The war that can never be won
فوزى فراج Ýí 2008-07-28
The war that can never be won
The Iraq war can never ever be won, and the idea that we have to win is defying both logic and the truth. that war was waged on groundless reasons, on false and fabricated accusations, it was illegal and was never authorized by the UN security council, it was an invasion to a sovereign country, that caused the destruction of the infrastructure, the killing of 100,s of thousands of innocent people, the displacement of millions, the waste of hundreds of billions ( about a trillion) of tax payers money, everything that had to do with this war was and is immoral, illegal and unethical regardless of all the justifications that seem to be as untruthful and phony as the reasons given in the first place. So how and under what conditions could McCain/ Bush define as victory or winning the war, yes every war can be lost and can be won, but not this one, it can never be won, as long as there are innocent people, hundreds of thousands of them that were murdered and lost their lives, and a country that is in shambles, this war can never be won, thousands of Americans has given the ultimate price and their loved ones will never see them again, babies who will never see their parents or ask for their advice when they need it, or parents who will never see their children or take them to school on their first day, that war can never be won as long as these conditions remains, and since these conditions will never cease to exist, this war can NEVER EVER be won. Those responsible for that war must be held accountable, and must face a judge and a jury of their peers to determine if they were guilty of SOMETHING!!!
Senator McCain continues to support the war and said on many occasions that he would rather lose the election than lose the war, he said he will never surrender, the good senator apparently is still suffering from the Vietnam defeat syndrome , he wants so badly to win A WAR, he will never recognize that a war that was waged unlawfully, unjustly, illegally, immorally, and unethically can never be won,( and that tells volumes about what kind of a president he would be when it comes to respecting the laws, about his morality and his ethics……..etc), there is no winning in a war like this, what would the criteria for winning this war be Mr. McCain, can you in all honesty present it to the families of the over 4000 Americans who lost their lives in this war with a straight face and tell them your loved ones paid the ultimate price for this, or to the more than 30,000 injured and disable Americans, How about the forgotten innocent Iraqis that you NEVER mentioned a word about them Mr. McCain, the hundreds of thousands who were killed because of your war Sir, would your criteria for winning the war be something to console them or bring them cheers, or the millions of Iraqis who became homeless because of your war, or they don’t count, they have no value to you as long as you can claim that you “ won the war”, they have no value just like those innocent Vietnamese you dropped your bombs on them while they sleep, of course they do not count as long as you can say, my friends , we will never surrender, we must win this war, you sir should be called the WAR candidate, since you seem to be obsessed with WARS . That is all what you are about sir, wars and winning the wars, as you said, I know how to win a war, the problem is the only war you were directly involved in, you lost it decisively.
I know how to win wars !!!!!, so being the president of the US has been reduced to knowing how to win wars, never mind the Economy that is in its lowest point in decades, never mind Gas prices, never mind the housing and health care and education and a whole list of other issues, important to the American people, for as long as you know how to play with wars and win wars, it is all ok, but honestly Sir, you keep saying I know how to win wars, why don’t you tell us, inform us, educate us, which war did you run and managed that you won????? . Please Sir, tell us which war did you really win!!!! The American People and American need a president who know how to win the PEACE, how to restore our reputation and credibility with other nations, how to fix what the Bush administration were able to destroy In eight long years.
You now talk about your days as POW, you, admitted that because if your Dad, and being a high ranking officer, you were offered to be released, but you refused, yes you Sir, said you have REFUSED to be released unless others who were POWs before you were released, you speak as if it was all up to YOU, that you were in control and in charge of who gets released and who does not, as if you were in command in that POW camp, that as if you were in a position of giving orders to your captors, Sir, those who captured you, and as you said, tortured you, were the ones in command, those were the ones giving the orders, and if they really decided to release you, they would have done it regardless of what you say or what your wishes were, they would have released you even if they have to drag and drop you at the nearest red cross , so that Gallant and brave mask you pretend to put on, somehow does not fit, so please, please do not insult our intelligence .
