LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 138
0 members and 138 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 10-11-2005, 01:31 AM   #11
notcasesensitive
Flaired.
 
notcasesensitive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Out with Lumbergh.
Posts: 9,954
Elevating(?) The Level of the Debate.

Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
There isn't a lot of difference a government killing its own people and people getting killed in a war.You can call it collateral damage if you want, but it still boils down to killing innocents.

Sometimes that killing is acceptable. It was acceptable in WWII because of the fact that Hitler was practicing genocide. Of course, we didn't get into WWII because Hitler was practicing genocide. We, meaning the upper levels of military and civilian government knew it was going on, but they didn't think it was worth getting involved in. We got into WWII because of Pearl Harbor, and the fact that Germany declared war on us after we declared war on Japan.

I also don't think it was a bad thing that Saddam was deposed. Had Bush I done it in 92 when we were driving him out of Kuwait, I would have wholeheartedly supported that. But he didn't.

Bush II also didn't depose Saddam because he was killing off thousands of his own citizens and trying to exterminate the Kurds. In fact, we've stood by for decades as Iran, Iraq, and Turkey have all tried to eradicate the Kurds.

W went into Iraq because he was getting his ass kicked by the press for failing to get Bin Laden. He needed a diversion. That's why we went into Iraq. And killing people because you need to boost your poll ratings isn't true or just or right. It's cynical, dishonest, and borders on the criminal. I say borders because I'm not aware of an existing statute that would expressly fit this situation.

As I said yesterday, right war, wrong time, wrong reasons, too great a cost.
Poll: If I had posted my typed-in response to this post earlier in the day, which questioned the exact nature of Bush's "deposition" of Saddam*, would this have raised or lowered the net level of the debate on this board today?

Just wondering.



*I'm guessing it was similar to the Saddam-Satan relationship in the South Park movie, but with the roles reversed and Bush playing the top. Wait, did I just call Bush Satan or did I call Saddam Satan? Does this post qualify as POPD? TIA!
notcasesensitive is offline  
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:39 AM.