A Letter Home (more Iraq/France stuff)

[yoxer]

The bit concerning the proof that Iraq has WMD will do for a start

[Guest sslatter]

yoxer:

The bit concerning the proof that Iraq has WMD will do for a start

We, Joe Public, would be the last to be told details of any 'proof', probably for fear of revealing information sources, which could jeopardise the lives of certain undercover operatives/informants. Taking the WMD aside for a moment, surely you must suspect (if not agree) that Saddam Hussein is a tribalist murderer and despot who could not complain if he 'got what was coming to him'? Play with fire, and you'll get burnt etc etc. But he's also just one of many throughout the world.

 

But I'm not pro-war. I know that there is a hidden business agenda behind every conflict, no matter what politicians may say to the contrary. Double standards, which have always been manifest, and always will be. It's one of our failings as human beings, and is not unique to any 'tribe', 'race', or 'nationality'.

[yoxer]

The US Administration has offered no evidence to support its alarming rhetoric about Iraq. For instance, that Iraq "retains the infrastructure needed to build" a nuclear weapon (as Bush warned in his September 12 speech to the United Nations) is not the same thing as building one. No credible authority believes that Saddam Hussein possesses nuclear weapons.

 

According to former UN weapons inspectors, 95% of Iraq’s chemical weapons have been destroyed. Iraq may possess stores of biological agents, since the US supplied Baghdad with stock for anthrax, botulism and other diseases in the 1980s. However, Ritter and others point out that the potency of these agents is expired and that Iraq lacks the delivery systems (e.g., long-range missiles and rocket launchers) to turn chemical or biological agents into weapons.

 

Remind people that the most likely scenario in which Saddam Hussein would launch weapons of mass destruction < presuming he had any > is an all-out war aimed at deposing him -- exactly the course being pursued by the US.

 

Despite hundreds of searches by UN inspectors, no evidence has yet been found of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programmes. A succession of "dossiers" presented by Downing Street has been criticised for providing inaccurate information, with the most recent one subject to ridicule because a student's 11-year-old doctoral thesis was being passed off as current intelligence. There was a further setback for Washington and London when the accuracy of satellite photographs shown to the United Nations by Colin Powell, the Secretary of State, purporting to show Iraqi officials moving incriminating evidence from a suspected site, was questioned by Hans Blix.

[Peter Gowman]

quote:

---

Yeah too right and probably a lot more of Americas finest rotting in graves with no idea of how or why they got there

---

Intelligent comment. - NOT

You also insult the memory af all of those that paid the ultimate price to protect the freedom of speech that you so eloquently practise.

I for one am willing to fight for the right to protect your freedom of speech. Are you?

Do you understand the difference between dictatorship and democracy?

[yoxer]

Do you understand the difference between dictatorship and democracy?

 

well looking at America I can see how its getting a little blurred at the edges .

 

If I knew what we were fighting for then I might

[Peter Gowman]

Blurred around the edges in Iraq's case as well is it?

[yoxer]

of course it is , all the more reason for not taking such drastic actions proposed by the US & UK.

 

There is a view, apparently held by many, that democracy is a perfect and desirable form of government.

 

It has been reported recently that somethere between 40 and 60 percent of the western world belivee evolution just did not happen.

 

The system we have is hardly a pure form of democracy. We let technocrats make the major decisions. Most of what we all hold in our heads is nonsense, and we happen to prefer our own nonsense to someone else's.

 

The word democracy is thrown around as though it it is intrinsically good. Can you imagine if decisions were made on the basis of where the majority of ignorance lay. It would be hard to devise a more foolhardy system.

 

No-one disputes that Bush was declared the winner of Florida by the courts, not by the votes, right?

 

So is this democratic?

 

Yes, America is a lot more open and accountable than many countries. Yes, Americans are more free than citizens of many countries, etc etc etc. And yes, they will be able to vote Bush out once he ruins the country, thankfully.

 

But can it be called a true "democracy" if it doesn't currently have a government that has been directly elected by the voters?

 

You can draw your own conclusions.

[Peter Gowman]

Try practising your freedom of speech in Iraq and you'll find out precisely the difference between democracy and dictatorship.

[yoxer]

Yeah yeah yeah , and has to do with what exactley ?

[yoxer]

I dont live in Iraq, I dont wish to live in Iraq , I do not support the iraq regime which Ive now stated several times , so your comments concerning free speech etc etc have to do with what in regard to the preposed war.