I think an attack on Iraq on behalf of the United States is likely, and if it occurs I think it will be unilateral action as well, which isn't good either.
I'm not sure what kind of war it will be, whether it will be solely for the purpose of disarming Iraq, or whether it will turn into a resource war. The majority of liberal media raises many valid points about how one of ulterior reasons behind the war the is that it seems to be about oil and how the U.S. wants to control oil reserves in the Middle East, but most conservatives deny this, and say that that argument is unfounded and that the "war on Iraq" is only to disarm Iraq of its weapons. Others point to other reasons relating to the oil, and mainly the money that comes from it. Obviously those aren't the only motives for attacking Iraq though.
I disagree with a couple of the ways the Bush administration is trying to justify this potential war, one of them being the connection between Iraq and Osama Bin Laden. In Bin Laden's last release, he urged Iraqi people to go against their secular/socialist (I forgot which word exactly) leader, yet in most news reports this part was conveniently left out, and Colin Powell, in his appearances on Sunday news shows uses the video to demonstrate the link between Saddam and Osama, and I thought that was kind of lame. Maybe he knows something most people don't know, or he wants to easily justify this attack by playing on fears of the American Public. I don't know.
I was also shown an article the a few weeks ago, pointing out how in the past two centuries or so, every single time a country tried to justify attacking another country they used fears of "terrorism" or attacks on the home country by various third parties or nations. And all of a sudden, we're up to orange.
edit: i wasn't sure of this, but now am, the initial phase of the attack's underway. Special forces were sent in to encircle baghdad before aerial attacks began. Here we go.
__________________
word is bond
Last edited by tm11 on 02-18-2003 at 07:41 AM
|