|
|
|
|
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/27/2005 9:57:31 AM | | We should not have tried to force a revolution. That said, the world now has a different sort of problem, and I don't think it's in anyone's best interest for the world to say, "you made the mess, fix it yourself." That position might feel good, but it certainly doesn't solve any problems, in my opinion. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/27/2005 11:56:30 AM | Why is it USA still in Germany? Because there was a dictator
Why is it USA still in Japan? Because there was a dictator and military expansionist nation
Why is it USA in South Korea? Because there is a dictator and military regime in North Korea
I think USA and Britain should stay and see through it all that there is democracy and industrial nation so the rest of the Arab world can see what it is like to be in democracy, I am grateful to have such dictators removed, the allies did loose millions before removing Hitler. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/27/2005 12:49:23 PM | | What Democracy is that? a cross on a ballot paper every four years? Lies and deceit? Oh yes, thats right a democracy is one that goes to war on a so called peice of bad information, a rumour, and then after countless deaths and the demolision of an infrastucture, spending millions to destroy a country and billions to build it up again, whilst trying to bring together different groups, and allowing loss of life in the meantime, if we had gone in and removed a dictator, which would have been plausable, yes, but to basically demolish a country, and then, talk about the different reasons, was it weapons of mass destruction, oh, no its akready been established that they were none, Was it to free the people of tyranny, oh no, we already established the deeds in question were way in the past and other dictators recently were more, in line for reprimanding, was it to bring the Iraq,s peace, er, tell that to the countless women and kids who are suffering, or was it cos of recriminations for 9?11 er thought that was another country altogether, what exactly are we doing there? democracy?? i think not! | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/27/2005 1:54:15 PM | | democracy the usa could,nt get their own vote system right,took the vote away from demographic voters,who actually won last time when a recount was put in place,it all looks sad and pathetic.like kashmir near pakistan where so called christian aid and muslim workers are kidnapping young children and making them prostitutes in our,yes our major cities in the world.masquerading as helpers in the aftermath of the earthquake in the region.the answer is pure greed,these goverments did nothing but sell arms during the balkans.remember those concentration camps on the tv.dont remember much being done until the attrocities were documented,behind the veil about the beheading of rebels by the taliban-nothing done.in germany on the tv you see more about iraq and what is going on there,not on british tv,same way when the war was going on in northern ireland not half of the killings,injuries where documented,falklands,again the same(ant-arctic agreement-nice sum of money for being a part of the region)..its all a bit sad as there is no level playing field.i was always on the understanding 911 was caused by what is going on in palestine?i know bush knows****about geography ,but he went after dust bin lid in iraq?afghanistan what took them so long to find tha arms-caches they had stocked and helped to build.its all just propaganda, i for one pity the soldiers who are not fully trained to do the job at hand,a couple of lads i know have just gone awol,after seeing people getting murdered(their words) bombing an area children were known to play in.because of someones orders,lets hope the soldiers on the ground take the same stand as they did in vietnam.when they questioned blanket bombing areas and took apeaceful stance on the ground,they will possibly get more respect from the iraqi people.these are a different breed of people with different views,customsand ways of life.its not a matter of change needed but understanding.respect goes out to all servicemen/women.just not really our war, is it?????? i remember on a walkway in hulme,manchester uk in the late 80,s which read IF KUWAIT GREW CARROTS.., | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/27/2005 1:54:32 PM | | democracy the usa could,nt get their own vote system right,took the vote away from demographic voters,who actually won last time when a recount was put in place,it all looks sad and pathetic.like kashmir near pakistan where so called christian aid and muslim workers are kidnapping young children and making them prostitutes in our,yes our major cities in the world.masquerading as helpers in the aftermath of the earthquake in the region.the answer is pure greed,these goverments did nothing but sell arms during the balkans.remember those concentration camps on the tv.dont remember much being done until the attrocities were