For you that wanted USA to invade Iraq, suck on this..

[Trem]

I didn't read it like that.

Ho hum.

It just seemed to make sense.

 

[Stazbumpa]

Half and half here tbh. I think its patronising but possibly quite correct in part. Name one arab country (apart from Turkey afaik) that DOESN'T kill its own citizens?

What I dont agree with though, and what also really pisses me off, is that Saddam (and others) will use technicalities to question the legality of the proceedings because of US involvement, whilst quietly ignoring the legalities of the very actions he is on trial for.

Shoot the fucker in the head and get it over ffs.


And I do find it amusing that people wring their hands because of dictators like him all over the world, but as soon as someone does something about it they then become the bad guys.
I mean, we do the right thing by handing him over to an Iraqi legal process so that a fair trial can at least be attempted and so the whole world can see that due process is taking place, and it still gets blasted as being wrong.

What the fuck else are we supposed to do then?

He has been brought to book and must now face the consequences of his actions. And what brought him to this place? Diplomacy? Sanctions? The UN?

Nope. Good old fashioned violence. May he die and be forgotten.

 

[Munkey]

Qatar!

edit; the UAE, Bahrain.

Maybe Egypt...but we dont count them as arab

 

[tris-]

Nope. Good old fashioned violence. May he die and be forgotten.

would be better if he was thrown into one of them shitty prissons tbh and let the in-mates deal with it, or a good old public stoning.

 

[Tom]

Half and half here tbh. I think its patronising but possibly quite correct in part. Name one arab country (apart from Turkey afaik) that DOESN'T kill its own citizens?

<snip>

Shoot the fucker in the head and get it over ffs.

Erm ok, but that would hardly present a good example now, would it?

 

[Tom]

would be better if he was thrown into one of them shitty prissons tbh and let the in-mates deal with it, or a good old public stoning.

"Right! Who threw that! Come on! Who threw that!"

 

[Afuldan]

This post was pointless. No matter how much you cry about it, or how much ignorant self-absorbed shit you fling, it will still have been done.

n00b. It takes alot to get me riled, but you have touched a very, VERY agitated nerve. Those men have done NOTHING to warrant being called murderers. If anyone currently fighting is a murderer, it is the spineless cowards who hide in civilian buildings shooting at our men-in-arms every day.
How 'bout you shut your sniveling ass and go back to concentrating on growing some 'nads.

Afuldan.

 

[Driwen]

n00b. It takes alot to get me riled, but you have touched a very, VERY agitated nerve. Those men have done NOTHING to warrant being called murderers. If anyone currently fighting is a murderer, it is the spineless cowards who hide in civilian buildings shooting at our men-in-arms every day.
How 'bout you shut your sniveling ass and go back to concentrating on growing some 'nads.

just going on a limp here and guessing you are replying to the threadstarter . (ps might be good to read the other 11 pages as discussion was now about something else ).

And I do agree that countries who have never had democracy will have trouble getting used to it, but that doesnt mean you shouldnt try it. Hell portugal is democratic(completly) for only 30 years and spain for around the same amount, allthough portugal tried to be democratic earlier on and I guess spain aswell (are probably more examples to be found in european countries(not talking about the obvious ex communistic ones)).
It takes time for a country to get used to it, but that doesnt mean you shouldnt try it.

 

[~Yuckfou~]

Sorted.

 

[Trem]

just going on a limp here

Yuck has that problem, he uses Viagra I believe.

 

[~Yuckfou~]

Yuck has that problem, he uses Viagra I believe.

Nobody gives me a stiffy quite like you honey bun

 

[Durzel]

I don't agree with the reasons for the war, but i agree that Saddam simply had to go/be punished for what he had done.

More so than the other countless other dictators who murdered their own people?

Pol Pot? Mugabi? etc

I'm neither pro-war nor anti-war but I believe the World is a worser place for the actions that have taken place after Sept 9/11. You can't fight fire with fire, and all we're doing over there is inciting more and more terrorists to perform the sorts of actions that are becoming commonplace now.

As for Iraq, whilst I believe Saddam is a genuinely evil man who is inextricaply linked to a number of atrocities against his own people - that's no justification for us to go to war there.

