Quotesaddam hussein posed no threat to anyone else. there are dozens of dictators like him around the globe put in place by the good ol USA. he happened to be sitting on some oil.Originally Posted by mypost
Not sure I get your arguement. Iraq said they had no WMDs. The weapons inspectors said they had no WMDs. Blair and Bush lied that they had proof that they did have WMDs. No WMDs have been found.
The Iraq war was the result of one man's desire to finish what his daddy couldn't.
Saddam should've gone, but years ago. Around the time he was being funded and supplied by the USA and the UK - that was when he was committed most of his atrocities. But sure he was fighting Iran, so the USA and UK were happy enough to ignore it then....
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
saddam hussein posed no threat to anyone else. there are dozens of dictators like him around the globe put in place by the good ol USA. he happened to be sitting on some oil.
Your Chairperson,
Gavin
Membership Advisory Board
"Ex Bardus , Vicis"
I wasn't having a go at teachers at all sirhamish. My parents are both teachers, and I've been teaching for the last year myself. I was just using it as an example- could just as easily have said being a policeman and complaining about having to arrest people! Agree with you re the parents.Eanna, lay off us teachers!! I blame the parents, not the kids 'cos far too many parents don't give a siht about their kids schooling. I know what you meant and were using that line as an anology (right word?) but it really gets me going when teachers/kids are even mentioned.
I think there should be a new website eg. Rate the parents.com. = that would shut the fcukers up!
Eanna, I KNOW you were'nt - I wa just acting the maggot with you. I still get ****ed re. parents though. Funny you should mention your parents being teachers. In the school where I used to teach, the Principal and his wife, also a teacher, gave their lives to the school, virtually built it, expanded it, did everything possible to upgrade. Both retired recently and are relieved to have it in their past - I thought the breaking of the bond, so to speak, would kill them. Things have gone so bad now with the teaching scene that even devoted teachers etc are pi$$ed off. It was like getting out of jail - that's from teachers who had a vocation!!! Unbelievable isn't it the way things have gone but that's for another day.
even during the draft the poorer kids still got drafted,as if you were going to college (ie had plenty of money) you could avoid the draft. blacks made up 40% of the us army in vietnam,though they only made up 11% of the population at the time
6 straight months the us army has missed its recruitment target figure. according to cnn two nights ago.same for marines.
also on cnn a story,bout a set up on campus by a student. approaches two recruiting officers, gives a story how he wants to be in the army, but has to falsify documents (due to failing exams or something). the recruitment officers,caught on tape,assuring the student he will get away with it,that their superiors wont check up on the documents.of course some recruiting agents were on cnn pretending to be aghast at such goings on but i woulndt trust these f.uckers for a minute.i reckon theyr told to do whatever they can to get people into the us army
Re. the above - BOTH Colin Powell and Condi Rice said in 2001 and 2002 - on tape - as seen in The John Pilger series last Autumn on ITN News that Saddam Hussein was well contained, posed no threat and was monitored by UN and US. Then, bang, sudden sea change - Saddam suddenly had WMD and was a threat. BS.
Saddam always had a clapped out army, most soldiers treated like dirt except for the Revolutionary Guards and had as much chance of dominating the Middle East as Kilkenny City winning the Champions League. Israel would have seen to that re. any impending threat with tactical strikes as they had done in the past.
Sure it could be argued that wars might be illegal - but what's the alternative to the system we have now - total anarchy. Bush and co, by undermining an UN, will ensure a world of unilateralism where countries that fancy their chances can invade/pillage/murder to their hearts content. The UN is pi$$poor but at least there is an element of constraint.
It's rather hypocritical these days of the US to criticise the UN's lack of clout since most US administrations - Rep. and Dem. - have fcuked it up over years.
You mustn't do that much teaching with the amount of posts you do every day!
Maybe he gets the students to do it as part of English class.
I agree with what shedite says....I think the repubs successfully changed the reason of the Iraq war to the American people from being one of getting Saddam's WMDs to one of helping free the poor Iraqi people and part of the 'war on terror' © ™.
I think a lot of people against the war as almost afraid of speaking up because they will be seen as being against the 'war on terror' © ™. And since you're either "with us or agin us", will be seen as being in favor of the terrorists.
"Jacques Santini...will be greeted in every dugout of the country by "one-nil, one-nil" - Clive Tyldsley, 89th minute of France-England June 13, 2004.
"Ooooohhhh Nooooooo" Bobby Robson 91st minute.
Yeah Dubya & his buddies weren't exactly shy in making public for years their desire to invade Iraq come what may.
I don't think the US or UK governments can ever again stand in front of the international community & say they can prove any of their intelligence. Can we belive them about North Korea? Iran? They have zero credibility & will never be believed again.
I have never understood how the US can claim its legal detaining the Taliban members. The Taliban never attacked the US & has never threatened too. In fact they've never even left theor own country.
Top post.Really??Since when was a war "legal"? When the DN (Divided Nations) could finally agree on something? Sorry, but the world can't sit on it's hands and wait forever for them to agree to a war, or not. The Iraq conflict was the result of 12 years of failed diplomacy.
It's easy to say now that there were no WMD in Iraq. Before the war there, Hussein had used WMD in the past on his own country and his neighbours, and he had never allowed free, and fair weapons inspections. Nobody could prove that there were no WMD in Iraq, and anyhow, it was only one of the reasons why Iraq was invaded.
