Interview

[[AK]Squidly]

Check out this interview with some of the anti-war demonstrators from last weekend.

[[AK]Devil_Dog]

Yep, those are some of the real brain trust in the world...
And they wonder why no one at the top is listening.....

[Pixelsponge]

Of course this is a edited video, who knows what he cut out. I am sure if he heard a decent argument from someone who had actually put some thought into it (you and I both know there are a lot of stupid people out there, both liberal and conservative), he would have left it on the cutting room floor to push his point.

[[AK]Squidly]

I'm still waiting for a "decent argument".

[Pixelsponge]

Well my argument wouldn't be made against war, or the need for it, if need be I think going into Iraq might be necessary. My only qualm as of right now is evidence, I haven't been persuaded by Powel or anyone that there is a need to go in at this time, and especially not alone. The US should never start a war without UN backing. I think it would be political suicide for Bush without it. He and American would be seen by the worlds eyes, now matter the outcome, as the bully.

I also don't think Saddam is cooperating as much as he should, but I do think there is progress, we have U2 fly overs now and we do have some interviews being done to our specifications, but I think inspections need more time. How much more time, well that I don't know, but it needs to be enough to persuade countries like France, Germany, Russia and China to come to an agreement.

[Pancito]

There is a saying here, that a father says to his son: "Haz lo que yo digo no lo que yo hago" (Do as i told not as i do), everyone has an "agenda" even the good ol' USA.

A good deal is when BOTH parties think they screw each other on a deal. That is what we need here.

Why a country 1,000,000 miles away hates so much the USA being that far appart? What would America be without wars? would your economy be the same?

People outside the USA have so much questions about why you act the way you do? and let me tell you, sometimes if it stinks like chicken, taste like chicken, acts like a chicken, What is it? Probably a chicken....Meaning if 70% of the world thinks the US are inconsiderete people that only take for granted what they have and what they want, 70% of the world are probably right.

You guys probably have the power to take on the world? But why do you have it since you are disarming the entire rest of the world? what a Wacko like Saddam can't get to office in the USA sooner or later? A Wacko can't be part of NATO? Extremist do exist in the entire world, We need a middle point.

Decitions should be made with the brain not the heart no matter what is in the past or future, is not a metter of pride or Honor, it's a matter of doing the right thing.

[[AK]Squidly]

Originally posted by [AK]Pixelsponge
Well my argument wouldn't be made against war, or the need for it, if need be I think going into Iraq might be necessary. My only qualm as of right now is evidence, I haven't been persuaded by Powel or anyone that there is a need to go in at this time, and especially not alone. The US should never start a war without UN backing. I think it would be political suicide for Bush without it. He and American would be seen by the worlds eyes, now matter the outcome, as the bully.

I also don't think Saddam is cooperating as much as he should, but I do think there is progress, we have U2 fly overs now and we do have some interviews being done to our specifications, but I think inspections need more time. How much more time, well that I don't know, but it needs to be enough to persuade countries like France, Germany, Russia and China to come to an agreement.

A policy of containment is a big loser...doubly so with a loose cannon like Saddam Hussein.

As far as needing UN backing - I don't think I could possibly disagree more.
Libya is due to be heading up the UN Human Rights commission. Iraq is scheduled to lead the committee on disarmament. The UN is a meaningless institution. This sad episode is merely the latest in a long line of disappointing performances (Bosnia, Somolia, anyone?)

The US should act in it's own best interest. Sometimes that means working with the rest of the world, but sometimes it means ignoring the bureaucracy and going with those allies who are willing. Getting the entire world to agree on anything is impossible.

By the way, where did you get the idea that we were going to "go it alone"? There are many counties that support action - including most of Europe.

Finally, about Saddam - he's doing what he always does...give just enough to drag the situation along without ever actually complying fully.

[Pancito]

Originally posted by [AK]Squidly

The US should act in it's own best interest.

That my Friend is just the problem, everybody best interest. My Best interest are probably not the same as yours, then you are going to kick my ass for that? Or do I attack your friends and family for out personal best interest? Is not right either way.

