A-DM: I’m sorry to see that you didn’t heed Mary Beth’s message on bashing people. BTW, my post is intended to be constructive criticism. And while I do feel offended by much that you say, I won’t call for your banishment — nice guy that I am. (j/k) 😉
As for saying who’s a coward, I’ve never accused a single person on this board of that (well apart from you, mainly because I truly hate you), but it is directed at certain individuals within the anti-war brigade, but I certainly wouldn’t label anyone on this board in meeting that criteria (again aside from you).
Oh good, I’m glad to see that you weren’t talking specifically about any of us when you wrote, “The anti-war brigade, as far as I’m concerned are all misguided cowards” and when you wrote,
why don’t you all leave and join Saddam and see how much more comfortable your lives will be then, oh no, can’t do that can you?, that would mean giving up your cosy protected lifestyles, while men and women in the armed forces give their lives not only to protect you, but also to liberate a country where they don’t enjoy the pampered lifestyle you enjoy…hypocritical cowards.”
Forgive me for thinking that that may have been directed specifically as an attack on us (those who are anti this war). But, I think I can assume that you have more than implied that we are “stupid”. Or was I wrong about that too, in which case, how stupid of me.
(BTW, my father, a very intelligent man who was a Captain with the British Army during WW2, and was a Major with British military intelligence, whose brother was an RAF pilot killed during WW2, and whose father was an officer who was gassed during WW1, does not believe that the action is justified. Ah, and re. an earlier comment of yours, he is over 30).
You told us before, “forget your prejudices and your hatred,” good advice, I suggest you do the same when it comes to any of the board members. And remember, judge not lest ye be judged. I’m sure I’ll be judged over the validity of this post later.
You accuse Bush of being a war criminal. why, because you don’t have the stomach for war?, and he has the uneviable task of sending his countrymen to their possible deaths.
You sit at home in comfort while the troops risk their lives to support both their country and President, what makes you right and them wrong?
And you can’t accuse Bush or Blair of being war criminals for undertaking an action that needs to be taken, war criminals by law are those who break the rules of engagement and ignore the Geneva convention, the fact is, is that they are war criminals in you’re mind because you don’t agree with their stance, when in reality you have no justification for that accusation.
BTW, I never accused Bush of being a war criminal, nor did anybody else in this thread to my knowledge (I may have missed it), I merely said, somewhat waggishly I might add, that it would be nice if he could be tried as a war criminal, but he, unlike in Britain, opposed signing on to the International Criminal Court — which is yet another example of how the US admin. does not support the strengthening of international law, nor the UN etc. And, BTW, the leaders can be held responsible, as war criminals, for the actions that their troupes take, and the directives they give. Oh, and only a real idiot would ever “accuse Bush or Blair of being war criminals for undertaking an action that needs to be taken,” especially considering that it is highly debatable (we are debating it, aren’t we?) if the actions they have taken, and are taking, were the best approach. And even if they just made an honest mistake, that in and off itself would most probably not justify branding them as war criminals.
One more point, what makes you so absolutely sure that you’re right, when most of the world, seemingly, thinks you’re wrong? And I’ve heard very few of the intelligentsia (or people who practise international law) who believe that the war is justified or support the war, but things may be different where you are.
Sure Saddam has a brutal regime, and the world would gain by having such a regime removed from power, but it is the pre-emptive nature of this strike (as well as other concerns) based on numerous assumptions (rather like your posts I might add) that has many people scared — the idea that ‘we’ have the sovereign right to attack ‘them’ because if ‘we’ don’t ‘they’ might attack ‘us’, for instance. The coercive and threatening tactics (as well as the bribery) of the US to get other countries on side hasn’t exactly won the confidence of people either. They say they want to bring democracy to Iraq, they speak up for their sovereign rights, but do we have any indication that they respect other’s sovereignty (Canada has been threatened economically because of our lack of support), and do we see them trying to build a more democratic, fairer world-community, including the UN? They have stated that they have the right to protect their interests abroad, and it’s clear that they will do this by any means possible, despite the fact that it often impinges on other’s rights. But that is another issue for another day…
Another pint I wish to make, I can see some rather compelling arguments coming from both sides (not really in this thread though ;)), but upon weighing up the arguments from a standpoint of what I consider to be the issues of paramount impotance, we all have inherent biases, I fall most assuredly on the anti this war side.
BTW, you have the right to post here as much as you like A-DM, but I do feel that this thread is becoming a little overly dominated by you (in word count anyway), but since there doesn’t seem to be much of a pro-war response, I suppose you’re just trying to even things out with your incessant barrage.
BTW, this is aimed at no one in particular ;), but it’s something to bear in mind when in a heated debate and “emotions run high”: One can be on the offensive without being offensive (hope this post does not offend any sensitive sensibilities).