Response to Hey Mike Kelly!


Bruce Similarly thanks for your time .
Same point numbering :
  1. Wouldn’t it be great if Hussein took Saudi up on their offer. I think we can both agree that the economics of this is not as simple as saying the US will make a fortune from Oil because of this war.
  2. I agree with a lot of what you say (did I say that?) and would like to see fundamental changes but not sure if that will happen. You can call me selfish but if it came to a choice I will still choose my children’s lives ahead of the lives of terrorists whom I don’t even know. I am still more concerned about protecting my children against those terrorists than of understanding their point of view. So if that’s selfish then yes Guilty as charged. I think any parent will respond in similar manner. I know the present action in Iraq is addressing the symptoms rather than the root cause but let me put it this way: If you have a cancer you remove it. It is too late to stop the smoking that caused it 20 years ago. OK you need to quit smoking now but if you cant or wont that doesn’t mean you don’t bother to remove and treat the cancer. I’m not for a minute expecting EVERYTHING will be OK if we bomb Iraq. But WHAT is your solution? I mean in practical terms? Its one thing to say to reappraise things or think about things differently but how do you actually in practical terms put that into effect. I’m sorry but I am a pragmatist. .
  3. Fair enough I am accepting that oil is a factor and a big factor. But I do not believe the only factor. .
  4. ”Do you or do you not accept that the oil economy is structured in such a way as to keep prices low?” I’m afraid you have to rephrase the question as I don’t understand what you mean. If I had an oil well in Texas I would like oil prices to be high. If I was buying oil from Saudi I would like the prices to be low. Industry the world over would like the oil prices to be low. The same is true for all the raw materials that they would purchase. Is this what you mean?
  5. There may not be a enlightened social democracy immediately after Hussein is removed but it will be better than what Hussein offers. And the wheels to change to evolve a better government can only begin with him gone. There is precedent for thinking this. Look at Yugoslavia and Afghanistan. .
    I am convinced that if the CIA could put a bullet in Hussein’ s head they would do so. I mean are you saying they haven’t killed Bin Laden because they don’t want to? Hussein has I believe and I can get you sources on this, a very elaborate system in place for saving his own neck. .
    The destruction you talk about happened in Yugoslavia. Do you think that they are now better or worse off than before NATO intervened? .
    Despite all our lengthy discussions, You do NOT represent what I am saying adequately with the following: .
    1. Hussein must go.
    2. Hussein must go immediately.
    3. The human cost of war is worth paying to get rid of Saddam (as long as the Iraqi people are paying it!). .
    4. There's no other possible way of achieving the same end. .
    5. As far as you're concerned, there are no other choices than (in your words) "doing nothing and allowing Hussein to continue or ... disarming Hussein" (by implication, through the means of a war). .
    I agree with 1 and 2 if Immediately means within the next 3-6 months. 4 is correct in my opinion. You have not shown me any alternative (that I consider practical). But if you have some let me see them. .
  6. Now hold on. Mike Kelly is obviously not the only one that thinks this should be done. The UN in resolution 1441 has said that Hussein “must actively disarm or suffer the consequences”. What do you think are the consequences? A fine? A parking ticket? .
    The allies changed the government in Germany post WWII correctly in my opinion, also what about the Balkans. It wasn’t me that decided who those governments would be ! honestly. .
    I am not saying the ANY country can overtake ANYOTHER country as they please. There has to be a reason. The UN has shown us many reasons. And everything else has been tried. .
    By the way I was counting Kurds living in Iraq loosely as his own people and he has used WMD against them. .
  7. Yes I believe that the war will benefit the Iraqi people. I could equally say it is naïve to always assume that the US is out to harm the Israeli people. .
  8. You say the only way to stop this is to stop selling Iraq arms. Now call me an idiot if you like, but as far as I know the US or Western countries are no longer selling arms to Iraq ie they have stopped. Or do you seriously think that right now the US are sending troops down there and at the same time selling arms to the other side???? .
  9. You are right thanks for the correction. See there you go I agree with you again. .
Yea this is taking up a lot of time. I think it is worthwhile though. Thanks. Email me if you want to continue if I do get banned again

Rachel. While I hardly think the regime is Kuwait is a brutal regime in comparison of the one in Iraq I think they that those countries you name should be tackled too and now believe there is a will to do so but it would require huge resources. Maybe if the UN really got behind it it would help. But you can only tackle one at a time. Also when I look back some of the wars of this and the last century (I assume that was what you meant) I see that western powers have liberated Germany France etc and more recently the Balkan states and Afghanistan.


Created By: mike kelly