View Single Post
Old 03-19-2003, 11:28 PM   #43
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
Quote:
Originally posted by Uryoces
Everyone knows that war is wrong, but this one is a bit fuzzy, kind of gray. There's circumstantial evidence all around, nothing to convict with. I'm mildy suprised that Germany and Russia are opposed to military action, but France is not really a surprise.
Name countries opposed to the US attack of Afghanistan. The smoking gun existed. To justify a war, the reason must be that extreme and that obvious. Even in WWII, Germany sank 100 US merchant ships - and that still was not sufficient to declare war on Germany.

Afghanistan was clearly a justified war. Korea was a justified war. Persian Gulf was clearly justified. I mention Persion Gulf with particular emphasis. I fumed while most of us opposed that war - and now forget that fact. Again reason for war was based upon an obvious smoking gun - based totally on logic. How many forget that even George Sr would not commit until Maggie Thatcher put a backbone up his ass?

War must be justified by the smoking gun. None exists (yet) in Iraq. But that point is now moot and irrelevant. The only question remaining: will America learn, again, why war must be avoided until a smoking gun clearly exists.


It is very obvious why Germany and Russia are so opposed to this war. The Bush doctrine makes it especially obvious. Why does China keep asking, "Who's next?" Specifically listed in a paper that defines the Bush Doctrine is pre-emptive military attacks on any nation that might become a super power. Specifically listed as potential threats to a US dominant position (and therefore justified for attack) are India, Russia, and Germany. Why would Germany and Russia approve of a war based upon a new American doctrine that outrightly lists them as a possible threat to the US - and therefore the next Iraq?

In any other situation, China would abstain from any UN resolution such as the failed US resolution for war. China votes in its self interest. Normally an attack on Iraq would be of no interest to China. However because of this Bush Doctrine, a justification of attacks without smoking gun, well, even China would have vetoed that UN resolution - because China keeps asking, "Who's next?"

Publications for those who think outside of the headlines (which does not include UT) keep asking this question. PBS Frontline's "War Behind Closed Doors" could not have been more blunt. Who's next? George Jr's administration now advocates attacking any nation 1) because they 'might' be a threat and 2) without any justification of a smoking gun.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote