Originally Posted by abewsed
jjc,
You are right in the past the Governments have had a clear-cut enemy, including the Gulf War. Terrorism is not a clear-cut enemy; he/she can be staying in your own country as with N Ireland, or in Libya, the old USSR, and E Germany etc. How do you declare war on terrorism? The again when was the last time the US has had 4,000 killed in one day? I don’t know about the US, but the UK’s never had 4,000 killed in one day since WWI.
This might be why they are trying to sell the war to the people. It is not a simple thing as, “the enemy is over there, go get them.” It was easy in the 60’s, 70’s and 80’s. The enemy wore Red as in communism. We were united in Europe (excluding France as they were not part of NATO) as to who our enemy was. Sadly, as the Iron Curtain came down a new and real threat emerged. The new threat is called terrorism by the governments. But the reality is this…
We have surplus weapons, which was supposed to be used to stop a Soviet attack on Western Europe. And vice-versa for the ex-USSR countries. Where are the surplus weapons going? Not in the skips. They are being sold to the highest bidders. Again money is involved. So now we have (so called) poor or third world countries buying state of the art weapons. There was a threat of a missile being fired on aircraft. I just wonder if the weapon were used, whether it would be made in the USA, i.e. a Stinger Missile. They were supplied to the Afghans (and other countries) to shoot down Soviet aircraft. Once the Soviets left Afghan, the CIA were sent in to collect the ones not used. The Afghans decided to keep them. So the US said that the missiles would be useless now as they would be old. Ha ha, the Afghans still have weapons that work that are from the 1940’s. There was also a serious threat that the IRA had them!
To keep it simple, there is now an abundance of ex-Cold War weapons handed out across the world. Mainly coming from the ex-USSR counties that are strapped for cash. Then if we look at the weapons being sold, it is not just rifles, machine-guns etc, it is (suspected) that weapons of mass destruction. The Iranians now have a missile that can hit Isreal, where did they get that technology? Also it is worrying that they might have a few nuclear warheads just for fun. So put the two together and they have a LONG RANGE NUCLEAR MISSILE. Are we (UK) worried? No! But the Isrealies are!
I suspect there is more to this proposed war. What it is, I don’t know. But every Government since the last war, has been suspicious of Saddam. The little trickles of information, from defectors and weapons inspectors, have indicated that he is still in the weapons of mass destruction race. Whether it is in Iraq or some other country.
I think the question for the link between Al-Qaeda and Iraq is a definite yes. And if not directly, indirectly. As he has been supplying money to known terrorist, up to Sept 11. But then again so was Libya, but they shut down their training camps very fast! In fact, Libya is very quiet these days, which is good news. Lockerbie, proved that they are associated with terrorists. So another way to look at this, is why is the UK not wanting to attack Libya?
As to Saddam killing his own people and the SUDDEN INTEREST. The interest has always been there. But since 1992, the UN wont allows anything to be done about it. There was a serious plan to go and attack Iraq again in 1994, but the UN were against it.
Lets be honest about Germany they do not have a good track record, where wars are concerned. France turns with the tide. “I” believe they are out for themselves, with the aim of stopping the war in the Gulf and then being seen as the Big Brother of the New Europe. Don’t get caught by their sudden interest in peace. Any other European Country, but not France. Getting on to France and WW2, only 2% of their country were in the Resistance! When the Allies invaded North Africa in Nov 1942 (Morocco and Algeria), who were they fighting? No the Germans initially! Then before that the Australians and British attacked Lebanon. It was the job of the 11th (Scottish) Commando who attacked a bridge which was held by the Vichy French. Did the French lay down their weapons and welcome their fellow brothers with open arms? No! It cost William Campbell from Janetstown his life, including 125 other “Scots”. Were any of them killed by Germans? No, all by Frenchmen over two days.
Then worse, as accounted by Caithness soldiers. After the 51st Highland Division surrendered to the Germans at St Valery, they were marched to POW Camps in Poland. On their way they were allowed to stop at village wells and drink water. But most of the French towns refused the Scots a drink, but the other countries (including Germany) allowed them access to the wells. This sums up the French, in my eyes!
You joke about India and Pakistan! But do you realise that there is now a greater chance of a nuclear attack, than there was during the Cold War! Now that is something to think about! But it is ok; it is in the Far East. This again this is another area where the UN is failing in its so-called job!
When Tony said that N Korea was next on the list, he must have been eating magic mushrooms! If any country (other than China) attacks N Korea, then Seoul disappears! Tokyo might as well. With Korea it is not a case of preventing them from getting a nuclear weapon. It is that they defiantly have THEM (number unknown). If the US attacks them and China stays out of a war, then N Korea is goosed. So their only defence is to Nuke Seoul and then threaten to Nuke some other place. Korea needs to be handled with kid gloves!! Not by another nutter!!
In the past the UN weapons inspectors have been in and out of Iraq like yo-yo’s. The reasons? Not being allowed access to suspected sites. Or worse, just kicked out. Now (playing Devils Advocate) why did the weapons inspectors put complaints in against Iraq? It was because they suspected weapons of mass destruction were being hidden or being researched or built. Not because they liked the scenery.