You finally said that you would withdrew the troops from Iraq( that after saying you would stay there for 100 years) but only after achieving victory and Honor, as far as Victory, we have discussed that above, this war can never be won by any standard of decency, now to what you call HONOR, do you Sir know what Honor is, do you have any idea what it means, what is your definition of honor, is part of that honor of yours to invade a country with no justification whatsoever, without any authorization from the international community, the UN security council, without any legitimate reasons, to destroy that country and bring death and destruction to the citizens, to kill hundreds of thousands and displace millions, to kill over 4000 of your own men and women to injure tens of thousands, to cost the tax payers of this country one trillion dollars and still counting, which part of your HONOR was that senator, honestly, if you know that that country was able to really defend itself against your invading forces and to inflect a very heavy casualties on you, would you still have invaded it!!! Very doubtful you would, What kind of honor are you talking about senator, the honor of removing a dictator, who gave you the authority to remove dictators around the world, who gave you the right be it legal or moral, how many other dictators are still around, are you planning to remove all of them, or just those that you feel you can win a war against, was the price paid by the Iraqis and the Americans for removing Saddam worth it Mr. McCain, was it?
اجمالي القراءات
13603
للمزيد يمكنك قراءة
:
اساسيات اهل القران
التعليقات
(14)
Dear amr, Here is how
The UN, the Arab league, the neighboring states, the European union, and the Iraqi people must all step to the plate and assume their responsibilities, but first and foremost, the US must come clean and admit to the entire world the truth about that war, and take responsibility for what was done, be it paying reparations to the victims and a pledge to pay the cost of repairing the infrastructure, and a promise to have all those responsible to stand before an international tribunal to determine if there were any justification for what they have committed. The UN must take responsibility for replacing the occupation forces with other forces under the command of the UN generals to keep the order with a time table for the Iraqi government to take charge of their own internal affairs during which a systematic reduction in the UN forces must take place. The Arab league and European Union in addition to the neighboring states must agree to help stabilizing the situation and provide assistance that must be agreed upon in advance. The UN Security Council must pass a resolution defining the course of action that must be followed by all the above parties.
May be I am dreaming!!!!
Mr. Fawzy Farrag
Thanks for this article
To tell you the truth Mr. Faraj, when I was in Iraq and I was hearing that Bush wants to get rid of Saddam, I welcomed that, and when I was hearing that France and the World community didn't generally agree to this war, I was saying that the world community must be blind to leave such a murdurer like Saddam in rule of Iraq. Alot of us said the following : we need a change even if it will bear some disadvantages, we need a radical surgery.So I don't agree with you when you say that there is no justification for that war, actually it was fully justified, and the world community was blind and still it is blind, and actually Bush was right to go to Iraq.The problem is that the Americans didn't have a plan to rule Iraq, they didn't know what to do, and till now they don't know, that's the real problem. however the American's are not fully responsible about what happened in Iraq, The islamic world bears the most blame, it is unfortunate to say that but this is the truth, those miltant islamic groups have no ethics at all, they are prepared to kill innocent civilian people just because they are from other sector or to kill few american solidures. So the blame is not on Bush alone. However now seeing that the Iraqi government is stronger than before and seeing that a reconcilliation plan is on the ground, then I think that a bit by bit things can settle down towards the benefite of Iraqies. Of course no doubt Americans should pay money for all the destruction and the causualities that they are directly involved in. They should help the Iraqi government economically to setlle the displaced and improve Iraqi institutions, so that Iraq can move forwards after all these years of sorrow and misery. There is no benefit of blaming the past, we need to build the future, McCain is dreaming, he is fighting the wrong battle, on the wrong ground
Best Regards
Brother Zuhair Al-Jawhar
You said Bush was right to go to Iraq, and the war was justified, very well my friend
Let's see now, was Bush right when he said the invasion was about WMD
Was he right when he said to bring Democracy to Iraq and the ME
was he right about killing several hundred thousands of the Iraqi people , either directly or by proxy
was he right to destroy the infrastructure of Iraq
was he right to displace millions of Iraqis from their homes and or country
was he right to squander the Iraqi oil resources either in rebuilding what he destroyed or in displacing their revenues
was he right about increasing the Iranian influence in Iraq and the region
was he right about the military occupation of Iraq for more than five years now and may be to establish military bases there
was he right about destroying the Iraqi armed forces altogether
I can go on and on and on, but it seems to you that it was ALL worth it, just to get rid of ONE man, why didn't the Iraqi people do it themselves, they tried before and failed, but they should have continued to try again and again till they succeed, or do we always need the west to do everything for us, to fight our wars, to liberate us from our dictators, to provide us with our food , our medicine and healthcare, our transportations, our war machines, to educate and cloth our families, what do we exist for my friend, for procreation
should we after all complain that the west is exporting to us their values as being discussed on other articles here.
