quote:
Originally posted by britneyspearsatemyshorts:
i actually liked his speech, there was speculatuion he would have to give France and some of the axis of weasels concessions in his speech and he did none of that. he pointed out clear and simple the Iraqis are no longer under a brutal dictator how anyone could disagree that is good is beyond me....
I don't think anyone ever disagreed with that. It was my reason for supporting the war.

The problem is that it was never the coalition's reason for going to war until no WMDs were found.

And what about the rest of the bastards in the world? What about Burma, North Korea or Liberia? There are plenty of other wankers to depose. But where are the threats of invasion against them?

quote:

France, Germany and Russia were the three nations to whom Saddam Hussein's government owed the largest debt.
Gee, why did these nations oppose invading Iraq?
Out of the goodness of their hearts?
Or because they were reaping large profits by (while violating U.N. sanctions) doing business with Iraq?
It is not for an altruistic defense of international human rights and international law that Germany and France opposed the war. It was for their own self-interest.
I really find this argument absolutely repulsive, every time I see it.

Germany, France and Russia were not opposing a war because a very small number of companies based in those countries were illegally doing business in Iraq.

They opposed a war because there was no proof of WMDs. There still isn't.

They opposed a war because international law is built on respect of sovereignty, and has been for 300 years.

And they opposed the war because of intense public oppposition in their countries towards the war. No one likes warmongers.

The hundreds of thousands of people in cities around the world demostrated against the war not to support the French companies who did illegally did business in Iraq. They did it because they hate war.

This argument set out by Dave is disgusting. Lets acknowledge it for what it is. It stinks of embarrassment in the face of allegations, real or unfounded, that the US might have spent taxpayers' money to invade a country to the profit of the US oil industry, and squirmingly endeavours to throw the profit motive back against those who hate war.

It is pathetic, and evasive. It tries to make people who oppose war as a valid instrument of diplomacy look like they're motivated by greed.

It is a grubby, grubby lie.