|
|
| nankerphelge |
I'll field your question CS:
Sure we helped Saddam at one time. We also helped Noreiga (and then took him down) and we worked with bin Laden againt the Soviets (and are now taking him down).
Just because interests were somehow aligned at one point in time doesn't mean that those interests will stay aligned. Like any relationship -- each side has its goals. Those goals can change over time. Remember that as bad a guy as Saddam is, he is not a religious Muslim zealot. At the time we courted his favor, Iran had become a big problem. The shah (a long-time ally) was gone and our embassy was taken over. If we felt that working with Saddam was in our best interest at the time, his being a bad guy was just part of the reality in which we operated. We believed we could work with him.
Over time, that relationship changed for a number of reasons. For exmaple, post cold-war, the proliferation of serious weapons has increased. Saddam has embraced those weapons and has shown his intent to use them. Plus, poist 9/11, the US's tolerance of such activities has changed. We are not willing to sit back and let these people go unchecked so that they can harm us as they did and would no doubt do again.
People and countries can change course. I think both Saddam and the US are far different now than they were when we were working with them. If it had happened over-night, the inconsistency would be less understandable. But it happened over many years and in view of some rather important changes in world power and history.
|
|
|
| cocksucker |
Telecaster that's what we call opportunistic behaviour and not a very strong argument to start a war. So maybe tomorrow Saddam is a friend again? Don't make me laugh!!!Please come up with something better. |
|
|
| Pattie |
I wanted to ask that question too, but I wasn�t eloquent enough. Good luck with the demonstrations I just came back from one  |
|
|
| cocksucker |
Nanker Phelge wrote:
I think both Saddam and the US are far different now than they were when we were working with them.
Bullshit! Hussein is violating human rights for over 30 years. Don't be so opportunistic. And please don't start with these stories if you haven't even a clue what has passed in Iraq the last decades. |
|
|
| telecaster |
quote:
cocksucker wrote:
Telecaster that's what we call opportunistic behaviour and not a very strong argument to start a war. So maybe tomorrow Saddam is a friend again? Don't make me laugh!!!Please come up with something better.
I will get back to you when I am done watching liberated
Iraqis dance in the street with joy. This is awesome. Warms by heart.
In the meantime I will ask you a question:
Why are you, N. Korean, France and Syria endorsing keeping
Saddam in power and doing nothing about it besides
issuing worthless resolutions?
Get back to me in 5 please |
|
|
| cocksucker |
Again: you should not have brought him to power in the first place. Think first before you act. But thinking is not the strongest part of patriots. |
|
|
| telecaster |
quote:
cocksucker wrote:
Again: you should not have brought him to power in the first place. Think first before you act. But thinking is not the strongest part of patriots.
Nice try at avoiding the question. If you don't have an answer do be embarrassed, just say "I have no answer to your question"
|
|
|
| cocksucker |
Telecaster, I answer your question by ask you one: Why try to get rid of Hussein? He might be your friend again tomorrow? Isn't that what you told us? Times change. Certainly if American interests are involved. |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
quote:
cocksucker wrote:
Why did the US contribute to establish the Saddam
regime in the first place? Was it to help the people from Iraq? Was it to establish a democracy?
It wasn't to help Iraq or establish democracy.
We fucked up as often happens with US foreign policy. In fact its happening right now in other areas.
That has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this war, other than its fuel for semantic debates about the inherent, yet irrelevant, inconsistencies in the respective positions. All mistakes suffer from that, thats why they are called mistakes - its not a reason not to fix them.
So anyway, this Pattie chick? She, uh, you know, uh, got the chrome-trailer hitch bit down pretty good? |
|
|
| nankerphelge |
CS:
First off, we didn't bring Hussein to power -- he came to power by force long before we worked with him in the late 70s/early 80s. Saddam essentially took control and killed all his opponents.
I will agree that we could have chose to not deal with him in the late 70s and early 80s. Saddam was always a ruthless killer, no question. But we had lost our ally in Iran, and so we did take the opportunity to gain a foothold with Hussein to counter that change.
