A Quark of A Different Spin. (adameros) wrote,
A Quark of A Different Spin.

Questions from mike1980 and my answers (just in case he doesn't like my answers and deletes them):

Would you still feel the same if there was another 9-11 attack?
What country would do it? No definate link between Iraq and Osama. But we do know that Saudi Arabia funded most of September 11th. We do know that many of the Taliban leaders have moved to Pakistan and are restarting their regime of terror. We know that North Korea has chemical weapons, is working on nuclear weapons and is more than willing to sell to questionable governments and organisations. If Iraq is such an issue, why was our vice president still doing business with them after the first gulf war?

Did we not give peace a chance, and in turn we got the Twin Towers destruction, the Pentagon attack, and United Airlines flight 93 crashing in Pennsylvania?
And we fought the Taliban and won. But why are we attacking a group not connected to 9/11? Why are we not going after Saudi Arabia, or the terrorist cells in Pakistan? Or countries like N. Korea, that are willing to supply terrorist groups?

If you were a cop and a criminal (with a record for murder) had a gun and he refused to put down his weapon would you let him go?
What weapon? Last I heard no Weapons of Mass Destruction had been found. What happens if we find no such weapons? How many soldiers will have died for this? How many civilians? If it turns out these weapons do not exist, can we send Bush to court to be tried for the lives lost and the damages done?

Why are defending the man who killed 5000 Kurdish in 1988?
Why are we allies with Turkey, who has practice genocide on the Kurds in their counrty, and have more U.N. violations than Iraq. Or maybe Israel, practicing genocide on the Palistinians, and again more U.N. violations than Iraq?

If you were against the genocide of Jewish in Germany during Adolf Hitler's rule, then why do you think the genocide of the Kurdish in Iraq by Saddam Hussein to be ok?
It must be okay, we're letting Turkey try to kill off their Kurds and let Israel do the same Muslims in their country.

Why are defending a dictator who uses his intentionally places military artillery near civilians?
Why do we defend Israel, which actually uses their weapons on civilans?

Why are you defending a man who went against the UN 688 and 1441 resolutions?
And all the resolutions Turkey and Israel (or friends) have totally disregarded?

If this is really “about oil” then why are their already plans to set-up a new government after Saddam is no longer in power?
Why have the oil companies already met with the U.S. goverment to divide up the oil reserves. With little or no regard for the Iraqi's themselves.

If you were the President and Pearl Harbor had just been bombed would you have just let it go?
No I would not. Can you show proof that Saddam is linked to Osama? Would you just randomly bomb countries you do not agree with, no knowing if they were involved?

If you believe that the majority of our citizens in America are against the war, why do all the current consensus point to the opposite?
Maybe for the same reason local radio stations have told their DJ's they wil lbe fired if they take a pro-peace stance. So much for freedom of speach.

Do you actually believe that if Iraq did not have oil that Bush would let a dictator, with direct links to terrorism, alone?
Yes. Saudi Araba and Pakistan beingleft alone. As soon as oil flow is threatened we send in the troops.

If I'm for the war and if all I care about is oil, then why am I involved in www.changingtheclimate.com (highly recommended) and why have I been cutting down on gasoline consumption?
Because gas is expensive? You are trying to help the enviroment? You like exercise AND have blood lust?

Wouldn't that be defined as a contradictory action?
No. It depends on your motivation for trying to save on gas.

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded