Sijun Forums :: View topic - Why are Bush and Co. so eager to start a war?

elam · Posted: Sat Mar 22, 2003 9:12 pm

Slate has a bunch of cartoons about the war, worlwide and American. Canadians are only slightly funnier than Europeans, which aren't funny at all.

[666]Flat · Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2003 1:31 am

SolarC · Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2003 5:08 am

It's really hard to say which are the real motives of mr. Bush and co. for the war. But here to analyze the official reason.

1. Iraq - al Qaeda link.

This seems to be propaganda or pure paranoia, there has been no concrete evidence to base this assumption on.

2. Iraq is a military threat to the world.

There is nothing to support this claim. During the first Gulf War Iraq didn't destroy a single U.S. tank or plane. According to U.N. weapon inspectors, Desert Storm destroyed over 80% of Iraq's remaining military capability. Iraq has been paying indemnities to Kuwait and U.S. oil corporations since 1991 and haven't had enough financial capability to build another arsenal.
And there has not been a single threat made by Iraq after the war against any country.

3. The war will be quick and painless.

War has never been painless. There has already been civilians killed and the war has only began. In the "quick and painless" Gulf War one there were 200 000 people killed.

4. Iraq through out the weapon inspectors 1998.

Simply not true. The inspectors withdrew from from Iraq december 1998 because U.S. told them to pull out so that U.S. could launch a bombing campaign on Baghdad. The operation Desert Fox started short after and U.S. dropped over 1000 bombs and missiles on Iraq.

5. Weapons of mass destruction.

First Bush claimed that U.S. would have proof of Saddam having weapons of mass destruction. After a short while the proof was just a few satellite photos of some military transportation in Iraq. U.N. weapon inspectors tried to follow the lieds given by Bush, but couldn't really find anything of that sort.

If there is some weapons of mass destruction in Iraq they would have been found by the Inspectors with time. Why U.S. didn't wait the inspectors to get their inspection completely done?

faustgfx · Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2003 7:04 am

Steven Stahlberg · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2003 8:07 pm

That's strange, this thread got real quiet. Well I'm bored so I'll bump it.

SolarC, the war may have been started for the wrong reasons, as you say it's very hard to know the secret reasons, and the purported reasons seem a bit weak I agree... but once in a while even a corrupt evil dictator like Bush will do something right, even if just by accident. Smile

Seriously, IMHO this war is on the positive side of the scale, as wars go, from the point of view of Iraq. If Saddam is left alone - he could rule another decade, his sons taking over after him for another couple decades.

Of course the huge mistake was not finishing the job 12 years ago. Imagine all the human suffering that could have been prevented, all by a little more military action then. Sometimes violence does work. Just look at Americas Wildest Police Videos. Smile

Saying that USA is intent on world domination, or anything close to it, is just silly. Most americans don't even think that much about the rest of the world, if it's not in their news, which it usually isn't.
Can you imagine Bush to Congress: "Ok, here's my master plan for world domination, it'll cost the lives of millions of american boys, and cost 1.5 trillion... oh and by the way, please make sure to pay before the new president is inaugurated next month. What do you say guys? Guys?"

SolarC · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:49 am

> seriously, IMHO this war is on the positive side of the scale, as wars go,
> from the point of view of Iraq. If Saddam is left alone - he could rule
> another decade, his sons taking over after him for another couple
> decades.

You are right, end of Saddam's dictatorship is a very positive thing for Iraq. However the costs and risks involved in this war are just too huge to take, in my opinion.

If the war will continue for too long, a lot of Iraqi civilians will run out of food and water. Nobody can really tell what will happen in the post-war Iraq. One worst case scenario would be that Iraq would go into a similar crisis that has been going on in the Israel and Palestain. For sure Israel will take an advantage of this conflict and commit crimes against palestinians and walking over U.N. decisions will be much easier for any country than before.

Anyhow, I of course do hope that everything goes as well as possible.