What scares me more than anything is that we can't stamp out terrorism. To believe that we can dissuade every possible terrorist from carrying out some form of attack against the Western world, particularly in light of what has transpired since Sept 9/11, is folly. We can't realistically protect our airports, major cities, key installations and figureheads 24/7/365 - there will be another 9/11 style major disaster sooner rather than later I feel, perhaps on our soil this time.

 

[dysfunction]

So what you're suggesting is that we leave everyone to get on with their own business??
And thats going to be the solution?

I think not. You have to take action. You have to fight back against terrorists.

I think getting rid of dictators is a good thing. They should be doing it more often.
If the world stood together on dealing with this sort of thing we wouldnt have half the problems there are now. The UN should be stronger than it is but it falls to its knees on every major crisis.

 

[Durzel]

I think getting rid of dictators is a good thing. They should be doing it more often.

And why do you think it doesn't happen more often?

Simple - there's no incentive for us to get involved in the atrocities that have happened (and still do happen) in Africa, etc. There's nothing in it for us.

 

[Nightchill]

History has proven time and time again that showing weakness to terrorists is the worst possible course of action. Strength, force of arms, dedication and an iron will are the only methods.

The knee-jerk reaction that allowed the current Spanish government into power was illogical. Spain was targeted by Al Qaeda long before the Madrid bombings, long before Iraq, and long before 9/11. Regardless, they pull from Iraq. What do they get in exchange? A hefty bomb on a well used railway line.

Blaming it on Morrocan terrorists can only go so far when the Spanish intelligence service have definite links from the cell leader to Ansar al-Islam (Iraq's al Qaeda splinter group). Eitherway, if the Spaniards have learnt that it's folly to attempt to bargain with terror, it can only be a good thing.

 

[DaGaffer]

Wow, this thread is depressing. It scares me the number of people willing to give up our freedoms to fight 'the war on terror'. If you lock people up without trial, and without recourse to the legal system, through the creation of dodgy political doublespeak ("Enemy Combatants" - gimme a break), then you create the circumstances for your government to do it YOU. There's a reason why have a legal system, and that's because we're free, but at every turn we're happy to give those freedoms away to make ourselves 'safer'.

Thomas Jefferson said "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance", however, what he meant by that, wasn't what a lot of people here seem to think (let government be vigilant for us - they know what to do), he meant we have to be vigilant, and keep an eye on anyone who would deny us our freedom, including those we elect. They're there to serve us, not the other way around.

If we allow travesties like Guantanamo to exist, how are we better than the men we incarcerate? If we don't have enough evidence to stand them up in a court and try them by our laws, then they shouldn't be there! How hard is that to understand?

I'm no bleeding heart liberal; quite the reverse in fact, but I'm anti-war, because I don't believe you can impose democracy at the end of a bayonet, but more importantly, just like with Guantanamo - our 'elected representatives' blatantly lied to us to fulfil their own agenda; the War on Terror has far less to do with Terrorism than it has to do with control at home.

 

[dysfunction]

Wow, this thread is depressing. It scares me the number of people willing to give up our freedoms to fight 'the war on terror'. If you lock people up without trial, and without recourse to the legal system, through the creation of dodgy political doublespeak ("Enemy Combatants" - gimme a break), then you create the circumstances for your government to do it YOU. There's a reason why have a legal system, and that's because we're free, but at every turn we're happy to give those freedoms away to make ourselves 'safer'.

Thomas Jefferson said "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance", however, what he meant by that, wasn't what a lot of people here seem to think (let government be vigilant for us - they know what to do), he meant we have to be vigilant, and keep an eye on anyone who would deny us our freedom, including those we elect. They're there to serve us, not the other way around.

If we allow travesties like Guantanamo to exist, how are we better than the men we incarcerate? If we don't have enough evidence to stand them up in a court and try them by our laws, then they shouldn't be there! How hard is that to understand?

I'm no bleeding heart liberal; quite the reverse in fact, but I'm anti-war, because I don't believe you can impose democracy at the end of a bayonet, but more importantly, just like with Guantanamo - our 'elected representatives' blatantly lied to us to fulfil their own agenda; the War on Terror has far less to do with Terrorism than it has to do with control at home.

