capt_zman said:
Look at the opposite point of view in relation to U.N. resolutions and Israel. We have a vested interest in the well being of Israel, much the same as Russia and France have in Iraq. Then why isn't another country pushing for a resolution against Israel? Why hasn't anybody gotten the whole world to agree on a disarmament of Israel? Why hasn't anybody threatened the use of force (with allies) against Israel?
When this happens, we'll see what the world has to say. Until then, we'll look at reality and resolution 1441.
You are asking good questions, but the answers are readily avialable.
1) Yes, the US has a vested interest in the well being of Israel, as you point out. I encourage you to ask yourself WHY that is so. [In case you are wondering about me personally I'll save you the time. I am pro Jewish, but anti-Zionist.]
2) The US has repeatedly used its veto in the Security Council to block resolutions and actions that it deems unfavorable to Israel.
3) Israel's arms and the money to maintain its military is supplied by the United States.
4) No one in the world is capable of "threatening to use force" against Israel and have that threat mean anything. The reason for that is elementary. Israel has the full and unqualified support of the Government of the United States. Which country or group of countries do you think has the ability to take on the USA in a military confrontation over Israel? I'll answer it for you, NONE.
5) Israel has "won" several wars with its neighbors. Did that really happen because of the mighty Israeli military, or did it happen due the unqualifed support provided by the United States?
The whole world, with the exception of Iraq, wants Sadaam to be disarmed. That isn't the problem and it is why we were able to get Res 1441 passed unanimously.
The disagreement is over the method chosen unilaterally by the United States Government. Most countries to not want to invade at this time. Most countries do not wish to be dictated to by the USA any more than they wish to be dictated to by SH. Most countries do not accept the concept that the United States may do as it chooses, in the world community, merely because it has the military power to back it up. Today Iraq, tomorrow whom?
Once this happens, I can only wonder what the United States will do when the Chinese decide to invade Taiwan and recover their territory. Will we go to war with China to pevent it or will we merely abandon the Taiwanese?
If Sadaam attacks Israel, as he did the last time, the current government of Israel will respond militarily. What do you think the aftermath of that will finally become? And, no, I don't mean the outcome of the battles; we know the answer to that. What will be the future result over the long term?
In 1989 (or thereabouts), the Israeli military made a preemptive strike against an Iraqi nuclear development and took it out. I agreed with that. However, Israel did not invade Iraq or try to change its government.
The Bush administration's doctrine of "premptive strikes" for the purpose of achieving "regime change" reverses traditional American values and would not exist but for the fact that US military might is unchallenged and the tragedy of 9-11. IMO, it is bad policy. This President, George W. Bush, has no problem being a bully on an international scale.
GWB, will soon be gone. Even if he should be "re-elected" or "elected" for the first time, depending on your perspective, he can't be President beyond 2008. The rest of the United States and its people will have to live with the consequences of this new doctrine, way beyond that point in time.
Keep in mind please, that throughout the history of nation states, there has almost always been a "super power" that emerged. Soon after that nation became a "super power" it began to throw its weight around militarily and dominate other peoples wherever it could.
Before too long, every one of those super powers collapsed and no longer exists.
Personally, I would much prefer that the United States continue to exist indefinitely, than it become just another failed super power that once was.
We do not need the United Nations to control or run the United States, but we do need a world body that can keep rogue nations from each others throats or powerful nations from taking advantage of lesser nations. That is why we orselves were so instrumental in creating the United Nations. It was our baby. Now we're trying to kill it by making it irrevelant so that we can do as our President pleases? I think that is a mistake.
An even greater mistake is the US Congress abdicating its Constitutional responsibility, by transferring to the Executive Branch, the power to declare war. I believe our forefathers were correct. No President, popular or unpopular, should have the power to take this nation to war. I'd like George Bush to go before the Congress and ask it to declare war against Iraq. I'll bet you they would not do that even today. But they copped out and passed a resolution.
The President already had the authority to use military force in defense ot the United States or its interests. He should not have been given the power to declare war against another nation, no matter how unpopular its dictator might be.
I don't want to see us become a rogue nation that ignores the collective will of the overwhelming majority of the world's nations and peoples, just because we have the military power to do so.
Those of you that tell me we "have a lot of support" are playing the same game that the President is playing. We have the support of a few small and relatively insignificant countries, that will do just about anything to get our money, and we are paying them to do so. The ONLY significant government in the world that supports this action is the United Kingdom, and 85% of the people of that country, DO NOT SUPPORT their Prime Minister on this issue.
I realize that we are going to war, no matter who thinks what. I've known that all along. This President and his cabinet, with the exception of the Secretary of State, have no respect for world opinion and never have. His "efforts" in the UN have been a political ploy all along. He is not making this decision tonight, he made it a long time ago, and in the intervening period all he's been doing is running a PR campaign to convince the American people to support him.
Truthfully, I don't think Bush himself is smart enough to plan or orchestrate this on his own, but Cheney, Rumsfeld and Ashcroft are, along with their cohert Dr. Rice and the folks outside of government that support them (including GB I). Bush himself is akin to the FOX network, which effectively plays to the intellectually challenged. What percentage of our population falls into that category I would not pretend to guess or want to know. It's too frightening.
I pray that God will protect our boys in uniform and the innocent Iraqi's that will suffer from the military activity. Sadaam and his coherts deserve whatever happens to them, but the innocent do not deserve to die because of it.
Perhaps I am wrong, and hopefully it will be proven to me and others like me that we are, but as of now, I see no evidence to justify the invasion of Iraq. It is conspicuous by its absence.
God has truly blessed America, but he won't continue to do so if we allow ourselves to become like the other super powers that have faded into history.
Please pray for our troops and for the innocent, especially the children.
