[Sanjuronord]

Originally Posted by Keitaro

So you saying it would better if we just didn't invade Iraq and remove Sadam?

How to survive under Saddam: Don't take a government job...
How to survive under Democracy: Don't go outside: you'll get blown up by the insurgents. Don't stay inside: the Americans will bomb you.

Until some actual progress is made in Iraq (and there is still no indication that it will if you ask me) you can't claim the country is better off. A "democratic" deathtrap is still a deathtrap.

Originally Posted by Keitaro

Bush saw Iraq as a major threat to the world and took action when the U.N would do nothing. Just about all of the U.N.'s major members thought Sadam had or was in the process of creating WMD's. Now with the French, Russian and British intelligence and not to mention the head of the CIA all telling you Iraq had WMD's what would you have done?

1) By do nothing you mean they wouldn't agree with the rush to war.
2) Most of the intelligence was American, so it's a matter of which countries believed us the most. Now many of those nations despite "believing" Iraq had weapons disagreed with war.
3) There have been plenty of sources come forward at this point to say that Bush administration rushed to war and pushed for evidence from the CIA to prove their predisposed conclusions on Iraq. (former Secretary of Treasury: O'Neill for example)
4) Much of the "evidence" was "found" by going back through old information and coming to drastically different conclusions from what was initially thought.

5) In 1998, Cheney(now Vice-President), Rumsfeld (now US Defense Secretary), Wolfowitz (now deputy US Defense Secretary), and Jeb Bush (the only Bush that sounds more like a redneck than George W. Bush) all part of the PNAC ("Project for the New American Century" boy doesn't that sound ominous...) urged President Clinton to invade Iraq!

Originally Posted by Keitaro

we do have a responsibility as the worlds only super power to look after the world much like looking out over the younger kids on the block and stop the bullies from picking on them.

Ever occured to you that, maybe we ARE one of the bullies?

Originally Posted by Keitaro

Must I say this over and over again Bush did not lie whatsoever. He was misinformed he did not lie to anyone. This is exactly what Kerry is saying and he is wrong to say such things.

No, Bush did lie and he continues to lie. Even during the debate last night, when he said Saddam did have the materials to create WMD and could have given those to terrorists. No, he didn't have weapons, he lacked the materials to create them, and he had no connections with Al Quade. The president continues to say that Saddam could have given weapons, that he didn't have, to terrorists, that he wasn't connected to.

Originally Posted by Mcdonalds

I would have at the time, allowed the WEAPONS INSPECTORS to carry on trying to find these WMDS that didn't exist in the first place, this could have prevented the invasion in the first place.

A strong point that most people miss, Bush dismissed the weapons inspectors. The very people who could have determined what we now know to be true: there were no weapons.

Originally Posted by Mcdonalds

Ok so you don't think we should remove every dictator in the world, just Saddam Hussein? or the ones with WMDs like North Korea. In fact North Korea are probably even a bigger threat?, they actually appear to have the blue prints to make an A bomb, and the fact they have nuclear power plants in their country. Should the U.S. go invade North Korea?.

We only invade the countries we think have WMD (*wink, *wink) not the countries that we KNOW have WMD. Everything we thought we knew about Iraq we do know about Korea. He's made no secret that he's attempting to create long range missiles capable of crossing the Pacific to reach the US. Hell, wasn't there a news story about him test firing a missile over Japan?

Originally Posted by Umbrae

Are you not keeping up on recent events, or do you not belive that statement? Honestly that was written in seriousness. Russia is quickly heading tward another dictatorship.

Interesting sidenote, in the 1996 elections in Russia, Yeltsin barely beat the Communist candidate and many early polls had Stalin receiving more votes than Yeltsin. Yes, the dead guy... Good movie about it too. Spinning Boris

Originally Posted by Umbrae

If you belived I was joking due to stating cecorship of the media is one of the first indications, show my a single dictatorship that had free press.

We're going the same way if Fox News is any indication. In fact they won an appeal in Florida court, against a wrongfully terminated employee who was pressured to air clearly false information on bovine growth hormone in milk (or something like that), because they claimed and the court agreed:

it is technically not against any law, rule, or regulation to deliberately lie or distort the news on a television broadcast

Now if that isn't a dangerous idea, I don't know what is.

Originally Posted by Umbrae

As an industrialized nation that can easly produce more of eery vital resorce than we need, not only is it a basic humanitarian ideal to do so, but can severly help stimulate our, and thier economies.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that if we spent 30% of our military budget on ending world poverty, we'd have the problem licked in ten years. Now just imagine if we're selfish and just focus on ourselves.

Originally Posted by Umbrae

To tell a goverment they cannot do what they are doing, does need to be stated by the world at large. Not one man, even if he does lead a world superpower.

Because that is exactly how it'll be seen. As the actions of one man (country) against the will of the world.