Quote:
Originally posted by Big Monkie
The thing is, are they really free now? Maybe they will be better off under a bush and co installed/appointed govt, maybe. A lot of their real troubles were the result of the sanctions during the last dozen years. Wouldnt it have been better for us to have helped them help themselves? Isnt that what conservatives usually claim is best? Dont you see how this pre-emptive strike stuff is an extremely dangerous precedent? What if other countries start taking the same attitude and attacking/invading others based on no evidence but because of what they MIGHT do later? Think about the precedent that has been set now.
And in any event, they aint going to be free under whatever puppet govt gets installed.
|
I'm not defending the sanctions in any way. In my opinion the USA and Saddam have probably done equal damage. I never supported a preemptive strike, but once they did they opened up a huge can of worms. At that time, if they pulled out like his dad did, noone would have won. The people would still be dealing with Saddams oppression and the oppression they got as a result of our sanctions. I'm not saying they're truly free now, not at all. But think, if a situation left you starving and it was up to another country to decide whether you were left for dead or given just enough to live each day, you'd want the food. Even if the country had the power to give you alot more, you'd take what you can get. Protesting DURING a war when the options are pretty much do no good like the first one or at least make the peoples lives a little better, make their lives better.