[extropy-chat] Re: US not right to invade say Iraqis

[John K Clark]

"Brett Paatsch" <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au>

> It wasn't just an idea, it was an action. An inherently
> dishonourable action

I realize that,... now. It was dishonorable not because it broke some 
mythical thing called "international law" but because it was based 
on something that was untrue, the entire Weapons of Mass 
Destruction crap. I don't know if they were lying or if they really
believed that load of putrid shit.
And I don't know which is more disturbing either.

> You weren't *seeing* the real gameboard and the importance of
> international law

And I don't see the importance of international law to this day. People
forget but at one time it looked like Bush had a good chance of getting
UN approval for the war; if he wasn't such a bumbling diplomat
it could very well have happened. But if that had happened would you 
now be saying good things about Bush? I wouldn't because Iraq would
still be a horrible mess.

Or suppose Bush invaded without the UN seal of approval but he found
loads of weapons of mass destruction just as he said he would, and the
Iraqi people really did greet American soldiers as liberators, and today
Iraq was peaceful free and prosperous; would you still say bad things 
about Bush? I wouldn't.

  John K Clark