|
Aneirin -> RE: The case against invading Iraq (6/29/2010 2:58:36 PM)
|
Just what is it with this fascination with weapons of mass destruction (WMD's) ?
The world has always had them, anything from a blunderbuss to a hand grenade is a weapon of mass destruction or for that matter a molotov cocktail is also a WMD.
In this modern use of the word, what are we talking about, offensive weapons, defensive weapons or just plain weapons which despite what anyone says if they possess a weapon they have no right to preach to others about them also having a weapon, as has it not ocurred the reason people or countries for that matter have weapons is to defend themselves against others with weapons.
But the problem is once someone or a country has weapons, weapons and even more weapons, they seem to think, hey look we're hard, don't piss with us, which could be seen as a threat by others, the country with the most weapons has the ability to upset others and has anyone ever heard of a country in history where a heavily armoured regime kept themselves to themselves and didn't bother their neighbours ?
Regards weapons, those in glass houses should not throw stones.
But if the thought is the person in charge of the weapons is the problem, who is to know the mental status of any leader, or for that matter the views they hold which are not public or even privileged knowlege, the private views, which everyone of whatever status holds regardless of how sane or insane they are.
Wise words perhaps, where politics or wealth generation is concerned, the lay person, believe nothing of what you hear and only half of what you see.
When are people going to wake up and understand where there is wealth and riches, war is a high possibility as interested parties want those riches for themselves, the same old story.Countries that have a wealth in riches are targets for others and so have to have the ability to defend themselves and their wealth. from others that covert their neighbours ass.
|
|
|
|
