Where are the Apologies?

[Barry the Sprout]

Originally posted by MagiK: The people who were wrong know who they are, they should admit to being wrong, Apology may be the wrong word here, but you cannot point to anything I have written in this thread demanding an apology too ME. so back off the personal slant guy, this isn't about me.

Yeah, I think we all know who you're talking about. If you are accusing the people I think you are of a lack of intellectual honesty in a debate then I feel more dissapointed with you than you do with them even... so to speak... (did that sentence even make sense? ) Escpecially as it almost certainly includes me.

I am not convinced by Colin Powell's proof. That doesn't mean I'm wrong, it just means I want more evidence. My line has always been that we don't have utterly conclusing proof - and my line has also always been that even if we did I don't think war is the answer.

So what exactly is it that you want an apology for MagiK? Why exactly is it that a lot of people in this thread find it so much easier to believe that normal people like myself and Mark are without the moral fibre to admit weakness than it is for them to believe that people hold differing opinions on the subject? I see a lot of disparaging putdowns throughout this thread, and what exactly is the provocation for that? That we don't automatically agree there is conclusive proof? Well - I've certainly been put in my place by you guys! I'll know when I'm beat next time!

Just in general I find some people on this board very unwilling to accept that others might think differently from themselves. They search in vain for reasons for why people disagree with them and come up with the idea that they're just lying to themselves! Or that they're not experienced enough to formulate an opinion. Or that they have an irrational hatred of America. Well, I would say to a lot of people on this site that there is no point having a debate unless both sides admit the logical existance of other ideas.

[skywalker]

If you're looking for an apology from me...don't hold your breath.

I do believe Iraq has weapons...I just think it is a better idea to find and destroy them. What good is a war if the weapons remain hidden. Rooting them out and destroying them sounds like a better idea to me.

Mark

[Night Stalker]

Well, if One prooves a theory, Barry you just provided my proof for my "won't accept any evidence as justification" theory. And I'm not saying that's wrong byt the way. As for providing more evidence, can you appreciate the spy's connundrumm? How much of what info to reveal and when? It's a catch-22.

My question to you is, if war is not the answer in this case, what is? Diplomacy clearly does not work. It has not worked for 12 years, and even now, with the axe about to fall - it's not working. Iraq just delays, hides, and evades. Not that I really blame them, but this mess could have been over 12 years ago. With full cooperation it could still be over really quickly, but it requires full Iraqi compliance. Mr Blix himself has stated that they are not even doing that. They hope to hide what they can and pull a fast one on the world.

When diplomacy has failed, what do you propose?

[Night Stalker]

Originally posted by skywalker: If you're looking for an apology from me...don't hold your breath. I do believe Iraq has weapons...I just think it is a better idea to find and destroy them. What good is a war if the weapons remain hidden. Rooting them out and destroying them sounds like a better idea to me. Mark

Mark, this is an act of war if it has to be done forcfully by an outside party. If Iraq does not do it on their own accord, it must be done for them. The way to completely interdict them in their production and research is with shock - massive dismantling of their programs quickly and decisivly. Unfortunatly you need the Dogs of War to do that. Inspections take too long, and allow the programs to be restarted more easily - making and endless cycle of inspect/dismantle/rebuild/find/inspect ect.

[skywalker]

Well there is certainly a lot of difference between organised dismantling of Iraq's weapons and the "shock and awe" proposal that has been floated lately.

Mark

[Night Stalker]

But the only way an organized dismantling can work is with full Iraqi compliance and cooperation - they have prooved they are not willing to do that. Forcing them to do that with Inspectors, take too long and doesn't really interdict them, as they play a shell game with their assests. The inspectors are here .... move the stuff there.

Shock is the only way to severly cripple their efforts, if not eradicate them. I am open to suggestions though .....

[johnny]

Originally posted by Moiraine: I am very surprised at this topic - I don't see why apologies would be in order, since the US still didn't bring evidence convincing enough that war is the answer. To whom apologize anyway ? No apology did come our way following the 'old Europe' tantrum. By the way, why would 'old' be considered an insult anyway ? Yes, the European countries are older than the US. Couldn't it suggest that we may bring more wisdom to the debate - as you are always so prone, MagiK, to dismiss young people's insights for lacking of experience ... How long since the US have suffered a war on their own land ? The civil war - 150 years ago. Nobody is still alive to talk of first-hand experience. Here in France, most families have still living members who talk about what it was like, during WWII and even WWI. We know in our very flesh what a war means from the inside - and the personal consequences of these two wars are not past yet. Who will suffer more from a war - Saddam and the guys in power, or all the Irak citizens who have already suffered so much under Saddam and will now get bombed ? Also, if I was a simple citizen of Irak or a countru nearby, I would probably resent a lot these people who come from far away to intrude in our affairs, hit us, and then tell us what to do. I thought we were to fight terrorism ? This doesn't look as if it will bring it down at all !

Excuse me, but why does the US need to prove Iraq has womd ? Wasn't it the other way around ? Aren't the Iraqi's supposed to prove they DON'T have them ? I believe that was the case, and so far the Iraqi's failed to do that in a dramatic way. So if there's going to be an invasion, it's totally justified, it's not like the US didn't give them any chances to prove us all wrong. They're still playing hide and seek, and frankly, it's getting quite annoying. So thinks the Bush administration, and a few European countries. Enough is enough.

[the new JR Jansen]

Originally posted by MagiK: Im not sure what Belgium has to do with all this...except maybe they see the chance to be an influence on the international scene which doesnt happen often. [/QB]

Well, being from Belgium i could give you the reasoning of the gouvernment but i'll only do that if you open a new thread because it isn't in the scope of this one.

[Jay&SilentBob]

Personally I never doubted that he has WoMD but I just dont think invading the country is the best solution to the problem.
And I sure as hell aint apologising, GBush has to earn my respect before I give it to him and so far he hasnt come within spitting distance.

[skywalker]

Welcome to the forum Jay&SilentBob!

Mark