Winter · junior member Member # Joined: 17 Aug 2002 Posts: 15

ValarianROOT · Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2003 9:02 pm

I've held off on coming here to read this post for a while. "Oppinions are like @$$hole, et al." Now that I have read it, though...

Sorry Steven, but I have to dissagree on the whole finishing off Sadam in '91. There would have been just as bad a backlash over "American Imperialism" then as there is now.

It's gotten to the point were the USA is being viewed as the police in a ghetto. "There's never a cop (US military action) around when you need one." And from watching the interviews with Middle East "specialists" on the major news stations its getting to the point where I feel the majority of the Middle East won't be happy with the US until we bomb Israil back to the ovens.

Really, though, the Middle East has been the USSR's and US's sarogate battlefield for so long now. The world is just now reapping the fruits of the Cold War. There are more questions than answers on how to bring peace to the Middle East. Just who's responsability is it to solve them? The US, the lone "Super Power" in the world. Or, those Middle Easterners that have to live and die there every day. And after that there's the continent of Africa... Not many know/care of the cycles of suffering that occur there. Where does the respossability lie for the worlds problems? Maybe the people in these countries need to learn how to get along on some level before the First World can help them, otherwise what is the point? "Might makes right," seems to be the only axiom that the world will listen to anymore.

JN

P.S. I'm sick of the fact that I live in a country that provides most of the world's food, just so in other countries power mad MFs can kill them.
_________________
Sleep is for the weak!!!

SolarC · Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2003 12:09 am

> one." And from watching the interviews with Middle East "specialists" on
> the major news stations its getting to the point where I feel the majority > of the Middle East won't be happy with the US until we bomb Israil back to > the ovens.

I don't think so. U.S. has taken Israels side in the conflict which should be none of it's business. I don't think that Palestinians expect U.S. to do nothing more than stop helping Israel and stop interfering in the conflict. Solving the conflict is only an issue of Israel, Palestain and United Nations.

> the Middle East. Just who's responsability is it to solve them? The US, the > lone "Super Power" in the world. Or, those Middle Easterners that have to

United Nations should be the only one deciding what actions to take in the name of international law. U.S. acting without U.N. permission is making a crime against rest of the world.

> P.S. I'm sick of the fact that I live in a country that provides most of the > world's food, just so in other countries power mad MFs can kill them.

Where did you get the idea of that? It's absolutely not true.

And the other thing related to this is the fact that USA is far from self providing what comes to food. It buys much food from elsewhere. USA's bad arrangment of food production and huge consumption is actually one issue why there isn't enough food elsewhere.

I realise you might just think that I am an anti-USA fanatic for saing this, but I assure you that I only wanted to correct errors. And what comes to USA's political decisions there just are many things done badly, but that is not my opinion about the whole country.

Svanur · Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2003 2:54 am

If I remember the figures right from American Cultural History, American's make up 5% of the world population but manage to consume 30%-40% of it's food.

Not saying these numbers are entirely accurate but they are "food" for though.
_________________
... and they shall know no fear.

elam · Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2003 5:41 am

Svanur · Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2003 6:43 am

K, I'll admit my wrong, it should be energy consumption.

On the other hand, every nation is guilty of propaganda in every way. The news media are kings and sometimes use information manipulated to suit them and to sell their stuff. Of course it's shallow, most people like it shallow.

Like someone said "people are idiots", goes for all. Good example: Muslim's were burning flags in Denmark and they were burning the Icelandic flag cause they thought it was the British. When asked whether they knew what Iceland was they just shrugged.

Perhaps the reason for US hatred stems from the fact that people like to appoint a common enemy. US was a little bewildered when the Soviet's fell and the cold war was over, no longer had they a common enemy. The Nazi did this and a lot of other people. The mass likes to enforce it's superiority upon others who show a hint of weakness. If you watch "The Pianist" or read "Maus" you can see people turning on their own people because of religion or for their own gain.

ah well rant off. I hope nobody takes this too personal.
_________________
... and they shall know no fear.

