RAM
10th June 2003, 21:16
This is taken from some work that I did in Philosophy (Ignore my views just look at the facts!)
Iraq- Debate
Either have the position of
1. War without a second resolution
2. War, but only with a second resolution
3. No war at all
I am for a war but only with a second resolution. I believe that he is a very dangerous man. I accept that he has not used his weapons since the early 1990s. (Which some of them were supplied to him by Donald Rumsfeld during the Iran-Iraq war!). So America is looking for its own weapons in Iraq. They also gave Iraq equipment, supply information, intelligence from the Saudi AWACS aircraft. America has also shot down an Iranian airliner. They were also arming the Iranians as well. France, German and Britain have all supplied him with weapons. This is the most amazing part that before the Gulf War 1 the Americans gave him helicopter engines, communications equipment, 21 batches of lethal Anthrax strains and hundreds of tons of sarin nerve gas from America Iraqs friend and now enemy. Do they want the weapons back?
David Miller went to Iraq to discuss trade with Saddam Hussein and he then gassed 5,000 of his own people at Halabja. Britain then gave Saddam 340 million pounds and America gave him another $1 billion dollars. Ohh Saddam you nice man!
In 1979 he called a meeting of the Iraqi Parliament when you asked all those who betrayed you to step outside and you had them shot. Other men who have supported you over the years are Ronald Regan, Margaret Thatcher and George Bush Senior.
In Iraq Saddam has no opposition and can go to war without consulting parliament and without asking the country. He also runs a regime of brutality and terror backed up by a vicious regime of intimidation and torture and as absolute ruler as he claimed a 100% victory in a presidential election. This must have been a hard choice for the Iraqi voter with a choice between voting for Saddam and voting for their wives and children to be killed and have their house burnt down.
As you can see from the history above he is an evil man who has been fuelled by the Americans, France, Germany and of course the British. I do believe that we should go to war but only with international agreement, which can only come from the UN. If we have second resolution then I would support war. If we do not have a second resolution then I would not support war. In the words of Colin Powel when will the world say enough is enough? if we do not go to war?
(Source: Bremner, Bird and Fortune)
(Edited by RAM at 9:20 pm on June 10, 2003)
Iraq- Debate
Either have the position of
1. War without a second resolution
2. War, but only with a second resolution
3. No war at all
I am for a war but only with a second resolution. I believe that he is a very dangerous man. I accept that he has not used his weapons since the early 1990s. (Which some of them were supplied to him by Donald Rumsfeld during the Iran-Iraq war!). So America is looking for its own weapons in Iraq. They also gave Iraq equipment, supply information, intelligence from the Saudi AWACS aircraft. America has also shot down an Iranian airliner. They were also arming the Iranians as well. France, German and Britain have all supplied him with weapons. This is the most amazing part that before the Gulf War 1 the Americans gave him helicopter engines, communications equipment, 21 batches of lethal Anthrax strains and hundreds of tons of sarin nerve gas from America Iraqs friend and now enemy. Do they want the weapons back?
David Miller went to Iraq to discuss trade with Saddam Hussein and he then gassed 5,000 of his own people at Halabja. Britain then gave Saddam 340 million pounds and America gave him another $1 billion dollars. Ohh Saddam you nice man!
In 1979 he called a meeting of the Iraqi Parliament when you asked all those who betrayed you to step outside and you had them shot. Other men who have supported you over the years are Ronald Regan, Margaret Thatcher and George Bush Senior.
In Iraq Saddam has no opposition and can go to war without consulting parliament and without asking the country. He also runs a regime of brutality and terror backed up by a vicious regime of intimidation and torture and as absolute ruler as he claimed a 100% victory in a presidential election. This must have been a hard choice for the Iraqi voter with a choice between voting for Saddam and voting for their wives and children to be killed and have their house burnt down.
As you can see from the history above he is an evil man who has been fuelled by the Americans, France, Germany and of course the British. I do believe that we should go to war but only with international agreement, which can only come from the UN. If we have second resolution then I would support war. If we do not have a second resolution then I would not support war. In the words of Colin Powel when will the world say enough is enough? if we do not go to war?
(Source: Bremner, Bird and Fortune)
(Edited by RAM at 9:20 pm on June 10, 2003)