Why the WMD's Don't Matter

[VBD]

Here is my idea:
The WMD's are mainly politics. The war, will destroy the WMD's easily enough if you know what I mean. But, what effect do the WMD's have? It decides if you can say the US is stupid or that its Smart. Thats not what matters people. If you say the war is pointless if there are no WMD's, your stupid. The real focus is to free the Iraqi people. It seems like the world won't let us take out iraqs goverment because a Brutul, Murdering, Turtoring, Thieving, Human Shielding, etc. governer with a goverment under his complete control isn't enough. Because of this, we need to come up with a WMD excuse wether or not it is true. We are the only people who have the guts to take a political bashing in order to make the Iraqi people a heck of a lot happier!

[hellswraith]

While I would very much like to agree with you, I think you are wrong. It is VERY important for us to find WMD. If we don't, the United States looks like a bunch of idiots on the world stage. Plus, our president sold us on the fact that there were WMD in Iraq. If there was none, then he lied to the American people.

Now, I still believe that freeing the Iraqi people, along with getting rid of a threat was a good thing, but they way you present your post to us doesn't sound very good.

[MasterBlaster]

Originally posted by hellswraith
..... If we don't, the United States looks like a bunch of idiots on the world stage.

We had better hope to hell we find them or looking like a bunch of Idiots is the least of our problems.

BTW: Did they ID the Origin of the anthrax in that briefcase that egyptian guy was caught smuggling into Canada a couple days ago. Who wants to take bets on what country it came from?

[Slow_Learner]

It is VERY important for us to find WMD.

Frankly, with as much money as the US has to play with, if there aren't any weapons then there shortly will be - and nobody is likely to know the difference. ;)

[Merrion]

If the real focus were to free the Iraqi people, why is nobody freeing the Ugandan people? Why didn't the US step in to overthrow the apartheid regime in South Africa? No - WMDs were the trigger condition because they represented a "real and present danger to the United States" and if that danger was incorrectly represented then the people responsible for this have some answering to do.

[plenderj]

What I always think about when talking about the proof, is the "proof" that Colin Powell presented to the UN.
What the hell was that about ?

[kleinma]

just remember Iraq is not a tiny tiny coutry... I am pretty sure that Saddam knew we were coming.. they have probably been hiding things since we started putting troops there...

if you notice we have found those mobile labs, tons of chem weapon/nuclear documents, anti nerve agents, gas masks, etc..

so it is very apparent they were in the process of things...

it will take some time... Saddam is good at hiding stuff.. and that country has a lot of desert... so just because things havent been uncovered yet.. doesn't mean they wont be..

but it is importaint to realize how much better Iraq will be without saddam. While it is apparent that some Iraqis are against our presence there, more are releaved to be rid of saddam. While some civilians were lost during the war... that was a days work for saddam when he was in power.. for anyone that had something negative to say about his government

[Wokawidget]

But will it be better without Saddam? I'm not convinced...:(
You now have a country who is in almost the same situation as Afghanistan...yea it has a central government, or will do soon, but it also has large waring factions who are trying to gain control over key sites...is this what we really want?!

Mind you, you could compare it to the Bronx in the US :D

Woka

[Xanith]

Originally posted by Wokawidget
But will it be better without Saddam? I'm not convinced...:(
You now have a country who is in almost the same situation as Afghanistan...yea it has a central government, or will do soon, but it also has large waring factions who are trying to gain control over key sites...is this what we really want?!

Mind you, you could compare it to the Bronx in the US :D

Woka
Yes I agree the Iraqi people are much better off with Saddam in charge. After all he was only on his first million people slaughtered and only used torture, rape, and murder to keep himself in power. The people lived in constant fear. They had no freedom of religion, speech, and lived in poverty while Saddam and his buddies lived in opulence.

I think you should pull your head out of your ass and see the daylight. If you think the people would be much better under Saddam your nothing but ignorant. You're not concinced? Try looking at how the Iraqi people were living and then ask yourself that same question. Looking at the facts its hard to imagine anything worse than living under Saddam.

X

[Wokawidget]

Don't go reading between the lines you retarded ****wit!
I was on about the country as whole, not the people living there. The countries infrastructure, businesses, trade and public services are all in jepardy now. To be fair, would any of the hospitals been ran-sacked if Saddam had been in control?!
What is best...an Evil Dictatorship? or an country in a state of Anarchy?!

[Xanith]

Originally posted by Wokawidget
Don't go reading between the lines you retarded ****wit!
I was on about the country as whole, not the people living there. The countries infrastructure, businesses, trade and public services are all in jepardy now. To be fair, would any of the hospitals been ran-sacked if Saddam had been in control?!
What is best...an Evil Dictatorship? or an country in a state of Anarchy?!
So the plight of the Iraqi people under Saddam means nothing? It’s all about the infrastructure huh? And your calling me retarded? Very amusing.

The infrastructure of Iraq was left in tact only military targets were bombed. The sanctions will soon be lifted and the US/UK and other countries are helping to rebuild and develop infrastructure within Iraq. Don't see why you are worried about that.

Do you really believe that while a war is going on everything is going to be perfect or happen overnight? Of course there was looting. It was put under control once the coalition forces were able to gain control and police and other deterrents could be put into place. You cant just turn military soldiers trained to kill into police when they are still being shot at.

There is far from a state of "Anarchy" as you put it in Iraq. Making a new government takes time. You cant wave a magic wand and have a fully functional new government in Iraq over night.

As far as your hospital statement.... hospitals can be restocked. I don't think the victims of Saddam’s regime found in mass graves can be replaced as easily.

X

[Slow_Learner]

//Do you really believe that while a war is going on everything is going to be perfect or happen overnight?

Thanks to global media and real-time live broadcasts, yes, many people had expectations that Gulf War II would be perfect, instantaneous and completely sanitary. Despite an obviously brilliant, scrupulously careful, and totally unprecedentedly quick total overthrow of the Iraqi government (~28 days to grind the largest and best-equipped military in the Islamic middle east into dog food), people still expected the action to go quicker, with fewer casualties on all sides, and with no interruption of any municipal utilities.

Within a couple of days of the fall of Baghdad, media talking heads were already making noise about the US' lack of an exit strategy - when just a few days before the same heads were making noise about the expectation that the Iraq conflict would go on for months or years.

In their efforts to collect advertiser money by providing riveting news - and for sure, a lot of the Iraq coverage kept me riveted - most branches of the media, left and right, systematically fed the public a warped set of expectations which, incredibly, the Coalition military very nearly lived up to. It was short, deft, with fewer casualties than the previous Gulf War despite being MUCH more complicated, and far less destructive to Iraq than the first go-round.

But yes, people are never satisfied.

[woops, forgot to give credit to the Brits et al.]