|
|
|
|
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/10/2005 10:00:24 AM | Thats very true, even under the Rule of Saddam, Iraq Tribes fought Iraqi tribes, It still happens now in thr presence of Uk & Us troops, One commander from the Iraqi police says that he only controls 25% of his police force, and thats due to 75% of the police in his Area coming from a different tribe to him. That said Commander is in carge of policing an area the size of wales! Which means that 75% of the police fore in that area are open to bribes will look the other way when things are happening and its been said that within that 75% are insurgents!
THAT PARAGRAPH REMINDED ME OF THE POLICE FORCE IN N.IRELAND!!!!! AND THEY ALL WONDERED WHY THERE WAS A WAR HERE!!!! BUT ALAS WE HAVE NOTHING LEFT TO GIVE SO WE MIGHT BE GETTING THAT UNITED IRELAND AFTER ALL.... IF ONLY GOVERNMENTS CUD LOOK AFTER THEIR OWN NECK OF THE WOODS !!!! | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/10/2005 10:20:41 AM |
the World Trade Centre was in fact blown up by controlled explosions and not by the four planes that everyone saw crash into the towers.
Four 'planes at the WTC eh? You're quite an expert then ;)
And you got all this from a horse called larry, who's the landlord of some pub or other.
Why don't you read the article? Are you afraid? | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/11/2005 8:20:20 AM | Interesting topic, Its nice to hear what others across the pond think about this war?
first thing, I salute men like wez 155, for putting their lives on the line for defending freedom and democracy, you have our admiration and respect.
We sleep better at night because of good people like you, back to the topic Its a shame your Country is at war, yes Saddam had to be removed, yes its about the oil and drugs too, and right now you face a quagmire and your faced with the following , should Britan and the US pull out? there is no definative answer, if you pull out many people will die and endure endless acts of thuggary by the criminal gang running extremist, if you stay ,more and more good soldiers and innocent people will perish for nothing a perfect lose lose situtation.
And as in for the United Nations, theyre as useless as a serving diet coke soft drink in a McDonalds restaurant, I dont have much faith in the United Nations my opinion only but i think half of them are 5 time zones behind their own A$$es.
The American who posted a comment Im sorry i didnt catch your name, made some interesting points, and as a Canadian its sad to see what our British friends are going through over there. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/11/2005 9:27:36 AM | I've been thinking lately, with the hurricane down south five weeks ago, and how oil and gas prices instantly shot through the roof, that perhaps the worlds oil supplies are finally being depleted. They are even talking in Alberta about trying to get what oil they can't from the tarsands, which is a very costly and huge endevor. With such a rich oil resource in the Arab nations, it would stand to reason we wouldn't want to lose good ties with those nations. This could be part of the motivation as to why so many troops are still in and fighting.
Over 4,000 souls lost on 911, and Bush needs to do something powerful and show the American people terrorism will not be tolerated. Funding from Saddam had been leaking to the Taliban for many years. Millions of dollars of backing to terrorist groups. I think Bush was very wrong for lying about why he began the war but that's a polititian for you. Duh!
Should we still be there? Yes, I think so. Should we have gone in the first place, I believe not. Saddam should have been captured or killed during the Gulf War, not a new war. A sharpshooter could have easily managed that end. Sure Saddam was a tryrant, but then there are tyrants living on your own street beating wives and assaulting children. Young people armed and carjacking and innocents being killed in our own backyard.
The situation in Iraq is sad. But that comes from years and years of dictatorship, not being allowed to speak freely, and factions of angry people pulling together in cell groups angry enough to one day defy their leader. Until those groups make peace with each other, there will be war in that country. A peacekeeping role is all that can happen now. But the fact more US and other countries soldiers have died post war is to me a very sad thing.
What worries me now more than the current situation to our east is Korea. They are the second most militarily powerful nation in the world, and they also have a huge hate against Americans. They teach their children to hate Americans at a very young age. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/11/2005 1:38:07 PM | Over 4,000 souls lost on 911, and Bush needs to do something powerful and show the American people terrorism will not be tolerated
For the sake of accuracy the number is just under 3,000 live lost. "Bush needs" seems to indicate he hasn't done anything in the 4yrs since the attack.
I'm sorry,no offense but WAY too much misinformation.
With such a rich oil resource in the Arab nations, it would stand to reason we wouldn't want to lose good ties with those nations. This could be part of the motivation as to why so many troops are still in and fighting.
Perhaps this was meant as a jest.After all,does ANYONE actually believe the governmental practices of the USA and UK are well liked in the region?
There are and have been MANY ways to get "good ties" with the nations in the region. The best way would have been NOT to have INVADED Iraq in the FIRST PLACE
THAT was a moronic and pompous decision to make. 911 was linked to Al Queda and Osama Bin Laden(who has BEEN HIDING;) IF the fools that made the decision to invade were sending their sons,daughters,grandkids into the frontlines.....there would NOT have been an invasion!
The USA SHOULD have waited on inspectors,and U.N. and OPEC commitment and involvement.There was NO need for immediate invasion.Why do nations in the region resent the USA and UK? Imperialistic history and PRESENT policies coupled with hypocrasy.
Funding from Saddam had been leaking to the Taliban for many years. Millions of dollars of backing to terrorist groups
If money to the Taliban is or was an issue then the USA would have invaded Pakistan,Saudi Arabia,Iran,Lybia and Syria. The taliban were NOT the terrorist Al Quaeda is the terrosit group.There simply is NO logic and NO evidence that Sadaam was involved in helping,funding or promoting Al-Queda.Pakistan and Saudi Arabia had MANY ties to the Taliban AND Al-Queda.See,there was no logic,no evidence and sheer hypocracy. Also, these are MUSLIM nations,so of course MUSLIMS travel and worship in other muslim countries,just as Christians travel from country to country.Also, many members of AlQueda have as many links to Germany,France,Holland,UK, and the USA if simply having traveled there or having organizations give money from those nations is the criterea for a "link". Perhaps the USA should be to blame for the $40 BILLION+ dollars given to Sadaam in the 80's.
the fact more US and other countries soldiers have died post war is to me a very sad thing.
Its also sad that so many Iraqi men women and children have died from the invasion and this occupation and resistance. The loss of life over decisions made by elitist pompous leaders is to blame on ALL sides.
Should we withdrawal? Let the Iraqi people decide.Put it to a vote after giving them the information.I don't believe they want the west there. From an economic point of view,its foolish for the US to continue to put 100's of billions of dollars into the occupation.Think of what good that money could have done if given to the Iraqi people(not to mention the millions of other people around the world) for rebuilding. Setting up a puppet government will NOT work in the long run. It NEVER has,Iran is a perfect examples of this. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/11/2005 4:18:18 PM | | HEY MARATHONMAN VERY WELL PUT INDEED! ANY CHANCE OF YOU RUNNING FOR THE PRESIDENCY, NO EXPERIENCE NEEDED JUST COMMON SENSE! A PEOPLES' MAN IS WANTED NOT AN OILMAN! .....LET US ALL BLESS OURSELVES>>>>>IN THE NAME OF THE FATHER (BUSH SEN) AND OF THE SON (JUN) AND OF THE HOLY OIL. AMEN! (WELL DOESNT HE THINK HE'S GOD) | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/11/2005 4:23:58 PM | My American brother wouldnt stand a chance of being elected,
hes intelligent, articulate, has passion, not the kind of qualities of PODUS, lol | |
|
| |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/12/2005 2:51:20 PM | LOL, he sure is , let me ask you this and pardon my ignorance?
you are Irish, what part of Ireland are you from? and I realised that one of the
Irish countries belong to the UK so to speak, and one is independant
my question what is the issue between North Ireland and South, if you dont want to post it you can email me.
Im curious, we in Canada hear bits and pieces. | |
|
arri
|
Joined: 10/5/2005
Msg: 85 | |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/12/2005 3:20:17 PM | | Almost 500 years ago, Northern Ireland was converted to catholic, i.e. sympetatic base for the Spanish to keep England in check. After Trafalgar and the end of Spanish superiority at sea, the strategic value of Northern Ireland ended but the religious division remained. Readers digest version. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/12/2005 4:41:52 PM | best way would have been NOT to have INVADED Iraq in the FIRST PLACE
THAT was a moronic and pompous decision to make. 911 was linked to Al Queda and Osama Bin Laden(who has BEEN HIDING;) IF the fools that made the decision to invade were sending their sons,daughters,grandkids into the frontlines.....there would NOT have been an invasion!
The USA SHOULD have waited on inspectors,and U.N. and OPEC commitment and involvement.There was NO need for immediate invasion.Why do nations in the region resent the USA and UK? Imperialistic history and PRESENT policies coupled with hypocrasy.
I 100% agree. My statement about over 4,000 souls were lost is true, only I worded it wrong. Since 911 and because of 911, it should have read. Suicides of partners and survivors of 911 and those affected have been astronomical. I watched a program on the history channel last week that gave horrendous statistics of after event deaths. I believe those people as well should be included in the headcount, but that's just my opinion.
