Funny how 'conservatives' claim a desire to leave the UN behind. But when it suits their needs (i.e. gives them an excuse to attack a 'belligerent' nation), we need to enforce UN resolutions...
Whereas members of al-Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
The 'meeting' that supposedly happened in Eastern Europe was deemed to be a falsehood. The ties were tenable at best. Even the Vice President has admitted to this. The ties excuse was dropped early in the war
Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;
Yes, where are those weapons? Oh, I forgot. World Nut Daily and DEBKA tell us they're in the Syrian deserts...
Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;
She has abstained from interference in the concerns of others, even when conflict has been for principles to which she clings, as to the last vital drop that visits the heart. She has seen that probably for centuries to come, all the contests of that Aceldama the European world, will be contests of inveterate power, and emerging right. Wherever the standard of freedom and Independence has been or shall be unfurled, there will her heart, her benedictions and her prayers be. But she goes not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.Perhaps those hacks in Congress may want to read this before passing another 'resolution' for regime change. It was none of our businessShe is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all.
She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.
She will commend the general cause by the countenance of her voice, and the benignant sympathy of her example.
She well knows that by once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force....
She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own spirit.... --John Quincy Adams, 1821
Buckley is wrong and so are you. I don't know what Iraq will be like in the future. Ultimately it is up to them.
Indeed it is and history tells us exactly what form of govenment they will institute. A monarchy (doubtful as they have no royalty), a military dictatorship (which our nation had no problem with while they used and supported Iraq against Iran in the 1980s), or a theocracy.
We are giving them the opportunity to make those decisions by the elimination of a tyrant who killed over 300,000 people and buried them in mass graves.
Again while tragic, I would refer you to Adams' statement.
I remain optimistic that given a choice, most people will choose freedom and democracy, which is the wave of the future. I also lived for two years in Communist Poland, including during martial law in the early 1980s. I returned in the late 1990s and saw the remarkable changes that have been wrought. None of us in early 1980s would have ever predicted such a transformation a scant decade later.
Let's see. Communism around for a total of 70-80 years at that time, Islam around for 1000-1100 years. Nope, I see no problem whatsoever overcoming that mindset, they'll just give it right up when they see how great democracy is. Why it'll probably happen practically overnight!! While you're at it you can explain how all but less than one handful of Islamic nations haven't embraced democracy. Turkey has been going at it for 80 years and perhaps only their close proximity to Europe has kept them from sliding back to their Islamic roots. When will 'conservatives' wake up to the realization that it is not our business to determine the level of freedom or the internal affairs of other sovereign nations?
It has nothing to do with leaving the UN behind. We had an adversarial relationship with Iraq prior to 9/11. Technically, we were still at war with Saddam. We were part of the UN coalition that kicked him out of Kuwait. We entered into a UN approved Truce Agreement. Saddam was violating this agreement and ignoring multiple UN resolutions. Those are facts and part of the political reality. We had the legal authority to enforce those resolutions, which is why it was cited in the Joint Resolution. Period. We also have the right to self-defense.
The 'meeting' that supposedly happened in Eastern Europe was deemed to be a falsehood. The ties were tenable at best. Even the Vice President has admitted to this. The ties excuse was dropped early in the war
The Resolution does not refer to the meeting in Prague. It is a fact that AQ was present in Iraq and that Iraqi intelligence had documented contacts with AQ. This was noted in the 9/11 Commission Report. Here are some other links to information concerning AQ and Iraqi connectioins:
The Iraq -- Al Qaeda Connections
Osama and Saddam Worked together for years
Yes, where are those weapons? Oh, I forgot. World Nut Daily and DEBKA tell us they're in the Syrian deserts...
The UN inspectors docmented from Saddam's own records that many were unaccounted for. The question should be what did he do with them and why did play games with the inspectors. If he had demonstrated that all the weapons had been destroyed and allowed a comprehensive and unimpeded inspection by the UN, Saddam would probably be still in power and the sanctions would have been lifted. Instead he lied and deceived. The UN found and destroyed a significant amount of undeclard WMD and other prohibited weaponry.
Sending the WMD to Syria or burying it in the desert is not all that far fetched. Saddam flew over 100 military aircraft to Iran prior to the Gulf War. He alse buried jet aircraft in the desert.
Perhaps those hacks in Congress may want to read this before passing another 'resolution' for regime change. It was none of our business
Self-defense is our business. Allowing Saddam to remain in power represented a serious threat to our country. The world is better off without the tyrant or his sons in power. Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism and Saddam had a history of irresponsible actions. The more we learn about his regime, the better the decision looks. Oil for Food.
Let's see. Communism around for a total of 70-80 years at that time, Islam around for 1000-1100 years. Nope, I see no problem whatsoever overcoming that mindset, they'll just give it right up when they see how great democracy is. Why it'll probably happen practically overnight!! While you're at it you can explain how all but less than one handful of Islamic nations haven't embraced democracy.
Are you equating Islam with Communism? Modern militant Islam has been arpound since 1979 and Khomeini. Iran is ground zero in the WOT. We are promoting democracy as a way to defuse the militant threat. Islam will have to reform itself, but we cannot ignore the impact on our democratic societies and culture. There are 5 to 7 million Muslims in the US.
Most of the countries in the world are not democracies. It has less to do with religion and more to do with history.
When will 'conservatives' wake up to the realization that it is not our business to determine the level of freedom or the internal affairs of other sovereign nations?
Nonsense. We have principles and values. Should we remain silent when Hitler, Stalin, and Mao murder millions? Or the killing fields of Cambodia and Rawanda? There are times when we may need to act. Do we wait to be attacked? No man is an island nor is a nation. We have learned that what goes on in Japan, Germany, Russia, and China can eventually affect us.
Where's the contradiction? I have no respect for the UN, and I'm all in favor of using it to our advantage when we can, or trying to. How is that a contradiction?
The 'meeting' that supposedly happened in Eastern Europe was deemed to be a falsehood.
"Was deemed"? By whom? If you're talking about the Atta-in-Prague meeting, I don't deem it to be a falsehood.
The ties were tenable at best.
"The ties were tenable"? You're not even sure what you're trying to say.
Anyway, you're arguing with the War Powers resolution now. This might have made sense to do in late 2002. But that argument is over, and your preference lost, because it passed in late 2002. That's three and a half years ago. Are you going to get over it?
[Ultimately it is up to them.] Indeed it is and history tells us exactly what form of govenment they will institute.
Um, "it's up to them" and "history dictates their future" are self-contradictory. Anyway, just to turn the tables on the typical sort of arguments certain folks fling around here - since when do conservatives believe in the (rather Marxist!) notion of historical inevitabilities?
Nope, I see no problem whatsoever overcoming that mindset, they'll just give it right up when they see how great democracy is. Why it'll probably happen practically overnight!!
Projection. No one said it would "happen overnight". Bush has repeated time and time again that this war is a long war. The only people bitching that it's not happening "overnight", as if that's unacceptable, are people like you.
When will 'conservatives' wake up to the realization that it is not our business to determine the level of freedom or the internal affairs of other sovereign nations?
It's not our business, perhaps, until belligerent foreign governments make it our business.
Anyway, by your standard, the Holocaust was not our business, so, good luck with that.