.Quote:
Originally posted by Xanith
People getting on the US saying it’s about oil while the very same nations reasons for not supporting action is oil
So basically US and the others have a common concern, i.e. oil. While the US would benefit hugely from war, others will not. So others are trying to prevent US from going to war. This is very loose, but I can't see anything wrong in this.
Simple. The US supported Iraq against Iran ... The country that is so against any military action in Iraq, yep you guessed it, France.
Only goes to prove US is one big opportunist and doesn't give a damn about morality or ethics. It was none of its business to indulge into weapons deal with Iraq in the first place. Iran Iraq war didn't hurt US and any participation in it should strictly have come on grounds which would prevent war or medical aid, food etc for war-afftected people. US specially has displayed a shameless selfishness in trying to profit from another country's war. I guess you don't have any consciential problems with that. I find it amusing US tells India and Pakistan to exercise restraint, while it itself has been throwing restraint down the toilet and supplying arms to Iraq.
Or maybe Iran Iraq war did hurt US ambitions of dominating the world and so US chose Iraq as its "ally" whatever that means to you, and decided to help Iraq win the war, is it so? If US had not supplied Iraq with WMDs in the first place, this whole situation would not have arisen. But you had to defend your allies :rolleyes:
Saddam as it so happened turned out to be a madman ... even after the Gulf War countries like France, Russia, and China are still are selling weapons to him.
US paved the way, I would say. You have no moral ground as a country to condemn other countries' deals when you have been doing it for ages.
You don’t seem to take into account Saddam’s history of brutality ... overlook all of that.
I don't want to overlook that. In fact I just don't want to look at it. Whatever Saddam does to his own people is for the Iraqi people to sort out. If they don't want Saddam they will remove him from power. US doesn't have any business doing it based on its own assumptions. As for WMDs, US was the one who placed them in Saddam's hands, so if it's any threat to the world, it's because of US actions in the past.
I’m afraid war is all but inevitable now ... against anything the US is in favor of doing despite any evidence presented.
Show me something I can call undeniable evidence. And that doesn't mean empty aluminium tubes, which Mr. Albadarei (sp?) has dismissed as false. He says the tubes cannot be used for producing WMDs because of their peculiar shape. The evidence Mr. Powell has presented wouldn't last a minute in any court. But of course US isn't playing by facts, is it? It's only trying to cash in on people's emotions, and using this war issue as a coy against economic problems. You are free to dispute these claims, but I don't think there's anything more to this war cry unless there's actually some solid evidence. Just because Iraq has not bared itself before the inspectors doesn't mean they are hiding something. You people have been too pampered by the concept of freedom you have been enjoying in the US. Maybe if the US were to undergo such weapons inspections, you would get to taste the humiliation the Iraqis are facing.
If India could deal with Pakistan on its own the US wouldn’t have had to get involved. The mess that is Kashmir is likely to linger on forever. My question is why doesn’t India just pull out? I mean the people there seem to not want to be a part of India (not that I can blame them with India killing over 20,000 since the late 1980’s). So why not pull out of Kashmir? Make peace with Pakistan.
Pathetic, just pathetic. US has been actively although indirectly and sometimes unintentionally funding militancy in J&K. Our government has given enough proof of it. Or you can try to find out why Pakistan has not been able to make much economic progress despite massive loans and funds given to it by the IMF, WB and the US. Or why US has been indulging into military aid to Pakistan. India has never attacked Pakistan, so Pakistan has never been under a direct threat of war (if you don't know, all three wars between India and Pakistan were initiated by Pakistan) So I see red in US attempts of delivering sophisticated weaponry to Pakistan.
