3/30/2003: US soldier carries injured Iraqi soldier

[quzah]

Originally posted by juju
But I'm going to assume you only mean to clarify your original intent. (I'm a trusting kind of guy)

Yes. I was trying to clarify the context or to what my original post was refering. Iraq in the last decade has done nothing with their WOMD. They didn't invade Kuait in the last decade, technicly it's 12 years. Iran was before that.

Incidently, we're the ones who aided them against Iran, no? Also, we're the ones who sold them the shit they used on their own people, correct?

So really, again, you're only the bad guy if we decide you are. Today Iraq is again the bad guy. For the past ten years, they weren't.

Or maybe they weren't important politicly at the time because there wasn't a Bush in the Whitehouse? One can only speculate...

I'm sure some day Korea will be worthy enough of us attacking them for an equally good reason. We'll all argue that we're liberating the North Koreans from their horrible goverment.

We'll wave banners and declare ourselves the champion of the day.

The fact will still remain: You're only a bad guy if today we decide you're worth attacking. Otherwise, we don't care about you.

Originally posted by juju
I agree that this was the stated purpose of the administration. But you were trying to say that it was only about oil, and I was simply saying that you can't prove that.

In the end, their intent doesn't matter. Only the consequences matter. And in this case, I think that the good far, far outweights the bad in this scenario. Sure, I'd rather they not go around invading countries willy-nilly. But have no control over that. And I see no reason to rage against the war after the fact when so much good is coming out of it.

Well I still believe it's about oil. But that aside, I never intend to change anyone's mind or even have them agree with my opinion. It's against my philosophy. Politics, religion, etc, it's not my goal or wish to change anyone's view. Just to give pause for thought. I don't really care if anyone agrees or disagrees with me. I just provide food to chew on.

Originally posted by juju
I didn't invade anybody. I'm just a guy with a computer. Don't ascribe to me likes, intents, and actions that aren't my own.

We in this context describes America. Obviously I didn't invade, but if you were to take 'we' literally, I'd be including myself. It is a common genralization. People use 'we' to reference their country, their company, etc.

Originally posted by juju
Yes, you did. You said:

It seems clear that even you don't believe what you really said.

No. This is again a common generalization. Or maybe it's just my understanding of the English language. The generalization here was in the same line of thought as described previously in the same post. I stated that Iraq had done nothing with their WOMD, or hell, with any weapons, to the rest of the world (as I was trying to outline the context of the original post's intent). This thought was held over to this repeated text later in the post (the item you quoted). I figured it was a common understanding that when you've detailed context, you don't need to repeatedly do so throughout the rest of the pharagraph(s) on the same topic.

I'll be more specific next time.

TTFN.

Quzah.