In response to Am's thread about what questions you would ask a peace protester, this thread is for questions you ask someone who supports war on Iraq

Here are two from em to get the ball rolling: -

What do you think the war will achieve?

Do you believe war will make the wrld a safer place to live?

JonBon,

I at my mispelling of "protester." Ah well, someday I'll get it

I'd like to ask war supporters at what point they decided that war is the only alternative and why.

I'm hoping that war supportes counter-demonstrate so these questions can also be asked.

Thanks for the balance, I often need it

AM

Author-Musician. Do we get to see the final piece?

Anyway. I think it would be fair to assume that war supporters know that war is not the only available alternative.

So maybe the wording should be why is war the best alternative at this time?
Ask why there is urgency to act now instead or allowing other options to be pursued more completely.
Ask for the moral and/or practical considerations for waging this war.
Ask what problems will be solved by fighting this war at this time.

"When talking about interactions between countrys do you think the Unitied States should operate by a different set of rules than other countries? If so, what rules would be different for the United States?"

My question is how does bombing Iraq help in the search for missing WMD's? I would also ask why it is necessary for the US to go to war with Iraq. Is there one clear answer to this question?

When Saddam's gone, we can really get down to business looking for stuff

maybe dig under the schools of iraq & see what he's got under them or maybe dig under a few new Palaces & mosques to see what he burined in the concrete with them at the same time

or better yet...check for those underground labs

Goamerica- what does your last post have to with the topic here?

eeyore


I'll have an article ready probably by Monday. Since this forum isn't exactly mass media, think I can get by with a link to a .txt document and will post the link here. Otherwise, first serial rights go to the buyer (if anyone wants it). I'll probably try The Nation and The Progressive first since both pay fairly well. If anyone has any other leads, I'm all ears!

Thanks everyone for the suggestions. I've definitely received some good points of view that I had missed and will try to cover them all.

When does it end? do we stop at Iraq?

why not N. korea when they ACTUALLY DO have WMDs?

will saudi arabia's insitence we get out once saddam is gone start a war to change their regime?

what about Iran, because they are trying to get WMDs as well, will we disarm them with force as well?

what if Iraq does have WMDs and uses them on our troops, won't that cause bush to use his WMDs, which would show others THEY can use WMDs?

what happens when N. korea uses their nukes on s. korea? won't this all lead to full out nuclear war?

if you support war so much, why aren't you in uniform?

what happens if this escalates into a world war?

why can our "friend" israel, who has a history of aggression, have nukes, despite not signing the NPT, but no one else in the region can?

do you feel you aren't honoring the men that died in vietnam? did they die in vain?

these are the major ones. I have.

Want to start a shooting war in North Korea so the North Koreans can push "the button" & nuke Seoul?

"...Want to start a shooting war in North Korea so the North Koreans can push "the button" & nuke Seoul?..."

Does this mean we can't fight terror against countries that can actually defend themselves?

But, back to the topic. my question is simple:
When we occupy Iraq, will the world be safer?

Questions for pro-war activists

1. What is it that you fear?
2. How does evaluation of assumption stimulate a rational justified determination?
3. Where is the logic of executing a war influenced by a resolution made by the U.N. (while the U.N. is still unfavorable of war) when the U.S. executive power has made clear that it will operate independently despite any opposition from the U.N. Does this not insinuate that the U.S. Executive power can not formulate a concrete case for war on its own?
4. Saddam has welcomed weapons inspectors back, had submitted his dossier on WMD of which the U.S. has disregarded most of, recently opened up the no-fly-zone to allow the flight of spy planes and agreed to destroy missiles that slightly exceeded the range limit of what the U.N. will allow. Bush said the destruction of these missiles are just the "tip of the iceberg." How much more will Saddam have to appease Bush or is war in Iraq simply inevitable?
5. If war in Iraq were to start tomorrow, who would be the aggressor? Why?
6. North Korea (a nuclear power) recently tested fired a missile half way to Japan yet Saddam is the "mad man." Can you support this derogatory statement giving cited examples of Iraq's foreign and domestic policies for the past 12 years in contrast with North Korea?
7. Bush claims that he has exhausted all other avenues of diplomacy with Iraq yet he refuses to have any direct dialogue with Saddam even when Saddam has requested to debate the issue of war with Bush. Can you honestly believe that all other options have been exhausted and that we are left with no choice but to invade Iraq?
8. Bush wants to have a war in Iraq before summer because he does not want the soldiers to suffer heat exhaustion. When was the last time the U.S. scheduled a "war" to accommodate the most comfortable season deemed adequate for our military personal?
9. Twelve years ago Dick Cheney told Saudi Arabia that the U.S. military would only be located there for as long they needed to be. Today the U.S. military is still there and Dick Cheney is a wealthier man because of Saudi oil. Do you think it is a stretch to claim that Bush wants war with Iraq because he wants control of its oil fields?
10. Do you ever question the legitimacy of Fox News when they have to air slogans such as "Fair and Balanced" or "We Report, You Decide?" Has it ever occurred to you that Fox News is often times negligent in conjuring creditable sources and lacks journalistic integrity when the news is actually dictated rather than told as a story?

I fear that if Saddam gets off the hook & sanctions are removed, he will soon have a nuclear tipped warhead to threaten & blackmail the World with

2. One has to assume the worse when dealing with a madman

3. The Resolution has been violated multiple times already

4. First, the declaratation was old (see Paragraph #2 of articleBogus Declaration & Missing Materials

Secondly, He can appease Bush by handing over those missing VX & anthrax vials

5. We would because of our pre-empitivness

6.
Domestic:
he's starved his people while he builds more palaces: Saddam's Palaces Triple

Saddam has torture chambers (owned by one of his kids) that'll give you nightmares

Foreign:
Saddam's violated UN Sanctions: Violation of UN Sanctions

7. First of all, Saddam just wanted a circus debate to get tv attention. Second of all, yes i can believe all options have been exhausted because we've given him chance after chance & he still hasnt been honest completely

8. I don't know. But it does kinda make sense since our soldiers have to lug around 100 ibs. of equipment

9. No. If we wanted Iraq's oil, we would have swept the country years ago & we wouldn't be worrying about inspections or the UN opinion.

10. do you have actual proof of this?

Then that entire region must be suicidal, because nobody in that region, within striking distance, is afraid of Saddam.

Iraq has no long range delivery system. Currently, they'd need to buy a nuke off of Russia or Korea - just like the rest of the world - and FedEx it to us.

And if your argument is Israel, I would find that disingenuous. Israel can take care of itself. If Israel disappeared tomorrow, the world economy would hardly know it. If Japan disappeared tomorrow, the world economy would tank. Not to say that one is more important than the other, but one can defend itself and the other is more important to us from an economic standpoint.

Nobody seems to care that Korea can nuke Japan at any time and are testing 3-stage missiles that can strike the US. Something is very strange about that in my opinion.

REMINDER: This thread is NOT to discuss our stand on the Iraq issue. It is merely to pose questions to those who may be "pro-war."

We have plenty of other threads to share ideas on the use of force in Iraq.