American Idiot

You want resolutions that Israel broke? here's a whole list of them

musalman.com/news/musalman-UN%20resolutions%20against%20Israel.htm

Although the US has not broken any resolutions per-say, we have always supported Israel when they have done so. But essentialy we violated the charter of the United Nations which states "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations..."

The suggestion that a country might possibely become a threat so we invade them and topple the regime has no historical or or legal basis. It was stupid on our part because now other countries can use the same excuse to invade another country and use us as an example.

An invasion of US soil is not likely and will likely result in a nuclear war that ends all life as we know it. Yet the threat is not of direct invasion because we can only keep up this hegemonistic act for so long. New super powers are on the verge of rising up ie the European Union, China, l, India, will soon rise to new levels and keep in mind that a great deal of the world's population is in these areas and that these countries all have nuclear arsenals. If we continue our acts of aggression all on the pretext of democracy then it will truly be us against the world.

Again, is it logical to spread democracy and freedom through the use of bullets and bombs? How can people enjoy these freedoms if we kill them?

You admitted that Iraq was not a threat. You can't use the UN as a reason for invasion when Kofi Anann himself said the war was illega and, that it broke international law. Iraq was exclusively a regional problem. The whole middle east is more threatened by Israel's nuclear and biological weapons so if we really took in the account of neighboring countries we would have stopped support to Israel.

We didn't commit crimes in Vietnam? Ever hear of the Mai Lai massacre? Go read any accounts of what happened in Vietnam and tell me no crimes occured. That's another story altogether.

I agree that something needed to be done about Saddam but this was not the way to go about it. How exactly are we supposed to leave now? If our troops stay, they get shot at, if our troops pull out then Iraq will turn into a state ten times more tyrannical than Saddam and it will be a huge embarssment on our part. So we're stuck in a dilemma. The way we went about things, the world is only more dangerous than before Saddam.

Of course we need some rhetoric like spreading democracy and our national security to invade. The public wont take too knidly of an invasion based on protecting Israel, gaining oil supplies, and raising Dick Cheney's stocks.

We have spent about 160 billion dollars on this war. It would take about 80 billion dollars a year to ensure that everyone on this world has an adequate food supply. Using that money to feed the world for 2 years would have made the world more content and less dangerous and Terrorists wouldn't have to resort to turning on us because we have been the ones practicing a cruel foreign policy towards them.