The people of Iraq are no doubt better off now that Saddam Hussein is
out of power. Even as a member of Amnesty International, I was still
surprised at what went on there, with all the political murders and
toture... In one of Uday's palaces (he is the oldest son of Saddam),
among all the guns, booze and porn, US Forces found a large cache of
UNICEF supply boxes intended for Iraqi children. Why weren't the Iraqi
children getting these things, which they were certainly entitled to?
I am, however, still against this war. The fact that Hussein has WMDs
(e.g. "big bad weapons") and may use them is no excuse to invade.
Doing so sets a dangerous precedent: As we mull over the pros and cons
of now attacking Syria for the same reasons, reports are coming in
that India is considering attacking Pakistan, for the very same
reasons: India claims that Pakistan has WMDs and is harboring
terrorists. Why would India's "war against terror" be any less valid
than the American one?
The United States does not have the unilateral right to "correct" a
regime that it sees as unfit.
Just my two rupees.
John
--- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, "Georgie Hinklemyer"
<samoolives_at_y...> wrote:
> I agree. I've heard about true acts of nobility performed by our
> troops - the same ones who were sent out to do serious damage to
> another country's leadership. A general telling his soldiers to kneel
> down and point their weapons at the ground to show the townspeople
> they mean no harm to the local mosque. A 16-year veteran
> acknowledging that people are happy to see Saddam's reign end but
> disgusted with the bodies and bloodshed in the streets, and sorrowing
> over the condition of a freed prisoner of the regime. Soldiers
> talking to Iraqis and trying to get them to organize themselves into
> some sort of police force for their own protection. Talking
> one-on-one to the Iraqi people. Once the weaponry was put aside, we
> got some pretty damn honorable people trying to do some pretty damn
> honorable things. Yes, I can support the Coalition forces (now)
> without condoning the purported reasons for going in, the flaunting of
> our science and power in the many faces of the world. Here at home,
> it seems no one listens to anyone with a differing viewpoint.
> (Present company excepted, of course!)
>
>
> G.H.
>
>
>
>
> --- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, "tschibasch"
> <tschibasch_at_y...> wrote:
>
>
> > I could not agree more with David. It is entirely possible to be
>
>
> > AGAINST the war but SUPPORT the military. And it is our right to
>
>
> > demonstrate, if we so choose.
>
>
> >
>
>
> > And another thing: We are only too aware that Iraqis could never
>
>
> > demostrate against their own government. The fact that they cannot
> and
>
>
> > we can does not mean that we shouldn't.
>
>
> >
>
>
> > John
>
>
> >
>
>
> >
>
>
> >
>
>
> > --- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, "dne44" <dne_at_d...>
> wrote:
>
>
> > > Lenny-
>
>
> > >
>
>
> > > It's as simple as this: I respect and admire the courage,
> dedication
>
>
> > > and professionalism of our troops. However, I do not believe in
> the
>
>
> > > cause and timing of this war as outlined by our government, and
>
>
> > > therefore do not support the war. This does not strike me as a
> self-
>
>
> > > contradicting view in the least.
>
>
> > >
>
>
> > > When we see actions such as those taken by the president of the
>
>
> > > baseball hall of fame refusing to honor the movie Bull Durham
> because
>
>
> > > of the political views of Tim Ribbins and Susan Sarandon, it
> strikes
>
>
> > > me that more than ever people are losing the ability to be
> rational
>
>
> > > about what free speech is supposed to mean (and this is true of
> both
>
>
> > > sides; however, it is particularly worrisome on the right since
> the
>
>
> > > government is taking an actively anti-free speech stand, at least
>
>
> > > rhetorically).
>
>
> > >
>
>
> > > - David
>
>
> > >
>
>
> > >
>
>
> > > --- In OliveStarlightOrchestra_at_yahoogroups.com, "7visions"
>
>
> > > <7visions_at_p...> wrote:
>
>
> > > > As for the " I Support the Troops" line being bandied about, it
> has
>
>
> > > always
>
>
> > > > been a bit of a cliche. This men and women have trained for a
> long
>
>
> > > time to
>
>
> > > > be where they are. If you say, "I Support the Troops, but I am
>
>
> > > against what
>
>
> > > > they are doing", just what are you actually saying? ..." I think
>
>
> > > you are
>
>
> > > > nice people, but I don't like soldiers". ?
>
>
> > > >
Received on 2003-04-15 16:46:00
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0
: 2020-02-04 07:16:16 UTC