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.
Options
What would make you eat your words on the war?
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Blatantly lifted from another place, but it's a good question so I thought I'd post it here.
What would make you eat your words about the war on Iraq? What event, whether you're pro or against the war, would make you admit you were wrong about your stance in the war?
I'd eat my words if proof was found that Iraq posed an imminent and clear threat to other nations- for example if plans were discovered about a forthcoming unprovoked attack by Iraq on another country, or if it was proven that Saddam had provided Al Qaeda with WMDs.
What would make you eat your words about the war on Iraq? What event, whether you're pro or against the war, would make you admit you were wrong about your stance in the war?
I'd eat my words if proof was found that Iraq posed an imminent and clear threat to other nations- for example if plans were discovered about a forthcoming unprovoked attack by Iraq on another country, or if it was proven that Saddam had provided Al Qaeda with WMDs.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
If there were conclusive proof that he didnt have WMD and didnt pose a threat to us, I think I would still probably be glad about the removal of Saddam. Whether or not you believe that to be a motivation of the war, youve gotta admit its a good side effect.
I suppose if it turns out that Saddam doesnt pose a thread and the Iraqi people actually wanted him in power, then that would make me eat my words totally.
There are lots of things, some of which have happened already, that make me think hard about the war and do push me further toward opposing it.
This begins to look and seem like the long running excuses used to continually escalate the Vietnam war so long ago. Obviously all the shining claims of popular support and uprising to join our troops didnt materialise and thus this whole thing smells more like conquest with each passing day.
It would be interesting to see if we dont get our butts handed to us before this whole thing ends. Will that wake up America to how wrong this kind of warmongering is and elicit the kind of contrition we should be showing towards many of our long term friends and allies whom we have grossly insulted by our arrogance and presumption? I truly wonder.
If the attack on Halabja was proven to be by someone else.
You see, I don't support this war because of WMD, I support it because he's a scumbag.
The best thing to hope for is that the Iraqi army folds asap and both sides incur as few deaths as possible.
You know I don't know what worries me more.
That it could happen.
Or that people like you would glory in it.
What scares me is that people like you will glory in successive unsanctioned invasions and aggressive means of conflict resolution until the whole planet is once again engulfed in flames.
I pray one day you come to comrpehend just how much worse this conflict is going to leave us all in the future.
Still better than just having a talking shop which consistently turns a blind eye to oppression.
Even worse when many of those who object to conflict do so from the comfort of freedoms they would deny others.
Of course, I'm sure that we could have talked Saddism out of power. :rolleyes:
And I'm sure you would love that too.
The "see, I told you so" mentality.
I'm saddened that it appears that such an outcome would mean more to you that the freedom of an oppressed population.
You seem to forget that true liberation and democracy has always been achieved, where it has been truly achieved through the actions of its own people for the most part. The UK threw down its own autocrats and the S (albeit with some help) ousted the British themselves. So too can democracy (if it is to be legitimate) only be achieved by those who want it enough for themselves to do it themselves.
You seem to think that we can impose our view whether it is shared by other cultures and national cultures. That is the mentality of imperialism that drove our forefathers to conquer the heathens so as to enlighten them.
I begin to see what your thinking truly is MoK and it doesnt flatter you or your intellect one bit.
mok you believe we should spend this generations lives removing every evil ruler and rebuilding their countries in the image of america. it would probably take 100 yrs and most of the wests recources and young peoples lives to do it. yours included.
a war machine that fights for 50 yrs is going to need an endless supply of flesh and blood. it is impossible and not desirable. some people don;t actualy want democracy. some people think they have but don't. freedom is only relative and comes with responsibilities and "restrictions". the world would be a much better place with diplomacyh and respect for international law and respect for other cultures who don't actualy want to be like us.
i suppose your one of these people who believe that america would alow "democracy" in iraq. don't make me laugh.
Just as China has been "talked" out of Tibet??? :rolleyes: Of course, China came into Tibet by the referendum invitation of the Tibetan people, right?
"Talk" is the preferred method by the impotent invertibrates who lack the requisites to do anything else...
No I don't.
I think we have a duty to do what we can to help remove dictators from office, by their very nature they are not there through the choice of their peoples and they use their power to oppress them.
I will always argue that peaceful means are preferable but I will always reserve the right to take the ultimate step - warfare. There comes a point when talking will achieve nothing. In this case neither side was willing to compromise to the extent that the other would need.
For the US to be satisfied, Saddism would have to have stepped down. He was never going to do that. If I thought that the Iraqis would have been able to do it themselves, then I would have gone down that route, but they aren't as 1991 showed.