documented,behind the veil about the beheading of rebels by the taliban-nothing done.in germany on the tv you see more about iraq and what is going on there,not on british tv,same way when the war was going on in northern ireland not half of the killings,injuries where documented,falklands,again the same(ant-arctic agreement-nice sum of money for being a part of the region)..its all a bit sad as there is no level playing field.i was always on the understanding 911 was caused by what is going on in palestine?i know bush knows****about geography ,but he went after dust bin lid in iraq?afghanistan what took them so long to find tha arms-caches they had stocked and helped to build.its all just propaganda, i for one pity the soldiers who are not fully trained to do the job at hand,a couple of lads i know have just gone awol,after seeing people getting murdered(their words) bombing an area children were known to play in.because of someones orders,lets hope the soldiers on the ground take the same stand as they did in vietnam.when they questioned blanket bombing areas and took apeaceful stance on the ground,they will possibly get more respect from the iraqi people.these are a different breed of people with different views,customsand ways of life.its not a matter of change needed but understanding.respect goes out to all servicemen/women.just not really our war, is it?????? i remember on a walkway in hulme,manchester uk in the late 80,s which read IF KUWAIT GREW CARROTS.., SORRY GOT A BIT TRIGGER HAPPY THERE,rather bushesque of me LOL. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/27/2005 2:07:13 PM | Yes Sadam had weapons of mass destruction because it was sold them to him.
Stop repeating political bias garbage that is aimed to ruin the your political leaders without at least a knowledgeable basis.
If you don’t speak Arabic, don’t give your opinion on what Muslims who live in Iraq want.
If you haven’t ever been in a battle, don’t tell anyone how you feel about it.
If you get your political facts from one side, don’t enter a political discussion.
If you don’t use your own mind to form decisions then keep it closed.
If you don’t know what JP4 is and can articulate its global implications, don’t discuss the first gulf war at all, because you’re ignorant and anyone who is knowledgeable will laugh in your face, behind your back and any other time you open your mouth.
Last: If you don’t Vote, shut up. One vote counts, your wine doesn’t.
Military people hate war, They hate war more than anyone else in the world. If you don’t believe that is true then go stand by someone being shot at and ask them. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/27/2005 2:13:29 PM | Course we should have gone into Iraq. It's the only thing this country's still good at. We're undisputed world war fighting champions. It's a far away, low cost, easy war with oil into the bargain.
The only people who were against it were students. For me those who don;t pay into the system that buys bombs & missiles shouldn;t have a say in who they're fired at. More so those of us in the 40% tax bracket should have the right to have personalised messages on them. "To Saddam, lot's of love from Steve & the kids".
Plus we had to got in and help the yanks because their game plan is always crap. That's why they've never won a war by themselves. So why was Bush's plan so flawed. Simple !! He sent in the American Marines. Marines (water soldiers) to fight in the desert. We the British work on a simple job description allocation basis. We send in the desert rats. Simple !! Desert rats for fighting in the desert, parachute regiment for parachuting, queens guards for guarding the queen, horse guards for guarding our horses, horse artilliery for firing horses AT the enemy, and light infantry for fighting during the day. (this post comes with large pinch of salt). | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/27/2005 3:39:12 PM | Please ensure you read message #115, or the thread will be pulled and suspensions levied if this thread is not carried out in a civil manner, just a friendly reminder.
Forum Moderator / Trappedonbayst | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/28/2005 5:24:53 AM | I really dont understand the people who are in favor of the Iraqi invasion even though I try to.
To me the facts are as simple as ABC:
1. This is an illegal INVASION, not a liberation. Which international organization blessed such an occupation. NOBODY. It was a unilateral decision by the US government (backed by their little brother the UK). A goverment that by modern and civilized standards was not elected legally.
2.this invasion was done in the name of profits, money, oil, interests, NOT in the name of justice to the Iraqi people. If the US and UK really cared about the sanctity of life and justice, they would have preceeded in several other invasions for other countries waiting in line who have dictators or totalitarean regimes: Zaire, N. Korea, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Cuba just to name a few.
