WAR?????? PART 2

[tatodotcom]

I never complained about people dying, I've seen more death than 95% of the people on this board. Soldiers know damn good and well that dying and killing are in the job description. Afganistan was the result of an attack on our country by an uncoventional enemy, and as such an unconventional responce was used. That responce was generally more widely accepted by Americans and the global community, and is justified, although a little iffy, under chapter 51 of the UN charter.

The basis on which the war with Iraq was founded was; insufficent, losely compiled from sources with questionable creditability, as of yet is unfounded almost in it's entirety, and in violation of UN policy and decree. The UN was setup after WWll and acted as a succesor to the League of Nations. It's main purpose was to prevent Actions like those commited by Germany, unfounded agression towards peace, stability, human rights, and the like. The US went before the UN and lost it's case, plain and simple. They then managed to shoot most of the world the bird by acting on it's own. The salt in the wound is that for the better part the UN resolutions and actions were effective in their goals, which we voted on, allbeit narrow goals and the actions laden with a little corruption. The UN isn't perfect, nor is the US government.

This has opened up the door for other countries to express a desire to harm or enguage in conflict with this country based on percived threats (Iran). This is the precedence our actions, and the mannor in which we justified them, have established. However Iran has a better case: unfounded agression aganist a sovereign nation, actions contrary the UN charter and decree, stockpiling of chemicial, biological, and nuclear weapons, just to name a few. We have done more harm to the stability of the world through our actions than Iraq could ever do in it's post Gulf War l state. The results of our actions will become more clear as your childern inherit what we've left for them.

You can believe the war is justified, but I guarantee your basis for those belifes are compiled from a narrow and incomlpete examination and understanding of the wider implications. Like you pointed out you are statistically more likely to die living in the US, than in the war zone, and on the same note you are statistically even less likely to die from the acts of actual terrorism. Statistics aren't a substitution for knowlege, they're a tool for pacifing peoples need and/or desire to rationalize the variables in the equation.

The fact that hunderds of thousands of people can now live freely and are saved from saddam is a good enough reason to go to war, not to mention 9/11. As for my beliefs being compiled from a narrow minded examination, what more do u need! We were attacked by these terrorist! They have threatend us on numerous occasions. I think its ironic that you're saying i'm close minded because you to are taking one side of the debate. I was giving statistics to show that just because 2500 soliders have died, i think(with no disrespect to soliders) that it is worth freeing the THOUSANDS of people and putting saddam in captivity. People are going to die, and i believe that it is justified. I have tried to look at it from others point of view, i really have. But when you look at the FACTS, i just don't see how people can think its unjustified. If the US didn't do anything, how many innocent lives would you like to see be taken before you think it is "justified" to go to war.