View Single Post
Old 06-11-2006, 23:32   #161
Xaccers
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milling around Milton Keynes
Age: 47
Posts: 12,969
Xaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny stars
Xaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny starsXaccers has a pair of shiny stars
Re: Saddam To Be Hanged

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paddy1 View Post
Well then, if a dictator is torturing and murdering his population, and the majority of the UN hasn't got it's finger out and decided action should be taken, then should a nation take action on it's own and oust the dictator?
If it is in a position to do so and its the only way to stop him, yes.
If the UN is unable to protect the people of a nation from it's leaders then why shouldn't another nation take action to do so?

Sure, in the real world nations don't intervene for a number of reasons; no personal gain, too much risk, lack of support at home etc.

Put it like this, if TB somehow manouvered himself into absolute power, tortured and murdered Britains, would you rather another nation came in and ousted New Labour, or would you prefer TB remained in power while the UN took their time and perhaps decided to do nothing because of TB's influence and promises to other nations?
Xaccers is offline   Reply With Quote