Quote:
Originally Posted by mbenz2001";p="
I trust Bush to do what is right for me and this Country not the rest of the world. After all we have already seen where the rest of the world put their priorities and they are not with ours. When Bush made those remarks in one of his speeches soon after 9/11, do you think he wanted to say "Your either with us or against us"? He was forced to make those remarks because of all of the BS he got from Countries (we thought were our friends) that said they wouldn't/ couldn't help in the war on terrorism.
|
It seems to me the bullying attitude of the US administration (publicly saying it would act against Iraq regardless of UN approval while negotiations were ongoing) was a big reason why consensus was impossible to reach. And the implication that the US should be allowed to do whatever it wants ('he was forced to make those remarks') is worrying. Why was he forced to make those remarks? Why could he not have shown some humility and negotiated with an open mind? No-one respects a bully.
In the end, we all want the world to be safer, but I'm afraid the willingness of the Bush administration to ignore international opinion and (arguably) international law by attacking Iraq (which it's now clear posed no threat whatsoever) is storing up problems for us all that far outweigh the benefits of getting rid of Saddam. It was a horribly short-sighted decision when there were other options available. It can only increase hatred of the US, UK and others as the terrorists can easily portray us as dishonest, criminal and aggressive to Arabs. A great recruiting tool.