| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Romee
Junior Member
Netherlands
180 Posts |
 Posted - 25 February 2003 : 13:24:31
|
1. Many posts are about the moral justification of a war against Iraq. There are more nations, like North Korea, Iran, some African countries, Tsetsjenia etc where awfull things happen. What is the reason not to start a war against these countries. Looking back on wars in the past, morals seldom seem to be the key issue.
2. Since the State of the Union there can be no doubt that the USA has a 'grand design' in which a change of regiem in Iraq is a cornerstone. The roots of this policy were clear before 11 september, as expressed by Wolfowitz in the international magazine 'Foreign Affairs' in 1999. He favours a military expedition because it would be the lesser risk, in comparison with the isolation of Saddam. Wolfowitz , Rumsfeld and Richard Perle (conservative hardliner) wrote in 1998 an open letter to Clinton in which they asked him to use violence against Saddam. Wolfowitz sees the world as unipolair and sees a role for the USA to act against other countries when its selfintrest is at stake.
Well in the Middle East this will take a lot of military, economic and cultural effort. This will be a slow process, sometimes even inert. I don't think the USA has the finacial resources, the patience, and sense of endurement to succeed. There will be moments of defeat. In the American society succes in the short run is rather important.
This policy of grand design in the middle east would in my opion work out very badly. There is no material, nor cultural-historic base for democray in the near future. Acting like this would destabilize the region, and probably the western world.
3. I think, as most people here, that Saddam is a treath. Most of the Iraqi population has all reason to hate him, and seems to feel that way. When war must be the ultimate solution, it can only be justified when it is the result of community policing between nations, not unilateralism. The Bush administration was never very convincing in this.
Romée
|
Edited by - Romee on 25 February 2003 13:27:17 |
 |
|
|
jimlord
New Member
USA
57 Posts |
Posted - 25 February 2003 : 14:24:56
|
"When war must be the ultimate solution, it can only be justified when it is the result of community policing between nations, not unilateralism. "
Nothing personal, but the term "unilateralism" is the wrong term to use here. Last I saw, there was a pretty long list of nations supporting the US position. You can say that it would be without unanimous support, but you cannot say it is unilateral.
And, that comment is a scary one. Let's say for the sake of argument that there are three countries. One (A) is a dictatorship and suppresses any opposition to their control by means of genocide. Also assume that your country (C) is the only one of the two remaining with the military means to depose the dictator. You ask for permission from country B, but they are afraid to grant it for fear of the repercussions of a loss by C to A, or they do trade with A and are beholden to them for resources. By your argument, the killing will go on and on until C convinces B, until B is taken over by A and leaves only two countries, or until C decides that it can't wait for the approval and policing of B and must take action now.
No, America is not the only "C" in the world, but to say that war can ONLY be justified by a concensus is a scary thought. |
Edited by - jimlord on 25 February 2003 14:32:21 |
|
|
|
padawan
Junior Member
200 Posts |
Posted - 25 February 2003 : 15:29:39
|
Here's another take... At another critical juncture, the Iraqi regime just released a set of documentations to UNMOVIC regarding the state of some of its WMD.
http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2285263
Blix is up and arms praising the move, of course.
Iraq keeps trickling the amount of info. released to the inspection team just to keep the fish (FR, GE, RU, CHA) on the bait.
This has been the game of Saddam from day one. Give them a little of what they ask when a critical juncture comes to get them off our backs. I bet France, Germany, Russia and China will surely fall for this and tell the world that the inspection is indeed working.
It ONLY works when Saddam wants it to work. When will we learn? |
"...be mindful of the SnitzForce..." |
|
|
|
seven
Senior Member
USA
1037 Posts |
Posted - 25 February 2003 : 17:13:42
|
This whole thing goes along with the old saying...
"It's easier to ask forgiveness than it is permission."
|
|
|
|
|
Romee
Junior Member
Netherlands
180 Posts |
Posted - 25 February 2003 : 18:23:22
|
quote:
Originally posted by jimlord
Nothing personal, but the term "unilateralism" is the wrong term to use here. Last I saw, there was a pretty long list of nations supporting the US position. You can say that it would be without unanimous support, but you cannot say it is unilateral.
From the rejection of the Kyotoprotocol till the explicit attitude that violence will be used aginst Iraq, with or without the support of other countries, this administration acts unilateral. One of their first acts was not only not participating in the widely supported founding of the international court of justice in the Netherlands. The Bushadministration also pressured countries to opt out. They wanted American soldiers protected from any courttrial in the future, and the USA even signed an act in which invading the Netherlands was permitted to free Americans, in case they would be brought to court there.
This is all acting from selfintrest, and no doubt, unilateralism. I could give many more examples.
quote:
And, that comment is a scary one. Let's say for the sake of argument that there are three countries. One (A) is a dictatorship and suppresses any opposition to their control by means of genocide. Also assume that your country (C) is the only one of the two remaining with the military means to depose the dictator. You ask for permission from country B, but they are afraid to grant it for fear of the repercussions of a loss by C to A, or they do trade with A and are beholden to them for resources. By your argument, the killing will go on and on until C convinces B, until B is taken over by A and leaves only two countries, or until C decides that it can't wait for the approval and policing of B and must take action now.
