What's up with Bush and Saddam

[Unregistered]

Bush & Saddamm now ? ... i havent watch the news lately ... are they going to war or not ?

[Jan]

well US and Aussie troops are there waiting for the next stage if that is any help. :bandit2:

[Unregistered]

i heard people say US troops are in kuwait now ...and they're going for Sadamm in the middle of January or by the end of Jan. ...is that true ?

[Jan]

Here a a couple of news reports from today.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,5855481%255E1702,00.html

http://news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,5855182%255E2,00.html

I don't think anyone really wants a war, but they are prepared in case there is no alternative :(

[Wojtek]

Yesterday, was the 12th birthday of the persian war.

Saddam held a speech in wich he said that he wont hesitate to attack US army members IF they come on his territory. He also said the Allah is great and Allah will guide them thruh all this. He also mentioned that the US people today are considered as the Mongolians of a few centuries ago (read: Barbarians).

[CareBear]

Originally posted by Wojtek
He also said the Allah is great and Allah will guide them thruh all thiswhich isn't any different then Bush saying the war on terrorism is a war of "good vs evil" and "with the grace of God we will win this war" and "God bless America and our troops"

[Wojtek]

Originally posted by CareBear
which isn't any different then Bush saying the war on terrorism is a war of "good vs evil" and "with the grace of God we will win this war" and "God bless America and our troops"
All I know is that God would kick Bush's ---, and not bless his stupid war campain.

[murat]

no he would kick sadamns --- for killing his own population

[Wojtek]

Originally posted by murat
no he would kick sadamns --- for killing his own population
No, he would kick both's --- for wanting a war with no reason

[Unregistered]

well sadamm is evil cant let him stay in power for that long ...or else he'll bring harm to the world.

[Dusty]

I find it odd his "evil" suddenly matters now when no one seemed to mind just a short while ago.

Ignoring the fact that Saddam doesn't have one, I'm sure launching into an all-out war, pushing him into a corner, and giving him nothing to lose is just the right way to handle a man with a nuclear bomb.


This would make a wonderful movie. Such a shame it's real.

[merickson]

How many Iraqi kids are we allowed to accidentaly kill while removing this evil man before we become evil ourselves?

[Webdude]

Well, figure this. Saddam is the one leader on this planet that has never had a weapon he didnt use. That's what all this is about. There's a difference between having weapons for defense and having them for offense. With his history, who would trust him to have mass destruction weapons? Besides, his very threats to the U.S. now verify to me that he has such weapons, and certainly intends to use them. He's not really that stupid. He wouldnt make such public threats in the open if he didnt have the means to carry them out. This time around he is NOT saying ALLAH will destroy us like he did in the last war, he is saying HE will destroy us. Read the words and you know he has the weapons.

So the question now is...do we build up a force there that can take him out and possibly intercept any launches? Or do we fall back and wait for him to nuke someone else in that region (or turn them to putty with chemicals) and THEN try to build up a force there? Personally, I prefer the pre-emptive strike option. I'm sure there are those politicians and scientists high in the Iragi structure that having been giving us secrets, which would explain why the U.S. is being so forceful now......they just cant release that info to the public without risking the lives of their key informations (hence losing their source of information) in the Iraqi structure..

[Wojtek]

In my oppinion this is like the cold war.

Both sides are bull----ing on each other and waiting for the other to act.

It's just plain stupid.
Even if hussain would have such weapons, what would be his advantage to strike on the US? None, because the US would strike back 999x times harder on them.

Bush only wants hussain out of there from an economical point.
He gets a new leader up and a new 'frendship' begins between bush and the new leader and misteriously the new leader will sell the USA gaz for almost nothing.

There's always $$$ behind everything nowadays.

Not some " USA's security issues "

[Dusty]

When he was actually using chemical gas against the kurds, we gave him only a verbal reprimand and then reasoned that the kurds targeted were probably pro-Iranian anyway (Iran was the enemy, we were allied with Iraq). Decades later, we're eager to go to war with him for only possessing it. I find that amusing.

We expect them to put their total faith and trust in the UN weapons inspections program, when we before shattered that trust using it as a cover for our Iraqi spy organization. I find that amusing too.

When Iran was at war with Iraq and pushing for a regime change, we condemned them for threatening Saddam and the "legitimate government" of Iraq and violating the "accepted norms of behavior among nations". Now we're pushing for the same and violating the same. I find that amusing too.

We put sanction after sanction on Iraq, pushing millions to famine and death, and we do nothing to China, who have a thousand times more violated the human rights we accuse Iraq of. That's amusing.

We tell ourselves that the sanctions are caused by the weapons in Iraq, and as soon as they disarm, they will be lifted, and food an medical aid will return to Iraq. We tell the Iraqis that the sanctions will stay in place while Saddam is in power, compliance or no to weapon regulations. That's amusing too.

We repeatedly say Saddam expelled the UN weapons inspectors in 1998, though he did nothing of the sort. They left voluntarily, ordered by their leader Richard Butler to leave before our air strike commenced. This was even reported at the time, but the story was changed a little more than a year later to further justify the strike. That's amusing too.


I still wait to hear the justification for this first-strike-- oh wait, what're they calling it? that's it, "preemptive strike" on Iraq. They won't actually kill Saddam, I realize that. I doubt they'll even find him. Sort of like what's-his-name, um.... Osama bin Laden. Man, talk about falling off the pages, what happened to him?

This would make a marvelous black comedy, it couldn't be written better.

