A reason ?

[emprworm]

Right, and not allow the US hating peace mongers to sway us from doing the right thing.

I agree with the values and core principles of democracy and freedom.

But in this case for Miles, when he says "doing the right thing" that actually means : Impossing by force, against your will, the changes we want to happen.

My interpretation of doing the right thing is: not allowing a dictator to impose by force, against 24 million people's will, the tyrrany the dictator wants to happen

it is also known as a "moral obligation"

[sneezer3]

We don't know many things. But we have to believe they are true, if we want to make something. Maybe even in God's view are tyranny or anarchy in seeking violence best way to rule...but we believe democracy and order is better.

Well, its my view that it isn't who's side is God on. Its who's on God's side. look up Joshua 24:15 and 2 Chronicles 7:14

[Miles]

I agree with the values and core principles of democracy and freedom.

But in this case for Miles, when he says "doing the right thing" that actually means : Impossing by force, against your will, the changes we want to happen.

against who's will? We certainly don't have the opportunity to hear the side of the Iraqi's in Iraq, but amazingly Saddam has 100% support. Amazing, how increadible, this has not ever been achieved in history by any leader, but Saddam has it. Zamboe, I sincerely hope that you don't believe this.

What we have to go on is what Iraqi's are saying who have defected. This is pretty compelling.

Doing the rigth thing also includes enforcing our peace agreement with Saddam, because once we show weakness, as the UN have done, then terrorist and nuclear countries will be standing in line to take advantage.

[Caid Ivik]

Your reactions against emprworm's reply were very rude. Because of it, this thread is braking one of the holy laws of FED2k:

[pre]Don't bash someone because they don't like the same House as you.[/pre]

§2, part 3...

We don't know many things. But we have to believe they are true, if we want to make something. Maybe even in God's view are tyranny or anarchy in seeking violence best way to rule...but we believe democracy and order is better.

Well, its my view that it isn't who's side is God on. Its who's on God's side. look up Joshua 24:15 and 2 Chronicles 7:14

Ah, yes, but that wasn't point ;) Also, God gave us free will, so he won't support any side. He looks on individuals, not empires.

[sneezer3]

Ah, yes, but that wasn't point ;) Also, God gave us free will, so he won't support any side. He looks on individuals, not empires.

We can both probbly agree that it would depend on the Situation. also he mostly looks on individuals, but looks and judges everone includeing empires. He has appointed a day in which he will judge everbody.

Also the word "kill" comes from a hebrew word "ratsach" which means to to perform a intended murder.(explaned here)

Reffrances to back this up(you can't argue with God's word ;D )

Revelation 20:12

Psalms 96:13

Matthew 5:21-22(Note it says "without a cause" God renewed that law)

[Caid Ivik]

He judged empires which stand against the chosen nation. But a "state" is de facto just like a law, not an absolute thing like human soul. Judged will be presidents, not their states. Now, we all are equal in his eyes. In all your points I've read He will come to judge people; not empires.

[emprworm]

Mexico: Possible Shift in Stance Against Iraq War

Feb 26, 2003

Summary

Mexico appears to be shifting its position from opposing to supporting a U.S.-backed resolution that would clear the way for war against Iraq. If Mexico shifts, it could influence Chile -- the other nonpermanent Latin American member of the U.N. Security Council -- to support such a resolution as well. However, Stratfor sources in Mexico City and Santiago caution that neither government has made a final decision yet.

[zamboe]

Mexico: Possible Shift in Stance Against Iraq War

Feb 26, 2003

Summary

Mexico appears to be shifting its position from opposing to supporting a U.S.-backed resolution that would clear the way for war against Iraq. If Mexico shifts, it could influence Chile -- the other nonpermanent Latin American member of the U.N. Security Council -- to support such a resolution as well. However, Stratfor sources in Mexico City and Santiago caution that neither government has made a final decision yet.

So far Chile keeps it's position to keep the support of the inspections in Iraq. Also the Chilean government will not support any military action that is not backed with a UN resolution.

I hope the Chilean government continues this policy, I just can't imagen how much diplomatic and economic pressure must be with our president right now.