But you are delusional is you truly believe that nothing has changed. In fact, aside from the one constant of Saddam being a bad guy, just about everything else has changed. As of the late 80s he had a well funded and aggressive weapons development program that changed the magnitude of his "badness" -- he was no longer simply a threat to his own people and immediate neighbors, but was in fact a regional threat and was quickly heading towards becoming a threat to Europe due to his long-range missle program. And after the Gulf War, he continued his programs (albeit disrupted).
And the US has certainly changed since 9/11. I don't think even you can dispute that. Bush said after 9/11 that we would take a different approach in dealing with rouge nations and we have.
You call us "opportunistic" -- I don't really know what you mean by that. Every country is "opportunistic" at some level. You seem more bothered by perceived inconsistencies in our foreign policy, totally divorced from the fact that things are not the same. |
|
|
| Pattie |
pretty good? pretty damn good I would say! haha
chrome off a trailer hitch, chrome off of a tailpipe, it�s all good |
|
|
| cocksucker |
NP:
You're right in the fact every country is opportunistic at some level. France and Russia too have supported Hussein. Motives are never noble in any foreign policy. But the USA is not interested in the people of Iraq. Mark my words: as soon as the war is over the country will be and stay a great mess (just as Bosnie, Afghanistan, Joegoslavia). The Americans have no proper plans to rebuild these nations. In that sense indeed nothing has changed and will ever change. That's the sad part. |
|
|
| Highwire Rob |
My family lived in Iran in the late '70s; we left before the revolution. My father worked as an American chemical engineer for OSCO oil group.
A couple of previous posts have attempted to justify past support for Saddam because the U.S. lost its "ally," the Shah.
The Shah was no better than Saddam--he brutalized and tortured his people. Why do you think so many Iranians welcomed the theocratic alternative (their only alternative) that was presented to them? Again, the U.S. supported a dictator for selfish U.S. $oil$ purposes.
The Shah's brutal secret police force, Savak, formed under the guidance of CIA (the United States Central Intelligence Agency) in 1957 and personnel trained by Mossad (Israel's secret service), to directly control all facets of political life in Iran. Its main task was to suppress opposition to the Shah's government and keep the people's political and social knowledge as minimal as possible. Savak was notorious throughout Iran for its brutal methods.
http://www.angelfire.com/home/iran/savak.html
And for those posters that justify war on Iraq for breach of U.N. Resolutions:
Most recently Israel has defied Resolution 1405 re: investigating Israeli actions in Jenin (April 2002). Israel has refused to sign any treaty regulating nuclear weapons, and has flouted other UN resolutions sixty-nine times.
69 times!! --I believe that Israel, "ally" to the U.S. has even Iraq beaten by total violations--by far! And a poster on a previous thread had alluded to "20" Israeli nuclear weapons? Try multiplying that by 10! But then, where are the WMD inspectors in Israel? |
|
|
| Scot Rocks |
They are protesting because as Pattie and CS have said, this war has been thrust upon us by the governments and elites. The reason given, weapons of MD, hell he has them no doubt, we should know, we gave them to him.
What about how Israel has weapons of MS in the middle east and has violated UN resolutions and who has also vetoed many resolutions against Israel, yep the USA but when France, Russia do it they are villified.
BTW, remember there is propaganda going on during a war, from both sides so don't always take CNN or whoever to be totally correct.
These are the same ones who profited out of Iraq, continued to sell weapons of Mass Destruction after disgusting mass killings. Of course they are gonna be happy, Saddam is a real bastard and they have lived under a brutal dictatorship, that does not mean war is justified. So does that mean that the western liberal democracies are going to go to every country and liberate from the totalitarian regimes that exist?
Essentially this war is about self-interest, nothing else. The USA/UK/AUS and others would not be doing it if there is not something in it for them, is that surprising? no. Is it wrong either? It has been the premise for International Relations for all time. That is the why these people protest, they have a right and they have good reasons as well, it is not all just Bush is a cowboy and oil argument, there are valid questions about the bigger picture in all of this.
Cheers
A now quite tipsy Mark.
|
|
|
| telecaster |
quote:
cocksucker wrote:
Telecaster, I answer your question by ask you one: Why try to get rid of Hussein? He might be your friend again tomorrow? Isn't that what you told us? Times change. Certainly if American interests are involved.