[Pixelsponge]

By go it alone, I meant without UN support.

I really don't feel threatened by Iraq at this time, I think right now he is under enough control to allow further investigation as to what he really has. What if did go in there, bomb the crap out of the country, turn everything upside down and find nothing? Opps, sorry about that.

I feel much more threatened by the million plus man army over in N. Korea.

[[AK]Squidly]

Originally posted by [AK?]Pancito
That my Friend is just the problem, everybody best interest. My Best interest are probably not the same as yours, then you are going to kick my ass for that? Or do I attack your friends and family for out personal best interest? Is not right either way.

If you're a murderous dictator that seeks to invade neighboring countries, then yes, I'd say "my" best interests will collide with "yours".

[[AK]Palooka]

Invading Iraq without France's support is not exactly going in alone. And what difference does it make, anyway? The UN has proven once again that they are completely irrelevant; they will always favor terrorists and murderous totalitarian dictators over America because they are jealous and resentful. And what has France done for us since we liberated them from Hitler? They will oppose us at every turn until we need to save their asses.

Here in Reno, one of the nicest restaurants in town, the Chophouse, dumped several thousand dollars worth of French wine into the gutter right in front of a bunch of America-hating, Bush-bashing protestors gathered before the legislative building across the street. I think that sentiment is increasingly common among Americans, and I personally believe we should not do business with France for the time-being.

By the way, in case you liberals have forgotten, the primary role of the US government is to protect its people from harm. That means taking out dictators who will likely provide terrorist networks with weapons of mass destruction to be used against US citizens. The stakes are much too high to give people like Saddam Hussein, who has defied the rest of the world and your precious UN without fail, the benefit of the doubt. We cannot afford another 9/11, much less a 20 megaton nuclear explosion in downtown Manhattan (which would, by the way, flatten every building in Manhattan and kill millions). Bush would really be committing political suicide if he allowed such an atrocity to happen.

[[AK]Squidly]

Originally posted by [AK]Pixelsponge
By go it alone, I meant without UN support.

I really don't feel threatened by Iraq at this time, I think right now he is under enough control to allow further investigation as to what he really has. What if did go in there, bomb the crap out of the country, turn everything upside down and find nothing? Opps, sorry about that.

I feel much more threatened by the million plus man army over in N. Korea.

I'm surprised that folks continue to question the existence of WMD's in Iraq. But if you don't trust the US, or the photos of the dead Kurds and Iranians, the UN itself estabilished their existence in the 90's. The numbers you hear quoted are mostly from UN reports.

But lets play this out - if Iraq has no WMD's, why the resistance at every turn?
Saddam can end this all right now by simply delivering on any of the 17 or 18 UN agreements since 1991 that he has ignored. If he had no weapons of WMD he could easily prove it - while humiliating Bush (and probably costing him re-election.)

The only reason inspectors are even in the country right now is because of the threat of force.

Appeasement leads to misery. We appeased North Korea, made them *promise* that they wouldn't build Nukes, but they went ahead and did it.

And now we have a mess. History is loaded with examples...do we really need another example in Iraq?

[Pixelsponge]

because they are bush-bashing that makes them American-Haters?

[[AK]Palooka]

Have you seen the signs? Have you heard the vitriol being spewed by the protestors? Find one who can make a good argument against going to war without bashing Bush or blaming America for everything that is wrong in the world. Most of the protestors are young anarchist gutter punks and other young people just looking for something to bitch about. They are desperate to preserve the flame that their parents lit during Vietnam, and this is the new Vietnam War that hippie-wannabes have been waiting for.

[[AK]Squidly]

Originally posted by [AK]Pixelsponge
because their are bush-bashing that makes them American-Haters?

Most of the demonstrations have been sponsored by Socialist party groups like "ANSWER." They aren't Anti-War demonstrations (where are the signs demanding that Saddam comply?) They are anti-Bush demonstrations.

The anti-American aspect comes when you realize that they are giving "aid and comfort" to the enemy. Evidence this.