[lowzeewee]

hey emprworm,stop being so *pro-USA*,like i have admitted,i m anti-USA because of what they do to other countries oppressed by them and they just wage lego war against them just because they are smaller,*thought to be* weaker than them and just poorer,not that i m brainwashed.But I think you should just stop pumping out nonsensical *obvious* Anti-Iraq crap,note,i do not churn out any gibberish kanuri language thingy saying how corrupt and vile bush might be.....and i do not praise and worship Iraq like a die-hard fan who has a wardrobe of 365 shirts saying f**k bush [ditto]

[Miles]

hey emprworm,stop being so *pro-USA*,like i have admitted,i m anti-USA because of what they do to other countries oppressed by them and they just wage lego war against them just because they are smaller,*thought to be* weaker than them and just poorer,not that i m brainwashed.But I think you should just stop pumping out nonsensical *obvious* Anti-Iraq crap,note,i do not churn out any gibberish kanuri language thingy saying how corrupt and vile bush might be.....and i do not praise and worship Iraq like a die-hard fan who has a wardrobe of 365 shirts saying f**k bush [ditto]

Emprworm has every right to be pro-USA, as do I. You throw vague accusations at us, without backing your claims. You are churning out nonsensical gibberish.

[Dante]

But then again, so are many other people. Mentioning no names of course.

[sneezer3]

But then again, so are many other people. Mentioning no names of course.

Numbers are irrelvent to it being right or wrong truth or a lie.

[Egeides]

hey emprworm,stop being so *pro-USA*,like i have admitted,i m anti-USA because of what they do to other countries oppressed by them and they just wage lego war against them just because they are smaller,*thought to be* weaker than them and just poorer,not that i m brainwashed.But I think you should just stop pumping out nonsensical *obvious* Anti-Iraq crap,note,i do not churn out any gibberish kanuri language thingy saying how corrupt and vile bush might be.....and i do not praise and worship Iraq like a die-hard fan who has a wardrobe of 365 shirts saying f**k bush [ditto]

Emprworm has every right to be pro-USA, as do I. You throw vague accusations at us, without backing your claims. You are churning out nonsensical gibberish.

Without backing our claims? Sorry but the anti-war is pretty much backed... And can you name one person here who is worshiping Iraq? Until now, I only saw people who said that both USA and Iraq governments were bad, but USA's intervention was worst than other solutions. About the right to be pro-USA, I believe anyone of good will can believe in something if he is honest. But acting against everyone else, not more than the other can do such. One's freedom of applying what he believes in is limited by other's same freedom. Thus it doesn't mean USA gvt has the moral right to act like this just because a part of its population believes so.

[emprworm]

hey emprworm,stop being so *pro-USA*,like i have admitted,i m anti-USA because of what they do to other countries oppressed by them and they just wage lego war against them just because they are smaller,*thought to be* weaker than them and just poorer,not that i m brainwashed.But I think you should just stop pumping out nonsensical *obvious* Anti-Iraq crap,note,i do not churn out any gibberish kanuri language thingy saying how corrupt and vile bush might be.....and i do not praise and worship Iraq like a die-hard fan who has a wardrobe of 365 shirts saying f**k bush [ditto]

Emprworm has every right to be pro-USA, as do I. You throw vague accusations at us, without backing your claims. You are churning out nonsensical gibberish.

Without backing our claims? Sorry but the anti-war is pretty much backed... And can you name one person here who is worshiping Iraq? Until now, I only saw people who said that both USA and Iraq governments were bad, but USA's intervention was worst than other solutions. About the right to be pro-USA, I believe anyone of good will can believe in something if he is honest. But acting against everyone else, not more than the other can do such. One's freedom of applying what he believes in is limited by other's same freedom. Thus it doesn't mean USA gvt has the moral right to act like this just because a part of its population believes so.

moral rights are not determined by a minority OR a majority of people. Even if most people in the world thinks something is right, they can still be WRONG.

[Egeides]

Thus moral behavious should be directed by Lietchtenstein people since "moral rights are not determined by a minority OR a majority of people.

[emprworm]

Thus moral behavious should be directed by Lietchtenstein people since "moral rights are not determined by a minority OR a majority of people.

[nampigai]

Thus moral behavious should be directed by Lietchtenstein people since "moral rights are not determined by a minority OR a majority of people.