3. Speaking of Saudi Arabia, what exactly was the difference between Iraq and S. Arabia before the invasion? Both had totalitarean regimes, both used torture in their prisons, both deny basic rights to woman, both denied the right to vote for their citizens, both have oil...........ah yes...oil...but the difference is that S.Arabia catered to the US and the UK while Iraq did not play the role of a puppet to the bullies..I wonder...does the invasion have anything to do with that?
4.The US has the biggest and best arms market in the world by far. The economy depends on it.The people back home would be very upset if they were out of business or unemployed. But wait, if we make new weapons we cant market them or use or sell them unless we TRY them somewhere and on someone. We cant test them on dummies, we have to test them on people..LET`S BOMB THE IRAQIES!!! So much for the American causes of humanity and justice.
5. Who are the real war criminals? Can some stiff American or Brit look the Iraqies in the eyes and answer this question? Smart bombs my foot. There were always far less civilian casualties before the modern arms era. The "proper" way wars used to be fought is long gone. Soldiers used to get killed ,not civilans. Bush and his puppy Blair should be put on trial for murdering thousands of civilians, KNOWINGLY! A few simple examples among hundreds: air bombing a wedding in process, bombing a bridge with civilians crossing it, bombing reporters on the road or in their hotel. Not to mention Clinton`s act on the Serbs.
6.A note to the Americans and the Brits: STOP WHINING FOR YOUR DEAD. Yes it is sad, but what did you expect? You started this damn war, you pay the price.
7. And a note to all those countries that sent troops to Iraq. WAKE UP! Gaining favors from a superpower by supporting the killings is pathetic and shows how low you can stoop.
8. And my final note. No ,I am not 100% anti-American. Believe it or not I am an American. I believe Saddam is evil and he should be put out. They tried it on Castro, why not here? But this is not the way of doing it. This is why we are called "civilized". We use diplomacy, Something the US and Britain used pathetically because they were so triggerhappy. Now America and England ,I am sorry to say that the vibrations of what you did will be haunting you for years to come simply because what you did was WRONG! And if Americans are as God fearing as they admit they are, they should spend Saturdays in church as well. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/28/2005 6:50:04 AM |
And if Americans are as God fearing as they admit they are, they should spend Saturdays in church as well. I agree with many of the points above, but I don't think it's necessary to confuse the American public with the administration. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/28/2005 8:37:39 AM | | Iraq is just the latest in a long list of colonialist buccaneering by America and Britain,Saddam was fine as a Dictator and ruthless thug when he was "our" Dictator and ruthless thug.The invasion has been the biggest pr disaster for America since the disgrace of Vietnam with concentration camps,torture,kidnappings,bombing of civilians,use of illegal weapons e.t.c.,aided and abetted by Britain.The excuses for the invading were as flimsy and false as those Saddam gave for invading Kuwait in the first Gulf War.To show the Iraqis the true value of the Democracy and Justice they now enjoy Bush and Blair should go to Bagdhad to answer allegations that they are war criminals,same court as Saddam,same judge and jury,dream on.A kangaroo court for Saddam carefully centred on one of the few incidents of murder he`s carried out(allegedly of course,the trial`s still on)that dosn`t involve western help somewhere along the line will do nothing but turn him into a martyr when the inevitable sentence is passed.Contrast the attitude taken by Blair over Saddam with the total apathy towards Mugabe murdering,beating and stealing the livelihoods of British citizens in Zimbabwe.Our wonderful government dropped uranium tipped(and illegal under international law)missiles on Iraq while Jack Straw actually shook hands with Mugabe,albeit through stupidity rather than design.These missile were also dropped on Sarajevo and there are deformed kids being born in Eastern Europe as a result,something else Blair will never answer for.All this war has done is stoked up hatred towards the west and exposed it`s total hypocrisy.The Armed forces of America,Britain and various other hangers-on are doing what they`re told,those responsible should be held to account but realistically never will be,an all-too common outcome that only history will put right. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/28/2005 10:46:29 AM | The only thing that American leaders should be politically criticized for, during the war in Iraq, is failing to provide the Turks living in Iraq the same political assistance as the Shiites.
