Subject:
|
Re: This just came across my desk... Iraqi Questions
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 22 Mar 2003 23:07:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
417 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Terry Prosper writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > > The UN is broken. The Security Council is especially broken.
> >
> > It's broken because of USA. This war proves that USA should be disarmed
> > once and for all. Enough with USA's permanent wars. For over 50 years now
> > USA has been the terror regime holding the world on the brink of a nuclear
> > war. USA should be disarmed, UN should control your goverment for a while
> > until Bush is trialed for crime against humanity.
> >
> > But it's a dream, it won't happen, I know...
>
> The Security Council is designed so the really powerful can stop any actions
> against its interests, including the United States (which has used it's veto
> power liberally). But the UN suffers from a lack of conviction in general.
> If it imposes sanctions against a country and demands certain actions, it
> needs to follow through on them (or not make the demands in the first place).
I agree.
> Disarming the US: I'd go for that as long as everyone else disarmed. I'd
> also like to see all dictatorships abolished in the process (I bet it would
> be easier with everyone disarmed).
Of course! But the dream is getting even better by the minute! :-)
> Holding the world on the brink of a nuclear war: Gosh, I could swear that at
> least a half dozen other countries have nukes.
Yes they do. But which country has been involved in the most ars since,
let's say, 1950? Don't even think about Russia or, hehehe, Iraq...
> The UN should control our government: And just how would it do that? No,
> this isn't a military challenge, it's a lack of conviction challenge.
Well, whatever you want, but USA goverments is presently the most dangerous
threat to security and peace for any country that opposes their interests.
> Bush put on trial for crime against humanity: Bush is an idiot. He has
> chosen a stupid war, at a stupid time, for stupid ends. But lining up Bush
> before Saddam?
Did I say Saddam is ny hero or what? Of course Saddam is evil! Of course
he deserves to be removed of command of Iraq. The question is not at all
about if Saddam is the happy-bunny or the big-bad-wolf, but if he is the
only one. The answer to that is no. Bush is out there too... And the N.
Corean guy too. And some others...
> Speak your contempt for Bush all you like, but you'll get a
> lot more respect if you keep things in perspective.
Bah. I don't seek respect out of people like John Neal. As for others,
well, if they don't respect me, it's ok. I'm not looking to win any
popularity contest soon, so I don't care about this.
We should probably stop talling about this issue anyway. Every one has its
own personnal opinion and I doubt that we will change ours, so why expect
others to changes theirs because of us? It's a waste of time. Yes, i'm
wasting my time over this.
Terry
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
64 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
