War in the name of protection/defence is right. But if you invade/kill/destroy a weak country who never really directly or indirectly harm you, you are committing atrocities. Iraq never harmed USA (some liers wanted to make you believe so) but no prove). How do you justify the killing of innocent Americans and Iraqis all in the name of perceived threat?.
2007-05-31 03:37:30 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Based upon your statement, I would assume that you think war in the name of religion is not justified? So why aren't you also directing your obviously biased comments at the folks who daily proclaim "Jihad" against peace loving peoples around the world and blow up innocent civilians with bombs who never directly or indirectly harmed anyone? The U.S., like all modern countries, may make mistakes, but at least we are no so desperate that we think straping a bomb to our chests will solve anything. In addition, when was the last time you saw food and medicine relief coming from a organization that spouts terror and hate? Get a grip.
2007-05-31 04:06:42 · answer #1 · answered by Beagle 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
WEAK! WHO the hell are u talking about??? and as for not harming ask a Kurd how they felt about Saddam's regime. they will be all to happy to tell you what Saddam did. oh by the way Saddam has announced on many occasions that he wishes for the destruction of America. Saddam did use chemical weapons against the Kurds. so there is your damn wmds.
2007-05-31 04:39:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Would you please rephrase your ignorant rant in the form of a coherent question, rather than stating it in the form of an uninformed lecture?
2007-05-31 03:48:46 · answer #3 · answered by Dave_Stark 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