To Kay,

Yes I do think the use of Atomic weapons at the end of WW2 was justified.
20 million odd Russians died fighting the Germans , millions of Chinese died fighting the Japanese.

These regimes were cruel beyond beleif this is why the US,UK and Russia agreed that nothing but total surrender would do. These regimes could not be allowed to stay in power (like Saddam was at the end of the last Gulf War).

How else could the Japanese have been forced to totally surrender. A full land invasion of Japan?
Planners estimated this would cost 250000 allied soldiers lifes , not to mention the Japanese loses.

Ask yourself this, why is Japan such a rich and friendly country today, why do they love everything American, why aren't Japanese terrorists attacking the West.

Perhaps because the Japanese people were liberated from a cruel regime and thanks to Bilions of dollars of US aid (probably hundreds of Billions in modern terms) enjoy an incredible standard of living today.

Of course the world is very differnt today and no one could justify using Atomic weapons under any circumstances but if you had lived through 6 years of a world war perhaps you would feel differently, perhaps you would think that taking 6 months off the war was worthwhile, i'm sure the families of the soldiers and POW's returning home did.

@deakmann:

>To those that argue that Britain and the US armed Iraq, this is a myth , the vast majority of Iraqs
>forces were supplied by, yep good old Russia and France.

A myth? What about this:

Sworn court declaration of former NSC official Howard Teicher:
Quote:

6. In June, 1982, President Reagan decided that the United States could not afford to allow Iraq to lose the war to Iran. President Reagan decided that the United States would do whatever was necessary and legal to prevent Iraq from losing the war with Iran. President Reagan formalized this policy by issuing a National Security Decision Directive ("NSDD") to this effect in June, 1982. I have personal knowledge of this NSDD because I co-authored the NSDD with another NSC Staff Member, Geoff Kemp. The NSDD, including even its indentifying number, is classified. 7. CIA Director Casey personally spearheaded the effort to ensure that Iraq had sufficient military weapons, ammunition and vehicles to avoid losing the Iran-Iraq war. Pursuant to the secred NSDD, the United States actively supported the Iraqi war effort by supplying the Iraqis with billions of dollars of credits, by providing U.S. military intelligence and advice to the Iraqis, and by closely monitoring third country arms sales to Iraq to make sure that Iraq had the military weaponry required. The United States also provided strategic operational advice to the Iraqis to better use their assets in combat. For example, in 1986, President Reagan sent a secret message to Saddam Hussein telling him that Iraq should step up its air war and bombing of Iran. This message was delivered by Vice President Bush who communicated it to Egyptian President Mubarak, who in turn passed the message to Saddam Hussein. Similar strategic operational military advice was passed to Saddam Hussein through various meetings with European and Middle Eastern heads of state. I authored Bush's talking points for the 1986 meeting with Mubarak and personally attended numerous meetings with European and Middle East heads of state where the strategic operational advice was communicated.

More here.

>es a few of there citizens are terrorists

A few of them? Nearly all terrorists involved in the attack of 9/11 were from Saudi-Arabia and were funded with money from there.

>Iraq accounts for only about 3% of world oil production,

Have you ever heard of the embargo that the UN put on Iraq after the first Gulf-War?

>even with 10 years of massive investment this figure would perhaps get upto 7 or 8%.

That does not change the fact that Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world.

_________________
"I'd rather be vaguely right than precisely wrong."
- J.M.Keynes

Is the situation in Iraq really so simple it can be bought down to a "it's about freedom", "its about oil"," its about enforcing the will of the UN", "its about defying the will of the UN" level. Could it be that the present actions are the results of a great number of complicated issues?

There are some observations I would like to make. It's interesting how much more valuable Iraqi civilian lives are depending on who takes them. Many thousands of people around the world rightly become agitated when allied military action threatens civilian lives. However, they seem much less bothered when Iraqi authorities action takes civilian lives. Does that mean the death of civilians is less or more important depending on who is responsible?

I am also bemused by the call for the trial of those responsible for the use of nuclear weapons on Japan. Great though the casualties were with those weapons, conventional bombing caused many more deaths. If that is a war crime then the aftermath of the Second World War would have been very bizarrre.

My final point is this. Have brutal dictatorships ever responded except to the use/ or threat of use of force?

_________________
Time to give up now I think

> Perhaps because the Japanese people were liberated from a cruel regime

Yes, thanks to the vast numbers of civilians who involuntarily sacrificed their lives to the cause.

> Of course the world is very differnt today and no one could justify using Atomic weapons under
> any circumstances but if you had lived through 6 years of a world war perhaps you would feel
> differently, perhaps you would think that taking 6 months off the war was worthwhile, i'm
> sure the families of the soldiers and POW's returning home did.

Perhaps, perhaps not. My opinion doesn't really matter, nor does yours. Nobody's opinion on this matters. There was never a trial. The allies won. Their decision to sacrifice all those civilians shall stand undisputed. I'm not happy about it, but that's the way it is.

Kay

> I am also bemused by the call for the trial of those responsible for the use of nuclear weapons
> on Japan.

Yes, my position on this is commonly met with ridicule. Who am I to question the decision to point the world's most fearsome weapons at civilian targets? After all, 250000 allied soldiers were possibly spared...

It's quite okay, my sense of ethics is apparently not shared or even understood by anyone, and the people I am speaking up for are all dead. You're bound to win this one.