If you don’t know what I’m talking about, please do some research and learn a little more about the area and its people. I suggest you start with the Ottoman Empire and remember that governments come and go but the people stay. | |
|
arri
|
Joined: 10/5/2005
Msg: 138 | |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we? [OPEN again]
Posted: 12/28/2005 10:53:50 AM | The Ottoman Empire intentionally relocated the Kurds to northern Iraq region from Egypt after they almost wiped out the Armenians ... the first time around ... in the 17th century because Armenians were friendly towards the Persians.
The Turks in Iraq became a very small minority, once the republic of Turkey was carved out after world war I. | |
|
| |
| |
arri
|
Joined: 10/5/2005
Msg: 141 | |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/28/2005 12:57:58 PM | You mean Assyrians. Their numbers are very small and even fewer practice the old religions. The empire almost wiped out the Armenians. There is almost none in Iraq. They have their country and many live in Iran, rather comfortably too.
Kurds and Arabs are both Sunnis. So, killing Kurds had nothing to do with religion.
It's always been the Shi'ites who were the religious second class citizens ... and not under the Ottoman ... Ottomans didn't care much about religious ideology. It was bad for business. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/28/2005 1:05:19 PM | | cheers for clearing that uparri,but wasnt it the kurds whowere paid to kill saddam in the cop de tat,that ended with the whole village being gassed after torturing the ring leaders,orwas all that just propaganda from the beeb?sorry about the punctuation try typing with a cast on,bloody murder. | |
|
arri
|
Joined: 10/5/2005
Msg: 143 | |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/28/2005 1:16:26 PM | It has nothing to do with religion.
The whole damn thing started back in the 17th century. The area that's now northern Iraq all the way to the modern Azerbaijan was Armenia.
Armenia was a disputed territory between the Turks and the Persians. There where a bunch of wars between the Ottoman and Persians and that area kept changing hands. Armenians proffered the Persians and whenever Ottoman had the area became shit disturbers.
So, the Ottoman relocated the Armenians and killed a lot of them, and moved the Kurds to Armenia (Northern Iraq) from Egypt.
Now we have 2 distinct ethnic groups that were displaced ... and both wanted their own independence.
Both were a pain in the ass for the Turks and when the Turks stuck them behind the borders of the modern Turkey after world war 1, they became pains in the asses for their new landlords. Iraq and Soviet Union.
Readers digest version. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/28/2005 2:42:13 PM | No it was the right thing to do. Got rid of a facist dictatorship, and got some oil into the bargain. No risk to ourselves & essential practice in case the Germans try again. You can only judge a horse by the races it's won eh ? Leopards & spots eh. And their tanks were called leopards too. I rest my case.
Same thing when we bombed Yugoslavia a couple of years ago. They were arguing over land. Can't argue over who lives where when there's no houses can you ?? | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/28/2005 10:04:50 PM | Do you think Britain was right to assist the Americans in the liberation of Iraq?
Who said it was to liberate them? Yes that's what we were told but also, we were told it was because Iraq had WMD. Then we were told that these WDM (that didn't exist) could be used against us in the future. We were told that Saddam wasn't cooperating with the weapons inspectors, when I clearly remember that in the weeks before the 'war' started, he was - I have it recorded on video as it happened. Then we were told that the WDM (that didn't exist) can be deployed in 45 minutes.
Then later we were told that it was because Iraq had intended to have WDM. Yet many people didn't even notice that someone isn't telling the truth!