??
,
Thanks Mr.Farrag(To be continued)1
By the way I want to thank you again for caring about Iraqi issues, that's very nice from you really, I really do admire your support for Iraqies, and Mr.Farrag believe me these questions in your mind are always manipulating our minds,it is not easy to find answers to all your questions, and to tell you the truth it is sometimes painful to discuss these issues
was Bush right when he said the invasion was about WMD
Yes, Saddam was manipulative, that no body could really trust him, even us Iraqies we were thinking that he had these weapons, and for your information during the war, all farmacies were devoid of Atropine because we thought that gas war might happen, we also were seeking information about how to deal with nerv, etc.... that for you to see how things were in Iraq
Continuation 2
Was he right when he said to bring Democracy to Iraq and the ME
Yes, But I don't know how much serious he was, but certainly he didn't succeed, and again the fault is not Bush’s, he tried, but he cannot creat the impossible, you can lead the hourse to the pond but you cannot make it drink the water
was he right about killing several hundred thousands of the Iraqi people , either directly or by proxy
He didn't, Islamic faschist groups did it
was he right to destroy the infrastructure of Iraq
He didn't Iraqies did, But he is to be blamed for not protecting them when he first entered Iraq, that was a very big mistake and the americans should pay money to the Iraqies to rebuild what was distroyed because they didn't protect
was he right to displace millions of Iraqis from their homes and or country
He didn't Iraqies did, due to sectarian violence, Bush has nothing to do with it
Continuation 3
was he right to squander the Iraqi oil resources either in rebuilding what he destroyed or in displacing their revenues
Prove it, if you can prove it, then of course he wasn't right, but that has nothing to do with the original decision
was he right about destroying the Iraqi armed forces altogether
Of course, I totally agree with him on what he did, he was totally right about that
why didn't the Iraqi people do it themselves, they tried before and failed, but they should have continued to try again and again till they succeed
They tried and continued ,but they didn't succeed, they tried more than dosen of times, you can read the book of saddam's brother Berzan about the attempts to assassinate Saddam, all have failed
or do we always need the west to do everything for us, to fight our wars, to liberate us from our dictators, to provide us with our food , our medicine and healthcare, our transportations, our war machines, to educate and cloth our families
We only want them to help us to pass a certain stage, till we can then do these jobs
should we after all complain that the west is exporting to us their values as being discussed on other articles here
The west has the right to export their values to everywhere, that is what freedom of ideation entails, let them spread their values, and we should spread ours, and who proves to be the best shall survive
Mr.Farrag Saddam is not a small dictator, he is exceptional one in history, he is by himself responsible for the death of more than million Iraqi in the wars he launged on the neirbouring countries without any justification, what happened to Saddam was the righteous punishment that he deserves for his atrocities, with Saddam and his family Iraq has no future at all, at least now they have some future on the long run, it is not about one man as you think, it is much deeper than that, it is about a foolish regeem that insulted Iraqies and humiliated them, and endangered their lifes in foolish acts, Saddam is not comparable to any of the Arab leaders nowadays or before, To me the Arab leaders even Kadhafi are good leaders, But Saddam unfortunately was bad
The real american mistake was to occupy iraq, and the other mistake was to turn out of iraq a battle field to fight al qaeda, while actually al qaeda has no real grouds in the Iraqi culture, that's McCain falso claims
Zuhair
Answers to few questions
As a neutral witness, who new many Iraqis who escaped from the tyrany of Saddam, I can say, Yes Iraqis asked and welcomed the help of US to get rid of Saddam, and I believe that they were a convincing source of the information that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.
The one to be blamed in fact is George Bush Senior because he left Saddam in power although he had the chance to get rid of him in a clean way.
Why they failed after the initial invasion of Iraq, which was in fact the fastest war with the least casulaities in history"
becuase they did not have a good plan what to do next and they did not understand the nature of Iraq
Who is doing the killings in Iraq? the crazy radicals both on the Sunni and Shia sides who are conducting bloody war to get control over Iraq, and I believe US is deliberaltely leaving them kill each other on the assumption this is the best way to get rid of terrorist groups.,,
The only winner after this stupid and badly conducted adventure of Bush's Administration is Iran.
But now, regardless of what happened in the past, any premature withdrawal from Iraq will only result in a bloody chaos that will result in three states.
Dear Zuhair
Thank you for yor response
,
You seem to be in a minority with your views, and it is your right to believe in whatever you want. I just find it very difficult for me to think that I would approve of American forces invading Egypt with their tanks and armored vehicles to liberate Egypt from a dictator regardless of how brutal he was, I find it extremely difficult to visualize hundreds of thousands of Egyptians being slaughtered and maimed fleeing their homes to escape to other countries with their lives, I find it difficult to think that Egypt would be under occupation and soldiers of foreign countries control the streets and order Egyptians around, shoot them at well without any one holding them to account, I find it difficult to imagine that I replace one dictator with another one regardless of names and appearances of so- called democracy, I find it difficult to that new government in Egypt to be ruling form a fortified green zone just like the old dictator even in some of his palaces, I find it difficult to see the infrastructure of Egypt being destroyed and the people could not find the simple necessities of their daily life, I find all of this and much more very difficult even to imagine, but, I guess it is just me. thanks for your response.
Mr.Farrag
Thank you
You are thinking in a postdictal manner, while decisions are made predictally
You cannot understand Mr.Farrag because you didn't live under dictatorship like Saddam's. You lived your life under the last king of Egypt and Nasir both of which are hardly one percent of Saddam's dictatorship, While Sadat and Mubarak are democratic when you compare them to Saddam, that's why you cannot understand, and that's why many americans like you don't understand, a man who lived in America for the last 20 years of his life definitly can't understand what living under a dictator of the magnitude of Saddam mean
Anyhow, the most important thing now is for people to think about the Iraqi issue seriousely, the problem that I am seeing is that people are thinking of their issues and the Iraqies are the victims, for example Obama wants to withdraw the troops, just like that, beek abo, why because it is bad for the Americans, What an ethical approach, The americans are in part responsible for the Qaos in Iraq, and morally there is no way were they can withdraw from Iraq without securing some kind of a system that ensure a stable country that cannot go to bloody sectarian civil wars, they should leave when it is 100% sure that there is a central strong government with an a strong Army that can prevent any blood shed, and of course this government should be based on political reconcilliation ,a real and a strong one, otherwise a military dictator will be the only solution, or dividing Iraq into three states separated by international forces and strong international laws that prevents them from fighting each other, it is not enough for Obama to say that : it is Iraqi issues, and we should leave it to the Iraqies themselfs, that's no enough, actually that is not moral, this should be said later after a central strong government is secured
I myself want the americans to leave Iraq, but in a secure manner, that secure the life of Iraq people, not because of winning an election, I don't want the fate of a whole nation to be decided on the basis of personal ambicions of a winning an election, that's a disastor
Zuhair
Repeating the same mistakes
The problem in Iraq is that Bush Administration is repeating the same old mistakes.
Democracy and secularism must go hand in hand and parties in Democracy should compete according to Political Programs , not because they represent Kurds or Sunni or Shiaats . Such kind of Democracy must lead to the catastrophic situation emerging in Iraq and eventually a more Dictator regime , even worse than that of Saddam will emerge just to implent Security, US along with Secretary Rice or whoever will replace her will swallow their pride and accept that Regime. In fact Iran and its allies in Iraq and its allies in the Middle East are winning , just because the United States and Bush Adminstration are Repeating the same mistakes of Vietnam and Afghanistan.
Democracy and secularism must go hand in hand and parties in Democracy should compete according to Political Programs , not because they represent Kurds or Sunni or Shiaats . Such kind of Democracy must lead to the catastrophic situation emerging in Iraq and eventually a more Dictator regime , even worse than that of Saddam will emerge just to implent Security, US along with Secretary Rice or whoever will replace her will swallow their pride and accept that Regime. In fact Iran and its allies in Iraq and its allies in the Middle East are winning , just because the United States and Bush Adminstration are Repeating the same mistakes of Vietnam and Afghanistan.
You never fail to amaze me
It is acceptable to have a different point of view, it is acceptable to disagree, it is acceptable to explain your opinion, but, on the other hand, it is not acceptable to tell the other person repeatedly that he (does not or cannot understand), particularly when you are talking to him about things that he himself experienced and you did not, and further more when he is your father’s age, and you are talking about things that happened before you were born.
First of all, there is no good and semi- good or semi -evil dictator and evil dictator, a dictator is a dictator is a dictator; Nasser invented and introduced this sort of thing in that region and the rest who came after him are following in his footsteps. It is true I never lived under Saddam; neither did you under Nasser, so let’s not go there and compare.
Second, it is your prerogative to adopt whatever stand you are convinced that agrees with your principles and philosophy regarding the invasion and the fall out of it, if you were one of those that has been waiting for Bush to invade and would have greeted his forces with roses, then be it, however, that scenario never took place and the calculations and planning were all flawed. The results speak for themselves.
Thirdly, I do not know what is the meaning of (postdictal ???), if you mean that my thoughts are reactionaries and based on events after they happened, then you have again been wrong in your presumptions, these were my views even before the invasion, many people will tell ,who read my thoughts and who spoke to me will tell you that, as far as What Obama said, he is not stupid, and he knows the rules of the game, but since you seem to feel this way about him, I am delighted that you cannot vote in the upcoming election against him.
Mr. Jawhar, you said in your last reply (The americans are in part responsible for the( Qaos “chaos” in Iraq, and morally there is no way were they can withdraw from Iraq without securing some kind of a system that ensure a stable country that cannot go to bloody sectarian civil wars, they should leave when it is 100% sure that there is a central strong government ……etc) , on one hand you said they are the solution and the saviors to your problems, their invasion was just that, now you say they are the problem, which is it? And who will decide exactly when is the time to leave?
I have spent not 20 years in the US as you mentioned, but almost twice as long, and I know the American politics a whole lot better than most Americans, there is no president of the US who will spend over one trillion of tax payers money and lose over 4000 soldiers and over 40,000 injured who will cost the tax payers hundreds of additional billions during the course of the rest of their lives, and go to war just for the love of the Iraqi people or any other people, just to liberate them from a dictator and to give freedom and a stable government and then leave, it is not even naïve to believe this, the US have a long term plans and has to make a bigger profits on its investment of blood and money, and take these words to the bank.
