Three stories which sayd it all about Iraq

Quote:

---

You dont think people in Iraq still live in fear?

---

A very different kind of fear. Again now at least they have hope.

Quote:

---

maybe you should provide evidence before you call something crap..

---

Read the rest of your post after that quote. You just said the samething I did. He repressed the majority of Muslims in his country. Thats why those on the left tell us they could never work together.

Quote:

---

Sadam and bin laden dont get along cause they are opposing islamic forces, much like protestant and catholic fuedes.

---

Represtion of other islamic sects is very prevelant in the middle east as it was in medieval europe, hardly a feature of Iraq.

and anyways you alawys seem to skim over a large point in my post..

IRAQ was not a place of fear as you seem to point out. I left plenty of evidence of this in my previous post.

Quote:

---

IRAQ was not a place of fear as you seem to point out. I left plenty of evidence of this in my previous post.

---

Why because they allowed churches. Come on you have shown no such thing. It seems you have no comprhension at all what life was like under Saddam. I guess those 300000 mass graves dont indicate anything. Naive dosent begin to describe what your saying. Maybe you would have liked to live in the USSR or Nazi Germany.

? Did i only talk about churches? The man i talked about went into great detail about how friendly the people were and even kind to a westerner. Was Sadam nice-hell no, but his people did live in overwhelmin fear, they simply lived as they knew how, that is why there was no Iraqi civil war, the people were satisfied with the only way the knew to live, now the live on true fear as the cant live their normal lives.


-What man truly fears is the unkown-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Why because they allowed churches. Come on you have shown no such thing. It seems you have no comprhension at all what life was like under Saddam. I guess those 300000 mass graves dont indicate anything. Naive dosent begin to describe what your saying. Maybe you would have liked to live in the USSR or Nazi Germany.

---

I suspect the issue is that depending on if you were a Sunni, Shia or Kurd affected much of the oppression.
AFAIK most (all?) massgraves are on Kurds or Shia muslims, so if you were a Sunni, not complaining on the goverment you were relativly safe, while not being a Sunni increased the odds for you getting murdered increased quite much. While with the current chaos, it's more random.

To use your Hitler/Stalin comparation. If you were German and not openly against the Nazis, you were quite safe, but if you were Jew, you were doomed. While in Stalin's USSR none were safe. Case B is scarier for the "safe" group(s), while A is scarier for the unsafe group(s).
Notice that this comparation is only used for the principle as the situations is very different.

BTW is there any fresh massgraves (as in from 1998- forward) found?

... and here I am, still wondering why the US didnt invade Saudi-Arabia!? :dizzy2:

gha! the world doesnt make sense! ~;)

Put it this way...We are there, what you going to do? leave and let a bloody Civil War break out? I don't think so. We stay until the job is done...unless any of you got a better idea?

I don't agree with the war, but we took on the job and we had damn well better finish it

Yeah lefties listen to ahdut. IF our countries messed their lives up so much, dont we owe it to them to make their country stable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ceasar010

Yeah lefties listen to ahdut. IF our countries messed their lives up so much, dont we owe it to them to make their country stable.

---

Yes we do owe it to the Iraqis to stay until the job is done. The question originally posed by JAG was 'Why was it [the war] such a good idea again?' i.e. 'why did we start it in the first place?', not 'quick, let's get the hell out of there'.

The best result so far of the Iraqi war was to remove US troops from Saudi Arabia. This was a large source of tension and friction between the US and the Arab nations. Getting "the infidels" out of the Muslim holy land removed one of AQs primary objectives. They probably would be happier if they had forced the US out through terrorist action, instead of the US voluntarily moving them, uh, a little north and east...

What's done is done. It is now the responsibility of the US to leave Iraq in as good a condition as we can get it. If we leave a violent mess we will look bad in the eyes of the international community, alienate a region that, frankly, has us by the short hairs, and potentially create a situation worse than Saddam's regime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lazul

... and here I am, still wondering why the US didnt invade Saudi-Arabia!? :dizzy2:

gha! the world doesnt make sense! ~;)

---

It's obvious! Because Nuder didn't want to lose tax money. ~;) The slow way works much better... ~D

Care to explain why it is 'irrelevant? I believe I showed its relevance:
Would you really like to examine the relevance of the mass graves Rabbit ?
Feel free to start .... where do you want to go ?
Who is in them ? when were they put in them ? for what reasons were such despicable actions taken ? who was supporting the people who ended up in them ? who was supporting the people who were putting the bodies in them ?

.....So go ahead , tell me the relevance to this topic of crimes commited by an ally of the West ?


... and here I am, still wondering why the US didnt invade Saudi-Arabia!?
...and here I am , wondering why the US didn't invade Pakistan ~:cheers:

IM just wondering why we didnt call for a new crusade and invade every Muslim nation ~D

IM just wondering why we didnt call for a new crusade and invade every Muslim nation
ah , thats because the military was only geared up for 1:4:2:1 actions , and they have found out that they couldn't even manage that ~:cheers:

Yeah we should have just nuked the entire Middle east on 912. No more problems ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ah_dut

Put it this way...We are there, what you going to do? leave and let a bloody Civil War break out? I don't think so. We stay until the job is done...unless any of you got a better idea?

I don't agree with the war, but we took on the job and we had damn well better finish it

---

I dont think anybody wants to just pack up and leave, but this war was a bad idea.

Quote:

---

I dont think anybody wants to just pack up and leave, but this war was a bad idea.

