I don't understand how can anyone cheer a war. People are dying.. when you die it no longer matters which side you were on and everyone has someone who loves them.
Funerals are indeed for the living. I don't like this one.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.unix-girl.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/642
you've seen me ask the same sort of questions on my blog kasia...it defies logic for me too...but some people are just warmongers at heart--arrogant americans who think the rest of the world is subject to their whims. or maybe they've bought into that "american dream" bs. or i don't know what.
but i feel angry and sad. and i think a lot of people feel this way. or they will once they see Americans being loaded into body bags.
#I'm not cheering. I already had the joy of a free, all-expenses-paid trip to the sandbox once, and that was plenty. However, I support wholeheartedly what the President is trying to accomplish, however much I disagree with his somewhat inept means of doing so. As he said in his speech last night, better to fight with our troops now than mop up with our police, firefighters, and doctors later.
#Maybe not everyone...You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone that loves Saddam, including his family.
#You guys aren't seeing the entire picture.
As the only remaining super power, the United States has responsibilities.
One of those responsibilities is to stand out for what is right.
If you are part of a regime that makes chemical, biological, and hopes to make nuclear weapons... then I don't care who loves you. You deserve to die before those weapons are used against others.
... just my opinion....
So, the US, aided and abetted by the UK, the Australians and a smattering of other nations, have decided that the best way to deal with Iraqs' non-compliance with UN resolutions is by breaking other UN resolutions themselves.
What a great example they set to the rest of the world...
#I can see both sides of this, really, and what I'm seeing is what I see in everything that has two sides: there's a point missing from both sides that neither is talking about.
On my weblog I go into detail about this but I'll be succinct: Saddam is killing people left and right, moreso now that we're coming after him. This isn't about democracy as much as stopping the killings. Saddam is yet another "mass-murdering fuckhead" (Izzard) going around like there's nothing to do to stop him.
Bush cries Americanisms (freedom, democracy, better life) but, really, we want the killing to stop.
As for the UN resolutions, we are not breaking any. UN Resolution 687 states that Iraq cannot have ballistic missiles whose range exceeds 150km. Today, they fired five SCUD missiles at us and Northern Iraq. The baseline range of a SCUD is 180km, and maxes out at 800km. They have demonstrated they are in violation. UN Resolution 1441 says war can be declared if they are proven to eb in violation. While our first attack last night was questionable, any further action is both legal and justified.
In fact, after this discovery, France is talking to the UK about support. It's about time.
No one likes wars. No one likes killing. No one, NO ONE wants this. This is the last thing on anyone's mind. What you see in people, like me, who say we need this war is that we know that after it's done people will stop dying. That is ALWAYS a good thing.
The saddest part of all is the number of lives it will take to save lives in the first place.
#Dear codepoet,
I agree with most of what you say and at the very least empathise with the rest. I need to correct you on one item:
> As for the UN resolutions, we are not
> breaking any.
You are making an incorrect assuming concerning which UN resolution I was referring to. There is a 1995 resolution which declared a zone just North of the Kuwait border to be a DMZ, into or through which it would be illegal for anyone more military than a policeman to move through it. That resolution is still in force.
#Mike: I think that resolution becomes null and void when one considers we have to violate that DMZ to support the enforcement of the seventeen resolutions that Saddam has violated. Let me cry a river over the one resolution America violates, everyone else can ignore them yet we cannot. Screw that.
Kasia: War is a horrible thing, and its something that no one really benefits from yet in this situation the Iraq people have a far greater chance of benefiting than anything else. Three of my friends shipped out last week, called up as Reserve forces. They are going to miss their friends, their families and their loved ones yet they are all going without a complaint. Why? Because they signed up to do this. They signed up knowing that any action they see wouldn't be directly helping America, no more likely they'd go to die for some person they've never met. They believe in the ideals of America, and want others to live in the same (relative) freedom that we do. People spit on those have died for america, and will die, by saying that this is just for oil, or imperalism, or money. Well if thats the lie we need to live under so millions can live in eventual peace, I'm all for it.
#Bush's comment lacked any supporting evidence. There is no evidence that Iraq intends to attack our cities. At least, none that has been shared. And we didn't care about Saddam killing people when he was fighting a war for us against Iran. So that argument doesn't hold much water.
Anyone that was cheering when watching bombs explode, or chanting "USA" when they heard the war had started, is a moron of the highest degree.
#