Can`t sleep...too stressed

[jenbstevieb]

Democracy is supposed to support peace and diplomacy. Our leaders are voted in by us to serve us. Why then are we being ignored in our objection to the upcoming middle east conflict? Freedom is great but surely before we go to war a referendum should be held......war involves us all in many ways, some direct others indirectly and I think the people should have had their say. I still cant make my mind up whether I`m for or against conflict but really do feel that we should have been formally asked for our opinion on the matter.......

I`m worried about the morning after. NATO is broken and defeated, the UN has been ignored...the world will be a better place without Saddam Hussein as leader of the Iraqi people but this will not even begin to heal the massive wounds currently being inflicted on democracy and diplomacy the world over.....

Worried...worried........

[Marky Boy]

Dont think were being ignored. Its just that the goverment will always do what the see is best in thier minds. Tony Blair has made a stand and I trust him because of it. I dont usually like politicians but he is not bowing to he said this and they said that. He said what he wants and hes sticking buy it. Its a tough decision to make but if he thinks that is the way to go Im with him.

They way I veiw it is that he runs the country and knows shit loads more about it than me so who am i to tell him how to do his job.

As for the UN the UK is only upholding international laws that have been broken buy saddam. If all the countries sat around like France and ignored it we'd end up like with a world that the criminals can do what they want.

In the end of the day its gonna happen so we should just all be supportive.

Dont worry though. I think this will all be over quickly and we can get on with our lives.

:) :)

[shadow21]

Originally posted by Marky Boy
As for the UN the UK is only upholding international laws that have been broken buy saddam. If all the countries sat around like France and ignored it we'd end up like with a world that the criminals can do what they want.


Hi Mark,
I usually don't like to talk about countries' politics, but I'd like to add a few comments to yours, as you seem to follow the "pro-war-anti-French" mood... (no offense)

1 - "France" didn't sat around, as you seem to think. "France" expressed its opinion to say "NO" to an unjustified war - and that is the point - AS FAR AS WE KNOW, that war is not necessary AT THE MOMENT!!
Of course Saddam has biological and chemical weapons: U.S. know that: they sold them huge amounts.
Of course Saddam has high capacity weapons: US, France, UK, and 49 other countries around the word sold Saddam weapons.

US (more precisely, the integrist who leads the country ) wants a war, and of course, he will have it, that leads to point 2:

2 - When you say: "we'd end up like with a world where the criminals can do what they want". Who are you thinking of?

Bush says that Saddam is a dictator (and that's true, I don't mean to say the contrary, but how many countries in the world are led by a dictator), and he knows that too: US placed Saddam where he is now, and the rest of the world said nothing, because it was a good thing at that time...
But what is the definition af an imperialist dictatorship?
Bush says he wants to bring democracy to Irak: WHAT KIND OF DEMOCRACY WILL HE BE ABLE TO BRING if he is not able to wait for a democratic decision himself??? I thing THIS is really frightening.

3 - (and that's my personal opinion) Don't you think each country deserves the right to defend itself?
What if, one day, US decides that UK (well, more likely France at the mo' :rolleyes: :rolleyes: )is far too much dangerous for the rest of the world? After all, UK (and France) owns mass destruction weapons, nuke, an army...

and finally:

4 - Do you realize WHAT is a war?
It's not only a word! People -MOSTLY civilians- will be killed:dead-death-destruction-end of life...
Do you realize even hospitals will be bombed?
Do you realize how much the 10 years embargo struck that country?
Do you know what kind of weapons will be used? let me help you a little on that: they didn't use their whole stock of nuclear ammo during "desert sorm"....

I don't mean to change the mind of anybody here, just to show another point of view. No offense

Cheers

Fabien

[Leon]

Hey Fabien,

great to hear another point of view and I agree with all points.
3 is a little dubious, but you're correct, it is a country's right to defend itself. However, is it the right of a repressive regime to defend itself? THis leads into the arguement of who is right... ANd that one has no answer.

[Marky Boy]

No offence taken. Everybody is entitled to their own veiw. Its always good to hear another opinon. :)

I dont want to see war like me and the next guy. Its just sometimes these things have to happen.

[Robbie]

The argument goes that WE voted the MP's in and they are representing us in the Commons and we therefore don't need a referendum.
Personally I agree with Shadow 21, but war now seems inevitable. I'd like to see it over as soon as possible with the minimum nuber of civilian casualties possible. I think people can become a little detached from what war actually is due to it all taking place so far away.

[Martin]

I beleive this war is totally unjustified and Blair and Bush have show no regard for the democracy of the UN.

If we lived in a ture democracy our MP's would vote the way their constituancy wanted not just tow the party line.

[Will Taylor]

Blair is going against the will of the people who elected him, and against the will of the Labour party - as a result I should be very surprised if steps are not being taken at theis very minute to remove him from office.

Robin Cook, anyone?

[SMiFFAD]

i dont think any of us can comment on wether the war is just or unjust, as i suspect none of us have any real facts about the state of the middle east.

The only people who have these are our polititions, letting us vote would not be right IMO, as we cannot make the decision based on facts......and we are not going to be given facts as this would damage any possible war plans.

Sadamm is a threat to the world, he is certainly a threat to his own people. BUT i dont think America is going about this the right way at all. i dont belive for starters they are going to war for the oil fields, i think this is babble made up by anti war protesters, simple propoganda. Think back to 9-11, the whole argument behind the terrorists was that the west is trying to impose its will and belifes on the rest of the world.........just like the us is now.....i think this is going to be very dangerous, not because of iraq, but all the other terroist groups.....who are just sitting back and saying "well your prooving our points".

i think this will open the flood gates for them.....iraq is going to be the easy bit...the after affects are not going to be nice.

Added to this that the UN might as well no longer exist....and we are headed for trouble. Give us 20 years and the world is going to be an unbearable place to live.....long before we run out of petrol so get out and drive :D

Like i said, i am not in a position to say wether war is justified or not..........we just have to sit on the fence and have our desinys decided for us......as is always the way.

[Leon]

Originally posted by Will Taylor
Blair is going against the will of the people who elected him, and against the will of the Labour party - as a result I should be very surprised if steps are not being taken at theis very minute to remove him from office.

Robin Cook, anyone?

Gordon Brown is waiting in the wings. Have you noticed how he has been TOTALLY silent?

Was talking to one of my clients earlier, who also sees no future at all for the UN.
Plus considering that this war will go atomic and that there will be internal strikes against this country.

[Will Taylor]

I said Robin Cook as he was the first of the Cabinet Ministers to walk out, but yeah, Gordon Brown is just as likely if not more likely to get in to No 10.

The League of Nations was a UN like organisation, was (ironically)created by US President Wilson after WWI to prevent war breaking out again. However, it was dissolved/ignored when its mandates were ignored by major powers doing whatever they felt like, and everyone realised that the L of N couldn't do anything about it.

I say it's ironic, as it is now America who is going to effecticvely destroy the UN by ignoring it over Iraq to secure US economy, just as Germany destroyed its ancestor the L of N, by doing whatever it felt like to expand it's empire...

[Jeff]

Wasn't the UN supposed to be a step on from the L of N because it had it's own army? Perhaps the UN could in theory, therefore take military action against the UK and USA for going to war without the UN's say so?

[Will Taylor]

In theory, yes, in practice, the USA are armed to the teeth with the better weapons than anyone on the continent, and they have more of them...