Hussein was an unpredictable, dangerous thug who had to go. Unfortunately, he could only be removed by force. 25 years of war, daily terror, torture, and executions by him and his cronies, was more than enough. Yes, there have been problems there in the last 2 years, and many people have been killed. There would have been millions more killed however, if his regime was left in place to do, god knows what, in the future.
How many of his own people did Saddam kill? Five million or thereabouts. But, of course, in the main there were no cameras to record it, so it was pretty much ignored by bleeding hearts in the west.
Totally disagree with that statement - it was pretty much ignored by the west's leaders more like when he was the "good guy" in the war against Iran. It's an ignorant and lazy excuse by the Right imo....
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Yer average Joe didn't really give a **** about Iraq until the war. People were being totured to death day and daily and, because of UN sanctions, people were dying because of poor medical care. Of course, it was only ever mentioned briefly, because the people died quietly.
That allies change is a fact of life and it's also a fact that your enemies' enemy is your friend. That's the way it will always be and whingeing about it after the fact is a bit pointless unless you've got the gift and could've forseen the future.
What's best for the people of Iraq should be all that counts, and it is difficult to assess that properly at the moment. What is certain is that if Saddam was still in power, people would be being killed in all manner of horrific ways. I've a friend working out there at the moment and he works with several Iraqis who were tortured by Saddam and who had friends tortured to death. You can see torture victims who appear to have Parkinson's disease. Torture was par for the course and systematic and can hardly be compared to the despicable events in Abu Ghraib.
Is it best to be tortured to death or killed by an explosion? Some choice, but at least Iraqis may have some future and it would serve people well to look past the end of their nose when jumping up and down about evil Bush and Blair.
Maybe it would serve Bush and Blair better to look towards their allies in the middle east if they are genuinely concerned about torture. Sorry, I forgot they use many of these "friendly" countries to do their torturing for them.
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Ah, if only all the world's ills could be solved in one all-encompassing gesture. Sorry, this is the real world and many different factors have to be taken into account. Unfortunately torturers sometimes have to be dealt with and cannot be removed just like that.
Unless they're in Iraq, and they can make up some bullshít intelligence to bomb the crap out of a country just because Daddy Bush didn't finish the job...
If you attack me with stupidity, I'll be forced to defend myself with sarcasm.
Poor reply, but never mind, if you can't fight the logic, blame the Americans, or better still GWB.
Maybe so, but you don't bankroll them and publicly support them because it suits you for the moment...
There are indeed, dozens of dictators around the globe, but there are dictators, and then there are DICTATORS. You can't compare Saddam Hussein to someone like say, Fidel Castro.
Saddam became the leader of Iraq in 1979, and his reign lasted for 24 murderous years. His war against Iran lasted 8 years. One billion people were killed during it. Near the end of it, he poisoned the inhabitants of Halabja, where 5,000 were killed in one fell swoop. At his inauguration speech in 1979 as President, he ordered dissenters out of the building, to be executed on the spot. He invaded Kuwait in 1990. America and 33 other countries had to liberate the country then. He turned against Iraqi Kurds soon afterwards. He constantly interfered, and then expelled UN Weapon Inspectors from his country. He and his regime, tortured, and executed anyone who did not unequivocally back him daily, using some of the most violent methods ever known to dispense with his opponents. While it turned out that he had no WMD when Iraq was invaded, he was capable of developing and using WMD in the future. There were several "smouldering guns" found by UN Weapons Inspectors pre-invasion. Sarin was found by British troops after the war. He was in material breach yet again, of UN Resolution 1441, which warned that he would face the consequences if he didn't comply fully with UN Inspectors. He didn't, so he had to be dealt with it. He was dismissed as leader of Iraq by America and it's allies in 20 days.
Away from the media coverage from Iraq today, the country is slowly finding it's feet. The country has been liberated. It has a democratically elected government, however flawed. It has a free press. It has a new currency. Schools and hospitals are been reconstructed. Civilians are not being executed by the government anymore. Daily life is gradually improving. The new Iraq is not perfect, but it's a lot better than what it was. The new Iraq will in time become a flourishing state, and a model for other countries in the region to follow.
Ah now! Typo, I hope! Or maybe you work for Fox News!
Nobody's arguing (or they shouldn't be) that Hussein wasn't evil and that it isn't great that he's gone now. However, if you think the US invaded to save the poor Iraqis from this nasty man, you're taking in far too much of their propoganda. Apart from bankrolling him to power in the first place, they openly supported him for years while he was off killing all these people and never made a move to remove him. And there' splenty of other dictatorships the US have set up as well - nasty Nicaragua (who, we were told, were going to blow the poor defenceless US to smithereens before brave Uncle Sam intervened), Chile, Venezuela (where the president unbelievably wanted to use his country's oil revenue to improve his citizens' standard of living and not sell it to American oil companies on the cheap) etc., etc. The reason most are against the war is because they recognise that the world simply can't go on allowing the US to do whatever it wants, whenever it wants.
Hussein at one stage did have WMDs. Wonder where he got them from?
There's other nasty leaders in the world too. China and North Korea spring to mind. China's OK because they're a growing economic power with potential for huge American investment and profits. North Korea's OK - even though they're actively making threats regarding the use of nuclear weapons - because they don't have any oil and so the US don't care.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks