| I'm getting a bit tired about the usage of labeling every person who expresses some doubt about strike on iraq as a Saddam's supporter. I don't agree with the strike, I would like Saddam to be removed and a new democracy to be created in Iraq. It is too easy labeling people against war, it is a bad way to 'cover' real faults. Many of the people who promote today's strike, have made business with Saddam until the day before yesterday. The american embargo has forbidden Iraq to import food and medicine for 12 years, really bringing women and kids to hunger and death from every kind of ill. Why hasn't the same 'authoritary' embargo been able to forbid Saddam to buy tons of weapon, paid with millions of dollars and regular receipts, I mean we are not talking about black market, but real commerce. Everyone is involved in this: U.S.A. - EU - Russia etc... President Bush started saying that war was necessary as saddam did not allow UN inspectors in, but when he allowed them and they found nothing, Bish said Iraq had well hidden their illegal weapons. After more unsuccesful inspections, Powell said he would bring in a 'short' time, undeniable proves about Saddam's secret weapons. Powell's short time is running since more than three months......... Did anyone of you see these proves? During UN actions against Milosevic, U.S.A. authorities produced REAL proves with atellite pictures showing UCK's officers brutally killing thousands, putting them in 'common graves'. Just one day before attacking, President Bush said that Han Blix, cheaf of UN inspectors, was trying to protect Saddam....... Are thousands of missiles a day really necessary to overtake Iraq. Or President Bush must renew U.S.A. arsenal to justify all the money he is asking the contributors for waepons purchase and development? What is the effect of war on oil price? Aren't Bush's best friends and Bush himself oil magnate? Isn't America facing an employment crisis with no previous since 1945? Better for a president bringing the attention somewhere else. I don't think Bush is facing unsolved problems from Clinton management. I think Bush is not the right person for the chair he is sitting on, as his peronal interest is more important than U.S.A. and international community. Don't forget that he got to the power with at least 'doubtful' elections. North Korea is ten times more heavily armed and dangerous than Iraq, but President Bush becomes angry when he is brougth to talk about that, as he doesn't want attention to be removed from 'real' problems. | |
