1. Most Discussed
  2. Gainers & Losers

imho why pres bush thinks he must attack

  1. snuff

    6,931 posts.
    On my way to the supermarket this morning I was thinking about the situation and thought about it from the US position. On Sept 11 2001 planes were used as weapons of mass destruction and caused the deaths of over 3000 people in the US. From the perspective of the perpetrators they were killing US citizens and inflicting large harm on the US (forget about the fact that people from many countries died, it was the US they were attacking. Although the planes were not your classic WMDs they were used for that, how else can you describe the attack. Not long after there was the anthrax scare. Anthrax is a WMD and even today we do not know who did it.
    So, OK, here you are the leader of the most powerful nation on the face of the earth AND you have the most porous borders on the face of the earth (well maybe I am overstating that, there may be more porous borders in Europe) and one of the most open societies on earth. Nevertheless, it dawns that it is really impossible, despite all the rhetoric about Homeland security, to guard the borders. How can you deal with all those (thousands, tens of thousands?) full containers pouring into the US EVERY DAY. And what about the airfreight? How could you check everything? I think it an impossible task.
    So the situation is you have an enemy who has declared his hand and used the equivalent of a WMD. Do you think that Al Quaeda would not use other kinds of WMDs if they had the chance? The enemy has not been conquered. The enemy are also radical Muslims. It just so happens there is this place, Iraq a Muslim based society despite the Christian Deputy President, who have a record of having developed and used WMDs. They were driven back in 1991 but not completely defeated and despite the demand they disarm they have shown no inclination to fully co-operate for 12 years. They have also shown a willingness to support radical actions due to their support of the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Consequently, as Iraq regards the US as an enemy you can be certain that they will support other radical action. So when an Al Quaeda operative knocks on their door asking for WMDs for their proposed action plan will Saddam refuse? I think not. Iraq is the only Muslim nation with a history of WMDs and who may still have them, who has some sympathy for the radical position, because of the hate of Saddam and his government for the US. If Al Quaeda, or any other radical Muslim group, were to ask, Iraq would deliver WMDs. Pakistan also has a WMD but they do not have a record of using it, nor do they have a long standing problem with the US as Iraq has.
    The bottom line is that the US is very vulnerable and cannot be defended from such an attack from a WMD. It is too easy to deliver a punch from a small parcel - if you have the parcel. They have to wipe out any possible source of the biological or chemical agent, and the only known possible source is Iraq.
    If the US were to be attacked it would disastrous for many countries, including Australia.

    I am not in favour of war but I think I can understand the US position and I have to say that France does not seem to be understanding the US position at all well.

    I guess I have also argued for strong borders as well with which I am in full accord with Howard.

    Regards

    Desmond

DISCLAIMER:
Before making any financial decisions based on what you read, always consult an advisor or expert.

The HotCopper website is operated by Report Card Pty Ltd. Any information posted on the website has been prepared without taking into account your objectives, financial situation or needs and as such, you should before acting on the information or advice, consider the appropriateness of the information or advice in relation to your objectives, financial situation or needs. Please be aware that any information posted on this site should not be considered to be financial product advice.

From time to time comments aimed at manipulating other investors may appear on these forums. Posters may post overly optimistic or pessimistic comments on particular stocks, in an attempt to influence other investors. It is not possible for management to moderate all posts so some misleading and inaccurate posts may still appear on these forums. If you do have serious concerns with a post or posts you should report a Terms of Use Violation (TOU) on the link above. Unless specifically stated persons posting on this site are NOT investment advisors and do NOT hold the necessary licence, or have any formal training, to give investment advice.

Top