ValarianROOT · Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2003 7:28 pm

Thanks elam for backing me up on that. I am a bit frustrated, as you can tell, by all the press against this war in principle. Consensus around the world is that Sadam shouldn't rule Iraq. The fact that the US is abused for starting a war to get him and his r�gime out really ticks me off. I take it personally as a citizen of my country and I get ticked off when I let that abuse blind me to the sane and rational views against this war. There are always reasons against war, but in this case I particularly do not see any other way to solve the situation. I admit the US holds a large percentage of the blame for Sadam being in control. The world has changed, though. The US, British and coalition nations are not attempting to exterminate the Iraqi people like the Iraqi UN ambassador said, but eliminate a vile r�gime and protect/free a country of people that have suffer too long.

If one thing good comes out of this war though, a large number of Americans might begin to realize what the hell is going on in our world and decide maybe there is something we can do about human suffering before we have to land troops. As it is the majority of the world is so effed up that peace seems impossible to me.

Damn it.

JMN

P.S. I still stand behind the Israeli comment from before. The implication is that we should forget that it was Palestine that invaded Israel. I hear frustration and resentment against Israel that it holds so much influence in the world and other Middle East nations can't interact as much as them. Its BS to think the US would even consider not being involved in the negotiations between Palestine and Israel.
_________________
Sleep is for the weak!!!

aColdOldKodiak · Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2003 8:10 pm

SolarC · Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2003 11:25 pm

>> And the other thing related to this is the fact that USA is far from self
>> providing what comes to food. It buys much food from elsewhere. USA's
>> bad arrangment of food production and huge consumption is actually
>> one issue why there isn't enough food elsewhere.

> According the United Nations World Food Program, the U.S. was by far th > biggest donor at almost $800,000,000. That's EIGHT HUNDRED MILLION > DOLLARS for dumbasses who can't read and are too lazy to research. Oh, > Europe was third with a paltry 118 million. Feel the love.
> The US in 2000 imported 9% of it's food. Don't take this the wrong way
> Solar, but YOUR FUCKING STUPID.

Calling me stupid is far from enough to get me provocated. Please read again what I said before.

It is great that U.S. makes a huge donation to that particular food program, but it is still absurd to say that U.S. provides most of the worlds food. And that 9% is quite much food taken from elsewhere. Especially when much of it comes from countries that don't have enough. USA's huge consumption (yes, energy) is related to the issue as well.

> I find it very interesting how the media plays out the whole Iraq situation. > You're always hearing people complain of the bias of the U.S. press and > how it glorifies the war and ignores the civilian cost. And how American's
> are 'brainwashed' into believing this to be a just cause. Yet, listenting to > the questions asked by foreign reporters, you'd think they live in fucking > Bizaro world. It's always, 'Why were these civilians killed by American
> bombs?'. 20 times in a row. No probing of the umpteen atrocities being
> committed by Iraq's military. None. I am amazed at the lengths the U.S. > military goes to avoid casualties and the way it treats pow's.

People say different things. All I did was to analyze some of the official reasons for the war. Despite of the good things to gain, I don't think they are worth taking the risks involved. Plus more importantly starting a war with that weak arguments, with lack of evidence and without U.N. permission is totally unacceptable. Not depending on which country does it.

ValarianROOT · Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:25 am

But noone denies that Sadam should be removed from power. Tell me how anyother way was going to get him out.

JMN
_________________
Sleep is for the weak!!!

[666]Flat · Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 10:42 am

Yeah, yeah, keep it tight, boys. Yer master trio of Bush, Powell and Rumsfeld is gonna need all yer pro-active freedom luvin' patriotism when it cums ta payin' da bills for this most essential war. In case the economists' worst case scenario comes into effect we be talkin' 'bout pocket money amounting ta 1.9 trillion bucks, including da reconstruction and all the other nasty cost centres. Oh, and I heard only 1 % of the US citizenship (da richest of da richtest of course) is gonna benefit from Bush's upcomin' fiscal reform? Yeee-haaw, baby -- way to go, partner.
_________________

ValarianROOT · Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 2:30 pm

So its all about money to ya eh Flat? Maybe its true even the Germans are overcompensating for something? Hmm...

