Would you support....

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Would you have supported wars against Iran or North Korea

  • Yes

    Votes: 5 20.0%
  • No

    Votes: 20 80.0%

  • Total voters
    25
all_i_want said:
military interventions are not made on the basis of right or wrong anymore, theyre made on the basis of profit and national interests.

id say NATO should go. UN peace corps are pretty useless. but then, US doesnt lead the world towards worthy causes anymore. and european community.. well, they obviously cant be bothered. if they couldnt be bothered in the 90s when there was a genocide going on in the middle of the continent there's simply no way theyd go to sudan to help people.

Insuring there is peace and stability in the region that holds the majority of the planets energy supply is not just a worthy cause, it is in fact a necessity. The seizure and sabotage of that energy supply would have a severe impact on the planets economy creating a global economic depression which would ruin the global economy and prevent any economic aid from reaching the third world.

The United Nations passed 17 UN Security Council Resolutions against Saddam under chapter VII rules of the United Nations which allow for the use of military force to enforce the resolutions. It was an absolute necessity that Saddam comply with these resolutions peacefully or face military force to bring about that compliance if Saddam failed to live up to his obligations. On March 18, 2003, the day prior to the start of the war, Saddam had failed to comply with all 17 UN Security Council Resolutions and was in violation of the 1991 Gulf War Ceacefire Agreement. Compliance with these resolutions was necessary for the peace and stability of the region. This is why the removal of Saddam was a necessity.
 
Back
Top Bottom