If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Moral arguments over Iraq
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Temporarily ignoring the debate concerning international law, diplomacy, economics etc, is it morally justified to invade Iraq?
0
Comments
Could we stick with the Iraq issue possibly.........?
If you accept that we feel we're under attack, you'll understand, not agree with but understand, why since we helped Europe out, we're surprised and disaapointed by countries like France who aren't helping us. The belief is that the resentment, jealousy or just hatred of America runs so deep, some people in Europe are getting off on Al Qaeda's murders. This is what many Americans see when we see the peace movement. It's why the peace movement had no affect in the US. Support for the war is at 70%.
For the peace movement to be effective. It must take a stand that conveys that the people in it care about American lives. For instance, Chirac said that a war could create mini Bin Laden's bent on attacking America and we're trying to prevent that. That was a good one.
I hope you are deluded in your idea that you speak for the american people (though you may be right, I just went on the NY Post website and it seemed ridiculously right-wing)
You are not under attack, Saddam has never attacked the US or direct US interests, there is no proven link with Al Qaida and Saddam is pretty much incapable of waging a war of agression.
Do you dispute these points?
Nobody hates the US, there is a difference between being critical of a certain policy and hating the US, but you don't see that.......
Youre too young to appreciate that fact though, so keep up the gross generalisations and blanket claims, they do provide continued amusement.
But the NY Post is so funny. And their headlines get picked up all over the place.
Like the wrote the Axis of Weasels regarding Germany and France and it really stuck.
And they put a close up of Michael Jackson on their front page with a quote from him: "I am not a freak." OMG
Arafat's picture with. "Arafat chance." It was about him wanting to be Prime Minister of Palestine.
If you want to employ that simplistic and irrelevant argument, consider this: if it wasn't for the French you'd be spelling flavor with a 'u' and still be a colony of Britain. You should be more grateful to the people who made it possible for you to become an independent nation.
The people in the peace movement care about all lives, American soldiers, Iraqi children or anyone else. The people I saw on the march were very removed from the American-hating, anarchist/communist hippy image you would like it to be. There were in their majority middle class families, many of them right wingers, World War II veterans, Gulf War veterans, old ladies and many other groups that don't fit your description. Perhaps that is a bit hard to swallow?
America supports dozens of brutal dicatorships throughout the world annually. America supported Stalin, Pol Pot, and Saddam Hussein. America used weapons of mass destruction on Europe, Japan, and Vietnam. No other country in the world is more belligerent than America. No other country acts with such impunity and disregard when belligerently attacking other nations. America has threatened to use an "E-Bomb" an "tactical nuclear weapons" on Iraq and America finances the murder of the Palestinians and the Kurds in Turkey.
Now back to Iraq.
Why is America being attacked by al-Qaeda? Why would Iraq assist al-Qaeda? Is there something inherently wrong with this, given how America is foaming at the mouth to rain death and destruction upon Iraq?
Another words, it does not matter if you have been attacked, what matters is that you may be potentially attacked in the future. Why you were attacked in the first place is not something that concerns you. Perhaps India should follow your advice. Obviously Pakistan is a threat to India. Why not take India out? Israel threatens its neighbors all the time and has attacked them in the past. Israel could possibly assist America in attacking Iraq. Obviously Iraq would be perfectly justified in attacking Israel. Taiwan is clearly a threat to China if it acquires nuclear weapons. Should China wait for the mushroom cloud or should it take out Taiwan now? South Korea has a huge army and America threatens North Korea all the time. Why shouldn't North Korea attack South Korea, and if they do, precisely what is your argument? Kuwait is a threat to Iraq and so is Iran. Both of those nations could assist America, and actually are assisting America, in attacking Iraq. Why not attack those nations?
Where has Iraq attacked the United States? Where is Iraq threatening to even attack the United States? It looks to me like Iraq simply wants to be left alone? Is that too much to ask? Iraq banned "Weapons of Mass Destruction." America spends its time thinking up how to create new ones.
