I understand your concern with the Iraqi people's suffering. But wouldn't war bring more, larger devastation?

In an ideal world their would be no arms... this is far from an ideal world ... the UN packs up and goes home ... leaving Iraq to grow and prosper... they say hind sight is 20/20... but we will ignor this... makes you wonder and maybe even worry about Kuwait, hmmm... the Saudi's have shown no alligence to Iraq... I wonder if the Kurds will be hanging as pictures at a museum some day. The Iraq's that are still being rounded up to this very min. just because they believe their should be a change at the helm... But the UN can be safe in the knowledge that they did nothing.

yeah girls don't belong in this thread I'm sure but *sigh* what is going to become of us? (I hate this stuff)
Paxxy put it well saying he is "Human" before being anything else.
If more ppl would remember that and focus on the fact we are all the same and consider the hatred and pain they wish to inflict on the enemy as being someone they themselves love, none of this would happen but ppl always lose sight.

In this day and age if this keeps up, in the end there will be no place to draw a line down on to for us to call our space or home...

saddest part is I doubt it will ever stop... (until there is nothing left for us to start it over w/ again)

I love every body I just go to work every day and break my Blank.

Maybe we should learn somethinfrom ancient civilisations. they worshipped plants, animals and respected human life. They killed only for food. Call me pagan if you will, but if WWIII happens, we might go we started from. Wipe the slate clean and write all over again.

Some bloke said "You never learn anything when your talking." There's been enough talking, nothing will be solved and nobodys opinion will be changed. If you have a serious problem with the situation at hand, see you local elected representive (That's what you pay them for)and that is where is starts. Not on a Skinning site, especiallly mine.

Now about this Toon XP. I bought it and I think it's very good. Opinions anyone?

As I have said once before Brad, WHEN ARE YOU JOINING UP?
For one with such strong (dare I say Fascist?) views on the 'might is right' side of the political spectrum, allied to your belief of the divine right of the US of A to meddle in the affairs of any country at any time, it would be only fitting for you to lead the charge against these warmongers and tyrants!
Of course, when your butt is NOT on the line being an armchair general is fine.
Put up or shut up, any of us who have seen active service will be very interested in your opinions once you find out that abstract theory is one thing, facing a person who will happily damage your person is a different game.
How about this scenario, a country (any country) does not agree with George Butch being "elected" by (possible)dubious means, as in the very strange Florida finale, by a lethargic population, perhaps only 50% of whom voted and maybe 25% 'elected' Mr Butch.
Said country decides to call on their allies to invade the US in order to remove Mr Butch from power ..... highly unlikely but an interesting hypothetical situation.
Mr Butch Senior and the coalition forces could have wrapped the game up some 12(?) years ago but lacked the gonads.
Would it be cynical to suggest that a failing economy (based on this weeks figures out of Wall Street) and an upcoming election campaign have a bearing on the present jingoistic rhetoric streaming out of Washington?
Course not!
Perhaps my cynical comparison of the US and Japan situation in 1940 to the present US v North Korea pushing and shoving routine is unjustified, but that is very much another (on the surface) US instigated power play.
Maybe the first place the US needs to clean up is the US of A itself.
Aside from drugs, guns, horrendous crime rates and those headline grabbers, medical care (OK, it's there for those with SSS), basic education and unemployment do not reflect well on the 'World's Policeman'.
Of course, a few wars would be a 'good thing' for the economy, industry aside, the unemployed and the unemployable would be welcome in the armed forces, basic cannon fodder is always useful.
So Brad, you go and get some hands on experience, buy the T shirt and you will have some credibility.
As for this particular Wombat, I give up on this board.
I am interested in graphics and skinning, not uninformed and jingoistic propaganda. >

That's the part I don't understand.
If without the consent of UN, under what authority could the US possibly attack another country? What is so special about the USA that they think they can take justice in their own hands?
When we are talking about the USA, England and Iraq, we are talking about 3 independant countries. None has, legally, more imprtance than the other. None has the authority to attack the other. None has been elected by any supreme authority the police of the World. It may not be perfect, one may not agree with it, but that role since post-WW2 has been given to the United Nations. So, if the olice of the World that we have don't give the mandate to anybody to attack Iraq, then anybody who does it behaves like a rogue country.
If I know that my neighbour beats his wife and I call the police about it, but the police decide not to do anything about it, am I in my rights to then take justice in my own hands and burst into the guy's home and shoot him down? Of course, the guy may deserve it, and the girl may be grateful I saved her, but is it still legal, or even right? What if there were children around and I accidently kill a child or two at the same time?