I never claimed to be the brightest lightbulb on this planet, but I really think we should have stayed out of Iraq, at least as you say until the U.N. and OPEC commitment to war. However some of my points were valid. The world is not an endless sourse of oil and gas, we will run out one day. That is a fact. Guess I should have stayed out of this thread, war makes me angry and I think the forces in that country should have left long ago and let that nation sort out it's own future. | |
|
arri
|
Joined: 10/5/2005
Msg: 87 | |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/12/2005 5:06:38 PM | | Whats done is done. What needs to be done now is for the interenational community to get involved so Iraq can run on its own and let US leave. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/13/2005 3:36:45 AM | This is for Wez,
Look buddy, ive just sat here for about an hour reading peoples views and i believe there are some people out there with their heads screwed on, some good advice all round, but wez, not gonna blow my trumpet here but just passed my 13yr point, ive never questioned anywhere the army has sent me, its not my place to, i stood there and gave the oath of alleigence(spelling??) to her majesty Queen Elizabeth etc, signed on the dotted line and got the best career anyone could ask for, whay im trying to say is why are you geeting abusive with people for their opinions, get over it, spend more time doing the job uve been trained to do than on this forum and leave putting the world to rights to the government who i might add pays your wage, not good to be stabbed in the back by an employee | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/13/2005 10:41:20 AM | Rockhopper
If you dont mind me asking, its interesting to hear another soldiers view,
were you stationed in Iraq at any time? | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/13/2005 5:01:15 PM | hi onegreatm8,
Yes i have done a tour in Iraq, i go again at the end of this month, i had the privilege to be on the very first operation back in 2003, i never questioned why nor did i in Afganistan, the first Kosovo or Bosnia, its not my place to, ofcouse i have my own opinions im not brain washed, but my point to Wez was put that aggression time and effort into helping the Iraq people organising charity events ect. not complaining on why were there, its a job, we chose to do it, get over it and carry on, i hope that has answered your question | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/13/2005 5:16:45 PM | rockhopper1,
I appreciate your insights on a delicate subject, God bless you guys and citizens there. | |
|
arri
|
Joined: 10/5/2005
Msg: 92 | |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/13/2005 5:34:32 PM | rockhopper1 –I greatly respect the professionalism of the military. They know their job and they do it with honour and respect, and most importantly, without question.
I also totally agree with you. Time for politics is over. It is not a matter of about the war being right or wrong, or the president being whatever anymore and the sooner people realize that the better is for everyone.
The sooner people realize this the better it is for everyone. I also believe that it is time for the United States to extend an olive branch and ask the international community for a coalition of peace to ease the pressure on the US military and get the boys back to where they belong. | |
|
Roaul
|
Joined: 4/14/2004
Msg: 93 | |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/13/2005 5:46:48 PM | | i think this would be one step closer to world peace,now that one tyrant is gone and the fanaticals are also taken out,but after this we have to take out mugabe,the koreans need to sit and talk they are one nation devided in two maybe not the americans to host this but a neighbouring country with no major ties to either.at the gent who attacked wez,he is right to ask this question as he is finding out if people back home surport the brave and heroic soldiers and i do whole heartedly | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/14/2005 9:22:29 PM | Excuse me, why should "we take out Mugabe"? Please give a logical reason.
I support troops,I simply don't support their deployment in the case of Iraq,there is a HUGE difference. I don't support members of any group that believe others should act without question. I don't support any member of any group that questions the right of others to question the leadership of those who we EMPLOY. I respect every human that conducts themeselves with ethics that respects humanity.
IRISHSQUAW,onegreatm8, thank you for your too kind words.
GeorgieLeopard,you are a bright lightbulb,I trust you know I did not intend to infer otherwise.Perhaps the purpose of these forums is so we "lightbulbs" can help adjust each other so our "angle" has better perspective. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/15/2005 3:17:10 AM | the honest truth about this iraq war is its all about OIL FULL STOP.
as a iraqi my self i know this for a fact if america really wanted saddam out in the first place they would have taken him out in 1990, i hear u asking why they never cos he was working with them then and giving them oil but wen he tunred against them like binladin did to they made an excuse that he has WOMD so they can attack iraq. At the end of the day Bin Ladin and Saddam was funded by the americans and the british goverment are as bad as they play the suckers and ass lickers of the americans, they bring the terrorists into power by funding them etc and then they say that that we are trying to build a peacefull world. To be honest with u it makes them the biggest terrorists.
Programmes like "secret Rulers OF The World", Bowling for colombine" Farinhieght 9/11" are a recomended programes that u lot should watch they tell u the truth.
Thanks | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/15/2005 5:45:49 AM | LOL, he sure is , let me ask you this and pardon my ignorance?
you are Irish, what part of Ireland are you from? and I realised that one of the
Irish countries belong to the UK so to speak, and one is independant
my question what is the issue between North Ireland and South, if you dont want to post it you can email me..
