|
|
Lews_Therin
Promising
Famous Hero
|
posted November 11, 2002 03:30 PM |
|
|
In my extremely humble opinion, Privatehudson has many good points. It is reasonable and necessary to question a gouvernment´s motives, and even more so when that gouvernment intends to start a war. Purely speculative and as Dargon says "groundless accusations"? I don´t think so. If you consider the human rights situation of some of the US´ allies (for example Saudi Arabia and Pakistan), and the former friendship between US republicans and Iraq even after the gassing of 5000 kurds, I am very doubtful about Bush´s "good versus evil" rethoric.
Quote:
Those are all horrific motives. So if you make those kind of outrageous claims then don’t be surprised when people react to such allegations.
Considering the above, I don´t find "the man is a terrible dictator and has even murdered his own people and must therefore be removed" to be less outrageous.
Besides, Dargon, the sharp tongue that you used on PH seems rather strange to me  - I remember a debate some time ago, where you accused the scientists who support the theory of global warming of none-too-nice motives, too. You said that they were doing this against better knowledge, in order to secure their own jobs.
____________
|
|
HeyYou
Known Hero
and beloved food provider.
|
posted November 11, 2002 04:07 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I am just waiting for someone to say the English speaking countries have it in for the world.
~ ~ ~
The English-speaking countries have it in for the world.
~ ~ ~
You're welcome. 
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
posted November 12, 2002 12:38 AM |
|
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 12, 2002 06:43 AM |
|
|
Quote
“In my extremely humble opinion”
When have you ever had a humble opinion LOL…jk
Quote
" remember a debate some time ago, where you accused the scientists who support the theory of global warming of none-too-nice motives, too. "
That is so far below the belt...how dare you use someone's own words against them LOL. Like I said we all engage in assuming others motives…it is totally human and quite natural...but I will stand by my last statement that I think determining motives is an extremely tenuous place to take a debate....cause in the end we don't know their motives.
Maybe we should use “I feel” qualifiers when judging someone’s motives without evidence (i.e. “I feel Bush is replacing Saddam to make up for his father not finishing the job”)…versus framing these allegations as a thought or coming from a factual/objective state of mind.
Quote
“It is reasonable and necessary to question a gouvernment´s motives”
How is speculation about someone’s motives reasonable (unless you are a psychotherapist and then you are pardoned by profession…haha) If we had some sort of evidence then it would become reasonable…in my extremely humble opinion…haha.
I think the thing that is so disagreeable is that the allegations about Bush’s motives seem so transparent for basic dislike/hatred (see there I go using motives..haha…but I am allowed to…right? hehe).
Furthermore these allegations seem very wild and outrageous indeed….For example…if Bush W. made 3 million dollars upon our invasion of Kuwait…then I could see someone logically (not necessarily correctly) arguing that Bush is only invading Iraq to line his pockets given the historical precedence. But given that there are no links like that to any of the “out there” allegations (i.e. can someone please show me where the USA has taken over a country only to then possess and exploit their oil resources ) that have been made in this thread….it makes the question of motives less credible.
Quote
“even more so when that government intends to start a war.”
Why is it only one way? Why aren’t we questioning the motives of all those who resist removing a dangerous dictator? Both positions assume the loss of life so why only question the regime change leader’s motives. If Bush is right and Saddam is a clear and present danger….thousands/millions could die….so those standing in the way of a regime change are endangering lives…..if Bush invades….thousands/millions could die. Either way people die…so again I ask why is the questioning of motives only one way?
Moreover where is all the great analysis about the UK’s motives other than alleging that Blair is kissing butt to America (hardly a war crime like gets leveled against the USA)….but analyzing the USA’s motives seems like a national pastime in many European countries (and why isn’t anyone advocating positive motives if they are so objective????). These facts seem to provide ample evidence to assume that there is a large contingent of people out there who are biased if not bigoted against the USA.