America did not declare war on Germany until Germany declared war on America, a full two years into the war. You did not declare war on Germany to help out France in the least, for if that were true, you would have declared war in 1939. You are not under attack at all. You are attacking other nations. Iraq has not attacked the United States and why should Europe, especially Germany, help America of all nations out when it was America which destroyed Germany and erradicated its national existence for half a century. And speaking of France it is amazing America has the gall to criticize France of all nations. France is the oldest ally of the United States. It was France who was pivotal in America securing its independence and it was only Napolean's return from Elba which prevented the British from wiping the floor with America in the War of 1812.
Gee, I wonder why that is. Who after all partitioned Europe with Communism, after firebombing Germany and later going on to destroy the British Empire.
Source.
It is not the peace movement sending American soldiers to Iraq, which has not attacked the United States, to die and incite more terrorism in the process. It is not the Peace Movement which supported Saddam Hussein, who for some reason is now evil, for years and it is not the peace movement which gave the man the all fear inspiring Weapons of Mass Destruction in the first place. It is not the peace movement which cooperated with Pakistani intelligence in funding bin Laden's war against the Soviet Union, who later turned on the United States. It was not the peace movement which is behind the Patriot Act either. It is not the peace movement which sends troops to the middle east and supports the Israeli mass murder machine with billions of dollars, which breeds resentment, which results in dead Americans. The peace movement did not support Pol Pot and the peace movement did not support Stalin. The peace movement did not industrialize Communist Russia in the 1930s with loans through the Export/Import Bank. The American government did all these things and it is the American government which is not only the first and foremost danger to the world, but to Americans living in their own country. But I suppose that is just another reason to support America's Empire. The profits of it are privatized and the costs of it are socialized and if thousands of Americans and hundreds of thousands abroad have to do, why should you care right?
What happens if Israel expels the Palestinians from the West Bank? What happens in the massive Moslem populations in Europe go rioting? Anyway, you will create more terrorism and more hatred of America than ever before. Before long America is going to be more isolated than North Korea.
Simple things.
In 1990, Saddam Hussein started a war by invading Kuwait.
In response, and with UN approval, the US, UK, French, Japanese, Russian, Czechs, Saudis, Kuwaiti refugees, Syrians, Egyptians and anyone else that I missed took action to remove Iraqi troops from Kuwait.
In 1991, the alliance ejected Iraq from Kuwait and on 3 March, 1991, representatives of all the combatants signed a cease-fire at Safwan.
Within less than a month, Iraq broke the terms of the cease-fire. They used helicopters in the Northern no-fly zone to deliver chemical weapons against the rebels in that portion of the country.
A state of war exists and has existed since Iraq broke the cease-fire.
Is the US justified to invade Iraq? They are justified in taking any actions that are allowed within the Law on Land Warfare to prosecute the war and bring it to an end.
It is not the acquisition of territory which annoys me nor is it America's colonialism. What bothers me is the hypocritical condemnation of other nations by America for acting in the mirror image of America. What irritates me more than anything is the baldface lie that America's imperialism is motivated by morality, which it clearly isn't.
LOL you mean the corporation that calls itself a country, a nation created by Great Britain to be its gas tank? Kuwait is about as much of a nation as Alaska is.
Out of financial self interest. Do not even make me laugh about the United Nations. The United Nations has no legitimacy whatsoever and never has had any. America only listens to the United Nations when the United Nations agrees with America. Otherwise America simply goes about its own business. That is the funniest thing about America. Americans will actually say in the same breath that UN Resolutions must be enforced against Iraq while at the same time declaring its own intent to disregard the UN at will if it does not like what it says. UN Resolutions do not apply to Israel so there is honestly no reason whatsoever for any country in the world to listen to the United Nations. The UN simply has always been irrelevent.
Yes, the invasion was supposed to be a UN police action. Of course when Iraq withdrew from Kuwait, and the mission was accomplished, this was not good enough for America. America then went on to slaughter Iraq's conscripted army by the tens of thousands.
Dictates have no legitimacy. LOL give me your lunch money or I will kill you says the schoolyard bully. Might does not make right.
Yes, I wonder if Americans would be content to have "No-Fly Zones" set up over America to protect American minorities from the attack of the American Federal Government. :rolleyes:
The dictate.
No. Iraq is a sovereign nation and has initiated no aggression.
ROFL international law. Does that apply to America? Oh wait, America doesn't want to be part of the ICC right? Those things only apply to nations like Serbia. :rolleyes:
How many are in the Coalition of the Bribed as of late?