>I appreciate your passion and view in general, but I think this >one issue is the bases for many who argue against the war.
No, the Basis for my arguement against this specific war is that it was not the right thing to do. We'd destroyed their infastructure with monthly bombings over the past 12 years, and with sanctions that destroyed their clean water, education, medical treatment and acess to food. One of the reasons for my arguemnt that it was not morally right, is that they posed no threat to us.
Things to consider—
I have some responces you might want to consider as well.
1. Invaded a neighboring Arab country unprovoked.
We were supplying the weapons to them when they did this. They were our "ally" at that point becuase we were fighting Iran. We didn't say no, and it's not like Kuwait, which is and was at the time, led by a fascist Shah, was some haven for democracy that was being invaded. They just supplied us with cheap oil.
2. Launched SCUD missiles into Saudi Arabia.
Yeah? They're next door. I also would like to know at what time this happened. It surely wasn't in the last 12 years, or I'd have heard about it. They don't have the capabilities to launch any warhead payload to the USA.
3. Gassed the Kurds in the north.
Yeah, and we turned our heads. In fact, there was a massive PR campaign paid for by the Bush White house to make it seem like Saddam was a great guy. I think it's hilarious that GWBush brings this up as a reason for invading when WE were supplying the weapons and giving him the go-ahead for all this stuff.
3. Behaved like an vicious animal (as dictators commonly do) torturing and murdering thousands of human beings.
So did the war criminals working for the US armed forces when they buried hundreds of surrendering Iraqi troops alive with bulldozer tanks. So did the scumbags just recently in Abu Ghraib. So did our government during the Japaneese scare during WWII. So did we when we blew up our own SS Maine to get into the Span-AM war. So did we when we overthrew Allende and placed Pinochet in power. So do oil companies that have private mercenaires to kill protesters in underdeveloped african nations when their refining process makes the people sick and their children die. This isn't really a point for me to concider. He was a brutal dictator. So what? There are pleanty out there. We are to blame for his coming to power just as much as he is. We helped him along the whole way up untill he invaded Kuwait.
4. Saddam possesed WMD and failed to account for all it.
Uh when was this? Cause I was pretty sure that they UN inspectors didn't find anything. Remember? That's why the UN didn't okay the invading of Iraq, because they WEREN'T IN VIOLATION?
5. Had contact with Al Qaida operatives (see 9-11 report).
Oh, geese, let's revise history eh? I remember there being somthing about NO CONNECTION between 9-11 and Iraq being key in that 9-11 report.
6. Recieved, delayed, and kicked out UNSCUM inspectors when the heat was on.
When was this? In like 1993? Yeah so what? We went to war then. Doesn't mean a thing now.
7. Shot at jets enforcing no-fly zone activity.
saddam himself did that? Really? Crazy! For some reason there's somthing about US and British Jets constantly and consistantly bombing civilian areas like Um Quaser for no reason for 12 years straight.
To me these alone indicate a desire and temperament for sadistic violence and power unique among world leaders in that he is willing to abuse and violate peaceful nations and human beings.
yeah no kidding! We totally should NOT have supplied those weapons to him! Darn you Reagan and GHW Bush!
Furthermore, there are hundreds of nations that are just as bad-- if not worse than Iraq as far as phychotic fascist leaders go. Why don't we invade them ALL?
Now throw in WTC I
that was under clinton and the FBI helped to set it up. Look it up. There was a "sting" operation that they had Al-Husseini go through with, "in hopes of getting the bad guys"
, two embassy bombings
that saddam was behind?
WTC II
how many Iraqi's were on those planes? oh, yeah, zero! How many dollars did Saddam funnel to this operation? Oh yeah! ZERO!
, no further inspections claim needed as well
What huh what? I don't know exactly what you're saying here, so forgive me If I have no clue what you actully mean. If you mean that there was no UN inspectors allowed into Iraq, you'd be lying through your teeth.
, and 20 UN violations and I say, have at 'em.
Yeah, but the UN didn't, and why should we enforce UN policies that the UN doesn't want to enforce? I say screw the UN. We shouldn't need to what the UN says, global government is a horrible idea. We should be able to do what is RIGHT becuase it's the right thing to do. Invading Iraq was NOT RIGHT.
Again, I say that regardless of all the WMD issues, I believe invasion based on humanitarian grounds was enough.
So should we invade Niger? And N Korea? And China? and Somalia? And Ethiopia? and Pakistan? And India? and Tibet? And Jasper Texas? and columbia, and argentina and guatemala and the hundreds of bananna republics that have fascist dictators? We niether have the resources nor the moral authority to play the world policeman.
Tell me honestly now, if Gore was in office, would your views be the same?
yeah. They would. I'm not a democrat.
Also, who do you think most Muslim extremists would like to see elected?
George W Bush has been Al Quida's greatest recruiting tool ever. He is proof of their fears that the "great satan" of the west is coming to take over the middle east and ... I don't know, have a pork roast or somthing to defile the land. He's invaded and toppled two major middle eastern countries in just three years. LOOK OUT! THE GREAT SATAN IS COMING! yeah, they want to keep bush in office, he's great for their cause.
There is one thing in general Arabs respect--bravado and strength.
thanks for speaking for every arab ever.
I don't know if Kerry would have the presence to enforce UN demands.
He'd do whatever they tell him to do, unfortunatly. I don't care about enforsing UN demands. I don't like the UN, and I'd rather see it's power diminish, if not it be disbanded.
And frankly, I don't know if Kerry would have an anti-war position altogether if Bush didn't own the matter first. I believe he may have acted similar.
He allready voted for war. I don't like kerry, I think he's an out and out corprorate puppet, just the same as Bush. But Bush has screwed up and needs to be punished at the polls.
Unfortunatly the general populace is too scared or stupid to ditch the major parties (which don't really represent them, they represnt their parties, taking on views that they don't actually hold for party line's sake) to vote libertarian or green or nader this time around.
But the original post was about why Bush should be impeached.
I think clinton should have been impeached, and kicked out of office, but for differnt reasons than that petty stupid stained dress. What devisive emotionally driven baloney.
He should have been impeached for being a war criminal. He should have been impeached for signing way to many executive orders, calling for the collection of blood, DNA, Urine, and fingerprint data on every american citizen to be stored in a centralized database by the year 2005. All this TIAO and Homeland Security nonsence is just an extention of the same unconstitutional and fascist polices of Clinton.
Bush needs to get out of office, and I'll be the first to call for Kerry's impeachement if he screws up.