I am not saying Saddam is a nice guy. I'm saying the nobody has supremacy over another country and no coutry has authority over another.
Also, let us not forget thant there are probably a couple of dozens dictators that are just as bad as Saddam. The question is not and has never been about delivering the Iraki people, if it was the case, many other countries would have been freed already.

No, Wombat, if I were fascist, I would delete your ass from this site for making such an offensive personal attack. Do you even know what fascism is? Or do you just apply it to everyone whose views don't fit your own?

Did I say "My country right or wrong"? No. I outlined a LONG list of carefully considered reasons why I think military action in Iraq is necessary. I followed it up with an equally long list of reasons why military action should NOT be taken in North Korea.

The US November 2002 elections were primarily about Iraq and Bush and his party won big time. Additionally, Bush already has EXPLICIT congressional authorization for military action in Iraq. So don't delude yourself into thinking that Bush doesn't have support for military action in Iraq.

Additionally, why is it that many people seem to think that the UN charter ONLY applies to the United States? Where was the UN charter last year when Spain attacked Morocco forces? Where was the UN charter last year when France sent troops into the Ivory Coast (another sovereign nation)? When are India and Pakistan going to abide by the numerous UN resolutions dealing with Kashmir? Hell, where is the outrage that North Korea is blatently violating any number of international treaties?

This is why your argument is so empty. Because it reeks of hypocricy. It is utterly unconvincing because you choose not to actually debate the issues but instead make blanket attacks against the United States, against people you disagree with (like me). The United States is already at war. That war began on 9/11. Take a poll of most Americans and you'll find that most consider Iraq a battle in the larger war on terrorism.

You may not agree with these views (obviously you don't). But if you're going to discuss them, at least 1) Educate yourselves on the issues you want to espout (such as the ridiculous claims about crime, health care, etc.). The standard of living in the United States is the highest in the year. The per capita GDP of the US is the highest in the world. Violent crime? UK has a higher level of violent crime than the United States. I'm not going to pursue this "America sucks" portion further because it's pointless to argue with someone who knows so little on the issue but is willing to make such wide, blanket statements.

If this discussion has shown anything, it shows that the intellectual honesty of the "anti-war" crowd is empty. At best, we see a bunch of moral equivalence arguments that don't even address the issues I raised. Some of you just pretend I never wrote the pages of reasons why military action on Iraq is necessary and why it's not necessary with North Korea. I posted this. I took time to explain my views. They weren't "might makes right". They weren't "my country is always right". They were a series of reasons based on now over year a year of consideration. And I get called a fascist. Disgusting.

I debate these issues all the time on other sites and it's rarely an issue. Of course, we don't have people calling others "fascists" there. It's one of the reasons why I think the anti-war movement has been so in-effective. They don't want to deal with the real issues at hand:

The key issues I point out such as “Do you really want to take a chance that this guy is going to get WMD given his tendency to USE them? Has everyone forgotten that he dumped millions of tons of oil into the Persian Gulf? Or that he set off the wells in Kuwait (and still hasn’t paid reparations)? Or that he used chemical weapons against the Iranians? Or that he used them against his own people? Or that he’s violated nearly all the conditions that ended the first gulf war (i.e. violated the cease fire agreement)? These things are all ignored.

Instead we get hysterical arguments about how Americans think their country can do no wrong and that we're just mindless robots following our leader. Or that we just want oil. Or that it's Bush Jr. trying to clean up Bush Sr's mess. Or that we're just war happy. Or that the US (alone amongst industrialized nations) must abide by the long legally moot part of the UN charter with regard to military action (while similarly not suggesting that their governments do anything about this alleged "Criminal" behavior of the US such as enact trade sanctions) Or some other such nonsense. And if all else fails, start making blanket statements on what a hellish country the US is and how those who have concluded that military action in Iraq is needed are fascists.

It seems straight forward to me. If you really think the US is acting in some criminal way, then those people have a duty to try to get their governments to enforce these alleged laws. They could at least apply trade sanctions. Otherwise it's just empty chattering.

Frogboy: "If this discussion has shown anything, it shows that the intellectual honesty of the "anti-war" crowd is empty."

This is very insulting. I could say the same the other way around. Since when is war so intelligent?

Anyway, the topic here is about the invasion of Iraq byt the US/UK. If the topic asked what we thought of France's sending troops into Ivory Coast, my answer would have been exactly the same. I'm neither pro nor anti US.


And anyway, we don't really know the real agenda of our governements. I suspect that the US will not attack Irak at all. The threats only was a big help in getting the UN inspectors into Iraq in the first place, and tey still help get the inspectors the collaboration they need.