No, America is not the only "C" in the world, but to say that war can ONLY be justified by a concensus is a scary thought.
If the world was as simple and accurate as your example, I would no doubt, take action. I would for example have supported the bombing of railinfrastructure to the concentrationcamps in worldwar 2, and still dont understand why that didn't happen.
You seem to say, that other countries take there positions, because they fear fighting this war. (argument B). Well, I am sorry to remind you, that most European countries have a rather impressive record that shows the opposite. Your argument B also says that these countries wouldn't start a justified war, because of resources. You know probably, that most of the oil that Iraq is allowed to sell, is bought by the USA. I think resources are part of the issue. The problem is not only hesitation in acting, but also acting without hesitation because of resources.
I meant with community policing, what Samuel Huntington, also in "Foreign Affairs" wrote. He does not think that we live in a unipolar world, as Wolfowitz describes. In his view there is one superpower, the USA, but there will never be a moment that this superpower can do without the support of allies and regional coalitions.
And believe me Jim, nothing personal. |
|
|
|
Kent
Junior Member
United States
193 Posts |
Posted - 25 February 2003 : 23:48:14
|
Romee,
I'd check the facts on where most of the Middle East oil goes, if I were you... it goes to Japan and Europe, not the US. Most of the US oil comes from Venezuela, Mexico and Alaska (the strikes in Venezuela are driving up US prices, at this moment). We buy some oil from the Middle East, but most of it goes to Europe, simply because of the distance....
If this is "all about oil", then it's about oil for France and Germany, not the US... Your argument has holes in it. |
Edited by - Kent on 26 February 2003 07:35:31 |
|
|
|
Doug G
Support Moderator
USA
6493 Posts |
|
|
Nathan
Help Moderator
USA
7664 Posts |
|
|
Romee
Junior Member
Netherlands
180 Posts |
Posted - 26 February 2003 : 09:06:27
|
Read what I wrote in my forst message. It is on other things than oil. Oil came in answering someone else.
Read what I wrote on oil, it is not on oil from the Persian gulf, it was on oil from Iraq.
Read the links above;
quote:
The vast majority of Persian Gulf oil imported by the United States came from Saudi Arabia (63%), with significant amounts also coming from Iraq (25%) and Kuwait (11%), and small amounts from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Iraqi oil exports to the United States increased by about 160,000 bbl/d in 2001 compared to 2000, to around 780,000 bbl/d,
Romée |
|
|
|
Bookie
Average Member
USA
856 Posts |
Posted - 26 February 2003 : 09:47:08
|
This isn't the first time oil has caused major problems in American economy. It has effected us on a personal level as well as a national level. The effects of oil can really change a person's life. As I recall, I heard a story once about a fellow who went by the name of Jed. He was a poor mountaineer and he couldn't hardly put an adequate meal on the table. One day, he was outside shooting at something he would bring home for dinner and some sort of substance started bubbling out of the ground. Come to find out it was oil (some people call it black gold or Texas tea). Well, as a result of discovering oil on his property, he became a very wealthy man. His relatives told him he should pack up his things and live the high life in California. He decided that wasn't a bad idea so he loaded up his truck and moved to a place called Beverly Hills which is known for its swimming pools and movie stars.
 |
Participate in my nonsense |
|
|
|
Kent
Junior Member
United States
193 Posts |
Posted - 26 February 2003 : 09:52:37
|
My point was that the French and German foreign policy (especially France with the Fina agreements) is MUCH more influenced by oil in this case than US foreign policy. While many may want to ascribe the basest of motives to US foreign policy, it REALLY is about terrorism, WOMDs, and national security...
Bottom line is that while the foreign policy of the US may be bumbling and inconsistent, but it is not motivated by wanting to take over another country's assets for our own good... |
|
|
|
Romee
Junior Member
Netherlands
180 Posts |
Posted - 26 February 2003 : 11:19:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kent
My point was that the French and German foreign policy (especially France with the Fina agreements) is MUCH more influenced by oil in this case than US foreign policy.
This might be your new point, but you told me
quote:
Romee, I'd check the facts on where most of the Middle East oil goes, if I were you... it goes to Japan and Europe, not the US.
And I showed you the fact that a lot of oil goes from Iraq to the USA.
Romée |
|
|
|
snaayk
Senior Member
USA
1061 Posts |
Posted - 26 February 2003 : 12:33:22
|
There's a reason why they say never talk about politics and religion, and this post is living proof of that. I hope that no one takes any remarks here and begrudges those who made remarks that may not properly align with one's own thoughts on the matter. Which is why, although tempted, I won't remark on this subject.
However, I will be creating another thread titled:
Is there really a God??
 Just kidding...
I had to post something here, 6 pages log required some input of mine... |
|
|
|
Kent
Junior Member
United States
193 Posts |
Posted - 26 February 2003 : 12:42:00
|
Snaayk,
Personally, I'm a dyslexic, agnostic insomniac....
I stay awake all night wondering if there really is a dog!
Sorry, it's an oldie, but I still get a chuckle from it!
|
|
|
|
Bookie
Average Member
USA
856 Posts |
Posted - 26 February 2003 : 20:33:58
|
| Why is it that every time I respond to a thread, it dies right after that? Hm. I'm starting to think this entire world is against me. |
Participate in my nonsense |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
Nathan Bales