Bush or Saddam? Who's really the evil one? Or are they both?

I'd like to get everyone's thoughts on the Dubya-Iraq situation. This is how I feel.

I couldn't give a damn whether Saddam Hussein lives or dies. Obviously he's a dictator. Obviously he's a not a good one. Iraq would probably be better off without him. But I really object the methods the United States are taking to remove him. They are drowning in hypocrisy. It's quite the clear the real reasons Bush wants war with Iraq are threefold. One, it's plain and simple a vendetta. Two, to distract away from the failed Osama Bin laden mission. Three, if the country's at war, nobody'll notice the slowing economy. However, the official reason is Iraq's dismissals and refusals to comply with prior UN resolutions. I suppose that is a good reason and all, except, George Bush himself said that unless the United Nations passed a new weapons inspection resolution against Iraq he would ignore anything they said and move America into war against Saddam. So Bush is after Saddam for disobeying the UN, and then he openly admits that if he doesn't get his way, he'll do the same thing? *cough* hypocrite *cough*. So of course the resolution passed, because the Americans leaned on the UN. Does this disturb anybody else? There's a reason the League of Nations failed. It was because the powerful countries had all the power, and they ruled what was supposedly an impartial world governing body. So now doesn't this make the UN obsolete if they're simply going to cave to American demands whenever they're made?

Furthermore, the official reason extends to Iraq's "weapons of mass destruction", which they may or may not have. Apparently the Americans don't like the idea of Iraq having these weapons, but it's perfectly okay for them to have them? Also, I read a Bush quote accusing Iraq of being the only nations to deploy weapons of mass destruction. This as if Hiroshima and Nagasaki never happened.

Anyway, so the Americans have their little resolution in place, but it's evident what they're really after. They want war, and that's why they're dropping the odd bomb on Iraq, just in the hope that they can provoke them into doing something which would allow the Americans to go to war with them.

Based on all this, who is behaving like the bad guy here? I'd really like to know what you all think. IMO, this war is a big mistake, the repercussions of which won't be fully felt for some time.

Well, it's good to know that the members of the forum are all too wound up in important things like Mariah Carey and Jerry Springer to worry about impending wars.

Escuse me?

For your information we are also debating important matters lately (wether or not Car Key Boi should be banned, the latest "in this thread" matter, which Miss World contestant is hottest, etc).

Furthermore you should know by now - if you want lots of thread replies, you have to post a thread, then alert all your "freinds" that you have posted a relevant topic so that they will read it.

That way other people who don't know you will read that other people replied and know that it is "okay" to post in your thread.

Better luck next time, King.

they are both assholes in a particular way

Well rebecca, I would alert my "freinds", but I really don't have any.

Rhythboy. Well, thanks for your response, I guess. I suppose that was the question, but what do you feel about the deeper issues?

i think both are very dangerous for the world

Who are these people?:confused:

How is that supposed to be funny???

yes matthias, they are both dangerous to the world, but bush being the agressive one.
Good for the amerikans they never realy elected him.

I will not lose any sleep if Saddam is somehow removed from power in Iraq. Provided it doesn't require "accidentally" bombing your own allies or a wedding party (like it took to remove the Taliban, apparently).

However in regards to the American government being big fat hypocrites (and oh yes, they certaintly are) regarding weapons of mass destruction;

The popular defense I have heard on this one is something like: "oh sure, why don't we just get rid off all our major weapons, so that people like Saddam are in control of the only ones in the world, and we have nothing to match them".

Does it not occur to these people, that perhaps Saddam and co are thinking the same thing?

Originally posted by salima
yes matthias, they are both dangerous to the world, but bush being the agressive one.
Good for the amerikans they never realy elected him.

Bush is the aggresive one?:rolleyes:

Barrie do you have anything to add to any of these discussions, either than insulting other peoples opinions?

I would hope that a man of your age would have learned how to stop fighting like a child, and how to debate like an adult.

If you don't like someones opinion, why don't you express what you see wrong with it, as opposed to posting smileys and empty statements?

And I suppose that you are making any more sense than I am?

Both

Saddam is more 'evil', Bush thinks he is doing the right things.

Saddam needs to be stopped, Bush isn't that bad, but is way out of his League

Bush is a lot smarter than you think

Remember when Saddam invaded Kuwait? He's an evil !!

Yeah, but Niratti, look at some of the things I brought up in the first post. Saddam may be evil, but look at the means Bush is using to entrap him.

Dude, Bush is DEFINITELY the aggressor, of that there is NO DOUBT. And Rebecca is making much more sense than you.