Is GWII justified?
-
As Gulf War II come to a close, we still haven seen any Bio-Chem attacks from Saddam & Co. Which means the regime may not have any bio-chem weapons...
So does it justified wat Bush & Blair Co.'s action against Iraq to disarm it of weapons of Mass Destruction?
Anyway, it's good to see a Mad Man's regime being toppled...
But the World is not safe yet, as Saddam & Osama Co. has not yet being caught -
let time tells.....
this war is the most propagandas in the world history
This is just the beginning of everything.........just wait n c.......
me neither support nor anti war
-
One word: NO
-
Justified or not, it is a very subjective matter. I think that is a moot point now anyways. All those who have seen the reaction of the Iraqis when Saddam's statue fell would feel very happy for those people. It gives a visual meaning to the word "liberated".
-
liberated yes, but now is in a state of chaos....looting everiwhere + Shi'ite Protesters Storm Iraq's Embassy in Tehran
, lawlessnesshttp://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=index2&cid=736 and yesterdae Witnesses: crowd hacks two Islamic clerics to death in holy city of Najaf -
I have never agreed to the american's action.At the same time, i do hope all these madness will end soon.
-
wonder if they will ever find WMD in iraq....
-
It will be justified only if they find WMD, that is the only thing that will justify this war in the technical sense, not happy 'free' iraqis, not chemical suits, not suicide bombers, it has to be WMD. WMD or if they capture saddam sharing a same bedroom as OBL
-
hmmm....wat if the coalition can't find any WMD?Originally posted by redrooster79:It will be justified only if they find WMD, that is the only thing that will justify this war in the technical sense, not happy 'free' iraqis, not chemical suits, not suicide bombers, it has to be WMD. WMD or if they capture saddam sharing a same bedroom as OBL
wat would happen? -
they would say they liberated Iraq from a madman...Originally posted by foga:hmmm....wat if the coalition can't find any WMD?
wat would happen?
and save the world by toppling a madman dictator who may possess WMD that possess a threat to the world -
wat if they were indeed wrong about saddam?Originally posted by Arena:they would say they liberated Iraq from a madman...
and save the world by toppling a madman dictator who may possess WMD that possess a threat to the world
jus wat if.... -
In wat way are they wrong with Saddam?Originally posted by foga:wat if they were indeed wrong about saddam?
jus wat if....
He's a madman and there's no doubt about it.....
He even used bio-chem weapons against the Kurds, he is a tyrant who oppressed democracy and freedom....
And he supports terrorism, so the point of removing a evil man who poses great danger to the world are justified, but regarding about Weapons of MAD Destruction, I am sure that they do have it, but it is a matter when will they use it and when will the US find it? As they are now pin down by the Americans, it won't be a surprise to see them unleashing the BioChem weapons in the last resort.... -
give people a free lunch and they will complain that there are no slaves waving palm fronds to create a cooling breeze
-
i dun get wat u mean?Originally posted by the Bear:give people a free lunch and they will complain that there are no slaves waving palm fronds to create a cooling breeze -
some people know only how to complain...
if you give them everything in this universe, they'll demand everything in the parallel universe.. and will make it seem as it you owe it to them and it's their rightOriginally posted by Arena:i dun get wat u mean? -
oh....... cuz they wanna be the SUPERPOWER in the WORLD!Originally posted by the Bear:some people know only how to complain...
if you give them everything in this universe, they'll demand everything in the parallel universe.. and will make it seem as it you owe it to them and it's their right
With the rising power of China, they may find fault with China in the future, but tt depends on the administration, whether the Republican or democrats heads the country -
u can find lotsa them in US.... heh...... so US can stockpile and improve WMD and others cannot? hmm.. issit because US is afraid that they (enemies) would use it on them, n it is absolutely right to use WMD on other ppl?Originally posted by foga:wonder if they will ever find WMD in iraq....
If so to lead an example of some sort.... sign a treaty this and that. like the Ballastic missile thingie with the Russians....
