|
Eddie - I don't think this thread is about the draft anymore... it's more about how CD feels about armed conflict with Iraq.
Caleb - about do I think Bush really wants to go to war with Iraq - yes, yes I do. Aside from the finishing-off-what-his-father-left-off business (which at most, I think is a half truth), theres the entire United-States-being-just-a-bully. Lets face it - America has the most powerful military right now. The problem is we don't want to give that power up. "Weapons of Mass Destruction?" Ha, thats just a cliche that the American media came up. Where was the US in stopping India from obtaining "weapons of mass destruction?" What about Pakistan?
[sarcasm] "Oh, but those countries aren't run by obviously evil dictators that want to use the weapons of mass destruction to obliterate the world!" [/sarcasm]
What about the entire India-Pakistan Kashmir conflict? Just a few months ago, those two were just about to start lobbin' nukes at each other. I don't know about you, but that shows me those two are just as bad as Saddam when it comes to handleing "weapons of mass destruction." What if we did something to piss one of them off. Is it so outrageous to think that they would begin to threaten us with lobbing a few nukes over? How come the United States wasn't threatening to invade and overthrow either of those two?
What about North Korea? We think they have nuclear weapons, and coincidentally, there are no future plans of military conflict against them, even though North Korea is one of the largest sponsors of terrorism.
Alright, so what is my point? My point is we're still holding on to century old Imperialistic beliefs. We [Americans] believe that we're still the most powerful country in the world, and any threat to that is painted as evil, or in light of recent fads, any such threat is referred to as "acts of terrorism" or "supporting terrorism" or something like that, and so, we obviously need to send our knights in shining armor to go and eliminate the danger to the world community (read: America).
The fact is, having nuclear weapons is like having an ace of spades in your sleeve - you have something to bargain with. America needs to wake up and sees that we no longer are the single most powerful military in the world. The (First) Gulf War took a coalition of MANY countries and a while to win a relatively tiny piece of land. Even then, we didn't overthrow Saddam. The thing about nukes is once you get them, you have something on the bargaining table until America changes her outlook on the world.
Now, about Saddam, do I think he'd actually use nukes on us? I don't know. If he did, there would be the rest of the world he'd have to face. How would everyone else react to us being nuked? Some would probably side with him, some would attack him. Where does that get us? World War Three, only this time it'll be Nuke-tastic. Honestly, I doubt Iraq nor North Korea want that. My opinion is nukes won't actually be used by Saddam - they're more of a bargaining chip. Does that mean I think Saddam is a Suzy Temple? All I know is this: what I know about Saddam is from the American media, which is influenced by the actions of America, which currently want Saddam out. My point is everything we know about Saddam is biased. Everything you hear is biased one way or another. You can't escape it. The real trick is to look past the bias and make your own opinion.
|