Finally, what really amazes me about what you said in regards to the loss of 100s of thousands of Iraqis and displacement of millions and the occupation and destruction of the infrastructure and your attitude of yes it was worth it, I just would like to understand, how is it that you had a personal situation that I will not go in its details a few month ago, and you were extremely upset and worried about what happened to your family, no one as far as I remember died or got injured, but you can with a straight face tell me that it was worth it for all those hundreds of thousands to die and more to lose limbs and millions to fled their homes, and that was ok, and was worth it, as I said, you never fail to amaze me Sir.
Best Regards
First of all, there is no good and semi- good or semi -evil dictator and evil dictator, a dictator is a dictator is a dictator; Nasser invented and introduced this sort of thing in that region and the rest who came after him are following in his footsteps. It is true I never lived under Saddam; neither did you under Nasser, so let’s not go there and compare.
Second, it is your prerogative to adopt whatever stand you are convinced that agrees with your principles and philosophy regarding the invasion and the fall out of it, if you were one of those that has been waiting for Bush to invade and would have greeted his forces with roses, then be it, however, that scenario never took place and the calculations and planning were all flawed. The results speak for themselves.
Thirdly, I do not know what is the meaning of (postdictal ???), if you mean that my thoughts are reactionaries and based on events after they happened, then you have again been wrong in your presumptions, these were my views even before the invasion, many people will tell ,who read my thoughts and who spoke to me will tell you that, as far as What Obama said, he is not stupid, and he knows the rules of the game, but since you seem to feel this way about him, I am delighted that you cannot vote in the upcoming election against him.
Mr. Jawhar, you said in your last reply (The americans are in part responsible for the( Qaos “chaos” in Iraq, and morally there is no way were they can withdraw from Iraq without securing some kind of a system that ensure a stable country that cannot go to bloody sectarian civil wars, they should leave when it is 100% sure that there is a central strong government ……etc) , on one hand you said they are the solution and the saviors to your problems, their invasion was just that, now you say they are the problem, which is it? And who will decide exactly when is the time to leave?
I have spent not 20 years in the US as you mentioned, but almost twice as long, and I know the American politics a whole lot better than most Americans, there is no president of the US who will spend over one trillion of tax payers money and lose over 4000 soldiers and over 40,000 injured who will cost the tax payers hundreds of additional billions during the course of the rest of their lives, and go to war just for the love of the Iraqi people or any other people, just to liberate them from a dictator and to give freedom and a stable government and then leave, it is not even naïve to believe this, the US have a long term plans and has to make a bigger profits on its investment of blood and money, and take these words to the bank.
Finally, what really amazes me about what you said in regards to the loss of 100s of thousands of Iraqis and displacement of millions and the occupation and destruction of the infrastructure and your attitude of yes it was worth it, I just would like to understand, how is it that you had a personal situation that I will not go in its details a few month ago, and you were extremely upset and worried about what happened to your family, no one as far as I remember died or got injured, but you can with a straight face tell me that it was worth it for all those hundreds of thousands to die and more to lose limbs and millions to fled their homes, and that was ok, and was worth it, as I said, you never fail to amaze me Sir.
Best Regards
This discussion cannot be won.
Mr. Farrag
Nasir and Saddam????????? as if there is any comparison. There are different magnitudes of dictatorship my friend, Saddam is the worst no doubt. Your argument is built on the logical falsy of dichotomy, which I saw it in the subject of Al-cohol.
Second I didn't say that it is worth for 100 of thousands of the Iraqies to be killed, just to remove Saddam, I said that the decision is justified and it is. The killing of a single innocent individual is never justified, then how about thousands.
Postdictal means thinking after the event took place, you are simply blaming Bush for what he didn't know, and for what he didn't do. Justification my friend is based on events prior to the decision and not on what happened after, Example: I have a patient of which the current evidence point that he has the disease X, and when I operated on him, it appeard that he doesn't have it, and then after the operation the patient had infection and he died from Sepsis, then can I be blamed for that??? The legal answer is NO.
