Hi Samuel!
Sorry the mail is long.
essence:
Why is the war not justified now, and was widely believed to be
justified in Yogoslavia ?
A: Because the latter war stopped ongoing genocid.
Why are so many people making such a fuss about US threats to conduct a
war of alleged aggression against Saddam Hussein?
A: What scares the shit out of europeans is the attitude of bush saying:
Hey we don't need an international mandate.
We can bomb whom we want, when we want as much as we want and _WHY_ we want.
18 Feb 2003, "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
SH> Regardless of who invades whom, both sides will call the other the
SH> "aggressor".
Usually yes ... but only one side will be right.
SH> Neither side wants to be thought of by world opinion as being the
SH> "aggressors".
Any side which STARTS a war without a good reason is an aggressor.
good reason == troops of another country invade your country
other country's government bombs your country
international community decides
SH> Countries which go to war against each other will often employ
SH> "agents-provocateurs" to make things appear as though the other
SH> country is the aggressor.
Yes ... but this works only one way.
Eg Hitler has done it.
Only somebody who wants to attack somebody else can use this tactics.
So this will work for the US. ("mass destruction weapons") but not for Saddam.
Saddam on the other side highly welcomes idiots (mostly from europe) who want
to protect civil buildings from US bombs by simply being in those buildings.
The idea of doing something against US aggression is great, but the picture
that is cause by this is horrible.
It looks like these people stand behind Saddam, which is not the case.
They stand against an US war.
SH> This is what Hitler did just prior to his invading Poland. The
SH> operations he pulled off in an attempt to frame the Polish people as
SH> aggressors were planned and conducted in a very foolish manner.
SH> Hitler's "agent provocateur" tricks didn't work out at all well for
SH> him because the staged scenes were discovered and exposed for what
SH> they really were.
Where do you see the parallel to the iraq ??
I only see parallels to US deeds. (Iraq was behind Sept. 11th, Iraq works
together with Al Quaida .......)
SH> When Slobodan Milosevic and the Serbs were conducting their "ethnic
SH> cleansing" campaigns in Kososvo, the US went to war against the Serbs.
SH> The US went to war against the Serbs just because their leader,
SH> Milosevic, was being seen as a very evil man in world opinion because
SH> he was committing genocide.
I strongly oppose !!!!
Nobody has the right to start a war because the leader is seen as an evil man.
SO WHAT ??
The war was started because the genocid. (And _ONLY_ because of the genocid)
And I highly attribute it to the US that they initiated an end to the murder.
If Saddam does now something like that - go get him.
If America finds evidence that something like this happens right now, they will
have no problems convincing the UN.
The problem is that nothing like this is happening right now - and the world
asks itself why it is so important to bomb Iraq now.
And the most plausible answer for most people is that the US wants the oil.
As mass-destruction weapons are conserned I quote a high US military:
"Saddam is a sun of a bitch, but he is _our_ son of a bitch.
He will stop the ayatola from burning down the region in an islamic
fundamentalist fire.
And I have to admit that we have provided poisonous gas to Saddam."
And than the Kurds in Iraq were murdered with the american gas.
No problem for america. Saddam was still their guy, and nobody spoke about the
dead Kurds.
After Saddam occupied (the oil wealthy) Kuweit, CNN and others spoke very much
about the murder of the Kurds. (what they did not tell was that it was american
gas which did it)
SH> Although he was doing very evil things, he wasn't threatening the US
SH> or any of those European nations which teamed up in a military
SH> coalition to stop his genocide campaign and to overthrow him.
But he did kill million of his own people.
And the war was initiated to stop the ongoing murdering. (which is naturally
against the human rights)
So the goal of the war was to stop the murdering of people.
What is the goal of a war against iraq ?
PS: Iraq is the most closely supervised country in the world.
You can't fart without being noticed !
SH> During the Kosovo-Bosnia war we were not hearing from the countries of
SH> our NATO allies any protests about US "aggression" against Milosevic.
Naturally not.
There was a reason behind it, which was justified.
I personally was for that war.
War is horrible, but there was no other chance of stopping the murdering back
than. So we had to face the terrible sides of war, because they were still
better than the situation prior of the war.
The situation now is completely different.
SH> It was considered perfectly OK to go after Milosevic and put him out
SH> him out of business.
yes
SH> This was seen as perfectly OK simply on the grounds that Milosevic is
SH> an evil man
no this did not have anything to do with Milosevic being evil.
It had to do with Milosvic giving the command to kill many 100.000s of people.
SH> Nearly all Europeans know that Saddam Hussein also is a very evil man.
yes
SH> He can be compared to Milosevic.
I think he is worse.
SH> Saddam Hussein commits genocide campaigns against the Kurds living in
SH> Iraq.
This was long ago, and it was done with american aid.
But I agree that he is evil.
What we europeans do not see is the imminent danger, which would justify a war.
If Bush sen. would have invaded Iraq and captured Saddam and brought him to Den
Haag this would have been a great deed.
But he hasn't.
SH> If Saddam remains in power he will kill more Kurds, and he will likely
SH> use chemical agents against them again.
I don't think this is likely.
Saddam Hussein is highly inelligent. (this makes him so dangerous)
But he is neither a second hitler nor satan nor ....
He is an intelligent man, who secures his power with extreme brutality. (even
more than china)
>From his completely weired point of view the killing of the Kurds made some
absurd sense. He wanted to show his own people what happens if somebody in his
own country turns against him.
Naturally he has to be punished for this mass murder, but I do not agree that
this is a reason for starting a war. (today his hands are bound ...)
SH> Why are so many people making such a fuss about US threats to conduct
SH> a war of alleged aggression against Saddam Hussein?
Because the US wants to break international law.
They think that they have the right to attack somebody, just because it will
benefit them, or because they think he is "evil".
Who gives the US the right to judge over others ??
If they show evidence, that there is a massive breaking of human rights RIGHT
AT THE MOMENT, than the situation changes.
But the "evidence" of the US, has been classified of Hans Blix (who is a highly
intelligent person) as It could show anything ... it is no evidence of mass
destuction weapons.
SH> If it is OK to attack Milosevic to stop genocide, then why isn't it OK
SH> to attack Saddam Hussein for the same reason?
Because the attack stopped the ONGOING genocid.
So there was genocid, many, many talks (and Milosevic could not be stopped)
than there was war, and than there was no genocid.
In Iraq there is no mass-murder right now.
So we don't need a war to stop it.
SH> It is about genocide
there is no genocid at the moment.
So the war can't stop it.
SH> and the need to get rid of a ruthless and evil dictator.
With what right ??
Who decides what is ruthless ??
What would you say if Hussein bombs the US.
He would state that Bush is a ruthless evilman.
Would it be OK ??
And if not ... where is the difference ?
What scares the shit out of europeans is the attitude of bush saying:
Hey we don't need an international mandate.
We can bomb whom we want, when we want as much as we want and _WHY_ we want.
And for every sane thinking person this is not true.
PS: don't take it too seriously ... but:
what have bush jr and saddam hussein in common ?
Both are not officially elected. (I would really like to see the votes, and
count myself ... I'm sure that it would have an interesting result)
SH> Sam Heywood
CU, Ricsi
--
|~)o _ _o Richard Menedetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> {ICQ: 7659421} (PGP)
|~\|(__\| -=> Maximum ease, vaseline please! <=-
