Impeach George W. Bush Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: MSI who wrote (15919)	10/22/2002 4:10:20 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 93284

Careful... do you take it upon yourself as an American to correct the wrongs of all nations around the world? Not at all. I was just showing the weakness of the argument that an American intervention to remove Saddam would violate inalienable rights. The argument that Saddam is a brutal dictator who abuses human rights is somewhat weak as a justification for invasion but its rathe strong as an argument against the idea that we can't invade because of in inalienable human rights. The point was not to make the case for an invasion but rather to shoot down your argument against it. "Do you really doubt that Iraq has a large WMD program?" No doubt, and there are a dozen others that are further along, including our "Axis if Evil", N. Korea. Another non-starter of an excuse. Again I was replying to your specific point. You claimed that there was no evidence of Iraqi WMD or that such evidence was secret and thus not available to you and perhaps false. But regardless of the evidence for new activities by Iraq the old evidence is massive. You raised the point, I shot it down. Now you raise another point which we can talk about but it doesn't defend your original point. North Korea does indeed have a WMD program that is apparently further along then Iraq's but other circumstances are different. North Korea doesn't threaten a big chunk of the world's oil supply. It has not invaded another nation in force since the 50s. It didn't sign a ceasefire agreement allowing for inspections. It is a more dangerous country to invade so to invade it requires more justification then to invade Iraq. But if you really think North Korea is the greater threat and should be invaded first then make your argument. There has never been a cease fire. There has been political and military action to enforce containment of Iraq every month for 11 years, which is why they are in their current degraded technological and industrial condition. There was a cease fire agreement but your right it was quickly violated by Iraq and the US has intervened as well. So I guess we are still at war from the 90s and don't need any additional UN resolutions. The controversy here is efforts by the administration to go to war without any evidence of such attack being imminent, The administration would not have to show any such evidence because it is not claiming that any such attack is imminent. Tim

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next