So you have no answer. Answering a question with a question is not an answer.
Do you have an ounce of courage to answer a simple question over the internet?
Why do you, Saddam, Pattie, N. Korea and Syria not want
to do anything about removing Saddam?
Simple question
If you can't answer I will understand
|
|
|
| icydanger |
hope N� 44 will be better, numbers
Ok LJ, cant help myself,,,,,did you see the "towel heads" dancing in the streets and eating lamb? :O ?
images....
many lies lay behind truth
none knows exactly unless being actually.... in them shoes
(what shoes?)
ive got the bluuuuuuuuuessssssssss
|
|
|
| Pattie |
That�s not fair telecaster, I want Saddam gone, I have for 10 years atleast. not fair. Read my first posts and I�ve stated clearly that I�m against him |
|
|
| LadyJane |
quote:
icydanger wrote:
hope N� 44 will be better, numbers
Ok LJ, cant help myself,,,,,did you see the "towel heads" dancing in the streets and eating lamb? :O ?
images....
many lies lay behind truth
none knows exactly unless being actually.... in them shoes
(what shoes?)
ive got the bluuuuuuuuuessssssssss
Call me dense, but WTF are you talking about? I shouldn't have started this damn thread. Is it too early to start drinking??
LadyJ. |
|
|
| icydanger |
oh,
forgot the Teles question
*Why are you, N. Korean, France and Syria endorsing keeping
Saddam in power and doing nothing about it besides
issuing worthless resolutions?
I cant speak for them, so answering the question in my name
- the kurdish problem and others further up and around may suddenly become uncontrolable
- I believe, like many, the investigations made would of eased little by little his dictatorship
- its a matter of being cautious (boomerang effects)
- he is not the only dictator(big work,for GWB+team+taxes)
- consequences of a turn over could be tragic, so war mongers fear them (!pussies of course like me)
- USA has endorsed it (the most) and contributed to it (am not saying we're the only ones) since over 20 years, making iraqi debt bigger + "embarging
- should of been ages ago, masses didnt understand too well why he stayed in place in 91?
- it may have been done in a different, discreet way, sending or buying secret agents to decapitate him
- others respect/application of laws????(mentionned before) dont want to come up with Middle East countries not respecting or not even SIGNING resolutions.
- dont believe in importation of democracy without counter effects
- its terrorism we were fighting = mafia type organisations who are ALL OVER.
Tele forgive my english it IS my mother tongue :P
|
|
|
| Riffhard |
To all of our European friends who are against the war.
Please get back to me when the following actions occur to your country:
A.- One of your country's most important buildings,no strike that,TWO of your country's most important buildings in the heart of your financial distict are leveled by Islamic extremeists flying highjacked jets full of innocent men,women,and children. Causing the death to all in the planes as well as thousands in the builings.
B.-When one of your country's most important military structures is hit by by a third highjacked jet. Causing the death of all the innocent men,women,and children on board and countless lives inside said military structure.
C.-When a tyranical dictator bent on regional domination and the sworn death of your country by means of WMDs has knowingly supplied terrorists that can and have carried out crimes against humanity in the name of Allah.
D.-When one of your supposed friends,in the USA's case France,stonewalls you in the UN all the while selling Mirage jet parts to a country that has sworn the death of your country. France has done exactly that in direct violation of the UN sanctions that they helped write!!! Mirage jet parts are specifically used for military aircraft. So,in other words,our supposed ally is helping arm our sworn enemy.
E.-When your country supplies the VAST majority of humanitarian aid and finacial aid to the world. The USA supplys more humanitarian aid and finacial aid than all of Europe combined.
F.-When your country has the balls to do the job that everyone knows must be done.
Riffhard
PS-The scilence is deafening concerning the Kosovo action. No bitching then. Why not? I'll tell you why. It's because the terror was right in your back yard and you needed the USA's muscle then. Now that we are taking action for OUR protection,as oppossed to YOURS and you bitch! Pathetic! Get back to me on these very valid and factual realities will you? |
|
|
| icydanger |
sorry i am a peace monger mistake above.
half mistake because here i sometimes feel as a war monger.
depends were you stand.
lol
moderate
|
|
|
| telecaster |
Pdog that you? Welcome to RO |
|
|
| icydanger |
LJ think back
I am in glue |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
Well now we're getting somewhere...if ya'lls hangup is that America did not get UN permission you're just gonna have to deal with it...The UN is not, by any measure, going to protect the American people...
What the fuck is the UN going to do with North Korea who threaten to nuke us on a daily basis?...Answer that question if you wanna gain some credibility...what is the UN going to do with Iran who sponsors terrorists that have sworn our death?...Answer that fucking question!!!
The message Mr. Bush is sending? America will not allow the UN to provide for America's security...Why should we? ...The UN has failed in everything it has tried...
Clinton was right to act in Kosovo without UN approval and Bush is right now...The anti-war crap is merely an expression of the Anti-american hatred of those who despise Bush and the republicans...It has nothing to do with what is right...and they know it...
By the way...maybe no one told you, but the war has already started...I think your protests are now, a wee bit lame...
[Edited by Fiji Joe] |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
Nellcote wrote:
"The UN is about as useful as feet on a whale.
Pres 43 Bush said on 9/12/01, after 9/11, "In the war on terror, either countries are with us, or against us. If your country harbors or sponsors terroist activities, then you are against us"
We are now finding that in the north of Iraq, is the Al Aman, a personally selected by Saddam, Al Queada aiding organization. This proves the fact that he is harboring terroists, as well as aiding same.
We are finding he is using missles banned by the UN ammendments, along with water mines.
Saddam violated 17 ammendments 331 times over 12 years that your beloved UN sent against him.
So, in effect, he says to the UN- F You!
Time to clean up the Saddam mess, move along.
He will not be the last dictator, so you'd better be prepared for more."
Awww...Fiji wanna have yo baby
|
|
|
| F505 |
Fiji Joe wrote:
The anti-war crap is merely an expression of the Anti-american hatred of those who despise Bush and the republicans.
Man please, do you really mean that? It's really arrogant to think people can't have a balanced opinion because of the fact they don't agree with Bush. |
|
|
| icydanger |
TRIAL
what happened?
paint it black disappeared?
is this some kind of voodoo?
right im grey today, zen |
|
|
| icydanger |
you know what fee jee?
i really hope North Korea will not be next on the list
does the team have time? energy? money? enough support? logistics?
what about the masses?
soory, i have been slightly/moderatly endoctrined by lenisnists /marxists
too many things on ones mind make's one forget the essential
|
|
|
| Riffhard |
This is a blurb that I lifted from an article written by UPI. The whole article can be found on the Drudge Report. This tells me all I need to know!
------------------------------------------------------------
A group of American anti-war demonstrators who came to Iraq with Japanese human shield volunteers made it across the border today with 14 hours of uncensored video, all shot without Iraqi government minders present. Kenneth Joseph, a young American pastor with the Assyrian Church of the East, told UPI the trip "had shocked me back to reality." Some of the Iraqis he interviewed on camera "told me they would commit suicide if American bombing didn't start. They were willing to see their homes demolished to gain their freedom from Saddam's bloody tyranny. They convinced me that Saddam was a monster the likes of which the world had not seen since Stalin and Hitler. He and his sons are sick sadists. Their tales of slow torture and killing made me ill, such as people put in a huge shredder for plastic products, feet first so they could hear their screams as bodies got chewed up from foot to head."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Now if your still insisting that the United States is acting immorally I say you are completely full of shit!
Before you start with the bullshit,"This is nothing but propaganda...." be aware that this was written by UPI. United Press INTERNATIONAL. Not an American or English media source but,rather a international pool service.
I'm sick of everyone casting moral judgments on the USA and Bush,but refusing to see the undeniable truth about this twisted sick fucker. If you say your concerned about the innocent Iraqis then get behind the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of England. Any other choice is pure hypocrisy and all your credibility is shot.
Riffhard |
|
|
| nankerphelge |
I luv you man |
|
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS<
/a>]