LOL! Here we go !
E-non, I here what you are saying, but I'm not following. The U.S. has been under attack for quite a while. 9/11 was not the first shot, and
Al-Queda is not the only group that has declared war on us, and Syria and Iran aren't the only nations that are terrorist-sponsoring states. Iraq is
as well. It isn't a matter of if
Hussein has CBR weapons, its a matter of where are they? What did he do with them? Burden of proof has
been on him, not us, and he's done no proving. You are blaming Bush for breaking up the U.N. when the otehr members went against us for the purpose
of protecting their own under the table interests. And lookie, Germany won't forgive the new government of the debt from the old government. Now,
there is a nation that should understand forgiveness. France was protecting their financial interests as well and was willing to do that regardless
of whether or not a CBR weapon made it our shores and killed our people. Our lives is a risk the French government is always willing to take. Sure,
most of the people there were against us (so, what's new) but that doesn't make us wrong.
When you say they all were against us so therefore we were wrong and should have done it their way, you aren't taking into consideration why they
were not going along with us. Their reasons were not humanitarian or magnanimous. As a matter of fact, they displayed no better than apathy toward
the safety of my family. Funny how time goes and friends forget you, huh?
Now, as far as our reasons for the war.The threat is real, and it has been real. Its not something that occured with the election of Bush. You
really don't think Abu Abbas had sneaked into Iraq without Hussein's network knowing? You don't really think he was the only terrorist that
Hussein aided? You don't think these mobile labs werescience projects that travelled from school to school, huh? And you don't believe Hussein
would have lost a moment's sleep after handing the chemical or biological, or eventually, the nuclear weapon off to the terrorist so that the group
without border or national identity could do the dirty work for the nations that hate us, do you? Of course not should be the answer to each
question. The war on terror was a just cause for smashing Hussein and the threat he posed, a clear and immediate threat.You know what the funny thing
is? There's nothing that says some of the chemical/biological weaponry wasn't handed off before the overthrow of Hussein.
We seem to make a big deal about the condition of the Iraqi people. Gulags, torture chambers, child prisons, etc, and I'm very glad these people are
not living under this anymore. But I agree with those that say this is U.S. propaganda machine at work. Sure, every bit of it is true, but Iraq
isn't the only nation that suffers under such cruelty. I don't see a mad rush to liberate the Christians in Sudan. Oh, yeah, they're Africans, to
heck with them. So, why do we worry about the Iraqis anyway?
Oh, yeah. Now we come back to that three letter word that some treat like a four letter word, oil. Or, as some act as if it should be referred,
The "O" word.
Of course oil is the key. What baffoon would be such a dimwitted knuckle-dragger to think otherwise? I got some news for you
kind peeps, my car doesn't run on water and pine sap can't be used as lube, s oyou're darned right I expect my country to ensure I have the gas to
get to and from work. And by the way, did I mention the fact I have a habit of doing about 30-35 mph over the speed limit? Bring me back a few extra
gallons, I'm wasteful. And I don't want a little putt-putt car again. This Taurus is as small as I'll ever go again, and I'm mad about the fact
that Ford Motor Company determined I shouldn't go any faster than 110 MPH and governed it there. Get the picture? I need gas. I'll pay for the
gas, I'll pay fair market value, but it needs to get here. It doesn't need to be bottled up because of a sanction that is the result of a nutbag
that would rather his people starve while he sticks his fingers in our eyes rather than get rid of CBR weapons that he doesn't need anyway. Some of
the "member nations" had little oil deals already going on, so they weren't really worried about it, now were they? And selling weapons parts and
pieces to Hussein through back doors was pretty lucrative and he'd have the money for that as long as the "oil for food" *nudge-nudge, knowing
wink* program was in place.
By the way, why is it that our fine friends in the U.N. refuse to lift the sanctions on Iraq, even though the Husseini regime is no longer in power?
Wake up, friend, the U.N. is not humanitarian but a political machine, and one whose mission is to fleece and destroy the U.S. and they'll make the
Iraqi people suffer more if they think it'll in some way hurt us.
But, I stray.
Oil is the very reason we give a tinker's rip about the middle east. I know some of you aren't religious, and many aren't Christian, but my
thinking is that there is so much oil in that region is so that we will
be drawn to that area and we will
care about what is going on
there. Otherwise we may not care how the Jew and the Arab is getting along.
So, in a nutshell. we have a U.N. where the other permanent members had their own financial agendas that worked against both our national security
and the welfare of the Iraqi people, and a nation with oil needed by the rest of the world that was being held hostage by a sadistic dictator. There
doesn't seem to be anything covert about this situation, and the plain view evidence is alot more overwhelming than the conjecture that I've seen.
And, even if there are underlying reasons for this military action, the obvious reasons are sufficient for conducting it anyway.
Are there underlying reasons? I have no doubt. But while I see many people screaming about hard to define and prove underlying reasons on the side
of the U.S., hardly anyone makes mention of the uncovered underlying reasons France, Germany and Russia were against us. There is where I see a more
glaring conspiracy that is being totally ignored. It would seem to me that those who are all about the dignity of humanity and against the suffering
of humanity would be wondering why the above stated nations would be against liberating the Iraqi people in order to protect their financial concerns.
Isn't this, after all, what the U.S. is accused of doing, placing its economic interests above the human interests of people in other nations?
The double standards are really confusing me. It makes me think that maybe there is some old fashoined politics involved.