Quote:
Originally posted by Dragonlich
First of all, you seem to be able to predict the future; that must be really helpful in things like lotteries. Are you already a millionaire? No? Then stop predicting an increase in terror, because you JUST CAN'T TELL. For every angry young Arab, there's ten happy Iraqis. For every civilian killed by the US/UK forces, there's thousands killed by Saddam.
|
You're right, I'm a big gambler. Perhaps I should talk to Miss Cleo...is that whom you and the foreign policy groups contact for "accurate predictions"? I agree, you CANNOT JUST TELL what will happen.
Quote:
|
Second, this survey is as biased as any other survey you can get your hands on - it's being done by "The Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict (CIVIC)"... Hmm, sounds decidedly anti-war to me.
|
Forgot to read the part where the Red Crescent and the Red Cross make statements?
Quote:
|
Fourth, cluster bombs... these are primarily used in open fields, against concentrations of enemy troops and armor. Without them, it would be nigh impossible to take these out. Human Rights Watch can say whatever they want about them; fact is that they are still needed, and therefore still used. Using them on civilians is wrong, but so is using any other weapon on them.
|
So what's wrong with the bombs when terrorists use bombs with projectiles to maximize damage? Is our cause more just than theirs? What is our cause, by the way? Which part have we had success on? Do not mention to me that we got Iraq....hell due to 10 years of sanctions even Canada could have done what we did. There was no victory over Iraq. Not moral nor technological.
Quote:
|
But of course, it would have been much better had the US not attacked - after all, then one wouldn't have 10,000 dead civilians during a two-week war, but hundreds of thousands of dead civilians in the next few years at the hands of Saddam. That seems to be a better solution, eh?
|
I see nothing good in all of this bloodshed. To the people living there they have one type of dictator for another...this time with a considerably lower population. Stating the goal of this war all of the sudden is to "save civilians" is a cop-out. American policy from day 1 has considered civilians as a nonissue.
It seems like if you are against the American invasion then you are pro saddam. Why is that the case? Is life really that simple? Or is it because our Commander in Thief made it so.