You did not, because you did not have a UN mandate to do it. It was also the embarrassing fact that Saddam Huessien asked you for permission to invade Kuweit and your ambassador screwed it up by not giving a clear answer. He interpreted it as he had your permission. However, look for the motive as they always say. If you do, we are back to my original presumption. With current R/P value of 10 years for oil and 7 years for "Natural gas", I think that it is telling.
What I would do? First I would concentrate on making a sustainable Energy Plan for US, which minimized dependence on fossil fuels and really did something on energy conservation. Secondly, I am happy that I cannot be elected as US president. Because I am very bad on lies and prefer not to have to do them. Would not be able to work well with people like Cheney, Rumsfelt and the rest of the gang. Hakan At 10:01 PM 7/17/2003 +0000, you wrote: >Well, it never was given as a reason... > >Probably we should have taken out Saddam back in '91. Does anybody >remember why we didn't? My short memory might be faulty, but it seems >like the UN and the "world community" didn't want to. They wanted to play >around with the embargo. > >If somebody can confirm that, I'd appreciate it, becasue I really am not >sure. I think the UN and "the world" thought the embargo was an >appropriate punishment, so I don't think we can blame the it on the US. > >Here's a link >http://www.socialistworker.org/2003-1/449/449_08_RegimeCollapse.shtml to a >brief history of the governance of Iraq for the past 50 or 60 years. I >can't vouch for it's accuracy; It isn't what you'd call a source I've got >a great familiarity with :). > >I think it probably is better to do the right thing late than not at >all. Yes it did cost lives to not support the Iraqi attempted revolution. > >So given the situation early this spring, what would have been acceptable >evidence (or reason if you prefer) for the congress to declare war on Iraq? > >The UN didn't have enough hair on its backside to enforce their own >resolution, so how would you get around "The World Community" (That's >mostly France, Russia, and Germany who sold a ton of stuff to Iraq on >credit that wouldn't get repaid after a war) and their resistance to do >what the UN really should have done on its own? > >I'll also admit to getting out of my league in this discussion. My >original point was simply that we ought not be using federal dollars to do >allot of things that the federal government does, no more no less, and I'd >like to steer the discussion back to that direction. > >Eric > >--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Hakan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Eric, > > > > I have not heard that reason before and if that was the sole reason, > > I could have supported it. Some of those mass graves are also > > from the period when Iraq fought a proxy war against Iran. I do > > not want to argue, because some of them are also from more > > recent days. I have never said that Saddam Hussein was not a > > brutal dictator, because he was. I am not going to say that Bush > > was not lying to us either, because he did. Two wrongs does not > > make one right and they are both despicable. > > > > Personally I believe that the Iraqi people would have had a better > > chance against Saddam, if US would not have weaken them by > > an embargo that killed thousands of children and broke down > > the infrastructure and moral of the people. I belive that a good > > support to the resistance when it needed it, would have changed > > things. Instead of betrayal and inactivity, when they were killed > > in thousands. That was a large inhumanity at the time and I was > > baffled by the US double moral. So many of those mass graves > > are from a time when US encouraged uprising, but failed to > > help the ones who did and by that share a certain responsibility > > for the existence of those mass graves. Think about all those brave > > men who thought that they had the US support and what they > > must have thought when they faced the execution squads. > > > > I know that the Americans have short memory, but it should at > > least be some limitations of what you are allowed to forget. > > > > Hakan > > > > > > At 07:00 PM 7/17/2003 +0000, you wrote: > > >Tell the families digging through the mass graves for their relatives > that > > >we didn't do the right thing. > > > > > >Eric > > > > > > > > >--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Hakan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Eric, > > > > > > > > Do not worry, if US can get the right "American democracy" government > > > > in place. US have secured close to its 25% need of the worlds oil > resources > > > > and the money was well spent. In that case you can definitely say that > > > > US did the right thing for US. Who cares about the Iraqis? They > have the > > > > wrong religion and do not appreciate the American culture anyway. The > > > > world is a better place for American actions, after Iraq. It is so > > > afraid of > > > > Americans, that it is a petty that US cannot benefit from the extra > Biogas > > > > production and use it for solving the Natural gas problem. > > > > > > > > Hakan > > > > > > > > At 02:32 PM 7/17/2003 +0000, you wrote: > > > > >Actually, I agree that we should have had a formal war declaration. > > > > > > > > > >I DO think we did the right thing, and that the world is a better > place > > > > >for our actions in the past few months, but I think the methods by > which > > > > >we got to the decision to do it probably are suspect. > > > > > > > > > >It's an example of how violating the constitution "just a little bit" > > > > >becomes a slippery slope that isn't recoverable. > > > > > > > > > >Abe Lincoln was the first to get away with a wholesale violation > of the > > > > >constitution by not letting the south secede peacefully. The whole > > > > >concept of our government was a VOLUNTARY union of states. Once > > > > >membership becomes irrevocable, there is no defense against bad > > > > >government, and the country hasn't been the same since. > > > > > > > > > >Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >--- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, "Bryan Brah" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Eric, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Taking your argument a step further, we wouldn't be in this war > if the > > > > > > executive branch had not usurped the power to declare war from the > > > > > > legislative branch. Or rather if Congress had not allowed the > > > President > > > > > > to usurp its responsibilities. According to the Constitution > Article > > > > > > I, section 8, Clause 11 "(Congress shall have the power) To declare > > > > > > War." If the question of a declaration of war had been put to > a vote, > > > > > > it would have failed miserably. Instead our congressional leaders > > > > > > settled on a much weaker euphemistic "Joint Resolution for the > > > > > > Authorization of the Use of Military Force." This is NOT the > same as a > > > > > > declaration of war, and allowed our congressmen to pussyfoot > around the > > > > > > actual issue of invading another sovereign nation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will agree with you that we should not be funding "non-delegated" > > > > > > federal programs, but even so their cost is miniscule compared > to the > > > > > > daily, weekly, monthly and eventually yearly cost of the Iraq > > > > > > occupation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So you are right in a round-about way. Billions and billions of > > > our tax > > > > > > dollars would not be wasted fighting an unjust and illegal war > had the > > > > > > constitution been obeyed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -BRAH > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > From: mtushmoo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 7:21 PM > > > > > > To: biofuel@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Subject: [biofuel] Re: If you"re pro war, read this!!!!! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In biofuel@yahoogroups.com, Kris Book <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > http://www.costofwar.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Since the war is paid for using federal dollars, and none of the > > > > > > programs compared to the war cost are actually pograms that the > > > > > > constitution delegates to the federal government, it seems to > me that > > > > > > we should be cutting all those non-delegated federal programs > to pay > > > > > > for the war, which is a power that actually DOES belong to the > Federal > > > > > > government. > > > > > > > > > > > > Our tax dollars wouldn't be being wasted if the constitution were > > > > > > being obeyed. The federal government has no business in many > of the > > > > > > programs that it uses to meddle in our lives. > > > > > > > > > > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Buy Ink Cartridges & Refill Kits for Your Epson at Myinks.com Free shipping on orders $50 or more to the US and Canada. http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5705&lp=home/epson.asp http://us.click.yahoo.com/brYXfA/_xWGAA/ySSFAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
