Reason 3 : Iraq has fought a war with two countries. They fought a war in the 80s with Iran, a war that may or may not constitute self defense. A war that USA, under the leadership of Ronald Reagan, supported. His vice president btw was Bush Senior, and the guy they sent over to do the dealings with Saddam was Donald Rumsfeld. Guess we should be thankful he’s the one in charge of destroying that country. Then they invaded the dictatorship of Kuwait. More oil for them, but the USA wouldn’t have it and knocked them back. And now USA have invaded Afghanistan, a war that may or may not constitute self defense after 9/11. And then they invaded Iraq. And dare I say “more oil for them”? So to summon up : Iraq invaded 2 countries, USA invaded 2 countries – FOR NOW.
Reason 4 : Saddam and the Iraqi government are constantly defying the UN and pushing it as far as they can, but without breaking any clear set rules. They’d go along with a UN resolution, like the inspectors, for a while, then stop. And that’d go on for a while, but did they break any resolutions? Meanwhile we got the US who are constantly defying the UN. Every time there is a resolution up for condemning Israel when doing something with their military against the civilian palestinian population, like rolling in their tanks saying “we occupy this place now, you – move!”, the US is very quick to put in their veto. Not to mention that they defied the UN by invading Iraq in the first place. And also breaking the Kyoto agreement because they felt that the pursuit of a clean environment was too expensive for them. So yeah, Iraq was bad at following the UN, but the Bush administration just doesn’t care about the world opinion or UN.
Reason 5 : Saddam is a dictotor that need to be replaced by an government elected by the people. This reason has replaced all talks about WMD’s so I guess it’s gotta be important. But like the WMD’s argument, doesn’t really work considering… was Bush elected by the people? Nope! More people voted for Gore and then we had the Florida screwup. The american election system of having electorates instead of actually letting the people decide let that happen. But what would you expect from a system that dates back to the Roman empire. And if you’d look up the definition of “dictator” it’ll say “An absolute ruler”. Which Bush seems to be when he can’t only invade a soverieng nation at his own will, lie about and not be held responsible for it but actually might be reelected! And btw, how’s that “government elected by the people” going in Iraq? Got any elections coming up anytime soon?
stoff
You must be logged in to post a comment.