[quote author=“Humble Servant”]Josie
The list was in refference to Saddam’s WMD. You stated that he didn’t have any because he didn’t have a nuclear reactor….....remember? I was pointing out that there is other WMD’s that he may have had.
I wasn’t quite sure if you were referring to Saddam or Kim Jong-il. Saddam was in restraint, before we attacked, much more so than either NK or Iran. And we had a fairly good knowledge of Saddam’s activities, unlike the secretive DPRK. Saddam did indeed have some of those items on your list.
However, we did NOT go to war with Iraq based on the fact that he “might” have sarin gas, we went to war based on what Bush and his advisors called FACT, and said was a very real nuclear threat—and over which our European allies and their intelligence agencies sat around scratching their heads and saying, “Uh, guys, we’re with you on most stuff, and there is that whole NATO thing and all, but…we just can’t seem to find any hard evidence for this nuclear program you are so fixated on. Please help us?”
So they trotted out pictures of defunct chemical weapons facilities than had a layer of dust ten inches thick and hadn’t been used since the first Gulf War and said “SEE?! We told you so!” And Tony Blair said, “Good GOD! Saddam could have a warhead detonating within the borders of Europe in forty-five minutes!” People in MI-6 were resiging in protest over this information being fed to the public because they did not believe it to be true. Robin Cook, a prominent member of Tony Blair’s cabinet, also resigned for the same reason. Claire Short also resigned, though much later.
The weapons never existed, just as European intelligence proclaimed. I feel like I was lied to by my government. Can you see why I would feel this way?
So you would just stop talking, That’s good, but is it going to stop him from working on his weapons program?
Kim Jong-il booted the IAEA inspectors out, didn’t he? After Bush halted the supply of fuel oil and reactor construction. During the Clinton years, Kim Jong-il agreed to IAEA inspections. Diplomatically, our country worked directly with his. He needs this one-on-one treatment to feed his ego. When he feels slighted, he pulls these little publicity stunts to impress—I am not really sure who. His fellow rogue-regime cronies. At any rate, the Bush administration pushes his buttons. They’ve got their own strategy, I guess.
You think it would be easier to get a consensus on North Korea?
I think hands down it would be easier to obtain European support for action against North Korea than for Iraq.
Well let’s see, you have another nut in Iran who is calling for the destruction of Israel and he is working on a nuclear program. He has also said that the end of the world is just over two years away and he says that he will do everything he can to assist in making that a reality. Do we have a consensus on Iran? Nope, Russia, China, and the Arab states are not on board. You can forget about N.Korea as well.
I pointedly did not draw Iran into the conversation but of course it is much the same. What will we do with them? Kick the can?
It is not easy taking out a leader or country who has more than enough ready firepower to kill millions in the blink of an eye.
And yet they were willing enough to do it with Saddam. Why stop there?
If you were a South Korean I think you would have a little different attitude about this.
Oh, no doubt. But they might be glad enough to be rid of a can that has been kicked around since the Eisenhower administration.
We are not getting anywhere with this. I do understabd your point though. You hate Bush and anything he ever does will not be good enough. He can’t leave office soon enough. If another Republican takes his place we will just assume all the above relates to him as well.
Assume anything you like. I was a Republican for most of my life. Until this administration, in fact. I did not vote for Clinton. Right now I do not consider myself part of any political party since there is not a single one that I admire. Possibly, in a distant way, Ralph Nader. But I didn’t vote for him. I voted for Kerry.
I don’t hate Bush. He just makes me tired. I wish I could be proud of an American leader, but I realize that that there is no political leader anywhere in the world that I could be proud of. They’re all fallible and human, they spout ghost-written rhetoric in a pre-election frenzy that is what pollsters think we plebs want to hear, and then they make good on very few or any of the things that put them in office in the first place. Bush said he’d lower taxes, and he did. But I left the US just as he came into office (not for that reason) paying $1.10 for a gallon of gas; when I returned to the States, gas was almost three times that amount.
I think we have to ask of any leader, “Is my life any better because of you?” Is your life better because Bush is in office and not a democrat? He represents your particular values? I’ll tell you what I have seen as a result of Bush in office: our good name has been eroded away in foreign eyes. There is very little respect for America now among the British public, when there once was a great deal of respect. Every time Tony Blair was seen publicly with George Bush his ratings plummeted in the polls, and now he avoids it at all costs.
So, you may say, “So what? Who cares what other countries think of us?”
I don’t hate Bush. I’ll tell you what I hate. I hate what is happening to Africa while the rest of the world squabbles amongst themselves.