1  |   Order by index

Mar 7, 2003, 3:48am

bowen <thisguyrules at 7k2.4mg.com.ANTISPAM> kirjoitti
viestissä:3e681459 at server1.Activeworlds.com...
>
[View Quote] I still do not think the fact that one is capable of doing somithing
automatically justify it. I am quite sure I am capable of killing a number
of people randomly in my country, but I do not see how that would make it
right.
>
war,
is
>
> This still plays into the role of strategic defense of intelligence. You
give up
> that piece of evidence that proves it, you give up your undercover
operations.
> That's not something you want or the rest of the world should want
considering the
> circustances that arise without the protection of the US. Yes, the US
protects, Yes,
> the US takes "compensation"; but I would rather have the US be doing this
than Russia
> or France... considering their flakey past.

Since Iraque has not attacked any country lately, but it is USA that wants
to attack, and even worse expect people to approve it. I belive it is up to
USA to give some proof or simply shut up.
I guess it will go as always, USA bombs and Europe rebuilds *sigh*

>
> Hey, hear about Euro-Disney banning fireworks? Seems when the nearby
French units
> heard them they surrendered unconditionally (joke).
>
remember
>
> If the US does not go pre-emptive, you're risking possible Hitler-esque
actions by
> Iraq. War is bad, no one is arguing that... what we are arguing is the
saftey of all
> citizens of this planet. Which includes the US, of course we're going to
act in our
> best interest. Are you telling me France and Germany aren't acting in
theirs?

Pre-emptive IS hitler-esque. Hitler also killed jews BEFORE they could cause
any problem, he invaded Poland just in case etc.
Ok, I will give you an example of pre-emptive:
I have heard of a guy living 270 miles from me, he is known to be violent by
nature. I have also heard rumours that he owns a gun. So, I guess it is ok
for me to go there and kill him, just in case? I also take it wont matter if
I accidentaly kill his wife or child, since I remeber that you in some post
said it is ok to kill if not done on purpose?

I also wonder, they say Iraque has not destroyed some weapons during 10
years. During 10 years Iraqie has not been attacking any countries. How come
they now suddenly ( when u got a new moron ( read president)) has become
such a treat, just like that over one night? How come USA cannot wait for
the inspectors to finish their work? What is the bloody hurry?
Yes, I am aware that USA soliders cannot take the heat, so the attack has to
happen in winter or spring, but why this spring? why not next winter?
>
USA, I
wanting
bit
without
>
> Do Europeans not understand the term pre-emptive? Why do we need to wait
for
> destruction to come to us first before we attack? Well my good European
friend,
> perhaps you didn't see the attacks by terrorists on Septermber 11th, but
we're trying
> to stop the same thing from happening again on a larger, more catastrophic
scale. If
> _that_ isn't good enough for an attack on our soil, I don't know what is.
I'm sorry
> we can't please you.

I remembet September 11th, but I do not remeber Iraque beeing responsible
for it, as a matter of fact I belive those behind it was/are mostly from
Saudi-Arabia. I also remeber Al-quaida beeing behind it not Iraque. I guess
it would be justified to also bomb let's say Canada, because Una-bomber
lived suspiciouly near that country?
What people do not see to realize is that an attack towards Iraque will not
stop terror, but increase it. Do you really think the muslims fundamentalist
are that stupid that they will not see the pr-value in the attack? They will
get a lot of people motivated to join their mission, they can again point
how bad USA is , bombing their area. The attack will cause more terror, not
less. I just hope they will not take out their anger on all people, but will
remeber the adress.
Simly, you cannot blame a nation for what an indipendent organisation has
done.

Drac
>
> --Bowen--
>
>

1  |   Order by index