Sofia
"Basic debate involves links with proof. I don't seek a debate on this subject, because my beliefs have not yet been proven; they are based on strong feeling, and my own observations of history and media."
Nor have I been proven correct (or any of us) in our assumptions regarding the consequences of this action. But what does one do, as an engaged citizen, when one's rulers set out towards something so serious as war? As unprecedented as pre-emptive war? Where the "I disagree" voices to the plan run deeply in one's own country amongst not just the average citizenry but amonst the very most knowledgeable?
Then, I think, the address must be to something less happy than 'proof'. It has to be to self-education, as deep and as broad as one might manage, and to teasing apart issues of credibility of voice.
Relevantly, CBC TV had a wonderful program on this morning detailing the history of the Patriot missle issue which arose out of Desert Storm. As we know now, the army lied to the press and to congress, the administration lied to its citizens and to congress, and Raytheon lied to congress.
I also base my opinions on what I see. There is no proof that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 and there is no proof of them having weapons of mass destruction. Then you have Cellucci threatening Canada for our lack of support to the US in the war. The US are the ones who need to show proof that this war is justified and I haven't seen even a speck as of yet.
The following conversation took place recently in a courtroom somewhere in America:
Judge: So what exactly happened?
Defendant: Well, your honor, I killed him.
Judge: And why did you do it?
Defendant: I was afraid that if I didn't kill him, he would kill me.
Judge: Had he threatened to kill you?
Defendant: Well, no, not really.
Judge: Had he ever attacked you in any way?
Defendant: No, your honor.
Judge: Had he ever threatened to physically attack you in any way?
Defendant: No sir.
Judge: Was there something about him physically that intimidated you?
Defendant: No, definitely not. As you can see, I'm a big, brawny guy. And he was small and relatively weak.
Judge: Well then, did he have friends that threatened or intimidated you?
Defendant: No, your honor. He didn't really have many friends.
Judge: Did he have any weapons?
Defendant: I was afraid that he might have.
Judge: But did you ever see any weapons? Did he ever threaten you with any weapons?
Defendant: No, your honor. I sent some friends of mine over to his house several times to look for them though.
Judge: And ... ?
Defendant: They didn't find anything.
Judge: And when you killed him ...? Were any weapons found at that time?
Defendant: No sir.
Judge: So he didn't actually have any weapons?
Defendant: Well, I think he kept them well hidden. I know that he used to have some.
Judge: Used to? When was that?
Defendant: Oh, about fifteen years ago. He had some then for sure.
Judge: For sure? What makes you so sure?
Defendant: Because I sold them to him.
Judge: But I thought you were afraid of him?
Defendant: I was.
Judge: I see. Did he live near you?
Defendant: No. He actually lived all the way on the other side of town. We never really had occasion to see each other.
Judge: So your paths didn't really cross on a regular basis?
Defendant: No, sir. Our paths didn't really cross at all.
Judge: So this guy never ventured over to your side of town? And he never threatened you in any way, and never attacked you in any way, either personally or through a surrogate, and yet you felt threatened enough by him that you felt justified in killing him? Is that about right?
Defendant: That is correct, your honor. Like I said, I was afraid that if I didn't kill him, he would kill me.
Judge: I see here that, according to the police report, you were found in the victim's home, standing over his dead body.
Defendant: That is correct.
Judge: So he didn't come looking for you -- you went looking for him? Is that correct?
Defendant: Yes, sir. I wanted to get to him before he got to me.
Judge: I see. Is there anything else you would like to add?
Defendant: Just that a year or two ago, I was assaulted.
Judge: By this same guy?
Defendant: No. By a different guy from a different neighborhood. That's what I told everyone, anyway.
Judge: And was this other guy a friend of the guy you killed?
Defendant: Oh, no. They hated each other.
Judge: So that assault had nothing to do with you feeling threatened by this other guy?
Defendant: No, not really.
Judge: Okay, then. This is clearly a case of self defense. You are free to go, sir.
Defendant: Thank you, your honor.
PD - another great post.....
whoops, us secret service shot at the Soviets leaving baghdad - good thing their car was armored. 5 diplomats were injured. Russia is pissed off. And, Condaliza Rice has just arrived in Moscow to have 'secret talks' with the goverment there.....
Webpage Title
That's a perfect summation, PDiddie. Nothing else to do now but protest the hell out of it and try to find ways to get decent officials elected.
P.D. Brilliant! If this is all your own work, you should be script-writing!
I've read an interesting these on the website of NRC Handelsblad(a Dutch newspaper)
They say the US has used the old trick of "deployment deception". In reality there are much more US soldiers in Iraq than the 100.000 the media was reporting about. They got the info from
the order of battle site
The article is a too long to translate so check out the site or
the article(in Dutch).
Thank you Frolic for posting the link to orbat.com. This is a credible source in my estimation.
Frolic -- Dag! Didn't sign in but heard Rumsfeld a while back saying some thing like 300,000 in Iraq or "on the ground," or whatever, in his press conference. I am not a reliable source -- was working and only half-heard the radio... but the number caught my attention...
250.000 à 300.000 is the total number of troops in the area. But the "official" number of Combat forces is about 100.000.
Official is what counts around here, unless we've decided to return to sanity!
edgar, What about this war are we supposed to like? Actually, the only part of this war that I can respond to is that Iraqi lawyer that walked 24 miles to save that 19 year old girl in the hospital. That's the only positive thing I've seen so far. c.i.
Well, they are saying on tv that Saddam may well be dead tonight - That may bring it to a quicker end.
