Does UN have a choice, really?
 

Seems like if they don't go along with US plans, they risk being sidelined from future global decisions. That would severely unbalance the power balance and essentially give US precendent for any military action around the world. New World Order? Stay tuned..

I hope the US administration is genuine in its commitment to Iraq and Palestine in terms of rebuilding and all that, otherwise things will be grim..

Well.. the UN's 1441 deal .. or whatever it is.. was voted in and approved by the UN, yet they don't want to enforce it.. That makes the UN an unreliable entity.

The way I look at it is Saddam really didn't have a choice to begin with.

Ok, he says he doesn't have weapons of mass destruction, the U.S. says he does.
The inspectors don't find any, but the U.S. wants to go to war anyways.

Now, flip the coin. WHAT IF Saddam said, yep, I still have some, here they are. And "voluntarily" disarms as Bush says he wants him to do. Do you really think Bush would leave it at that?

FUCK NO
It would go something like "SEE, we told you he was hiding weapons. He's a liar, how can we be sure this is all of them? We need to go to war"

The Bush cartel.....errrr....administrations goal from day one was regime change, and no matter what Saddam or the UN do, that's what's going to happen.

Also, how's this for a double or maybe even a triple standard.

The Bush regime's line on this whole thing is that "Saddam is defying the will of the UN by not disarming, he's defying the will of the world"

So, the U.S. will now defy the will of the U.N to go and disarm him?

Israel has been defying UN resolutions for well over 30 years now. And WE KNOW they have weapons of mass destruction, they have nukes THAT WE SOLD TO THEM.
So why aren't we going for a regime change in Israel since they're also defying the will of the UN?


When they say its "not about the oil" that just makes me wonder. Its sort of like when someone says its not about the money or its not about the sex.

dude, let us know when you come up for air after kissing saddam's ass.
We'd like to laugh at you.:1orglaugh

Sure just as soon as you take your head out of Rush Limbaugh's enormous ass crack :thumbsup

"they have nukes THAT WE SOLD TO THEM"

HAHAHAHAHA

you lose all your credibility there.

saddam hasn't cooperated fully with weapon inspectors. if he's not cooperating, of course they won't find weapons. they're saying he has weapons because they can't account for what he had before and iraq says they were all destroyed.

do you believe saddam?

12 Clicks is right - time to do what needs to be done!

Jesus, Lenny2... I don't support this war either (rather see us leave the middle east all together), but you're a fucking idiot and make all of us on the opposition side look bad. Always remember, the best way to lose an argument is to overstate it.

For the record, I'm not for appeasement....I think something should be done.

But I don't think Bush is telling the whole truth, and he's too much of a cowboy and he's pissing a lot of our friends off. And as I stated above, saying this war will be about him defying the will of the UN is bullshit, because the US and Israel thumb their noses at the UN on a daily basis. At least tell the truth about why you're doing what you're doing.

I think he could get the results he wants if he does things differently, and we can keep all of our friends in the process.

And I hate that everytime someone asks a tough question about what the president is doing that they're called a pacifist or an appeaser. This is America, we have not only the right, but the responsibility to question our leaders.

There are lots of questions the president refuses to answer. Toppling Saddam is the least of our worries. What about after? What if the Kurds decide to take territories for themselves like the Georgians and Chechens did after the Soviet Union collapsed? Are we going to send American troops to fight them and reclaim the land for the newly installed democratic government?

What if Iran makes a move? Are we going to use US troops to fight the Iranian army and keep them off of Iraqi soil? (Letting Iran control the entire region is not an option for us, trust me)

So you're saying that we've never given or sold weapons of mass destruction to Israel?

And fellas, do you really have to make things personal? Calling me an idiot doesn't make your point any better for you, its really not necessary.

Last time I checked we were allowed to disagree with other people in our political views

The UN is proving itself an anachronisim. If no one assumes a leadership role chaos will follow.

THE USA IS THE UN!

just barely,

We don't need the rest of the world to ok our actions, we must lead - not follow.

Lenny,
1441 states the Iraq will face severe consiquences if they don't comply. Hans Blix has said they are not fully complying. The UN voted 15-0 and now they are afraid to act.

Also comparing Isreal who is on the defensive in my mind, to Iraq who in the last 15 years attacked 3 different countries is...... Let's just say not very smart. :thumbsup

that's got to be some of the silliest shit I've read here so far....

your second post was a very close second by the way.

you really do make the "thinking" people who have opposition to the war look bad - I see where only dis-owned you.

Besides - who cares - The Lights Over Badgdad Show is coming on soon even without your support... imagine that! :1orglaugh

ABSOLUTLY :thumbsup

Nah, we just humor the UN and make the other countries feel important. If they are stupid enough to disagree with us, they will be hit with the hard truth that they *aren't* important at all.
:thumbsup