jas1552 |
03-21-2003 06:19 AM |
Arguing that the US didn't care about atrocities in the past so they couldn't possibly care now is retarded. US leadership does change from time to time. So does policy.
Unless you're a mind reader you don't know for sure what Bush's motives are or aren't.
I don't think we're at war just for humanitarian reasons either. I do think the humanitarian aspect made it easier for Bush to make the decision to go to war.
Saddam started a war and made agreements to get a ceasefire. Part of that agreement was to destroy all wmds and prove it. He hasn't proved it so we must assume he still has them. He hates us. Terrorists hate us. Saddam already tried to assassinate a US president so you can't say he'll never try anything. Saddam may or may not give wmds to terrorists. Noone can deny that is a possibility. You can argue how strong the possiblity is but you can't deny it. Now that alone is justification enough for ending the ceasefire. Add to that the fact that Saddam murders, rapes, and tortures his citizens and it's even more justified. The flow of oil that will almost certainly follow the war is a nice little incentive also(for the country and economy by lowering energy prices not Bush personally).
Question for the "it's all about oil" people. Why do you think Bush wants oil? What will he do with it? Do you think he's wants to roll around naked in it? Sell it, become super rich, buy an island and party constantly? Maybe he just love his friends so much he wants them to get super rich? Maybe he just wanted to raise the price of oil so his friends would make money. But wait a minute if Iraq's oil flows into the market prices will go down and perhaps cost his oil buddies money. Do you think Bush & Blair are lying when they say the UN will be in charge of Iraqi oil?
BTW.... The debate is over.
ps.... Mooooooo
|