JMN
_________________
Sleep is for the weak!!!

Periadam · Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:34 pm

If I may interject a bit on that food line... the western world *does* contribute a good deal of money towards food for developing nations, but does anybody stop to think why those countries can't produce their own food like we do? Technically, they *could*... a lot of those countries are in some of the most fertile regions in the world. Why don't they?

Because western (primarily American, but I'm sure many Canadian and European countries are in there too) corporations buy up their land to grow coffee and livestock (that's Starbucks and McDonalds, right there) and make it extremely difficult for any local agricultural effort to rise above subsistance.

Also, all that food which is sent into their economy comes, not from the local area, but from whichever rich western nation sent it. This food is given to people free of charge. Nice, right? Hardly... What's the *lucky* above-subsistance farmer guy going to do when all his local customers get free food and say "screw you, buddy" to him. He can't make any money like that! So he goes out of business (sells his land to Starbucks or McDonalds so they can grow coffee or beef for fat westerners)... and since there's no more local food supply, what are the locals going to need? More food donations from those same fat westerners!

It's a vicious cycle. Food donation isn't exactly a good thing... it's killed a lot of the countries down there. What they really need are some good education programs so they can slow down population growth and increase the average earnings of the people.

Anyhoo, now my tangent is over.
_________________
Under communism, man exploits man. Under capitalism, it's just the opposite.

Peri.

ValarianROOT · Posted: Fri Mar 28, 2003 7:14 pm

Sorry Periadam, the reason actually is most third world countries don't have the technology to produce like the US does. That and because their land has been so over farmed down through the centuries it can't produce like the US can with its fertilizers, rotating crop schedules, and (dare I say it) genetically modified crops. Now there are organizations working, constantly, to produce cheap techniques for these countries to become more sufficient, but creating the tech is only a small part of the problem. Teaching them to use it and getting them to abandon old farming techniques is the hardest battle. These problems and the fact that the US have the largest tracts of farmable (which includes the fact that the soil is still relatively under farmed) is why the US is the largest single producer of food in the world. Commercialism and corporate domination doesn't always help the situation, but it's not the majority of what's holding third world nations back in agriculture. Just look what's going on in Africa. The government is taking land from large land owners and giving it to individuals in the population that don't know agriculture like they do or have the fiscal and other resources to make the land they've been given productive monetarily. If the government did something more like a CO-OP their intentions, however politically well intentioned, may have a potential to succeed. But, alas, education, feeding the hungry and military security without social responsibility and social empathy towards one another solves nothing.

JMN
_________________
Sleep is for the weak!!!

sf09 · junior member Member # Joined: 13 Dec 2002 Posts: 8

[666]Flat · Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 11:35 am

aColdOldKodiak · Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 8:40 pm

Seriously, let's not get into a lame sarcastic comments fight...

and if you're going to present any type of intelligent argument, use proper english, or be ignored for sounding stupid.
_________________
http://jcaart.cjb.net

aColdOldKodiak · Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2003 8:41 pm

woops
_________________
http://jcaart.cjb.net

Andy`Ba · member Member # Joined: 20 Jan 2001 Posts: 98

Importance is a great way to justify being mean and destructive, or doing anything else that's unpleasant enough to need justification.
As soon as one thing is 'important' then other things aren't.
So what's so important about this war? Why CNN and BBC concentrate all their attention only on Iraq?
Aren't people interested what's happening in America anymore?
_________________
Andy`Ba,3D artist
web 3D service
Free textures, 3D tutorials 3d jobs

ValarianROOT · Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2003 9:39 am

Hey Flat... I'm rubber your glue...

Any way we've reached the point in this war that public attention will return to watching new episodes of Friends and finding out how well their teams are doing in the basketball pool. Personally I have all my money on the 101st airborne, they really know how to drive the lane.

JMN
_________________
Sleep is for the weak!!!