Kay

To Buzzy,

It's clear that the US made a judgement call that Iran posed a bigger threat than iraq at the time.

Who knows whether this was a correct call or not.

Maybe the US helped create a monster , but does this mean we should let it live?

But a quick look at Iraq's forces , there Airforce is made up mostly of Russian Mig fighters , there army is armed with Russian tanks and artillery and French and Russian SAM's.

Where are all these US arnaments??

To Buzzy,

Sorry , i'll have to learn how to quote, but anyway.

Yes Iraq has the worlds 2nd largest oil reserves,
but if oil was our only concern there's much easier ways to get hold of it.
Money talks, and the US has more than anyone else.
It would be easy to pay off Saddam in return for guaranteed oil supplies and contracts for western
oil companies, but this is exactly the kind of short-sighted policies the west has pursued in the past. (ie-give a dictator loads of money and let him use it to repress his people , invade other countries and eventually turn against you)



With regards to Saudi terrorists , yes the 9/11 bombers were mostly Saudi, but we can hardly hold this against the friendly Saudi govt and mostly
friendly Saudi people. Saudi Arabi does not deliberatley harbour terrorists it helps to track them down.

I'm not saying the US/UK are blameless or always right. I hope the UK can persuade the US to take a stricter line on Israel and help find a solution to the Palestinian problem.

No doubt many mistakes have been made with Middle Eastern policy, but now's as good a time as any to try and put it right.

If Saddam can be removed and Iraq stabalised, plus a solution to the Israel/Paletinian situation found , the world could only be a better place for it.

@Kay

Yes, your opinion DOES matter and so does mine and anyone else's for that matter. We are the people who elect our nations' leaders and we are, therefore responsible, to some extent for their actions. That is democracy.

I would not class myself as being in the 'Peace at any cost' camp. I firmly believe that military intervention is, regretably, required at times. What I don't and won't condone is war based on flimsy evidence and dubious aims. This war is not about spreading freedom. That is not why wars are waged. Wars are waged for turf or for resource and, conversely, for self defense. The notion that Iraq is threatening America is laughable at best. "Perhaps someone in Iraq might help out a terrorist and that'd be the end of us all!"...... hmmm, perhaps someone in the west might help out a terrorist and that be end of us all too - and we have much better weapons to steal.

We can only make our own best guesses about the real motivation for this war but you can rest assured they are unlikely to be selfless goals. When things are done for the wrong reasons or in the wrong manner, the results can be catastrophic.

_________________
Folding@Home Team AmigaWorld no: 33424

Ok, I won't say much about this, but I have to make one comment...

> The UN security council has become no more than a talking
> shop. When you give someone an ultimatum you must be
> prepared to follow it through otherwise you lose all credibility.

That might be true, but then, the right decision would be to change the way the security council works.

Ignoring the UN has just thrown the world back to the pre-1945 aera, before the UN was founded. That should not have happened.

And no, nobody has the right to do that. Just because Bush thinks Hussein has to be overthrown dosn't give him the right to do so. If you think in that way, what comes next ? China ? Northern Korea ? And as Rumsfeld obviously thinks Germany is a threat to their politics, will they invade Germany next week to end the Green/Red terror regime here ?

The US and UK signed the charta like most other countries did. Only when it doesn't fit their ideas anymore, they break it.

No, the world will not be more secure due to this. Only more a place of hatred.

And before somebody accuses me of supporting Hussein: I hope that they will get that sucker. But the world should get away from the notion that it's a war on Hussein. It's a war on Iraq, and iraqi people will die (and already did). Innocent iraqi people.

Quote:

And before somebody accuses me of supporting Hussein: I hope that they will get that sucker. But the world should get away from the notion that it's a war on Hussein. It's a war on Iraq, and iraqi people will die (and already did). Innocent iraqi people.

Its always the poor sod caught in between the belligerent that cops for most of the damage.

This war is illegal. even my father (20 years Forces history - Borneo f'rinstance) doesnt agree with this war. and I am fairly certain a large number of ex servicemen agree (certainly in the UK).

And no - I dont like hussein. but then I dont think I like Bush and Blair either.

_________________
XH558 - the worlds last flying Vulcan.
ok, its actually XL426 in the picture but you know what I mean.

Kay I didn't say your position was laughable, I said I was bemused. The reasons for that bemusement are explained in the section of my post that you did not quote.

_________________
Time to give up now I think

"Ignoring the UN has just thrown the world back to the pre-1945 aera, before the UN was founded. That should not have happened. "

Well many nations have been ignoring the UN for years since then. Israel, Soviet Union/Russia, Iraq, Burma/Myanma Naingngandaw, Argentina for starters, and I'm sure the UK and the US. France of course did run a series of nuclear tests in the face of world opposition and used her agents to sink the Rainbow Warrior. The sad fact is that the UN is only effective when the major powers choose to make it effective. The UN has no power of its own.

_________________
Time to give up now I think

These are troubled times. My thoughts and prayers are with those innocent people who fall victim to this unjust war.

in just hpe the americans can stop shooting us.

no offence intended to anybody in this post.

They said that they had spen millions on preventing "blue-blue" fire but they still mangaed to shoot a Tornado down the a patriot missile.

_________________
Dogs come when called, We cats take a messege and get back later - maybe!!!!