How do you know what Thomas Jefferson meant? Did you speak to him?
Anyone can select quotes and give their own interpretations. Just look at religious texts and the numerous deviations.

So how would you go about helping other countries out of the grip of Dictators? How would you go about protecting the country you live in, and others from Terrorism? By the sounds of it you wouldnt do anything which in my opinion is a lot worse.

I don't agree with whats happening in Guantanamo or some of the other methods that have been used but I do think a proactive means is necessary.

 

[Bullitt]

More so than the other countless other dictators who murdered their own people?

Pol Pot? Mugabi? etc

No, equally so imho.

These criminals should be trialed for their actions against basic human rights.

Off on a bit of a tangent, i heard today on the news that Molosovich (sp?) might actually not be trialed at all in court because of his failing health. This scares me more that somebody can get away almost scot free due to raised blood pressure . But of course like any court trial for anyone - innocent until proven guilty.

 

[DaGaffer]

How do you know what Thomas Jefferson meant? Did you speak to him?
Anyone can select quotes and give their own interpretations. Just look at religious texts and the numerous deviations.

So how would you go about helping other countries out of the grip of Dictators? How would you go about protecting the country you live in, and others from Terrorism? By the sounds of it you wouldnt do anything which in my opinion is a lot worse.

I don't agree with whats happening in Guantanamo or some of the other methods that have been used but I do think a proactive means is necessary.

I know Jefferson meant what I described, because he said so and actually had it framed in the constitution; that's what 'the right to bear arms' is all about (along with other things), its about stopping enemies 'foreign and domestic'.

As for your second point, I wouldn't go about helping other countries out of the grip of Dictators. We're not (despite what many people like to think) the world's policeman. Besides, where do you stop? Iran? North Korea? We may not like Iran's theocracy, but it actually came into being through popular revolution. And I personally am less than keen on fucking with the North Koreans because they've got nukes and are crazy enough to use them. But if you don't want to have a pop at the rest of the so-called 'axis of evil', then why pick on Iraq? WMD is bollocks, and even if it was true the Iraqis had no delivery mechanisms that could affect the US or UK or anyone else in 'the Coalition of the Willing'. Saddam was in no position to threaten the Gulf states or Saudi (with Coalition troops on the ground there), had no reason to attack Syria, wouldn't have dreamed of attacking Iran a second time, which leaves Isreal, who are big and ugly enough to defend themselves.

Iraq wasn't about defending ourselves from terrorism either, unless you follow the Arab maxim that the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend', in which case why not attack anyone who Al' Qeada might have dealings with? (ooh, you can't, because its a very long list and includes the Saudis).

At no point did I say we should do nothing to defend ourselves, and I personally had no problem with the Afghan war, because there were identifiable bad guys on the ground tied to the 9/11 attacks, but, once the war was fought, then keeping people locked up without the ability to defend themselves is no better than Naziism; Guantanamo is no different to early German concentration camps and leaves a stain on the reputation of a country that is supposed to better than that; America is supposed to be the example, the ideal, that represents why 'our way' is better than 'their way' (and I know America isn't perfect by any stretch, and never has been), but how can we in the west engage the Islamic world with western values when we do shit like that? And the Iraq war is another example; democracies don't invade other countries unless attacked or in aid of an ally, that's why we're better than them, and even when we fail to follow our own ideals, we generally look to correct the mistake or do better next time; that's not what's happening now; Bush and the Neocons have taken 'we're better' to mean 'we can do what the fuck we want', not 'we have to be an example to others'.

Now we're there, we're stuck with it and have to do the best we can, but it doesn't alter the essential wrongness of being there in the first place.

 

[Trem]

I'm not sure how to take you most of the time Gaffer, I also feel you dislike me.

BUT that was a fucking excellent post that I fear won't get read.

 

[Trem]

Double post......kiss my knackers.

I actually felt sorry for Saddam when the close up pictures were shown of him at the trial, he was swallowing heavy with fear. He also apparently said to the guards when they came to take him away "go easy, I'm an old man".

But then after that clip it showed a guy crying his heart out because his brother was killed by Saddam for one reason or another.

I have really mixed feelings about this whole affair.

