The article was terrible 1st of all
Quote:
|
It is immensely to President Bushâ₠¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢s credit that he recognises weakness is more provocative than strength to those who live outside democracyââ‚ ¬â„¢s rules. We are safer in Britain today than we were 27 months ago, thanks to him.
|
Where is the proof we are safer. Now we have Iraqi terrriorists who now without a government will have no fear to attack us.
Sadam was a terrible man but the problems with the war were:
The government lied to the people about WOMD - how can we be a free democratic country if the government fills us with no just propa ganda but straight lies?
We accept we have no jurisdiction in iraq without UN support - what was the basis for war? Self defense from something we have no evidence off. We can't just attack a country because they
may be a treat to us. This is enforcing your will and values and thus becoming a dictator/conquer yourself.
We do prefer that insane muderers do not run countries but who are we to say who is insane, and one system is democratic when one is not. Since we still have a monarchy tecnically
in power we wouldn't grade as a US style democracy. If the queen decided to dissolved the government and take over the country will america attack us?