World Police, Implied Responsibility

  1. I've been staying away from this forum moreso because the discussions had become overwhelming and emotional. I have just a few thoughts to share and put out for discussion.

    "Operation Iraqi Freedom" - there was a great opinion letter sent in to the Las Vegas Review journal from a former military person stating he didn't like the wording for this war effort. It implies that this war is about liberating the Iraqi people instead of the supposed intent of disarming Saddam Hussein. What comes with this implication? That for every country with a dictatorship we are going to come in and "free" the people? Is this the message we are really wanting to convey? Are we going to approach other countries with this same resolve (i.e. Cuba, North Korea, African nations with dictators, etc.) or is it only when American businesses stand to profit or gain from intervention?

    Weapons of Mass Destruction - Did I miss something, or have we not found any WMD? I've heard a lot of rhetoric but no reports of any certainty confirming that they have been found or dismantled.

    911 - Why does it seem like people are trying to connect SH with 911? Has their been any proof that SH and OBL are connected? Or is this part of propaganda to inflame and ignite more of an acceptance over this war effort?

    These are just thoughts running through my head I thought I would ask the good folks of this forum. I like hearing and trying to being open to all sides.
  2. 14 Comments

  3. by   jnette
    Still attempting to sort through all this myself, Vegas. I hear your questions/concerns.

    It's OK to ask, to question, to ponder. Far better than the alternative.

    There are more than just 2 views on this. I'd prefer to struggle as long as I need to than just "wing it".

    What's sad is that some folks hardly know there's a war going on... and that's the TRUTH !!! Hard to imagine/understand, but true.
  4. by   SmilingBluEyes
    Vegas some of these same questions plague my mind as I struggle to process all the events, happening so quickly these days. I hav NO easy, quick answers. I will revisit this thread when my brain is not consumed with "women in the military" thread and the like. I am numb right now. rofl....
  5. by   Disablednurse
    Vegas I know what you mean. When we were first talking about going to war with Iraq, all we heard was about weapons of mass destruction. Once we got there things shifted and the talk slowly shifted to freeing Iraq from Saddam Hussein and 911. Well they have found no WMD and true enough the troops have brought about the freedom of the Iraqi people. But have you heard him threaten Syria and Iran to keep them out of Iraq. All we can do is pray that this does not get out of hand.
  6. by   Mimi Wheeze
    Vegas, I don't know how to post a link, but you might want to check out the thread started by StuPer titled "Saddam n' Regime go bye, bye." After about the first page, we have been discussing this very topic. There are some very solid points made, both pro and con.
  7. by   LasVegasRN
    Thanks, Mimi - I should have started reading some threads before posting this one!
  8. by   WashYaHands
    Vegas! Hidee Ho!! I've not been posting much, but have tried to keep up with the threads, points of view, etc.

    To address the WMD item, coalition forces have only been at this for 3 weeks now, and made incredible progress just getting into the country. I think in terms of WMD we need to give the search some time. They may not find any WMD, but then again, they may. We Americans can be impatient. Coalition forces have only begun to scratch the surface of investigating underground tunnel systems and vacated buildings. Also, we should also remember that just because something isn't being reported in the media, doesn't mean it's not happening. We only see a slice of the big picture.

    In reference to the 9-11 connection, I haven't seen a direct connection so far either, but again, we've only been there for 3 weeks. A few weeks ago there were reports of a terrorist cell in Northern Iraq near the Iranian border. This media story faded away as other news was reported. So, what happened to this terrorist cell information? It's still there being investigated, we've forgotten about it because it's no longer front page news.

    I will agree that after this war is over, Iraq will most likely become a routine "peacetime" deployment for coaliton forces, much like the past North and south Iraq no fly zones have been. But, we've made a committment, and we will need to see it through.

    Just my point of view in response to the initial post.

  9. by   Mkue
    Vegas I think it's a very worthwhile question at this time.

    Linda made some good points. I was thinking too today that information throughout this campaign is being gathered and possibly likely to be included in all one report many weeks or possibly even months after Iraq is in the rebuilding phase under new leadership.

    There very well could be information now of WMD and terrorism (linking OBL to SH) and it will come out in due time. I'm hearing the coalition is continually finding documents that could link many things. Once all that info is confirmed and linked together we should hear the true story. But not until then, as there have been so many unconfirmed hyped reports as in the chemical weapons factory.

    Also I think that more Iraqi's exiled and/or still in Iraq will come forward with new information as time goes on. I'm also hearing that the real evidence may be buried under ground and that most definately will take time to investigate.
  10. by   pickledpepperRN
    Heard on radio news that the same private company that fired an employee for reporting the rape of children in Bosnia (she won her lawsuit) is destined to get the contract to police Iraq. True?

    Also I don't know much about this organization. They may be worth looking into:
    Dedicated to Building a More Effective United Nations System
  11. by   renerian
    Glad to see you post Vegas! I think we know what they want us to know. I am a firm believer some things are not told to us. I think they filter what information we get. Does that make sense to you? I don't think I am being paranoid just realistic.

  12. by   molecule
    no WMD have been found and the administration is lowering expectations
    check out this by Paul Krugman:
    more and more it looks like the war was an excercise in power.

    maybe we need work on our own democracy......
  13. by   Furball
    It wasn't that long ago that people were screaming that the UN needs more TIME to search fo WMD. (after 12 years?) These same people expect near instantaneous results from the US.

    I expect it to be difficult for our guys to find proof at this early juncture. It may very well that much of it was transported over to Syria, destroyed or reduced to a more innocuous form like fertilizer. Hussein certainly wouldn't make it easy for us, line it all up, in the open and in alphabetical order. Gimme a break.

    An Al Qaeda supect was nabbed in BAGHDAD just yesterday or the day before. Time, allow some time.

    Edited to ad; Vegas! I thought I was seeing things! Come back!
    Last edit by Furball on Apr 30, '03
  14. by   maureeno
    actually, the first UN inspectors [mid 90s] did find and destroy lots of stuff...

    the reason it is fair to wonder where the alleged WMD are is because in order to justify war the BushII administration was precise in enummerating tons and liters of imminent threats, and because the allegations of nuclear arms proved false.

    Intelligence agents from both the US and Britian complained information was being distorted and misused; as the Guardian news said Sunday
    "The case for invading Iraq to remove its weapons of mass destruction was based on selective use of intelligence, exaggeration, use of sources known to be discredited and outright fabrication."

    ok, so if more time is needed why not ask for help from the UN? this would help our credibility. as Hans Blix stated, the lack of finds is 'conspicuous.'

    also about the al Qaeda suspect in Baghdad, he is an associate of an affiliated group and the US does not know if he had connections with the government of Iraq. His capture is not a justification for pre-emptive war.