Quote:
Originally posted by Pacifier
Oh so the USA is only moralic superior nation if it is easy? Liberating some nations is "annoying"...
so the goverment is allowed to do whatevery they want to, just like iraq a couple of years ago...that brings up the question again if the USA is able to learn...
So the people have to starve a bit longer, no problem for them, they are used to it...
Why wait? Why not force him out just like Saddam? I try to see the whole picture with the eyes of a pro War guy and it makes no sense. so please explain it to since I seem to be too stupid...
And if he is gone, do have plans for the time after that? or will it be try and error like iraq? Do you have plans to prevent the nation to become a nation "where various tribes like to murder each other on a daily basis" or where various groups try to murder american troops on a daily basis?
Do you think the USA will wait until a stable goverment is installed in the iraq or will they try to get out of there as quick as possible leaving the nation in a potentially unstable situation?
nice try, but there are no connections between Saddam and AlKaida.
|
*sigh*
Congo, Zaire, Angola: The US goes in, the US shoots some random people, and the US spends the next twenty years in a guerilla war, pissing off everyone else on the planet. No, that sounds like a really great plan...
Pakistan: a country filled with fundy muslims, all eager to kill their share of the US invasion force. Again, great idea to "liberate them".
North Korea: An army of millions of brainwashed north-koreans, a maniac at it's head, ready to blow up his neighbors, a large norther neighbor able to intervene, and in the past willing to do so... Perhaps waiting is a better idea, in terms of lives lost/saved, than going in gung-ho, like you seem to advocate.
And Liberia: why NOT wait? Suddenly everything has to be done right away? Wait a week, and Taylor is gone. As for when he's gone: you wanted the US to go in, so *you* think up ways to keep the peace there.
By the way... you seem to think pro-war guys are murderous bastards. They're not. They're just more willing to go to war than anti-war people.
I see it like this: anti-war people are determined to never go to war again, no matter if they're forced into one. They prefer to look at far-away people and be angry about their sad lives. Intervention would be bad, because that might actually kill people, and killing people is wrong. Therefore, we should all just sit back and continue looking and protesting and hoping everything will turn out fine.
Pro-war people don't like doing that: they'd prefer to actually go in and try to *solve* things by direct action. If people die during that action, that is the price to pay for a better world. Yes, it's sad for the families, but they'll get over it eventually.
And finally the links between X and Al Qaida: sorry, but where's *your* prove of links between Taylor and Al Qaida? You started throwing around accusations.