Serious Arguments Thread

Started by finti5 pages

told you around a year ago about the man in charge of US is no good Tex.

Yup

So your running in the next election I take it? 😉

USh turning into a Blair-clone!😛 every opinion he has, you have!

you sure you havent got it the other way around there Mah

Blair is supporting Bush because he thinks it is the right thing to do. How daringly criminal of him! Oh, he simply MUST be a lapdog of Bush now, just because he happens to agree with him! Why did I not see it before?

It's a contemptuously bad piece of analysis to say that. I don't remember anyone ever saying that Churchill was a clone of Roosevelt.

In any case, Tex, this won't be a unilateral war; now the French think a weapons inspection deadline is a good idea this is turning into far more the sort of thing it should be- the enforcing of UN declarations made some time ago that have been flouted for too long, rather than just one warmonger's senseless assault on a country he dislikes.

The US sure as hell isn't getting access to Iraqi oil and the intention here is to prevent terrorist atrocities; just about every study we have says that leaving Iraq is more dangerous than any other option.

Iraq should submit to legally made UN Resolutions now or it will get what it deserves.

In any case, Tex, this won't be a unilateral war; now the French think a weapons inspection deadline is a good idea this is turning into far more the sort of thing it should be- the enforcing of UN declarations made some time ago that have been flouted for too long, rather than just one warmonger's senseless assault on a country he dislikes.

well there sure as hell isnt a unified agreement on this, and it's still mostly UK and US attempting to get everyone else to agree, which the large majority does not.
attacking Iraq, what the heck is it good for? before everything is destroyed, saddam has said they will defend themselves and all hell may break loose and stay loose for a long period of time.
blair says he wouldn't agree on everything Bush says cause of loyality, but because he thinks they do the right things, but to me it seems Blair would say 'yes' even if Bush pointed his gun at the UK!
blair Always agrees with Bush!!

Well, no, Blair would not say yes to everrything Bush says and the UK and US have already had several serious disagreements on how to handle the Iraq issue; all they really agree on is that something must be done. For the UK, there is no question of unilateral action; but many US hawks still think solo is the way to go; I am almost certain that the US administration will, and has been, seeing sense on this issue and will do no such thing as stupid as going in alone.

I think you will find international support improving soon, Mah. The French want the deadline, the Russians are ok so long as their (extremely large) credit bill with Iraq is guaranteed, and if all those come over the Chinese will probably abstain.

I will remind you, yet again, that UN resolutions state that Iraq must be, if necessary, forcibly stopped from doing what it is doing. This is not just the US; it was agreed by the globsl body responsbile for this very sort of thing.

If you think the US is the crazy country and Bush the crazy man that you say they are, they would also be targetting North Korea and the like. As it is, the reason Iraq is being targeted is precisely because this is a situation where the UN is very clear and because the US will not just go rampaging around the whole world on its own.

we'll see, I don't think international support will increase, and if it does it will be from the mega-countries you listed, which will be good enough for attack yes, but I dont see most countries supporting it. even our US-loving foreign politics-minister doesnt think too much of it.

But international support is already increasing, in lieu of the new relevations about Iraq's nuclear capacity revealed by an international body and if they actually get around to releasing their evidence soon it will increase further still (though this will only, mostly, be stuff that any person could find out if he goes and reads the relevant documents).

France and Russia have been two of Iraq's most vigorous 'supporters' in recent years; they are the leaders in pro-Iraqi sentiment outside the Arab world and now they are turning around. The mood is shifting; Iraq has failed to deliver on recent promises to allow inspectors back in- something which all countries agree is necessary- and patience is running out.

well that is most unfortunate. and those evidences, hasn't some countries, like Germany, already seen them and not given more support?

Schroeder is certainly riding the anti-American wave, for sure. But I can't see his logic; the UN has said that Iraq should not be allowed these weapons, the commission appointed by the UN says she has them and is still building them, other agencies have since repeatedly confirmed this (the new nuclear evidence being very worrying indeed) the UN says that Iraq must be compelled if she does not co-operate... how much more is there to say?

This is why France is coming around; she doesn't want an invasion regardless (which some of the more worrying US voices have been asking for (see, I think Dick Cheney is far more scary than Bush)), but now thinks there is a solid case for compelled inspections.

even our US-loving foreign politics-minister doesnt think too much of it.
that is because he swing with the wind, he might change his views yet again that spineless jerk of a politician
I think Dick Cheney is far more scary than Bush)),
still Bush is a warmonger and I think he has mistaken his chances of reelection clings on him going to war.
Even so everybody griped about no one stopped Hitler before he went too far. Now we have someone who is willing to stop a dangerous leader, and then they whine about that too.
I say get Saddam and pluck his mustache

Would Bush really be foolish enough to pin his re-election hopes on a successful war? It didn't work with his father.

I think that is what he clings to. Never claimed he was smart, but the Democrats need to come up with an opponent to Bush soon, one that can be around so they get used to him before the elections. More or less like they did with Clinton

maybe he thinks he can be better then his father
well ush and finti u might be right that a war with attack iraq is a smart thing to do, but it could just be that it could cause a lot of problems.
this could be come the end justifice the means if things go wrong

maybe he thinks he can be better then his father
should be a piece of cake

probably

well Ush, didn't someone say that Iraq's weapons had a questionable range and quality? that they didn't pose such a big threat..sorry I can't remember who, saw it in the news the other day.

well, bush does have to think about elections

'Questionable' hardly makes me feel assured, Mah; the inspections should continue. And the UN has very little reservation about the lethality of Iraq's arsenal.