The close ties between Taliban and ISI of Pakistan are known to the world. It was one of the two nations which formally acknowledged Taliban government in Afghanistan (I have repated this because you don't have any answers to these points) A former ISI chief has confessed of diverting funds to Taliban and Al Qaeda in a Pakistani court. Despite attacks on Afghanistan, most Al Qaeda members have run into Pakistan and sought shelter there. And US can do little about it because Pakistan government is sympathetic to them. Your own foreign ministers and ambassadors (Robert Blackwill recently) have accepted India's claims that Pakistan is actively sponsoring the cross-border infiltration into J&K and they have many times asked Pakistan to put a stop to it, saying attempts by the Pakistan government are "not enough". It has been revealed that Pakistan supplied nuclear technology to North Korea in exchange for missile technology. Thus Pakistan has breached nuclear non-proliferation agreement. If you don't know all this, you shouldn't be debating at all because you are not ill-informed, you are just ill.
This one is sponsoring terrorism to kill US citizens. Also Saddam has aspirations to control the regions oil supply. Pretty simple really.
US can equally well be accused of conspiring to kill a ruler of a soverign country. You still don't have any credible evidence. You have shown dictotarial traits by making it clear you will not wait for others to join you. I can use the same argument against you and say US wants to control the oil supply in the world.
They have. Some people just don’t want to see the forest for the trees. I’m sorry your one of them. But for most people its pretty obvious.
You want us to believe that the trees you have singled out (Iraq and North Korea) are the forest, while we don't understand why other trees (Israel and Pakistan for e.g.) should be left out as they too are in the thick of it :rolleyes:
If the US didn’t help Israel ... people that want nothing but to see you dead.
US could have done better to curb the violent neighbouring nations instead of fuelling the conflicts by arming Israel. But then it's a rather stupid thought, isn't it? "Fight crime. Shoot back."
And when last I heard the US was instrumental in getting both sides of the Israeli and Palestinians to the peace table. The US has tried to foster peace between both sides, the US can’t do everything and ultimately it is up to both Israel and Palestine to settle their differences.
Yeah, US certainly can't do everything, but whatever it does should be sensible. Supplying arms to a nation is not a sensible move, I think.
As far as Pakistan goes I don’t know of what you speak as I haven’t done any reading on the subject. But I highly doubt that the US is directly supporting militants to act against India.
I don't think funding by US to Pakistan went to ISI and through it to militants, without knowledge of FBI and CIA. Perhaps you don't disclose such embarrassing information about your "allies" to public :rolleyes: I guess you don't know of the Pressler Amendment too? Also read my above comments to learn more of your own government representatives saying things about Pakistan which don't suit a US ally. And when you yourself admit you don't know much about the Indo-Pak subject, don't you think it crosses the border of stupidity and ignorance to actually suggest something as a solution to it?
Yes, destroying a brutal regime like the Taliban government was such a horrible thing. They only supported terrorism, didn’t allow women any rights, murdered and killed all opposition and I’m sure these are all things the Afgani’s miss under the Taliban.
I don't see how that warrants an attack on Afghanistan. The people of Afghanistan didn't go to the international community to rid them of Taliban. And if it hadn't been for a clear link between the 9/11 attacks and Al Qaeda, I doubt if US president would have taken the trouble of locating Afghanistan on the world map. Internal affairs of a country are "internal affairs" of that country. No other country, not even the superpower of the world, has any right to intervene in it. You can take diplomatic measures, but certainly not military ones. I believe if I were a US citizen and if I saw a man beating his wife in the neighbouring house, my duty should be to report to the police, and not kill that man myself.
If his nation supported terrorists and threatened his neighbors yes he would be. Glad you understand that.
Yes, I do understand that. I expect Mr. Musharraf to be in line after Saddam then. His country has supported terrorists and has been threatening India since a decade. Read above to see your own ambassadors and foreign ministers endorsing India's claims that Pakistan has been actively supporting insurgency into India. That should be enough proof for your president to take an equally strong action against Pakistan.
I’m sure you know better than I do. After all you have that crystal ball that allows you to know what the Iraqi’s are going to do. Just use it on the Americans and let me know :)
You don't need a crystal ball to predict that. They are just going to screw the world.
