WMD just a convenient excuse?

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by darkes


You are completely wrong over this. We all know, or should know, how the UN works, and France (and possibly Russia as well) would have vetoed any decision to interevene in Iraq, because of the economic interests that both these countries had in Iraq.

---

While France and Russia did have vested economic interests in seeing Iraq stay under Hussein, The US and UK (ok mostly the US) have vested economic interests in seeing Hussein out. I wouldn't use the economic argument in this one as it is defiantly a two edged sword. I am not saying that France is clean…. just that the US isn't either...no one had very honorable goals at hart in this one.

Now with all this arguing over why the war happened I haven't seen one argument about the WMD's...I guess we all agree then that the man who was going to bring "honor, integrity and honesty" back to the US presidency just lied to his country and the world. (OH ya he wasn't going to get involved in forgin matters or nation building).

vercetti... ahh I see what you're saying now... well yeah I can't argue with you on that score, the Iraqi's have been screwed over more times than I care to count..... but this is one of those few ocassions where I'm trying to be optimistic :) - you're right the Arabs haven't risen as far as they might have done in the past century... but thats no reason to not try and help them better themselves is it? Correct me if I'm wrong but America is big on individual freedom etc which I think can only be a positive influence on the Iraqi people as long as they don't get totally screwed over again... I guess what I'm trying to say is that here we have a chance to help make the world a better place - lets not fux0r it :)
Z

[edit] bballad - about WMD.... from the looks of it everyone here seems to more or less think that WMD was just an excuse... I don't think Bush (or Blair for that matter) exactly lied... but I think they probably 'massaged' the truth a bit - probably over exaggerated (god I don't know what's come over me... I'm actually being optimistic twice in one day.... this is not good!... I'm usually the one being accused of being a cynical pessimistic miserable old sod..... )

Understood Zonewalker but I'm sure that there's a better solution to the problem that military power (can't find it yet though)

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by bballad

While France and Russia did have vested economic interests in seeing Iraq stay under Hussein, The US and UK (ok mostly the US) have vested economic interests in seeing Hussein out. I wouldn't use the economic argument in this one as it is defiantly a two edged sword. I am not saying that France is clean…. just that the US isn't either...no one had very honorable goals at hart in this one.

Now with all this arguing over why the war happened I haven't seen one argument about the WMD's...I guess we all agree then that the man who was going to bring "honor, integrity and honesty" back to the US presidency just lied to his country and the world. (OH ya he wasn't going to get involved in forgin matters or nation building).

---

I can't speak for the US, but the Iraq war is going to end up costing the UK a lot of money.
So the UK gets a few more contracts than it might have done, but there is no way that will compensate for the massive military cost.

All the signs were that Russia was prepared to compromise on the resolution that France was going to veto, as long as they had a guarantee that their debts with Iraq would be repaid, and all existing contracts were honoured.

Blair is in a slightly different position here, as he will have been relying on the intelligence documents he saw about WMD, a lot of which will have originated from the US.
I didn't vote for Blair, but on this occasion I think he is telling the truth when he says he believes the information he was given, and more importantly did not alter it. Time will tell whether or not this intelligence about WMD was correct.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by darkes


I can't speak for the US, but the Iraq war is going to end up costing the UK a lot of money.
So the UK gets a few more contracts than it might have done, but there is no way that will compensate for the massive military cost.

---

Its going to cost the US taxpayers a lot of money also...but it will make bush Chaney and Halliburton (along with some other US companies) a lot of money. Bush is sacrificing US public interest for personal gain.

bballad...

Quote:

---

Bush is sacrificing US public interest for personal gain.

---

thats quite a serious allegation you're making you know.... and if true I would say its quite reasonable grounds to push for the impeachment of Bush (which I wouldn't be sorry to see... )I know I'm not in the US so my opinion counts for squat on this issue but I really don't think that a leader should put personal interest before the interests of thier own countrymen (and women).

Vercetti... well... one can only hope that a better way other than militarilistic is found - sadly I can't see it happening any time soon though - the language of force and violence is all some folks understand

Z