Quote:
Originally posted by theking
To say "to be a meat shield for haliburton" is a radical statement and is not applicable to the reality of the "mission" in Iraq. The mission in Iraq is to establish a Democratic Republic in the midst of an area of the world whose people...in general...are enemies of the Western world and their way of life. To establish a "jewel" in the mid-East in an effort to change the face of the mid-east...not for the benefit...per se...of the those people...but for the benefit of the Western world. In other words the mission in Iraq is an extention upon the war on "terrorism" and is a forward thinking long term goal. The troops in Iraq are there in defense of this country against its enemies as well as the enemies of the Western world in general.
As...for you feeling it is your "right to decide" whether your country is doing the right thing. Anyone can pick and choose what laws they will...or will not...obey. There of course are consquences for breaking any law. In the case of "draft dogers"...in this country...the consequenc five years in Federal Prison...as well as being ostracized by the majority of society...loss of job opportunities etc....as Americans in general have little use for "draft dogers".
|
You know.. I didn't really have that much of a different view to you before the war, but in everything that has happened afterwards i've had to re-evaluate my position.
we are both fairly pragmatic in that we do acknowledge it was a strategic grab for resources and locale. However, I honestly now do not think Iraq will ever be a shining example of a democratic republic. The US knows this which is why the Iraqi's aren't going to be allowed to hold elections, the governing council are a bunch of ex iraqi's and Saddam oppositionists who fed us total bullshit about their WMD, and we were only to eager to lap it up. And now they're being forced onto Iraq by America.. If they had the right to vote right now it would become an islamic state under majority shiite rule and basically an Iran clone, who are currently supporting the guerilla resistance financially and militarily.
I know it's for our benefit, but they way in which we are trying to achieve it doesn't ensure we are actually coming out at an advantage, at this point in time i'm not even sure it's a good thing that Saddam is gone, at least he crushed the islamic fundies with an iron fist. As long as he kept Iraq oil currency as US dollars and was contained he's probably a bigger asset then the current situation is shaping up to be.
personally for me it's looking like I would have rathered spend 80 billion on giving the CIA and NSA some serious kahoonas and quadrupling the intelligence community/muslim informant network.
I'd like to know whats being done about the actual and real threats to us from saudi arabia and pakistan as opposed to strategic aquisitions.
related to picking and choosing laws, yes I will choose to disobey a law I find immoral/useless/politically-religiously motivated/whatever and I don't give a flying fuck what anyone could possibly think about that decision.
Politicians are the most corrupt bunch of self serving leeches this side of the police force. I probably cannot express to you the total lack of hesitation in breaking and utter contempt I would feel for such a law.
I never speed, never drink drive, never cause any sort of disturbance, but when it comes to freedom of choice, unless my freedom is being threatened by someone other than the government I will not comply.
In this situation I would rather join the intelligence services to do some actual good rather than gambling in Iraq.