Quote
“Dargon, the sharp tongue that you used on PH seems rather strange to me -“
Well I hope my tongue wasn’t sharp as in a disrespectful manner…I can’t tell you how many times I have written a response and then waited a day to edit it when I am in a less belligerent mood
PS….Lews…how is George
|
|
Lews_Therin
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 12, 2002 08:51 AM |
|
|
Hello Dargon ,
Quote:
but I will stand by my last statement that I think determining motives is an extremely tenuous place to take a debate....cause in the end we don't know their motives.
Aren´t we doing that all the time? When Saddam hinders the work of weapon inspectors, we are assuming
1) that he is producing weapons of mass destruction
2) for offensive purpose (i.e. war or terrorist actions).
Why is saying "our purpose is good" more outrageous than saying "your purpose is bad"? Both is not based on knowledge, but on trust/belief/speculation. If you want these "I feel" qualifiers to be used, shouldn´t you start using them yourself, first?
Myself, I don´t claim to know Bush´s intentions. But as I wrote in my last posts, I have a few reasons not to trust them. One motive for the war may be to conserve the huge increase of popularity that he gained after 9/11.
Quote:
Why is it only one way? Why aren’t we questioning the motives of all those who resist removing a dangerous dictator?
It is not only one way. Why are you perceiving it like that? When our cancellor, shortly before the elections, was strictly against any kind of military action, it was insinuated from all sides (very much including the US gouvernment) that his motives were opportunistic. (Which may very well be true, by the way.)
Quote:
PS….Lews…how is George
The elephant´s name is Anton, not George. And he is quite happy because he gets a new and much larger bed today.
____________
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
posted November 12, 2002 11:05 PM |
|
|
Iraq is asking for trouble, the parlament has turned down the UN resolution. Now it is up to Saddam to decide what to do.
____________
|
|
HeyYou
Known Hero
and beloved food provider.
|
|
posted November 13, 2002 05:33 AM |
|
|
Not really.
The proverbial ball is in the UN's court. It is they who must now decide what to do.
All Saddam has to do is sit and wait to see what happens.
____________
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity."
~ Hanlon's Razor
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 13, 2002 07:02 AM |
|
|
“Aren´t we doing that all the time? When Saddam hinders the work of weapon inspectors, we are assuming
1) that he is producing weapons of mass destruction
2) for offensive purpose (i.e. war or terrorist actions).”
Yes we are doing it all the time…as I said it is quite human. The thing is that some motives are much more readily apparent…given past behavior and character. Whereas other motives are much more of a leap. Saddam’s motives are quite easy to read given his mammoth mountain of behaviors that indicate he acts in a certain manner.
Quote
“It is not only one way. Why are you perceiving it like that? When our cancellor, shortly before the elections, was strictly against any kind of military action, it was insinuated from all sides”
You are speaking about nationally (there is always a lot of questioning of motives nationally in democratic countries IMO)…but there was minimal talk about that in the USA (don’t know about other countries cause I don’t live there). What I am speaking about as far as prejudice is more globally and more specifically here on this thread. I haven’t heard/seen any questions about the motives of any anti-regime change leader in this thread at all. That is what I mean. And globally questioning Bush’s motives seems quite the rave…whereas globally questioning other leaders motives seem quit dim in comparison.
Quote
“The elephant´s name is Anton”
Ah I see….so then how does Anton George Lews like his bigger bed
Quote
“If you want these "I feel" qualifiers to be used, shouldn´t you start using them yourself, first? “
It was a both a suggestion and a point. The point is most of our analysis of motives are nothing but feelings….at best gut intuition. But the suggestion I think may be good….I will try to start using the qualifier when I am making a judgment upon on unfounded motive
Quote
“Iraq is asking for trouble, the parlament has turned down the UN resolution.”
The parliament is a joke…there is no parliament…it an abuse of the word. I feel they only did that so it could make Saddam look like such the rational man reaching out to the world when he accepts the resolution. Oh what a man who seeks world peace he will be acclaimed.
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
|
posted November 13, 2002 11:39 PM |
|
|
|
Yes, but the parlament is there so it seems like a democratic nation.