US has just took off the mask it wore b4 and during the war about liberating this and that.... not going for the oil nor territory....
Then y issit that US is insisting that it shall be the head to rebuild Iraq? -
the treaty that the US signed was the ABM which is different form the NNP treaty.the NNP was signed by the likes of UK,China,India,France,Pakistan while the ABM was only between USA and Russia due to the fact that only those 2 countries make Balistic missles.Even the UK uses the US Trident and Polaris.Anyway the ABM was cancelled by the US cause under the treaty the both countries were barred from building spaced base weapons platformsOriginally posted by Moonstriker:u can find lotsa them in US.... heh...... so US can stockpile and improve WMD and others cannot? hmm.. issit because US is afraid that they (enemies) would use it on them, n it is absolutely right to use WMD on other ppl?
If so to lead an example of some sort.... sign a treaty this and that. like the Ballastic missile thingie with the Russians....
US has just took off the mask it wore b4 and during the war about liberating this and that.... not going for the oil nor territory....
Then y issit that US is insisting that it shall be the head to rebuild Iraq? -
US has always been very selective and sensitive when signing any treaties. I think some dubious ones includ not signing to be part of ICT, not signing that biochem thing, and also some stuff to do with landmines. Sorry i cannot be specific, these are just the top of my head, but the ICT one can seem extremely hypocritical since there are now clamoring that the war was fought for the WAR CRIMES and crimes against humanity of Saddam and his loonies
-
Btw US is a damn ass who uses Bio-Chem weapons during the Viet War........
When u r in Vietnam, go to those villagers or wat, u will see many man being physically deformed, while the chemical causes many normal people to have physically deformed children..... So wat r the US doing huh??? Trying to say this cannot tt cannot, but itself is just a hypocrite...
Anyway, I feels and see that the US is trying to dominate the world and can resort to any means of doing so by justifying their stand by their own words.... -
if im not wrong..the name of the chemical agent is called Orange..Originally posted by Arena:Btw US is a damn ass who uses Bio-Chem weapons during the Viet War........
When u r in Vietnam, go to those villagers or wat, u will see many man being physically deformed, while the chemical causes many normal people to have physically deformed children..... So wat r the US doing huh??? Trying to say this cannot tt cannot, but itself is just a hypocrite...
Anyway, I feels and see that the US is trying to dominate the world and can resort to any means of doing so by justifying their stand by their own words....
until now it is still effecting part of vietnam -
i thought agent orange was meant to clear foilage not a chem weapon against humans. sorry i could be wrong here but the mutations and chemical effects were side effects they decided to callously not consider
-
yea ur rite tats wat i heard too..but if im not wrong US did not test Agent Orange..they just use it when they have the chance.i might be wrong abt tis...can any expert give some light abt tis plsOriginally posted by redrooster79:i thought agent orange was meant to clear foilage not a chem weapon against humans. sorry i could be wrong here but the mutations and chemical effects were side effects they decided to callously not consider -
Agent Orange is indeed a weedkiller that contains dioxin, a chemical thats been known to cause horrendous side effects after prolonged exposure to humans such as birth defects in newborns and sterility in adults. The Americans knew about this and its use was either severely curtailed or banned altogether in the US, but was still used freely in Vietnam.Originally posted by redrooster79:i thought agent orange was meant to clear foilage not a chem weapon against humans. sorry i could be wrong here but the mutations and chemical effects were side effects they decided to callously not consider -
heh.... indiscriminate usage of agent orange... even after they knew the agent would affect the villagers there. they still continue to use it.... y? so they can win... they'll do anything to win....Originally posted by Viper52:Agent Orange is indeed a weedkiller that contains dioxin, a chemical thats been known to cause horrendous side effects after prolonged exposure to humans such as birth defects in newborns and sterility in adults. The Americans knew about this and its use was either severely curtailed or banned altogether in the US, but was still used freely in Vietnam.
I am not pro communist nor pro iraq.... but just stating my points of view abt the US military govt...