differently? What if we had used diplomatic methods to bring about the freedom of the Iraqi people? Or, what if we would have left them alone, and instead concetrated on one or more African nations that are also not free, and given them both political and food aid, help in building schools and training teachers. Help in training people for careers that will improve their economies. What if we had done that instead? Why do the people in the mideast hate us so badly? One big reason is because we throw our weight around and meddle in their internal affairs, often against their will. Why do we care so much about the freedom of the Iraqi people but do very little for so many others?
Bassackwards had the anwser: O I L. Oil drives our nation. The people of Africa supposedly have nothing to offer us, so we do not help them except for token donations. If we took all the money spent on the war in Iraq, and instead spent it on aid to countries that needed it, the world view of us would be much better. Many less would hate us. They would see us as saviors instead of rich pushy war mongerers. Whether we are that or not, that is how people see us. We appear very hypocritical when we "Help" the Iraqis by bombing them, and do nothing for many other poor countries. Go and see the movie, "Hotel Rwanda" and you'll see what I mean when I say we ignore and neglect other people, other countries who need us badly.
Sorry my ranting is so long!!!! [blush]
[/size][/black][/font][font "Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"][black][size 1][font "Verdana,Arial,Helvetica"][black][size 1]
[/size][/black][/font][/size][/black][/font]
[signature]