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
posted November 15, 2002 12:33 AM |
|
|
|
Ahhh, you were right Dargon.
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 15, 2002 05:34 AM |
|
Edited By: dArGOn on 14 Nov 2002
|
Makes me ashamed of my english heritage
I was dumbfounded by this recent poll of brits which reported
"When given a straight choice between the two leaders, some 32% of the undecided said Mr Bush posed the greatest threat to world peace, compared with 49% who named Saddam Hussein."
Is madcow disease still a problem over there
http://channels.netscape.com/ns/news/ns/story.jsp?floc=FF-PLS-PLS&id=11131922000450195&dt=20021113192200&w=PA&coview=
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 15, 2002 05:40 AM |
|
|
Quote
"Yes, but the parlament is there so it seems like a democratic nation."
Iraq isn't a democracy? Man it seemed so official when the parliment met All hail the king of peace, the man who stands against his own parliment to make the world a better and more safe place. I nominate him for the nobel peace prize...do I hear any seconds?
|
|
Snogard
Known Hero
customised
|
|
posted November 15, 2002 06:49 AM |
|
|
Would you stop insulting him!? He's doing it merely for all the good of mankind, not some lousy nobel prize of something.
____________
Seize The Day.
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 16, 2002 05:49 AM |
|
|
Quote
"Would you stop insulting him!? He's doing it merely for all the good of mankind, not some lousy nobel prize of something"
I am sorry....my bad
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 16, 2002 05:51 AM |
|
|
Predictions
Well with the inspections of Iraq coming up soon here are my predictions without a handy crystal ball
1. Iraq is currently doing a mad dash to hide and destroy WMD.
2. Inspectors will find evidence of number 1
3. Inspectors will be harassed, misled, intimated, and lied to.
4. In the end Iraq will harm and/or capture inspectors as the evidence of Iraq’s WMD increases.
Number 4 really makes me sad…as I reflect upon the situation I find it will be inevitable. Hope I am proved wrong!
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
|
posted November 16, 2002 12:18 PM |
|
|
I think #4 will happen first.
Iraq is not a democratic nation but they have a parament and a president so they can call their country a "republic".
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted November 17, 2002 07:46 AM |
|
|
So any one giving odds on a regime change by the coalition?
My money is on a military intervention....Saddam just can't help himself to obstructing the inspectors.
And for that matter...any one giving odds on whether he has WMD or has been working towards development of nuclear weapons. Some people in this thread have alluded to that he doesn't....my money yet again is that we will find evidence (that is if the inspectors are let out of their hotel rooms).
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted November 17, 2002 03:41 PM |
|
|
My geuss is that no matter how many weapons they find, no matter where they search this coallition will never be satisfied. As far as I'm concerned we are preparing for war right now, all the inspections in the world won't satisfy Bush and Blair. I don't exepect these inspections to be anything more than a front to legitamise an invasion.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
posted November 18, 2002 11:32 PM |
|
|
|
I think that Saddam does have WMD and will use them when he can't hide them from weapons inspectors anymore. Probably on Israel.
|
|
melissa_X
Adventuring Hero
Tiffany Taylor
|
posted November 19, 2002 05:29 AM |
|
|
pretty neat how this thread has grown
This post started 70 days ago (!) and I believe its a good thing how the situation has come so far. US did not strike yet, waited for approval of UN, and has been patient so far with the weapons inspections.
We pretty much know now that Bin Laden is still out there, and we get constant warnings about another major Terrorist strike against the US. Actually with the announcement last friday that they might be attempting another 'high casualty' attack soon, i was kind of worried that when I was in LA for my convention in a high rise hotel right next to the airport!
A strike on Iraq and control of that country will cost the US billions which I dont think we have, or at least that surplus we were building up with the clinton administration is going to roll back to deficit now with all this spending.
here's a good insightful listening on NPR about the Iraq arms inspection: http://www.npr.org/ramfiles/totn/20021111.totn.02.ram
Take care all and remember we all live in one big world community now made a lot smaller by the internet!
____________
|
|
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
