Attacking Iraq would intensify Islamic terrorism, not reduce it

[Chewbacca]

American bombs have killed thousands of innocents, take Laos as one example. We wiped 3,000 Talibon, mostly conscripts, off the face of the earth in one day with our bombs. Hardly any honor in that kind of warfare.

America has nukes, bio, and chemical weapons. America has used atomic weapons in war on civilians. Ever hear of agent orange?

America did support Saddam whilst he gassed the Iranians and thats the truth, not crap. If we are so high and holy, why not take Saddam out then? Or for gassing the kurds?

Should we put Reagan on trial for helping Saddam get where he is? For helping Saddam with military technology?

Saddam nearly won a nobel prize and did win an international humanitarian award for raising Iraqs literacy rate to one of the highest in the world.

So rarely are things so black and white, huh? The good, the bad, and the ugly all in one.

I wonder where my goverment gets off acting so morally superior, when history shows that we are not.

A great model for goverment doesn't neccessarily mean a great goverment.

Its a logical arguement that a war on Iraq will cause more terrorist attacks, more dead Americans, Europeans, Isrealis, not to mention more dead Iraqis. Alot to risk and lose on a big "what if".

If war is the act of commiting evil to do good, then it has to be based on more than "what if".

And thats just my opinion.

[Chewbacca]

I forgot to add that I joined 15,000+ other Americans on Sunday in the Boston Common to voice our opinion against a war on Iraq. That is alot of people on a freezing day. It's alot more people gathering than during the gulf war. I thought I'd mention it just in case any of our world neighbors think we are a bunch of warmongers over here. Some people obviously are, but I have yet to see 15,000 people gather for the pro-war side.

[Paladin2000]

I agree with most of the posts above but I am not going to quote any because I am too lazy and the post would look weird.

It is quite hard to justify the attack of a potential enemy just because he has good collection of doomsday weapons and he is being classified as insane and inhumane. Even if he has all these weapons, he has laid low for quite a while and hasn't showed any hostile intention towards US or NATO.

I do agree that he is a madman of some sort, but I don't think he is suicidal and he knows that if he uses any of the chemical weapons, the US and practically the rest of the world will nuke him to kingdom come.

Unless there is substantial prove that he is ready to use those weapons (photo of missile being ready for launch and etc.), any pre-emptive strike is going to anger the Islamic nations. And unless Bush intends to go to war with all the Islamic nations, it is not wise to kick Saddams butt as yet.

[ 11-04-2002, 10:30 PM: Message edited by: Paladin2000 ]

[Iron_Ranger]

Charean and antryg, I am not saying America is a perfect country, we have made big mistakes in the past.

Every time a discussion happens regarding this issue it ends up being 'who is more evil' agurment. Thats all beside the point. Saddam is evil. Its been proven, you can say Bush is evil if you want, hes pres now, and there is not much you can do about it.

Does Americas mistakes justify Saddams actions?

[antryg]

I will agree with you Iron Ranger that Saddam is evil. I will agree that he is a murderer. My question to you is: Given these facts does it justify the USA to go to war with Iraq? My answer is no. I give the same answer to Osama bin Laden even if everything he feels about America is true.
During the Gulf War we would have been justified to kill/remove Saddam.
When Saddam was trying to wipe out the Kurds using biological and chemical weapons, I believe we could have made a moral case for getting rid of Saddam.
I don't believe we can make that claim now.
Saddam was a war-monger/supporter of terrorists/genocidal killer/user of bioligical and chemical weapons 10+ years ago and we did nothing. We have no moral justification now. If it is our "duty" to protect the world then where were when when the outrages took place? Why is it we care now but didn't then?

[Charean]

Iron Ranger.... the only thing that bothers me is that we are going to war with the wrong party. We haven't taken care of the Al Queda yet, and until we do - we are vulnerable. Let us go directly to the source instead of dancing around it.

I found this article to put into words what I think. There are times I am not articulate, and this put my thoughts down well.

I would rather do a focused effort against people who are doing harm to us and others right now, than do a preemptive strike on Saddam.

[Iron_Ranger]

Originally posted by antryg: I will agree with you Iron Ranger that Saddam is evil. I will agree that he is a murderer. My question to you is: Given these facts does it justify the USA to go to war with Iraq? My answer is no. I give the same answer to Osama bin Laden even if everything he feels about America is true. During the Gulf War we would have been justified to kill/remove Saddam. When Saddam was trying to wipe out the Kurds using biological and chemical weapons, I believe we could have made a moral case for getting rid of Saddam. I don't believe we can make that claim now. Saddam was a war-monger/supporter of terrorists/genocidal killer/user of bioligical and chemical weapons 10+ years ago and we did nothing. We have no moral justification now. If it is our "duty" to protect the world then where were when when the outrages took place? Why is it we care now but didn't then?

Hey I agree. This should have happened much, MUCH eariler. Why we didnt we? I have no idea, I wasnt really intrested in polotics at the time. Why are we now?

Sept 11th is why we are doing it now. I beleive that Saddam has the complete power of launching a terrorist attack agaisnt america, one that could be much worse the 9/11.

Would you rather wait and see if he will, rather than act first?

Originally posted by Charean Iron Ranger.... the only thing that bothers me is that we are going to war with the wrong party. We haven't taken care of the Al Queda yet, and until we do - we are vulnerable. Let us go directly to the source instead of dancing around it. I found this article to put into words what I think. There are times I am not articulate, and this put my thoughts down well. I would rather do a focused effort against people who are doing harm to us and others right now, than do a preemptive strike on Saddam.

I think we have taken car of Al Queda for the most part. There are still little patches of them, but most of the ring leaders are killed or captured and the few that are still out there dont really have enough resources to be a thread. I did hear that some of them esacped into Pakistan and are trying to set up a place of operations there.

[caleb]

[TheCrimsomBlade]

everone must remember one thing! Al Quada is only one terrorist faction of more than 40 different groups in the middle that would love to see the end of America and the rest of the free thinking world. Iraq has been out to distroy the U.S. and freedom longer than most of the people at Ironworks have been alive and weather these groups are working together or not they need to be removed from the face of the earth! We just have to be careful not to take out the non-radical groups because they do have the right to belive and worship how ever they see fit as long as they don't kill other people or try to force others to worship their way when the other people don't want to follow them. The fact is that, Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden must die weather anyone else likes its or not they are a form or CANCER and should be removed from the face of the EARTH before they spread their terriorest ways one inch farther.

[TheCrimsomBlade]

Hay Chewbacca agent Orange is a weed killer used to get rid of brush and trees it's not a nuclear weapon. More americans service men suffered from it than Viet Nam citizens because it was dropped in areas that we held to help clear the land of all the heavy jungle follage so the cong couldn't sneek in to close and cut our hearts out. Try to get your facts straight please. 15,000 for letting the Terriorest live in boston, and 11,000,000 in NEW YORK that want to see them dead and another 100,000,000 thru out the rest of the U.S.with the NEW YORKERS! where would be now if it haden't been for a Tea party a few years back. on The british side I THINK!!!!