Welcome to the wonderful world of UN. What I read about the UN resolution was that it granted any member of the UN rights to attack based on Saddam's failure to yield a document proving destruction of WMD. I heard "any member". So, when we follow the resolution that the UN made, even with an unpopular move, how can we be blamed for not following the UN?? The only thing we didn't do was take a poll on how popular the move would be. It obviously was an unpopular choice. Either the U.N. members need to more carefully make their laws, or they need to be accepting of the consequences.
Saddam broke the rules of the UN and a member of the UN decided to beat him up. Saddam acted like a child, and pretended that he couldn't get the evidence together, and cockblocked investigators. So he was hiding something, and failed to prove WMD destruction. Bush may seem stupid, but I'd assume it was WMD too, if Saddam pulled that crap on me. He had them once, and he didn't destroy them.
If he cared about his people, he would've fed the UN the evidence and told us to stop bothering him. His people's suffering results from the actions of two major people, Saddam and Bush. Saddam's failure to lead caused us to fight him. You don't try to muscle or lie to every country in the world, especially when they expect you to fight using chemical or nuclear weapons, like Saddam had in the past.
As for bombing, it's standard procedure to cut off the enemy's ability to produce weaponry, or anything that can be used for weapons. I can't speak for all bombs, but military structures, major munitions factories are usually the first things to go. There are errant bombs that strike mosques and other civilian structures from time to time, and I feel sorry for the people injured in those bombs. It's a terrible misfortune.
__________________
It's never too late to be something great.
|
Threaded Mode
