Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    FOR WAR:

    WMD

    AGAINST:

    To date (200+ days) no WMD has been found, it may be noted that America supplied Iraq with supplies for making WMD, especially when **** Cheney was the president of a pharmacutical company. Also The Iraq dossier was "inaccurate" because the copy given to the UN, to be photocopied somehow lost 8000 pages relating to mostly America's involvement in supplying the Iraqi regieme. Colombia, who was the head of security turned a blind eye, as its government is "propped" up byAmerican troops "helping" to fight the Drug barons.

    They went in because Saddam had threatened to use WMD. We cannot stand by and let people threaten others. We had to go in there for the safety of our people. How were we to know weather they had them or not? If he didnt have them then he shouldnt have said he did.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHAD)
    They went in because Saddam had threatened to use WMD. We cannot stand by and let people threaten others. We had to go in there for the safety of our people. How were we to know weather they had them or not? If he didnt have them then he shouldnt have said he did.
    in the dossier it made it clear, that he didnt have them
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    George Bush shouldn't even be the leader. Never forget that.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bigcnee)
    George Bush shouldn't even be the leader. Never forget that.
    correct
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHAD)
    They went in because Saddam had threatened to use WMD. We cannot stand by and let people threaten others. We had to go in there for the safety of our people. How were we to know weather they had them or not? If he didnt have them then he shouldnt have said he did.
    America has WMD's which they have used.
    Not even a little hypocritical.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    FOR:

    The USA cannot be blamed for civilian deaths in any case. You can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs.


    AGAINST:


    No-one who has ever experienced the true horrors of war ever makes a statement like this. It comes from a place of ignorance and superiority completely cut off from the reality of death and torment that war always brings. The aggressor is always to blame for the acts of that aggression. Ignorance is not a valid response (as the Nurenburg Trials established legally). It is well known that in modern warfare, 90% of the deaths are civilian, knowing this going in makes any act of war an immoral act.
    Saddam Hussain attacked his own people! Killed hundreds, and you are saying we should have stood by and watched him kiil thousands more? Yes, american, britishish, iraqis and others died in the so called war, but many many many would have died if the troops hadn't gone in and liberated them.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bigcnee)
    America has WMD's which they have used.
    Not even a little hypocritical.
    My God Bigcnee... something I agree with you on. Excellent stuff. There is hope for you yet
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHAD)
    Saddam Hussain attacked his own people! Killed hundreds, and you are saying we should have stood by and watched him kiil thousands more? Yes, american, britishish, iraqis and others died in the so called war, but many many many would have died if the troops hadn't gone in and liberated them.
    Liberated? Liberation requires some degree of success, and the invasion of Iraq is yet to be anything near that.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    FOR:

    The war was not waged for oil


    AGAINST:

    If we take a look at Bush’s National Security Strategy, published in 2002 one major contradiction stands out. America’s “unparalleled and unequaled force and influence in the world” would not be allowed to be matched or overtaken by any other country out of basic principle - yet several sections down we find that America will champion the cause of the “free-markets”. Simple mathematics show that China, with its enormous demographics and leverage over foreign investors, will easily become a plausible challenger to this American power within several decades. But China is an increasingly oil dependent economy, with 45% of domestic demand imported (comparable to America’s rising 5O%), and has signed a panalope of contracts with Iraq for its oil needs. In a free market this would empower Saddam Hussein or a baathist successor; and build a new world power, China. It makes sense to demolish these contracts and have American firms snap up new ones, the future of American power depends on it.
    Saddam did exploit Iraqs most useful resource of oil, but where did the money he made go? To the people? to good homes? to good food 4 his people? to clean water supplies? to boosting the countrys ecnomy? no! It was spent on luxurious palaces for HIMSELF! NOONE ELSE!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHAD)
    Saddam Hussain attacked his own people! Killed hundreds, and you are saying we should have stood by and watched him kiil thousands more? Yes, american, britishish, iraqis and others died in the so called war, but many many many would have died if the troops hadn't gone in and liberated them.
    Yes, but many more died because of the embargo. Iraq had one of the top 5 best health care system in the world before the war, but now it is a shambles.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    FOR:

    Iraq deserves retribution for the 911 terrorist attacks


    AGAINST:

    Iraq had nothing to do with those attacks. There is no credible evidence linking the two. They are a relatively weak and poor country, isolated from world opinion. They have almost zero reach outside their own borders. They pose effectively no threat as US investigations themselves have shown (ignored by the White House). Also indeed Iraq is America's only potential ally in that region as Sadaam waged an unheard war against the Taliban who wanted to topple him.
    If you read my original thread, I didn't say anything about them being to blame for the terrorist attacks. (and neither has anyone else on this board)>
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHAD)
    Saddam did exploit Iraqs most useful resource of oil, but where did the money he made go? To the people? to good homes? to good food 4 his people? to clean water supplies? to boosting the countrys ecnomy? no! It was spent on luxurious palaces for HIMSELF! NOONE ELSE!
    That is better than being spent on weapons of increasing destructivity, whilst saying we shoould have world peace.

    That is better than being spent on propping up false regiemes like israel's domination over the arabs
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    Yes, but many more died because of the embargo. Iraq had one of the top 5 best health care system in the world before the war, but now it is a shambles.
    as always, another excellent point.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    Cost of War: So far the cost of the Iraq war is exceeding $89,000,000,000, that’s is equal to building 4000 new hospitals, or hiring 1,209,000 new teachers.

    Surely it is worth it to save thousands of innocent lives!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 2776)
    Yes, but many more died because of the embargo. Iraq had one of the top 5 best health care system in the world before the war, but now it is a shambles.
    Where did you get that from? I find it hard to believe, but if it is true, I'd be curious to know your source.

    Thanks.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHAD)
    If you read my original thread, I didn't say anything about them being to blame for the terrorist attacks. (and neither has anyone else on this board)>
    For completeness sake. And also for any americans who thinks that.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CHAD)
    Surely it is worth it to save thousands of innocent lives!
    yes, but now america owns another oil field
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zizero)
    Where did you get that from? I find it hard to believe, but if it is true, I'd be curious to know your source.

    Thanks.
    read it in a newspaper somewhere, that was before he attacked kuwait of course.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zizero)
    Where did you get that from? I find it hard to believe, but if it is true, I'd be curious to know your source.

    Thanks.
    Let me guess, you're one of those people that believe all the propaganda about Iraq being sooo third world right? Granted Iraq wasn't the best, but in some areas of life, it was a lot better than most.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sire)
    Let me guess, you're one of those people that believe all the propaganda about Iraq being sooo third world right? Granted Iraq wasn't the best, but in some areas of life, it was a lot better than most.
    in fact the UK healthcare system ranks as low as some 3rd world countries
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 16, 2004
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.