"Right, so if you go for 'Shock and Awe', MOAB and tactical nuclear weapons, it won't kill civilians in Iraq?"
I don't have any input into the military tactics that may be employed. Neither do you. I know that I have heard those who do have that responsibility make it clear that their plans are to minimize accidental civilian casualties. Recent history of armed conflict by US forces bears this premise out. So does their own words in all of their public meetings to discuss the subject. You may feel free to call them liars before they act, but I have no reason to doubt their words at this time.
BTW, every time senior officials discuss this "Shock & Awe" plan, there has been absolutely no discussion of it being used to slaughter innocent civilians or even Iraqi troops. They have discussed it's use to destroy Saddams military machine & his ability to communicate to his troops. It is designed to influence their military into not fighting in order to minimize the number of casualties, both civilian & military. Perhaps you have not listened to these very public discussions?
"Now, don't try and cast this as me being in the wrong. You're the one arguing for killing, for raining down bombs on a country quite unable to resist, not me... if it makes you feel bad, so it should."
Your premise that we are going to nuke & MOAB innocent civilians is most likely dead wrong. Your premise that I am arguing for killing is absolutely wrong. I am for the credible threat of force against Saddam to get immediate, complete & full compliance with all matters covered in Resolution 1441. It is totally up to Saddam whether there is war. I don't feel bad about that one bit.
I am for our President performing JOB #1, protect US citizens & US interests. Saddam is a real & present danger. There are too many irrefutable facts to support this.
"Don't try accusing me of defending Saddam or OBL, either. It's a pure and blatant lie - try and find anything where I have. You won't, because I never have, and never would. Care to retract your lie?"
I was completely wrong to paint you with the same brush as I have others. You are right. I was wrong to do so as you have not defended Saddam or OBL directly or indirectly to my knowledge. I sincerely apologize for making that clearly inappropriate accusation.
"And don't make half-witted comments about my motivation. You're plainly far too unintelligent to have the least notion of what I feel."
I don't & I won't at this time. I have not read enough of your POV to draw any conclusions, knee-jerk or otherwise.
"You're so keen to kill, answer this... if you could shoot your own children, and thereby guarantee Saddam would die, would you? If not (and who would...) then don't be so quick to berate those who see a certain inhumanity in doing the same to others' children, when it's not even certain you'll get Saddam."
I'll ask you to refrain from painting me with inappropriate accusations. My posting history shows no evidence that I support any such atrocities whatsoever. I believe that war is absolutely horrific. I abhor killing for any reason.
However, I would kill in self defense if I had no other choice. I also support the global war on terrorism. My posting history clearly enumerates why I do. I also would support a war with Iraq if that is the choice that Saddam makes. Again my posting history is replete with sufficient evidence why I take this stand. As for killing anyone's children, I have repeatedly made my case about this subject. There simply are no guarantees that innocent children, or any innocent people will not be killed. I believe that those who will be tasked with waging war, if Saddam chooses that route, will do everything they can to minimize that horrific eventuality. And Saddam will do everything he can to see to it that as many of his people are killed because he knows that most US citizens absolutely abhor this horrific consequence of war.
"And don't make half-witted comments about my motivation. You're plainly far too unintelligent to have the least notion of what I feel."
I was wrong about my inappropriate comment before. And you are completely wrong about my level of intelligence.
"You're so keen to kill, answer this... if you could shoot your own children, and thereby guarantee Saddam would die, would you? If not (and who would...) then don't be so quick to berate those who see a certain inhumanity in doing the same to others' children, when it's not even certain you'll get Saddam."
Again you are completely wrong about my desire to kill. Your hypothetical is completely inappropriate regarding this ongoing debate IMVHO. It has no basis in reality. I have discussed, in this post, my POV about innocent casualties & I stand by that POV.
"Last point. There is no significant connection between Saddam and Bin Laden. If you believe there is, then you're even more gullible than you are foolish."
I am neither gullible nor foolish. I am dealing with facts & reality in determining my POV on all of these issues. Please read the following............
Message 18666886
That post will provide an accurate rebuttal that still is spot on accurate. It also shows that your inaccurate premise that Bush or any of his Administration have ever claimed that Saddam & Bin Laden is THE reason to go to war with Iraq. They have made claims that there is evidence of Iraqi & Al Qeada connections & they have not been rock solid. However, it is not THE one & only reason the Bush Administration has for their current clash with Saddam. That is a cold hard fact. There are many reasons & the Bush Administration has repeatedly discussed every one of them. Sadly, folks want to point to the weakest of many legitimate factual reasons & deceptively make it appear that it is the ONE AND ONLY REASON. That simply is not true.
"Still, no need for you to reply..."
Wrong again. There were many reasons to reply.
Ö¿Ö |