Suddenly they can’t find anything. Oh, but then again, they did not let the weapons inspector into Iraq immediately after Sept 11, when the US wanted them in! Could it be a possibility that they have had time to hide evidence? So do we look forward to another ten years of wondering whether Saddam has the BIG weapons or not. Then one day we wake up and find out the UN was wrong. The problem is that it is not N Ireland that we are dealing with. It is not a few pounds of explosives. There is a possibility of a lot more. But then again the UN can always say, “Sorry we were wrong”.
If and a BIG IF. If Saddam had gone by the book after 1992, would we be where we are now? No! Would the US and UK be looking at spending billions on a mobilisation of the military, or would they be spending the money of the NHS etc and furthering a political career? The problem is not Iraq; it is Saddam, if he had the decency to die of a heart attack today, would there be a war? Possibly not. If Blair or Bush died today, would it make a difference to a war? I doubt it. Who is the problem?
We can sit here and debate the in’s and out’s of a war. But we don’t have the whole picture. I agree we have been fed bits and pieces, just to wet our lips. If Tony is lying to us, he will be found out! So why lie? Why is there not a stronger opposition being laid down by the House of Commons or House of Lords? Are they getting information that we are not?
If it is evidence we are looking for. Then I would say the last 10 years is enough to remove Saddam. He is a butcher to his own people and Kurds. He is a threat to future peace in the Middle East. He is an influence to other possible hostile nations. He has supplied funds to terrorist organisations. He is suspected of being behind culturing biological agents in Somalia. He still has Scud Missiles hidden (ops, sorry we were not supposed to mention that, as it seems to have been forgotten, but then again they are old). It is not a case of a smoking gun; it is a case of a loaded gun. It now is a case of why are we really going to attack Iraq, and without the support of the UN.
There is no right or wrong in war! War is not that easy. Is any war justified? Would it help to negotiate peace first? Yes. But then there comes a time to say enough is enough. 10 years later and we are still going over the same story. Has he weapons or not? I would say the UN has had enough time to find out FOR DEFINATE! Not a maybe!
You are right in “The ongoing crisis with Iraq is being seen by many Muslims the world over as a war against their religion. My greatest fear, if we invade Iraq, is an increase in religious bigotry and hatred from both sides leading to the Jihad many terrorist groups have been calling for.”
This is a real fear, but why has it come to this? Not because of Bush or Blair, as they were not around in 1992, they are more recent. Lets look at who has been there, the UN, Saddam and terrorism.
So if we did not have the “ever ending story of negotiation” of the UN. Who by the way, Saddam is looking at to prevent a war, and on his side. Then if the UN were not in the way, would Saddam run? The odds are that he would. He knows he could not stand up to the US alone. Where as now if there is a war it could escalate into a Middle East War, or worse an all out terrorist attack on the US and UK.
I think “give peace a chance” has had ten years in which nothing has changed. Sorry but this is a fact. Israel, Saudi, Kuwait, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey etc, all see him as a dictator and a madman. But their religion is against helping the unclean (us) attacking a fellow brother (Saddam). It was ok in 1992, as Saddam had attacked a fellow brother.
If you want to give peace a chance, then don’t call on the UN, as everyone just ignores them. Not just the US and UK! They are now seen as a food supplier, not the military might they were set up to be. It could be that too many cooks spoil the broth.
well mr fernie, no doubt your a wee bit young to remember the reasons behind the 10 year war with iran.at that time,iraq was the united states friend.iran was seen as a hard-line muslim state,death to america...etc.america armned the iraq,s on the side.500,000 iraq troops died in that war.its terrible when you have 2 prodomeniatley muslim countries fighting each other.then in 1988,saddam saw fit to gas 5000 iraqi kurds,for no apparent reason.then in 1990 he decides to invade kuwait,much to the disgust of his fellow arab states,saudi-arabia asked the americans to help,and the un.the forces mandate,was only to drive saddam out of kuwait.100,000 iraqi troops died in the gulf war.saudi-arabia and kuwait picked up the tab for the gulf war.here we are in 1993 considering going to war with iraq,im all for it.he is a dictator,as bad,or if not worse than pol-pot was.he rules his country with fear.saddams own 2 son in laws found that out very quickly,there both dead,murdered by saddams family.america and uk,are worlds 1st,and fourth richest economies respectivley..were self sufficent for oil here in uk,and america is 80% self sufficent for oil.i have no doubt saddam has been untruthfull with the un,why should i trust the words of a man,who has led to death,over 600,000 of his own people.....?????.ohhhh i almost forgot.....after the gulf war in 91,there was in uprising in the south of iraq,amongst the more moderate muslims,saddam reacted swiftly,killing 25,000 of his subjects.if ever there was a reason for going to war with iraq,then oil surely must be at the bottom of the list.i would call it...unfinished buisness,for the benefit of mankind.....!!!!!!!!!.i dont want to see innocents getting killed,but unfortunatley this will no doubt happen.but the wider picture is what we need to look at...a new leadership..a new iraq....dictatorships....always have a sell-by date on them,saddams is no different. m.bain ps..you may ask yourself,why should we go do our bit with the americans...well..its called repaying a debt.they saved our hides in ww2,and if they hadnt came along at the right time,then we would be speaking german by now.were only a small country,we need allies like america,population 260 million........!!!!!!!!!!...........wider picture people.......!!!!!!
and more recently :
)i can see that the reason some are replying is through political biases rather than valid arguments, but hey i have read them and some points do make sense so all i can say is open your mind and look at the facts and remember other people have a point of view too ,you dont have to like it but at least hear what is being said.
Bookmarks