SubKamran
Since it’s currently the National Debate, let’s join in.
What’s everyone’s thoughts on the ‘War on Iraq’ and how the Bush Administration is planning on taking this.
My personal views are...
This is nonsense, this is not a ‘pre-emptive’ strike on Iraq, this is called ‘prevention’ because, what Kennedy did in the Cuban Missile Crisis was actually take photographs of the Soviet Missiles, clear proof and then ask the UN to take care of it (long story short). This was pre-emption.
What Bush is doing however is this: “We THINK and GUESS that Iraq will deploy weapons of mass destruction on our soil, thus we will go and take care of this threat.” This is called prevention, not pre-emption. We do not have CLEAR and HARD evidence that Hussain is going to do this, not that I don’t mind we get rid of him, just that we shouldn’t and do not have the right to walk in a country we BELIEVE will shoot at us.
Like a man said on NPR today, the new ‘Doctrine’ is a sign of American Arrogance, and is all “We think someone is going to declare war on us, we reserve the right to attack it.” Besides that fact, it’s pointed at ALL of the Middle East, not just Iraq. Does this mean that India can do the same thing to Pakistan because it BELIEVES Pakistan will maybe attack them with Nuclear weapons?
In some cases, this may actually be illegal. It’s arrogance, saying that we can do whatever we want to any country because we think that they will attack us. It’s BS is all...sorry for the phrase, but that’s what it is.
Americans don’t want another war, we don’t want to start a fight, but it seems all Bush ever thinks about is WAR before anything else, ‘War on Terrorism’, ‘War on Iraq’ all WAR. Never PEACE, never ‘Peace Keeping Project’ or etc etc.
I don’t have a problem with America, every country has it’s quarks, but I do have a problem with this government and the way it carries out it’s needs.
(I do have a reputation for wording myself incorrectly, so hopefully everything I said was what i meant...my mom can help me figure it out...)
Guest
My knowledge on the subject is currently limited. However...I personally believe that this is not so much a war on Iraq, as it is a war on terrorism. Iraq, is known for harboring some of the worst terrorists...however I’m not certain we should turn Iraq into a parking lot just yet...that make any sense?
SubKamran
Yah, also on the Agenda is oil
Thomas Freedman was speaking on NPR, and he made a point that what’s going to happen on Day 3? Everyone talks about Day 1 and Day 2...
On Day 1, the mission goes well, we rid the country of Saddam and weapons
On Day 2, the Iraqi people will throw rice and celebrate
On Day 3? Now what? Leave, rebuild?
We cannot rebuild a nation by ourselves, we need many allies for financial support, allies we don’t have. Going by the phrase “You break it, you own it.” we will OWN Iraq on Day 3. We are responsible for 23 million people. We have to rebuild their country, that will take years with lots of investment.
TexasMandie
Ok..well...as far as Saddam goes..and Day 3, and what not...I realize it would take a lot to rebuild...but it would be worth it.
I personally think however, that it’d be great if we were somehow able to depose Saddam, without creating a lot of bloodshed...and without destroying the country. Then...the rebuilding, could take place on a restorative level...restoring the government, to an actually government, rather than a dictatorship; and restoring the faith of the people in that government...
SubKamran
Sure, like Tom said, it’s a well worth it agenda...but how much support will we get from the international community? We’ve already taken care of Afghanistan...now Iraq. Who’s next, China?!
Rat
I have one word: oil.
You can bomb the world into pieces, but you can’t bomb it into peace.
Guest
As a young republican, I believe that Saddam is using the money that he gets from all that oil, for terror. He keeps funding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to get attention off of himself. Even if it is for oil, I am still for it. The money is going into the wrong hands
SubKamran
So, we’ve decided: Oil, Terror, Money... lol, anything else?
(i agree someone should get rid of him, but invading a country is different, we have Special Forces, put them to work, undercover military is better and safer than all out war)
Jrottman
In regard to the question about whether Saddam has weapons of mass destruction or not, we are not exactly just taking a guess. The U.S. has received word from Saddam’s own son, that Saddam has been building up weapons of mass destruction, this was right before Saddam then murdered his son. Also, special aluminum tubes used for uranium enrichment have been transferred. Something even more scary is a shipment of bacteria cultures that were sent to Iraq that could be used for chemical warfare. What is so disturbing about this is that both of these items were sent from whom? Well the United States ourself. How bout that? This was part of a peace negotiation several years ago. A great article can be found in Newsweek about this.
SubKamran
Yes, but the problem is that we don’t have sufficient evidence that he wants to use these on us...although it’s a guess.
I don’t have a problem with getting rid of him, but I have a problem that we are going to leave in our wake a destruction of the civilians lives who are already war torn. Just like Afghanistan.
Rat
So...one thing I don’t understand is that if the USA can have weapons of mass destruction, and advance and improve them, then why can’t any other country? Is the USA special or something, that the rules don’t apply to it?
Nbanyk
but i don’t think they can...wasn’t there an act where (towards the end of Communist Russia) the Russians and Americans agreed to a limitation on the amount of warheads and weapons they could use? Like instead of being able to blow up the earth 79 times over, they can now only do it 18 times?
SubKamran
The problem Rat is who’s controlling the weapons.
Rat
Each is just as dangerous as the other, just Hussein’s more likely to attack first. If Iraq attacks with his weapons of mass destruction, will Bush retaliate with his or not. That’s the big question. Will Bush use heavy weaponry in retaliation with heavy weaponry, or not. My guess is yes.
hotleg1
whatever hussein deserves he will get
but the whole big deal leading up to it is hurting the economy (everywhere)
Basebala3813
Why not just kill Saddam himself, so that way Iraq will have a normal civilized leader. The U.S. could even make sure of that. But the truth is that Saddam has reluctantly let us inspect them. We required ALL documents of all weapons of mass destruction (UN approved and helped out with this), and Saddam handed us a bunch of BS (okay, so maybe Saddam didn’t personally hand them to us, but someone did). And then on top of that we find scud missiles that don’t have any documents on them. So Saddam not only hands us a bunch of erroneous documents, he also lies to us. I think this is definitely grounds for at LEAST ousting him out of office. Any thoughts (talk amongst yourselves)
Guest
Iraq is crazy. No, let me rephrase that, Saddam is crazy. For some reason I get this feeling he wants to take over the world... Killing his own people with his weapons of mass destruction, and then turning around a lying about having them isn’t the smartest or brightest thing to do. I think since they have so delightfully sent people here to blow us up. I think we should send someone to kill them, or mostly, Saddam.
SubKamran
Please note that Iraq hasn’t sent anyone here to blow us up...don’t get confused between Afghanistan and Iraq...
Rat
...By the way, a “puppet government” is a government of one country that’s controlled by that of another. That’s just what the American government would set up in Iraq. Total control over a bunch of oil. Quite convenient for an illegal war to have that as a prize, isn’t it?
hugsnkicez00
well then it shows how smart they r...to go into war and get something they need!
NeOdg
Why are 7000 anti-saddam Iraqis joining us, it will not bring more suffering, did he put a puppet govt in Afghanistan, you have no precedent for what you are saying,
SubKamran
“I don’t care what the world thinks, we’re going to war.” Was what Bush was virtually announcing when he said, “I respectfully disagree with the peace demonstrations.” (which, mind you, was all over National Public Radio all day)
That shows what he thinks Democracy means.
ALSO SEE:
Student speeches and essays
What students know about Iraq
Student vs. adult confidence in President Bush on Iraq
Mock UN Security Council
Student protests in the news