And later Blair said on the radio, that "the whole international community" was behind him which was a bare faced lie, yet people still didn't twig on.
We were also told that it was because of terrorist links with Iraq. And we were also told that Saddam tortures and kills his 'own' people, so Iraq needs liberation. So we were told that this is to bring democracy, when in reality, it’s for something else.
Saddam kills his own people so we do it instead, then we call it liberation? They were already oppressed so we 'liberate' them by killing at least 30,000 of them? (of that there be at least 15,000 children killed).
Democracy? Did anyone ask them if they wanted to be killed so they can be free from Saddam? Did anyone ask them if they wanted their country devastated and occupied?
So Saddam tortures people so we do the same in prison camps? And we also dropped the bombs of "Shock and Awe" on cities, where men, women and children live?
And we use White Phosphorus as a chemical weapon that burns human flesh right down to the bone? Sorry if this is distasteful but can we even begin to imagine how much agony that would be and how much suffering in total our governments have caused? Do we dare look at the suffering that this war has caused? Can we comprehend it? And for what?
So I strongly object to the word 'liberation' when it's caused so much death and destruction.
Do you think that Britain should pull out and leave it to America, or should all troops pull out? All should come out. The troops being there is not the solution its part of the problem. 9-11 was nothing to do with Iraq but even if it was, that’s no reason to devastate a whole nation and as Bush said himself, “people don’t like their country occupied.” What happened to that Bin Laden (who Hussein dislikes) anyway?? And to be frank, my opinion is, that those who think that terrorism can be stopped by the terror of war must have a screw loose, its nonsense.
Do you think Iraq is better of now without Saddam Hussein? No, its worse and now we do have terrorists in Iraq. More people are being murdered and tortured than under Saddam and that’s a fact. Our troops being there is only aggravating the problem and too much damage has been done already.
| |
|
arri
|
Joined: 10/5/2005
Msg: 146 | |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/29/2005 8:42:52 AM | | In my humble opinion ... if America pulls out .. Iraq will fall into a 3 way civil war in 6 months. | |
|
lealu
|
Joined: 12/12/2005
Msg: 147 | |
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/29/2005 11:43:40 AM | I agree that we should be in Iraq - not a popular opinion maybe but its mine
I think the place is better without sadam
I believe the weapons of mass destruction that we were told were there was to shut up bleeding heart liberals that would complain about fighting a war.
I agree with Mr Blair and think maggie should have sorted it first time round . | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/29/2005 1:42:22 PM | | The truth is we prop up dictators when it suits us and attack them when it doesn't. And now Bush and Blair have made the world a much more dangerous place. Should we pull out? Only if we can live with the place falling apart thanks to a situation we created. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/29/2005 10:42:26 PM | In my humble opinion ... if America pulls out .. Iraq will fall into a 3 way civil war in 6 months
That's what the justifying propaganda tells us.
However, Iraq is already at war or hadn't you noticed? And the occupying forces have more powerful weapons and technology and there are many thousand of them. Whether people get killed because the troops are there or they get killed through civil war which is already in effect, they get killed.
The troops being there is not helping but rather it's a reason for much resentment and unless they leave, the war will go on and on. There are plans to leave (or so we are told), so why wait when the military presence is making things worse? It's not getting better in Iraq and the people themseves say that it's much worse than under Saddam and that should be obvious if we can think at all. So don't believe propaganda that says otherwise, I know because I know people who have been there and I know because I personally know some Iraqi people. Iraq needs help but not by occupying forces and not by trigger-happy or scared soldiers who have been known to shoot at anything that moves. | |
|
| Iraq- should we or Shouldn't we?
Posted: 12/29/2005 10:52:14 PM | The truth is we prop up dictators when it suits them and attack them when it doesn't
Not quite true, the truth is that our governments prop up dictators when it suits them and then they attack the dictator's people when it doesn't! | |
|
|
| Page 6 of 7
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
|
Home
login 
