Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bigc
we elect and pay our congressman to use their own judgement to weigh the information presented to them and make the correct decision. the correct decision with regard to iraq was to not invade, but rather to allow the inspections to proceed and continue isolating saddam.
there is no world police force. leaders work within the system (UN, bilateral treaties, Nato, etc) and speak out when necessary to bring about change. although the US is a major force, we are not strong enough to solve the problems we face on our own. once you realize you can't beat the world into submission (if only GWB realized this 5 years ago) you learn to build consensus and form coalitions to isolate your enemies. it may not be the quickest solution, but its more effective in the long run.
we have limited resources and i think you have prioritize where we put our efforts. i personally believe stabilizing afghanistan, dealing with the genocide in darfur, and the myriad of humanitarian disasters in africa are far more important than 'rooting out terrorists' (who weren't there) in Iraq. as for your assertion that its simply bush bashing, i have a hard time believing any American president would get a free pass for the fiasco we've gotten ourselves into in Iraq. Indeed, when we embarked on another dubious nation-building exercise in somalia under bill clinton, it was the republicans who said we shouldn't be the world police and that we should be putting our efforts elsewhere.
|
right we pay them to use judgement, and when perceiving a threat, i would hope they act pro-actively.
Saddam was engaging in a "systematic deception" of the weapons inspectors, according to 9/11 report. He was jerking them around so that he could move his weapons around or have them shipped out of country, with the help of UN officials, mind you. that's according to his own generals, and intelligence. The inspectors were a joke and were on the payroll, so that would not work.
There is no world police force, but were the most powerful country AND we have a democracy AND a group of hundreds of people who make our decisions. seems like we would be most fit to confront corrupt bodies that are deleterious to their region.
limited resources? nobody here is starving, or oppressed; resources are hardly limited to the point that we can't renovate an area the size of one of our states... Quit whining about the cost of the war, you haven't paid a single penny more for it, taxes are the same, and even lower than they were. Clinton imposed the largest tax increase in the history of the world, with no reason to implement it.
perhaps you didn't know, but Al qaeda and Zarqauwi WERE in iraq, and were given medical treatment as well as passage to the northern border. not enough to warrant an invasion, but the torment he imposed on his people and neigboring countries is enough for me
BTW since you wanna bring up Clinton, you maybe should be mad at him for starting this whole debacle... Remember operation Desert Fox? Clinton bombed Iraq for the reason that Saddam had weapons facilities... hmmmm WMDss!!! he also went to Bosnia on a more friviolous whim thatn GWB ever had.... at least an event ( 9/11) sparked this invasion..
as for Clinton, what a pu$$y, he ast by and watched us be attacked by Al Qaeda several times during his admin, and he did NOTHING.