Better that than appease dictators, Clandestine. You may be comfortable with that position, I never will.
To then justify their warmongering on top of all other complicities might be seen by you and those who share your narrow view as legitimate but you and they fail to comprehend that those who have suffered under our financed oppression know full well that we were behind it all and know that they must suffer again when our bombs start falling.
I suspect if you were in their shoes youd wouldnt so smugly accept the supposed "right of attack" you currently champion.
This is not, as some would wish to believe, a "that was then this is now" situation. Geo-political realities cannot be sanitised of the perceptions of those most directly affected by our meddlings in this regard and the track record that we have left offers little substance to the claims that any such peoples would "welcome" us or have any cause to trust us as liberators. The double standards employed by the West are too well known to be compartmentalised and divorced from their fuller historical context by its victims.
When you comprehend that truth youll be that much closer to appreciating the fact that such pervasive militarism will only create longer term destabilisation and backlash. Then youll realise that your faith in its supposed value of enhancing our security was grossly misplaced.
I would eat my words if that happened. Also if in the near futute a system of democracy that worked harmoniously with the culture and population of Iraq is created by the Iraqi people themselves.
If the Bush/Blair coalition do not seek similar action upon other middle eastern countries.
If anti-western sentiment in the middle east is reduced.
If it is the Iraqi people who use their resources to help their economy, not American companies etc.
If the Bush/Blair administration admit their blatent hypocritical decisions.
If after this war human rights abuses are examined, investigated and tackled (not by means of attack) the world over by Governments who feel such a need to liberate people.
If more people realised the worth of every human being is equal.
I'd love this to happen, however I remain skeptical. (I hope for too much though.)
If the west uses it's power through international institutions to peacefully influence other nations.
If we never sell another weapon to a nation with a history of human rights abuses or opression of the people.
If the govt funds huge aid schenmes to cure all curable diseases and educate the population of the world.
MR
"i'd have no fly zones to the north and south. i'd have sattelite imaging. i'd have a huge ammount of weapons inspectors, slowly and laboriously working away at their task.
i would have very few sanctions against a war torn battered and opressed people. very few. i would not dream of denying sick children the painkillers and other medicines they desperately need. i would not prevent antibiotics and disenfectants from reaching hospitals. i would jail (strangeways preferably)any company director who traded in the few engineering/scientific products that i would agree to sanction. we know who these people are from america, britain, france etc. on the whole i would have allowed iraq to trade quite openly with the west. i might even have bombed the place with food and medicine.
i would have had some very shady characters around baghdad for years if neccessary. you know those arab americans your always going on about, doing their best to undermine saddam. doing their best to recruit people. in the first instance i wouldn't have encouraged him to invade iraq!
i keep hearing that saddam has had twelve years to comply with our demands. when you push people they dig their heels in. it's always more productive to lead people. WE ...we have had twelve years with our supposedly superior morals, superior education, superior political system to sort the problem out. we were doing quite well and then there was a right wing coup in america and george bush and his masters appeared and wrecked the whole fucking process!"
I didn't get the last line...but the rest sounded good to me. :cool:
one of those things.
+ the proof that the US tried everything to get a 2nd resolution.
0
we were doing quite well and then there was a right wing coup in america and george bush and his masters appeared and wrecked the whole fucking process!"
0
I didn't get the last line...but the rest sounded good to me.
which part of "wrecked the whole fucking process" did you not understand?
MoK, would be appreciated if you'd stop name calling. It's getting annoying, and it seems to suggest something when the best you can do in an argument is to call names at the other side Very few people would do that, I hope. I, and I assume most of the anti-war group, don't want any deaths, be it US or Iraqi. I don't revel in anyone's loss.
Thats like a three year old preferring to hit the person whos taken its toy rather than ask for it back.
In reply to both of these, can you point out where I have defended my country or the US for supporting dictators?
If anything, my comments about the UN being unable (or reluctant to act) shows that I believe they should act in these cases too.
I just won’t let my country’s poor actions to stop me supporting them when I think that they are doing something right.
Thing is Clandestine that I'm not in their shoes. However much I think I understand how they would feel, I cannot fully comprehend it. And unless you have also been in that position, neither can you.
Is this about me referring to Saddam as Sadist?
Isn’t he then?
Perhaps you would prefer that I referred to him as The Sadist Hussein?
If the three year old keeps asking and gets no response, he/she will hit the other person.
There are lots of things I could say to or about lots of people, that are true, but it's still not very nice to say it is it?
I sound like I'm lecturing a five-year-old...