US Troops are not prepared for chemical or biological attacks - Say *NO* to War -

[Frackal]

f you don't think we should be going to war now then you should be killed.

Matt...proven fake from???

Everyone agrees Saddam needs to go. When???

Matt, are you at all concerned with our shifting policy of pre-emption? Is this not the difference between a nation and an empire? As I understand it, until Caesar, the Romans too believed they always "had a reason" for invasion.

I'm curious....are we going to "install" a better goverment this time?

What makes this war so urgent ?

 

[Longhorn85]

The Army has been training for NBC for a long time, but the NBC gear is not exactly in tip top shape.

You'd be surprised how much the suit, mask and decon equipment/procedures and training has improved since the last Gulf War.

 

[MattTheSkywalker]

Matt...proven fake from???

Everyone agrees Saddam needs to go. When???

Matt, are you at all concerned with our shifting policy of pre-emption? Is this not the difference between a nation and an empire? As I understand it, until Caesar, the Romans too believed they always "had a reason" for invasion.

I'm curious....are we going to "install" a better goverment this time?

What makes this war so urgent ?

Frack,

That Sharon thing is as fake as "the protocols of the elders of Zion".

As far as Saddam going, there is no time like the present.

Is it pre-emptive? Yes. One could argue that the people of Iraq (and basically all Islamic countries, except Turkey to an extent) have very little in the way of human rights and any government set up after this is going to be an improvement.

There are reasonable objections, for example:

Why is it America's business to get involved in other countries government?

Well, although I might be narrow minded, there is such a thing as right and worng. The styles of government in the Middle eastern Islamic countries are anachronisms and also they allow the develoment of ideologies that are harmful to us in many ways. Getting rid of dictators is always a good thing.

Another objection may be

Given the US's track record of installing governmenets, why will the next one be any better?

Fair question. However, there seems to be a greater international interest in what happens here than there was with Chile or Cuba or VietNam.

The whole world is already watching what we do here, all of our issues have been laid out by the UN, and the international coimunity isabreastof developments. Ultimately, I believe the aus will gain UN approval, after conceding a lot of the rebuilding to the international community. Thus there will be many nations involved.

Even without approval, the developed world is watching Iraq for its oil fields. Everyone wants to be involved in the rebuild, so it shouldn't be an America-only deal.

 

[Doktor Bollix]

The main danger in Iraq is that while invading the country is easy, leaving again will be hard:

1) Control of Iraq extends the power of the US and allows more military options against the real threats in the Middle East and Central Asia, the ones with real weapons. Also, there's a huge amount of oil there but no Texans; this may change in the future.

2) The place is ungovernable. It actually takes a guy like Saddam to run a country like this, or even keep it one piece. Democracy works in societies, not artificial political entities like Iraq, a creation of some British civil servant. A puppet government would probably collapse without US military support, and a takeover by Islamic radicals or one of the many other nasty possibilities, would not be welcome in the US. Imagine the hassle of invading Iraq again in a few years. The voters would not be amused.

3) The Turks want to throw the Iraqi Kurds a beating, to demolish their independent state in Northern Iraq. They see it as a threat because 1/3 of their population are oppressed Kurds. Much of the horsetrading over Turkish help was on this issue, Turkey has already taken forward positions inside Iraq and plans the seizure of cities in Northern Iraq, ostensibly to deal with refugees. Washington distrusts the Iraqi Kurds and their plans for independence. I think the US will end up keeping them separated for some time, until some attack on the US in Northern Iraq, and then the Turks will get the green light. Why have a dog and bark yourself?

My prediction about the occupation of Iraq is that the Iraqis will be delighted to see us. For a while. The children won't start throwing stones at US soldiers maybe even for a whole two months. People just don't like soldiers from another country in their streets, unless the benefits are self-evident. We will be taking care of the Iraqis like a Dutch uncle for years to come on that basis.

 

[Frackal]

All the more reason to have UN support so they can shoulder at least SOME of the burden....I realize we do alot of the UN solidering anyway but still..

 

[BigRed54]

Also some poeple think there will be alot of our US troops die from this soon to be war. And thats not true. And it won't even last 5 yrs. ALTHOUGH... If we don't attack now and wait till he gets alot more weapons of mass destruction then we will have ALOT of troops killed. Either way somone is going to die i'd rather go with the the situation that holds the least amount of people to die. And don't even think making pease with Saddam is going to happen.