[Egeides]

Thus moral behavious should be directed by Lietchtenstein people since "moral rights are not determined by a minority OR a majority of people.

[Egeides]

Forgot something... You say that a full democracy would be aweful. Then who should have power? Corporations? Do you admit that US politics has most of its money by corporations and that corporations do not give money like this without it beeing paid back?

[emprworm]

And for the 10th time, I'm not pro-Saddam. Stop thinking that beeing anti-Us intervention = pro-Saddam. They're both greedy and both act for greed (why doesit pay big money for lobbies each time?).

what are you then? If you want to allow Saddam to stay in power as a slave master for 24 million Iraqi's then I do not see any other way to classify you. EVERY DICTATOR on this earth should be removed...by force as a last resort. And this is a last resort.

The Iraqi's want it. And their voice matters more than yours....matters more than every canadian, every american, and every european who thinks otherwise.

Forgot something... You say that a full democracy would be aweful. Then who should have power? Corporations? Do you admit that US politics has most of its money by corporations and that corporations do not give money like this without it beeing paid back?

the people should NEVER decide right and wrontg, or you will have mob rule, or tyrrany of the majority. Thus, thats how slavery came into being.

[Egeides]

I am for puting Saddam out another way.

And stop saying Iraqi are for seeing USA take control of their country, they never have been. They are only for Saddam to be out. And the three persons US gvt is proposing are potentially as worst as Saddam, all of them having lots of blood on their hands.

Slavery came mostly by the support of the one who possessed the slaves: the one who were richer. This means the elite and the one who got more power, people like W.Bush who passed many laws making the difference between poor and rich people even bigger.

[Miles]

Without backing our claims? Sorry but the anti-war is pretty much backed... And can you name one person here who is worshiping Iraq? Until now, I only saw people who said that both USA and Iraq governments were bad, but USA's intervention was worst than other solutions. About the right to be pro-USA, I believe anyone of good will can believe in something if he is honest. But acting against everyone else, not more than the other can do such. One's freedom of applying what he believes in is limited by other's same freedom. Thus it doesn't mean USA gvt has the moral right to act like this just because a part of its population believes so.

I was speaking directly to 1st colnel there Egeides. Nor did I in any way say that anyone "worships" Iraq.

The US government has every right to act for our national security. We also have every right to enforce our demands from 1991. We have attempted to give the UN some legitimacy by exhausting diplomacy, but the UN proved gutless.

So now we take matters in our own hands to rid the Iraqi people of Saddam's oppression and ourselves from his threat. Like Afghanistan, the fanatical anti-americans like Edric will see our intentions as time passes, and will be humiliated by the vase improvements in the Iraqi citizen's lives.

[Egeides]

If it really was only for liberation, why would they propose three blood-thirsty post-Saddam guys to govern??? I'm happy that Saddam will be overthrown, but at the same time I feel like Iraqi will simply feel that they hate Americans even more for taking the oil. If you wish, we may try to look at where the petroleum goes after.... I guess it would be a way to watch intelligently.

For now, I'll refer you here: http://www.presentdanger.org/papers/iraqspresp.html

And besides, US was supporting Saddam before 1991, you certainly know this. And it's before 1991 that the worst massacres were done. Turkey is in a similar situation RIGHT NOW. Prisoners were gased, dissidents are killed, Kurds are attacked by US helicopters.

[emprworm]

If it really was only for liberation, why would they propose three blood-thirsty post-Saddam guys to govern??? I'm happy that Saddam will be overthrown, but at the same time I feel like Iraqi will simply feel that they hate Americans even more for taking the oil. If you wish, we may try to look at where the petroleum goes after.... I guess it would be a way to watch intelligently.

For now, I'll refer you here: http://www.presentdanger.org/papers/iraqspresp.html

And besides, US was supporting Saddam before 1991, you certainly know this. And it's before 1991 that the worst massacres were done. Turkey is in a similar situation RIGHT NOW. Prisoners were gased, dissidents are killed, Kurds are attacked by US helicopters.

the patroleum SHOULD GO to those who pay for this war. France should get NOTHING...ZERO...ZIP!!!

the US and its coalition is fully justified to take enough oil to pay for the war, which will cost billions.

[Egeides]

Not more than what it costs, I would agree. Yup, to this I would. Would you?