Reading the news
Mar. 12th, 2003 02:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
weaktwosAhh, lunch. One of life's simple pleasures. I was reading www.salon.com while I grazed upon a tuna sandwich and some chips.
This article is interesting: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/03/12/foreign_aid/index.html. It discusses the extent of bribery that the U.S. must exert on various countries to try and get a vote on the security council.
What's particularly haunting is Ari Fleischer's comment of, "There are many ways to build a coalition. The Security Council is but one of them."
Clearly, the rest of the world doesn't see our threats to Iraq as mainly human rights based. Nor do they feel the threat of germ warfar like Bush does. If this impending war served more interests than just that of the United States, I feel certain that they would jump on board. After all, we're not asking for troop support, really. If the cause is right and good for the greater population, what a cherry deal to support the U.S. But alas, it is not that simple.
Any of you pro-war zealots care to comment?
This article is interesting: http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/03/12/foreign_aid/index.html. It discusses the extent of bribery that the U.S. must exert on various countries to try and get a vote on the security council.
What's particularly haunting is Ari Fleischer's comment of, "There are many ways to build a coalition. The Security Council is but one of them."
Clearly, the rest of the world doesn't see our threats to Iraq as mainly human rights based. Nor do they feel the threat of germ warfar like Bush does. If this impending war served more interests than just that of the United States, I feel certain that they would jump on board. After all, we're not asking for troop support, really. If the cause is right and good for the greater population, what a cherry deal to support the U.S. But alas, it is not that simple.
Any of you pro-war zealots care to comment?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re:
Date: 2003-03-13 11:49 pm (UTC)And kill innocent children? You think the US is going to go in there and kill innocent children? Where on God's green earth do you get that we're going to go in there and kill innocent children? We're not the ones hiding military equipment in mosques and civilian housing! Not only is Saddam pissing all over the *18* UN resolutions but he's giving the big fat finger to the Geneva Convention. And if you're so concerned about the children, how about the children in Iraq that Saddam is disfiguring and killing? You practice any kind of dissent in Iraq, then you and your family get shot, gassed, and turned into lab rats. Where's your compassion for them?
And a potential threat where we can't find anything? Where we can't find anything?! How about the Al Samoud with Warheads that are fitted for chemical and biological agents that we found. How about the Bombs that can scatter into mini bombs that are fitted to disperse chemical and biological agents that we found. How about the *unmanned drone* that Hans Blix so conveniently left out until after the debate at the UN, that are *all* fitted for the distribution of chemical and biological agents that have been found. There is so *much* proof pointing the finger at Saddam that it's amazing people can keep themselves blind to it.
And I'm sure that Iran is very very very aware of the 300,000+ troops that are right around the country.
And just look at Israel and Pa