Quote:
Originally posted by The Strangler
Mark my words, if we continue to tip toe around international opinion and allow those who have no reason to fear a durty nuke being set off in their country, we will be attacked again. And this time I fear more will wind up dead.
|
Well since I'm a dumbass and I hate getting into big debates about things like this, I didn't even read some parts of your post...
But I decided to reply to this part...
First of all, a "Dirty Bomb" wouldn't even be a very big devistating thing... people hear the nuclear material part and they're like "Nuclear Material!? A NUKE!? HUGE EXPLOSION YADA YADA!" but a dirty bomb is just like a normal bomb laced with Nuclear Material... Sure it would kill people and most likely render a small area of wherever uninhabbitable for awhile (quite a long while), but it wouldn't be like a nuclear bomb, and it would in no way top Sept. 11th in death toll...
Now a normal nuclear bomb/device/thing is a different story... But I think that would be quite hard for them to get that in this country...
But I dunno...
And yes we will be attacked again eventually in one way or another... Big or small... In the US or just US interests abroad... I think it's pretty much inevitable, even if we try to do something about it... Simply because there are sooo many terror cells in soooo many countries...
But whatever... I guess doing something is better than doing nothing in some situations, and yes having a "this isn't dangerous" attitude is bad in some cases, but having a "SHOOT FIRST AND ASK QUESTIONS LATER YEEEEHAW I WANT A WAR W00T W00T!" attitude is too... What if you attack someone and then find out they weren't doing what you thought they were doing or whatever? Then chances are the US would think up some way to cover their asses... I'm not saying they're NOT up to something suspicious, I'm saying WHAT IF they're not... And of course you say WHAT IF they are, but saying what if they are is just as much a possibility as saying what if they aren't when nobody knows 100% for sure... And just as dangerous... don't do something and if it turns out he is up to no good, some place gets attacked and people die...
Attack them and have it turn out he wasn't doing what we thought he was doing, people die and chances are it'd give Arabs and Europeans (like Angrist
) another reason to dislike Bush and stuff...
"But we still all strive for the reasonable, peaceful resolution and men like Saddam Hussein use our humanitarian nature against us. He constantly tests our mettle by refusing to allow inspectors into his fascilities"
I know this is a much smaller scale, but I constantly have people coming in and out of my room and it's quite annoying... Sometimes they could in and I'm like "I don't want anybody in here right now" Or say things like "Man I wish I had a working lock on my door"... Does this mean I'm doing something I shouldn't be doing? No, it means I don't want a bunch of people wandering in and out of MY room...
It's easy for us to just say "Well just let the damn inspectors in and all will be fine!", but Saddam might just have some big ego (or whatever it would be called) and is like "No! This is my country and I don't want weapons inspectors in!"...
Does it sound suspicious? Yes... Does it means he IS doing something suspicious? No...
And really, I think he most likely is... and I'm not necesarily against attacking Iraq... But I'm just looking at all different possibilities rather than "HE'S DEFINANTLY UP TO NO GOOD! LET'S GO IN AND TAKE OVER THE COUNTRY WHEN HE'S ALREADY LET WEAPONS INSPECTORS BACK IN AND IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF THE WORLD DOESN'T LIKE THE IDEA!"
And you'd probably argue that "Bush and them must have good proof and all that that Iraq is up to no good, otherwise they wouldn't be trying to push the idea of attacking Iraq so much"...
But if they had such amazingly good proof, why are a number of big countries still against the idea?
It seems like EVERYONE is very divided on the whole deal, and yet the people who want to attack are yelling and screaming that it's so damn obvious and we need to do it and all that... If it was so damn obvious, why are people so divided?
Bah I dunno, I hate this whole issue where people get so divided about things and bicker back and forth about it...
Whatever the US does, I just hope they do the right thing and don't make a mistake... Meaning if we attack Iraq, they better have really been up to no good, otherwise public opinion and stuff in various European countries and the middle east could go down (if it's not already low enough)...
I hate debating about serious topics
Edit: Oh, and I still don't think Angrist meant that the Holocaust was the US's fault, and it doesn't sound like that's "Just about what he said" to me...