 

[Paradroid]

I hope everyone watches Fahrenheit 911 when it's released, it'll open a few eyes to the circus commonly known as "western democracy" - does this want exporting????

A few years ago there was a scandal in Britains parliament surrounding tobacco advertising, F1 racing, Tony Blair, Bernie Ecclestone and a £1M donation to the Labour party - which, basically, excempted F1 racing from a tabbacco advertising ban (for a while). Quite rightly, there was a media splash, questions were asked (then answered), and, Labour looked like a bunch of shady bastards rather soon into their term of office.

In the US, Bush snr works for the Carlyle Group, the vice president Dick Cheney used to run Halliburton (he began cashing in on the very contracts that he helped initiate) - if asked about this you may be told to: "Go fuck yourself!".

And the defence secretary Rumsfeld?

here[/URL]]

Throughout the period that Rumsfeld was Reagan’s Middle East envoy, Iraq was frantically purchasing hardware from American firms, empowered by the White House to sell. The buying frenzy began immediately after Iraq was removed from the list of alleged sponsors of terrorism in 1982. According to a February 13, 1991 Los Angeles Times article:

“First on Hussein's shopping list was helicopters -- he bought 60 Hughes helicopters and trainers with little notice. However, a second order of 10 twin-engine Bell "Huey" helicopters, like those used to carry combat troops in Vietnam, prompted congressional opposition in August, 1983... Nonetheless, the sale was approved.

In 1988, Saddam’s forces attacked Kurdish civilians with poisonous gas from Iraqi helicopters and planes. U.S. intelligence sources told The LA Times in 1991, they “believe that the American-built helicopters were among those dropping the deadly bombs.”

In response to the gassing, sweeping sanctions were unanimously passed by the US Senate that would have denied Iraq access to most US technology. The measure was killed by the White House.
”

There was a scandal not long ago about Tony Blairs wife, buying and/or selling some flats from a dodgy bloke ffs! That's about our limit for political scandal - thank you very much!

Some people are drowning in the profits they've made from creating/sustaining war. It's that simple. The mere fact that someone is making a profit from all this - makes me sick. If the desicion makers are the ones profiting - it's worse.

I think we need to completely seperate government and any kind of profit making business.

War profiteering is a fekin cancer, and with no rigorous vetting/policing of politicians for "moral aptitude", it'll keep happening imo.

:touch:

(*get in there!!!*)

 

[~Yuckfou~]

Bunch of Kittens (BB) tbh.

You would feel differently if you had to live in those countries under constant fear, had lost family members, had family members permanently disfigured or maimed, or you wives/mothers/sisters/daughters had been gang raped.

I agree with Kilroy btw, messengers often get shot, doesn't mean the message is wrong.

Flame away, I'll not be responding because theres no reasoning with wets.

 

[Wij]

Double post......kiss my knackers.

I actually felt sorry for Saddam when the close up pictures were shown of him at the trial, he was swallowing heavy with fear. He also apparently said to the guards when they came to take him away "go easy, I'm an old man".

But then after that clip it showed a guy crying his heart out because his brother was killed by Saddam for one reason or another.

I have really mixed feelings about this whole affair.

Fucking hell Trem. Saddam put thousands of people through far worse. He REALLY deserves much worse. Have you raed anything about what went on in Iraq ?

/edit: I mean personally involved too. This wasn't things done by proxy that he knew little of.

 

[DaGaffer]

I'm not sure how to take you most of the time Gaffer, I also feel you dislike me.

BUT that was a fucking excellent post that I fear won't get read.

Me? Dislike? Not at all. I'm quite fluffy really

 

[DaGaffer]

I hope everyone watches Fahrenheit 911 when it's released, it'll open a few eyes to the circus commonly known as "western democracy" - does this want exporting????

<SNIP>

(*get in there!!!*)

Shame Michael Moore's such a twat though. Selective journalism at its worst. Example; I read an interview with him the other day, where he was complaining that the press never describe Osama Bin-Laden as "The Millionaire Osama Bin-Laden" rather than "The Islamic Fundamentalist Osama Bin-Laden"; that's because "IT'S NOT FUCKING RELEVANT YOU FAT TWAT". He doesn't blow buildings up bacause he's rich, he does it because he's a fanatic. Being rich helps give him the means, but has no bearing on why. Moore's full of crap like that. Oh, and all the stuff about the Saudi royals being allowed to fly during the groundings after 9/11 is apparently complete crap, so by all means watch Farenheit 9/11 but treat it with a huge pinch of salt.

 

[Trem]

Fucking hell Trem. Saddam put thousands of people through far worse. He REALLY deserves much worse. Have you raed anything about what went on in Iraq ?

/edit: I mean personally involved too. This wasn't things done by proxy that he knew little of.

I know this Wijlet. This is what I mean about my feelings on this thing. It is most worrying for me

He was a twat, I know this.

 

[nath]

Flame away, I'll not be responding because theres no reasoning with wets.

Yeah? Well it bounces off me and sticks to you!

*runs away*

 

[SoWat]

Oh, and all the stuff about the Saudi royals being allowed to fly during the groundings after 9/11 is apparently complete crap, so by all means watch Farenheit 9/11 but treat it with a huge pinch of salt.

Michael Moore (www.michaelmoore.com) does have his own way of presenting facts, and is a great self-publicist, but the underlying facts are sound. He takes great pains to provide evidence for all of his factual claims. He's thinking about offering $10,000 to anyone who can disprove any of the facts in Farenheit 911... so maybe a chance to make a few bob there if anyone thinks he's wrong!

I think the flights during the grounding were for members of the Bin-Laden family rather than Saudi Royalty and some FAA documents have recently surfaced which seem to confirm this.

As for Michael Moore himself... well anyone who can piss off the government, big business and the police is ok by me.

 

[Stazbumpa]

I believe a retired USAF General said the following. Dunno whether thats true, but the violence begets violence thing really bothers me.

Here's the truth, which you know in your heads and hearts already: Ineffective, unfocused violence leads to more violence. Limp, panicky, half-measures lead to more violence. However, complete, fully thought-through, professional, well-executed violence never leads to more violence because, you see, afterwards, the other guys are all dead. That's right, dead. Not "on trial," not "re-educated," not "nurtured back into the bosom of love."
DEAD.

It feels to me sometimes like we are not allowed to do anything about whats wrong in the world unless we all wear rose tinted specs and use peace and love to change things.
Some people, like ones who strap bombs to themselves, don't recognise peace and love, and even if they did, see it as weakness. So therefore we must walk taller and carry a bigger stick than they do.
Stop the War people really piss me off because its a brocken record tbh and there has been no war to stop for months. Christ, we even gave the Iraqi's their country back, but even that's not good enough for some because its not a democratically elected one.
Anyone that has a brain knows that you don't go democratic straight away, and the government even aknowledges istelf as a caretaker one until elections arrive.
But Iraq, and more besides, should be democratic because their way of life and government belongs in the middle ages, not the 21st century.

And nobody at all EVER has come up with even a half decent alternative to the course of action we took.

The UN must shoulder some responsibilty for the war because it was totally ineffective at controlling Saddam, and thanks to the bickering of certain countries that had more to do with USA hating and contracts for oil with Saddam than it did for moral reasons, we did not present a united front.
Thats why Saddam got away with it for so long.
I believe the war was a pre-emptive attack to nip in the bud any WMD ideas that Saddam had (we all know he had the ideas and the WMD are probably in Syria), it was an invasion to remove an evil dictator (which should've been done in 1992), AND IT WAS A WAR TO GET THE OIL.

YES, THE FUCKING OIL.

And securing the oil, and setting up a system so that the money from buying it is not going into the pocket of a mass murderer, is a GOOD idea. Iraq is the No 2 supplier in the world, right? We got there before Al Quaida did.

The next battlefield will be Saudi, coz Al Quaida know that the key is divide and conquer AND resources.
They have the divide and conquer thing down because of the UN being shit, but the resources is another matter.
I believe they are planning to overthrow the Saudi Royal Family, Osama has even been quoted as saying that they are in his sights. An Islamic revolution in the biggest oil supplying country in the world will give them control of said resources and then, friends, we are truly up shit creek because they could send us back to the fucking stone age.

And then everyone can continue this pointless argument as to whether the war was right or not by sending fucking smoke signals.