[mag]

Thank you, Swordmaster. I really didn't feel like looking for quotes to prove my point.

Originally posted by Titan
Germany wasn't an imminent threat to America militarily.

Well, the Germans were on the verge of conquering most of the Western world. I'd call that "imminent." Also keep in mind that there was no UN before World War II. So when the rest of the world saw Germany acting aggressively there was nobody they could go to for help. There were fewer diplomatic resources at their disposal. Thus, war became inevitable more quickly. Today it is easier to resolve conflicts without the need for going to war.

There are a lot of valuable lessons to be learned from WWII, but we also have to remember that not every war is WWII. And not every war is Vietnam. Each war may have certain elements in common, but we can't just take one war and try to make every war after that fit into that mold.

mag

[Titan]

I agree with your points again mag, except I think you give to much credence to the effectiveness of the U.N. And I like you, don't go looking for quotes to prove a point.

And yes, Swordmaster, you are correct in pointing out that my semantics were off in that sentence I horribly butchered. Bush may have said a time or two that the Iraq threat was imminent (although your quote in your post isn't one of them). My point was that many more times he stated the threat wasn't imminent yet, but soon would be.

[Ninja Dodo]

Maybe if the US actually payed their contributions and didn't go it alone all the time, it would be more effective, hm?

[Moosferatu]

I just have one question. If Bush didn't think that Iraq was an "imminent threat", why couldn't he wait and let the UN weapon inspectors do their job? Or did I miss something?

[Ninja Dodo]

Surely you couldn't have expected poor old Bush to wait for the inspectors to turn the place upside down and find nothing??? ... I mean, that would have left him fresh out of excuses to invade Iraq! How dreadful would that have been?

[mag]

Originally posted by Titan
I agree with your points again mag, except I think you give to much credence to the effectiveness of the U.N.

Actually, it's kind of surprising to find myself sticking up for the UN. Usually I'm the first in line to make fun of the UN for its gross ineffectiveness. I have to say though, they've really impressed me with how they've handled this Iraq situation. But even at its worst I think the UN at least gives countries a forum for discussion and diplomacy that wasn't there before.

And on a side note, I'd also like to say how refreshing it is to be having this debate with a conservative who actually listens to what I'm saying. Most of my conservative buddies (who are numerous) just tell me something along the lines of, "You're wrong. Shut up."

mag