The Relic

They weren't looking for nukes in Iraq, They were looking for chemical and biological Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the Iraqis were cooperating according to their lights. As has been said since, how do you cooperate in showing something that isn't there?

I love the talk about "The Alliance". Reminds me of the online game World of Warcraft. We night elves are allied with humans, gnomes, and dwarves against common enemies, y'know.

But this real-life "Alliance" has far fewer certainties than its fictional counterpart, beyond the knowledge that what we are talking about is international foreign policy that is dominated and often dictated by the US because of its corporate primacy, its standing in the UN and NATO and its access to technology.

Please tell me what, beyond a position of power, gives the United States the right to act as an international moral arbiter and carry the biggest stick, perhaps first examining its often infamous record to date on the world stage and remembering in particular that during the Cuban Missile Crisis it was the president of the United States who would have pushed the nuclear button.

By the way, "jig time" isn't necessarily fast time, as you seem to imply it is. In fact most jigs, like that excellent slip jig The Kid On The Mountain, are best taken at a moderate pace.

__________________
The Relic

Richard Dawkins for Pope.

had_enough

While agreeing with the call for our troops to get out of Iraq, I think america took the responsibility of trying to control the nuclear mess in the world. They saw the potential of self anilation after the 1st atomic bomb when off in Japan and "volunteered" to do the job. Someone had to take control and they were the leaders in the field at that time.

I very much doubt that if they did not take the reigns, we may not be here today. I think its right to limit the expansion of nuclear devices and energy to certain countries, like Iran, whose sole purpose is to wipe another country off the map.

We all know the capabilities of people in the arab world, compared to the rest of us.

Sid

[quote=had_enough]

I very much doubt that if they did not take the reigns, we may not be here today. I think its right to limit the expansion of nuclear devices and energy to certain countries, like Iran, whose sole purpose is to wipe another country off the map.

QUOTE]
Why should they be able to sell nuclear weapons to the likes of Pakistan, who have a dictator as a leader, yet won't allow certain countries to have nuclear fuel just in case they decide to build a bomb?

Even if they did build a bomb what's to say they wouldn't use it the same way as we and America used them, as the ultimate defence weapon?

If you look at it another way. Let's just suppose the roles in the world were reversed. Middle Eastern countries having the ability to take over European countries with very little loss of life.
Now, if Iran were to obliterate France because they suspected them of having weapons of mass destruction. Would it not be wise of us to say, "Hey, look Iran, we've got nuclear weapons, you come near us and we'll wipe you out."
This is what happened during the cold war. Russia thought they were going to be invaded by the Americans, who, judging from behaviour since may have had a point. After all, they do have lots of fossil fuels. So they built enough bombs to wipe out the world many times over. They never got invaded.

I'm not saying we should provide every country with nuclear weapons but to supply one country with a dictator nuclear weapons, then not even allow another country to use nuclear power is having double standards to say the least.

Casper

Well said Sid. Furthermore, Blair's response to a news reporter who tried to point out the double standards of the nuclear arms race was that-
democracies can have nuclear weapons because they abide by a set of international laws, unlike North Korea.

I think Blair forgets the fact that Britain's involvement in the Iraq war is illegal accoring to EU law.

__________________
Neither Nationalist or Socialist: Rationalist Meritocrat

Casper

__________________
Neither Nationalist or Socialist: Rationalist Meritocrat

Casper

__________________
Neither Nationalist or Socialist: Rationalist Meritocrat

ahwell

Fine Casper id like to see them back too but i hope you wont be on the gravy train when un civil war breaks out there.

skinny

I have no facts on this.......are the insurgents killing iraqis and destroying the infrastructure of the country from within because of infighting, and so a big slice of the dead in iraq can be apportioned to iraqis? just a question about a thought, because i have seen bombers blowing up market areas and the likes.

ahwell

Sunnies and sheites pardon the schpelling.

Casper

__________________
Neither Nationalist or Socialist: Rationalist Meritocrat