SORRY FOR TAKING SO LONG TO GET BACK TO YOU, NEVER SEEN THE QUESTIONS!!!
I AM FROM BELFAST N.IRELAND SO WE ARE OCCUPIED BY THE U.K.
I HAVE AN IRISH PASSPORT WHICH WE ARE ALL ENTITLED TO IN ALL OF IRELAND, ALTHOUGH THERE ARE ABOUT TO BE CHANGES ON THAT!!!
I ALSO HAVE A BRITISH PASSPORT WHICH IM ALSO ENTITLED TO AND THERE ARE NO CHANGES ON THAT!!
THERE ARE NO PROBLEMS BETWEEN THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH OF IRELAND AT ALL!!
THE PROBLEMS ARE ALL TO DO WITH THE NORTH AND MAINLAND U.K...
IT IS VERY COMPLEX BUT I CAN ASSURE EVERYONE WHILST I DONT AGREE WITH ANY OF THE VIOLENCE AT ALL IT WAS NEVERTHELESS INEVITABLE WHEN THE CROWN HAVING TAKEN OVER N.IRELAND FAILED TO INCLUDE ALL OF ITS SUBJECTS EQUALLY...
CATHOLICS WERE NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO VOTE AT ONE POINT AND THEY HAD NO SAY IN GOVERNMENT, NO DECENT JOBS HOUSING ETC...
BUT AFTER ALL THE VIOLENCE AND THANKFULLY THE END OF IT, HOPEFULLY, WE NOW HAVE A VOICE IN GOVERNMENT, WE HAVE DECENT EDUCATIONS, OUR KIDS GO TO UNIVERSITY ALMOST TOTALLY UNHEARD OF B4 THE TROUBLES UNLESS U WERE SERIOUSLY WEALTHY!!! | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/15/2005 3:03:08 PM | Irishsquaw
Well I suspect it must be a complex situation to explain, A few people here Georgie,Marathonman, Arranno gave me some imput as well.
I appreciate the additional information, but you say its getting better over there and the Violence has decreased? | |
|
| |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/16/2005 1:17:17 PM | | The violence isnt necessarily decreasing, you dont always get the entire picture from the papers, believe me... Im here right now | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 10/16/2005 1:26:59 PM | The majority of US servicemen, who in my view deserve better political leaders, will not be pulled out of Iraq. Some will go when they are needed for the next invasion, carefully packaged for our consumption with the various layers of "intelligence"/misinformation that we are now so used to. In fact the snippets of "news" about Iran, would indicate they will be the next country on the list to be bombed, invaded and de-stabilised.
The justification will be intelligence on WMD and/or harbouring/supporting terrorists. You and I will have no way of knowing the truth of any such claims, but we will hear them and read them through a compliant press.
The real reasons for the War on Terror are not obvious to everyone. We dont all have time to read the books written by and about the neo-cons that are behind President Bush and who funded his campaign, nor do most of us want to. But be in no doubt, the future envisaged is one of permanent war. They have said as much.
The thought that the real reasons for the wars waged in our name and with our lives might be economic ones is distasteful. But the truth is that the US needs to be on a permanent war-footing to justify the huge expenditure of tax-dollars on the US's major corporations, including the largest, The Pentagon, with 5.1 million employees. Their budget in the early years of the 21st Century, before the Iraq invasion, was over $300 billion a year. This expenditure benefits directly some of the countries largest employers, which are involved in weapons manufacture, and re-construction.. You need not look far to establish some big political names connected with these and the oil companies.
The outcome of the Iraqi's vote on their constitution will have no bearing whether or not the US troops move on. The Constitution is not what the Kurd, Sunni and Shia politicians wanted at outset, a social democracy, and so they have no control over their economy, which is now a US style capitalism, and Iraq's oil industry is being privatised along with the others. The occupation is now an economic one, and the US troops are, regrettably, there for the long-haul.
The UK should pull out its forces as they have now completed all they can reasonably have been expected to do in support of its military allies, the US. The troops were sent on a false premise, are protecting one tribal area in a country which is in reality 3 countries, and which is descending into inevitable chaos and civil war. Meanwhile the US President's claims that the Lord told him to invade Iraq, and his use of the word "crusade" will provide additional material for those who choose to see the occupation as part of a holy war.
The UK has no part in such a vision. There needs to be a signal to the overwhelming majority of peaceable Iraqi people that it is now time for them to organise their own security. The UK troops should be withdrawn now, otherwise before long our forces and our country will end up being viewed as the servants not of the Iraqi people but of the US corporations which are carving up theirs. | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 7
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
|
Home
login 