---

Well Im getting a bit tired of posting cliches here but ( yes here comes the Butt Monkey)

War is always a bad idea.

Yeah, but there are wars you can/should avoid and this was certianly one of them.

Quote:

---

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

---

You did see the big smiley did you not. Yes just like Ann I like to say outragous things to tweek the opossition. I truly believe the world would be a far better place if this were done. I hardly condone such a radical solution though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by King of Atlantis

I dont think anybody wants to just pack up and leave, but this war was a bad idea.

---

I don't agreee with the war...quote me. We are there now are we not? We can't turn back time can we? Let's just try and do the best wth what we can in our present situation

Sigh..

Why is it that my well thought out replies get no response but my heated one-liners will create a firestorm? :shame:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ah_dut

I don't agreee with the war...quote me. We are there now are we not? We can't turn back time can we? Let's just try and do the best wth what we can in our present situation

---

? Never said you did. People were arguing if the war was good or not and you made your statment that were there and we cant leave. I agree with you that we cant leave as I have previously said.

since our leaders(BUSH...) got us into a horrible situation were supposed to just sit along and not question his motives. That is all anybody has been doing, showing evidence that this was a poorly chosen war. I still fail to see your argument as I, nor anybody in this thread has said anything against your post.

Sorry PanzerJager, I would reply...but to agree with you. That does not take too much.

The hand-wringing liberals cannot stand war. But just how many of their leaders opposed the war in the first place?

And JAG, how about the segeant I heard on the radio this morning on the way to work? He is from the 151st artillery battalion of the Minnesota national guard. He is home right now on a two week furlough. The news casters actually played him saying (approximately) this:

"What I don't like is that the good things that are happening don't get reported. Two of my officers are in charge of obtaining school supplies for a newly reopened school in our area. A week ago, my battery helped to finish off an addition to the school, along with some small houses for teachers to live in. Another battery has been working to get the sewers and water mains back online to the town (sorry, I can't remember the towns name). Right now they are at about 75% of capacity. A local grandmother and her family has been cooking special meals for that battery in thanks for having running water again.

"But no one ever hears about that. The only thing that ever gets reported are the bad things. The suicide bombers and the innocents they destroy. I guess what we do just isn't news."

I felt so bad for the guy. Because he is right. Most of the good things I have heard about the war come from e-mail chains written by people (usually officers) who have just gotten back and want to dispel some of the myths of the war. They also want us on the homefront to know that a few bad apples don't ruin the whole bushel.

It makes me sad to know my friends over there are not being appreciated by so many people at home. And all for political gain. :embarassed: The Iraqis sure do love them though!

Azi

Quote:

---

The hand-wringing liberals cannot stand war.

---

Most cant stand wrong wars

Quote:

---

But just how many of their leaders opposed the war in the first place?

---

Your right and i find these people quilty as well.

Quote:

---

It makes me sad to know my friends over there are not being appreciated by so many people at home. And all for political gain. :embarassed: The Iraqis sure do love them though!

---

I appreciate the soldiers 100% not the leader that sent them.

So why do you keep trying to destory their morale by telling them what they are doing is wrong? You think they like being here? My friends are incensed at the media for continually harping on their failures. And yes, this includes the BBC. I love BBC world, but they are just as liberal as CNN, CBS, NBC etc. But the BBC is not focused (at least that I saw) on Michael @#$*% Jackson or any of our other worthless celebrities.

Three stories do not 'sayd' it all about Iraq. Add one more, about how the majority of the troops are improving the standards of living for those people. Another for how the terrorists keep slaughtering those who should be their countryment. One more for how many people would be dead over these past 27 months under Hussein...and you might, just might, have a point.

But good luck finding stories like what I want to see!

Azi

Quote:

---

So why do you keep trying to destory their morale by telling them what they are doing is wrong?

---

The war is wrong, but they are just following there nations orders cause they want to protect their families. I cant say there is much a nobler thing than that, but that doesnt mean the war is horribly the wrong one to fight.

King, I would like to know:

What is a 'right' war?

Woohoo! Time to eat!

Azi

Why is it that my well thought out replies get no response but my heated one-liners will create a firestorm?
On the whole a good post Panzer , but this passage with the link ...
The government of Iraq supported terrorism. This support was not only in the form of supporting palestinian terrorism in the same form as what occurred in London recently, but also with more internationalist terrorists.
Is based ariound an article that is full of rubbish that has been disproven many times over , and other ties to groups that are currently , or have been funded , protected and supported by the West .

The main thing I disagree with from the post is ....
The war in Iraq was neither a good or bad idea, it was a necessary action.
If it was a good or bad idea is just a matter of opinion , what matters and what is having a long lasting effect is the way in which it was done , the lack of thought that went into the action , and the complete lack of post invasion planning .
Oh , and I don't think it was a necessary action at all .


Cube Ann Coulter already did.
did you miss that idiot republican politician this week ? spouting the same stupid inflammatory crap on the radio that Lowry did at the time that Coulter came out with her "valuable insight" .
Nuke Mecca , that'll teach them a lesson . :dizzy2:

Quote:

---

what matters and what is having a long lasting effect is the way in which it was done , the lack of thought that went into the action , and the complete lack of post invasion planning .

---

Wrong the only thing that matters is the end result. If there is a free and democratic Iraq can you truly say it wasnt worth it?

So Gawain you subscribe to ORC?