If you want to blame Bush, then you should blame hin on the grounds of evidence presented before the invasion not by what happened after it. It is not related to your opinion, it is related to Bush's political decision.
Who killed the 100 of thousands of Iraqies? was it the Americans, the answer is NO, who killed them was muslim fanatics, and you know that very well. If the international society was honest they would have backed the US, and liberating Iraq would have been something fully legal, and by then things would have been better, but what can I say?
By the way the situation on my family is still their, who told you it finished, it is still ongoing.
Anyhow, all of that is not important now. What is important is to think in a sensible manner how to secure the future of Iraqi people, even if this mean increasing american interests. Also I never said that Americans are Angles coming just to liberate Iraqi people, I know it is not the case. I am not the naeive person that you think.
However I think that it is time now for the Americans to start withdrawing from Iraq, and in this respect I agree with Obama for now, but it should be a careful plan such as to avoid massive blood shed, otherwise it would be immoral. Actually if I was an american voter I would have voted for Obama, not for McCain, because the later is fighting a war against terror in Iraq, and Iraq is not a base for Al qaidaa as he thinks.McCain is fighting the wrong enemy on the wrong ground.
I am sorry if I hurt your feelings,but the whole subject is painful really, and I think it is more painful to me than to you.
Do you know Mr.Farrag Not only the Iraqi war cannot be won, even discussions about this war cannot be won, and especially if the discussion was with a tough and intelegent discussor like you.
Zuhair
Discussisons are not for the purpose of winning
Wars can be won or lost of course, “not this war as I said”, games can be won or lost, discussions are not and never had been to be won, they are to exchange points of view, to shed light on issues, to express an idea or a vision; therefore, w hen one expect or struggle to achieve a victory in a discussion, they are usually, and most likely are not the ones to have a discussion with, and I am sure you are not one of those.
I am also sorry to hear that your family’s situation has not been resolved yet, and I hope for it to be resolved soon.
As far as the subject of dictators, or Nasser and Saddam, please do not fire one shot and run away with it, if you really want to discuss these two, be prepared to spend some quality time to go over their history, I am aware that Nasser had more admirers outside Egypt who regarded him as a hero and a phenomenon that does not happen but once in a thousand years, unfortunately, I do not subscribe to this idiocy, and BTW, my discussion about alcohol was not as you labeled “ fallacy of dichotomy” , it was real and realistic and supported by facts, it is not my responsibility to convince you or anyone else, I just state the facts as I see them, so let’s drop the labels, shall we!
As far as the example you mentioned to demonstrate that Bush cannot be blamed for the consequences of his war, it Is inaccurate to say the least, and I will not tell you what I really think of it, first of all, I do not know about the legal system in Jamaica, but, in the US, if you misdiagnose a patient only, that is a problem, if you misdiagnose and operate on him, this by itself is the worst nightmare of any surgeon in the US, if you misdiagnose and operate and he died even of other causes, it is even worse, you can be sued for your life and will lose the legal argument. So much for your example, now let me give you another example that may be close to home, say that you are a contractor, and you build for someone a building, you calculated all materials and strength and everything else, but failed in your calculations, and he got in that building, it collapsed, he and his family died, are you suggesting that it is not really your responsibility , Bush was duped in this war by the likes of Ghalaby, and he himself was bent on that invasion, may be that is why he never pursued the truth, just today, another book published by Ron Suskind uncovering more of the deceptions that the Bush administration went with to justify the war, this administration is one of the most corrupt that I had ever seen in the almost 40 years in the US, and it will go in history may be as the worst in the history of the US. So please do not tell me he is not responsible, there is also something called accomplice in the judicial system, and if he had not killed those Iraqis himself, he sure as hell was an accomplice in that act!! And must be held responsible, regardless of if some group in Iraq wanted him to rid them of Saddam.
Finally, yes it is important to look at the future, but one can never forget the past, and the statue of limitations should never be applied in this case, everyone must be accountable for his/her deeds. I have responded to Amr‘s comment about what I thought is the way out, but I am not holding my breath.
I am also sorry to hear that your family’s situation has not been resolved yet, and I hope for it to be resolved soon.
As far as the subject of dictators, or Nasser and Saddam, please do not fire one shot and run away with it, if you really want to discuss these two, be prepared to spend some quality time to go over their history, I am aware that Nasser had more admirers outside Egypt who regarded him as a hero and a phenomenon that does not happen but once in a thousand years, unfortunately, I do not subscribe to this idiocy, and BTW, my discussion about alcohol was not as you labeled “ fallacy of dichotomy” , it was real and realistic and supported by facts, it is not my responsibility to convince you or anyone else, I just state the facts as I see them, so let’s drop the labels, shall we!
As far as the example you mentioned to demonstrate that Bush cannot be blamed for the consequences of his war, it Is inaccurate to say the least, and I will not tell you what I really think of it, first of all, I do not know about the legal system in Jamaica, but, in the US, if you misdiagnose a patient only, that is a problem, if you misdiagnose and operate on him, this by itself is the worst nightmare of any surgeon in the US, if you misdiagnose and operate and he died even of other causes, it is even worse, you can be sued for your life and will lose the legal argument. So much for your example, now let me give you another example that may be close to home, say that you are a contractor, and you build for someone a building, you calculated all materials and strength and everything else, but failed in your calculations, and he got in that building, it collapsed, he and his family died, are you suggesting that it is not really your responsibility , Bush was duped in this war by the likes of Ghalaby, and he himself was bent on that invasion, may be that is why he never pursued the truth, just today, another book published by Ron Suskind uncovering more of the deceptions that the Bush administration went with to justify the war, this administration is one of the most corrupt that I had ever seen in the almost 40 years in the US, and it will go in history may be as the worst in the history of the US. So please do not tell me he is not responsible, there is also something called accomplice in the judicial system, and if he had not killed those Iraqis himself, he sure as hell was an accomplice in that act!! And must be held responsible, regardless of if some group in Iraq wanted him to rid them of Saddam.
Finally, yes it is important to look at the future, but one can never forget the past, and the statue of limitations should never be applied in this case, everyone must be accountable for his/her deeds. I have responded to Amr‘s comment about what I thought is the way out, but I am not holding my breath.
أضف تعليق
لا بد من تسجيل الدخول اولا قبل التعليق
بطاقة
فوزى فراج
| تاريخ الانضمام | : | 2006-08-18 |
| مقالات منشورة | : | 149 |
| اجمالي القراءات | : | 3,648,864 |
| تعليقات له | : | 1,713 |
| تعليقات عليه | : | 3,274 |
| بلد الميلاد | : | Egypt |
| بلد الاقامة | : | United State |
دعوة للتبرع
مقالات من الارشيف
more
الماعز تقدس الصحابة: أنت قاسى فى هجومك على الذين يقدسو ن الصحا بة ...
بطون : لم تكتب لنا عن مصطلح ( بطون ) في القرآ ن الكري م ...
سؤالان : السؤا ل الأول واحد مليون ير مقاول وفاسد...
مسألة ميراث ووصية: توفت جدتى من فترة وتركت ارض عليها عمارة...
والعافين عن الناس : هناك شخص قريب لى ، وتعود ت على إكرام ه ...
moreالرئيسية | عن الموقع | التيار القراني | القرانبحث | الاتصال| اساسيات اهل القران
Copyrights (c) 2006 MAH جميع الحقوق محفوظة(amir@ahl-alquran.com)
Yes, it is a war that can never be won, in fact world war II was the last one to be won, the question is how to end it without transforming Iraq into a slaughtery house. Civil War is the only alternative if American troops pull out prematurely>