[CareBear]

The question isn't wether or not something should be done about Iraq because the whole international community knows it can't go on like this but the question is how.
You can't just go and bomb another country cause you happen to feel like it because then you set a precedent for every other country in the world to go to war with another one for whatever reason. And as opposed to Iraq, some of the ones that don't like each other do have nuclear weapons.
If the US had any solid evidence that Iraq posessed those weapons they would have shared it with the world by now since then noone would oppose a war. Except now they say: "we have it but we won't give it to you" which leads to all the current international protest.
Bush just wants a war and whichever reason will present itself will do and if there aren't any I'm sure they'll make some up that are supposidly backed by evidence noone's allowed to see.

[Wojtek]

Originally posted by CareBear
The question isn't wether or not something should be done about Iraq because the whole international community knows it can't go on like this but the question is how.
You can't just go and bomb another country cause you happen to feel like it because then you set a precedent for every other country in the world to go to war with another one for whatever reason. And as opposed to Iraq, some of the ones that don't like each other do have nuclear weapons.
If the US had any solid evidence that Iraq posessed those weapons they would have shared it with the world by now since then noone would oppose a war. Except now they say: "we have it but we won't give it to you" which leads to all the current international protest.
Bush just wants a war and whichever reason will present itself will do and if there aren't any I'm sure they'll make some up that are supposidly backed by evidence noone's allowed to see.
Nuclear weapons possesion by Iraq is just a bull---- excuse to start war with them. Don't tell me the states and iraq are the only 2 countries in this world that posses nuclear stuff.... :rolleyes:

[Blank Verse]

I don't know if anyone noticed, but there was a whole ----load of worldwide peace rallies today. If only the powers that be would take heed.

[conkermaniac]

There can't be any country with more human rights abuses than...the United States. America should shut up and stop complaining about Iraq and China and look at how bad the United States has been. What's happening with those prisoners at Guantanamo? And how about those times when the United States assassinated leaders of other countries, only to put up a worse leader who would leave millions to die while he himself became a billionaire (read: Mobutu)? The United States teamed up with Britain recently to chase out natives on Chagos so that they could build a stupid military base. A lot of Americans also treat minorities and elderly people like $hit - from policemen beating African-Americans to retirement home staff depriving old grandmothers of food. At least when China and Iraq commit human rights abuses, they at least stick to their own turf. The United States abuses people all over the world, including in their own country, and to tell you the truth, if any American was surprised that 9/11 happened, then that person was stupid indeed.

Oh, and one more thing - Saddam Hussein would have never had "weapons of mass destruction" had it not been for the United States. End of discussion.

[murat]

well, saddam hussain got 100% of the votes in iraqs last election... do yoe reaaly there is any democraty in iraq ?

anyways, this will be the same as the 2nd worldwar and the war against the taliban

the usa will kill "the evil people" and the population will be free again same as germany 1945 or afghanistan 2002
after that th us will help the people building a new great country, and iam pretty sure the iraqis 2040 will be very happy to live in a free country. thanx to the usa

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by murat
well, saddam hussain got 100% of the votes in iraqs last election... do yoe reaaly there is any democraty in iraq ?


I thought he got 96%? :p

Anyway, who needs democracy? Singapore and China certainly aren't democracies, and they're the two best-run nations in Asia. Every single democratic government in Asia is falling fast because the people are poor and will vote for the person that is willing to give them $10. The Philippines, Bangladesh, and Indonesia have the three worst governments in East Asia - and all three are so-called "democracies". Neighboring countries Malaysia, Brunei, and Singapore have been progressing at a rapid speed, and all three are dictatorships. If we move further up north, we see Japan and Taiwan. As if the corrupt elections weren't bad enough, over here, we see people throwing shoes and chairs at each other in a Congress meeting - and it's not a rare incident either. Don't forget Japan's free-falling Kieretsu economy (and if Japan had not been a democracy, the pathetic economic system would have been long abandoned), and Taiwan's struggling political and economic stability. Democracy is a concept that is wonderful for rich people with strong moral principles, but in poorer nations, it will always fail.

[Jan]

Probably everyone was scared to not vote for him or they would be zapped :fork: :fork: :fork: ogre2

[CareBear]

Originally posted by Wojtek
Nuclear weapons possesion by Iraq is just a bull---- excuse to start war with them. Don't tell me the states and iraq are the only 2 countries in this world that posses nuclear stuff.... :rolleyes: It helps if you take the time to read properly before you hit the reply button.
"And as opposed to Iraq, some of the ones that don't like each other do have nuclear weapons."


the usa will kill "the evil people" and the population will be free again same as germany 1945 or afghanistan 2002
after that th us will help the people building a new great country, and iam pretty sure the iraqis 2040 will be very happy to live in a free country. thanx to the usaI'm sure they're just sitting on the edge of their seats waiting to see if any of the upcoming million deaths will be their family or someone they know. I'm sure the parents of the three quarter of a million children that died due to the war and UN sanctions can't wait either.
War doesn't kill "evil people", it kills the innocent ones.

(I'm sure the US will be as humane as possible in killing Iraqi soldiers as well... like bulldozering them into the ground http://jeff.paterson.net/aw/aw4_buried_alive.htm )

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by CareBear

War doesn't kill "evil people", it kills the innocent ones.



Amen. The "evil people" are really the politicians who are fueling wars.

[Webdude]

Originally posted by conkermaniac
I thought he got 96%? :p

Anyway, who needs democracy? Singapore and China certainly aren't democracies, and they're the two best-run nations in Asia.

Gee, I sure see plenty of them running as fast as they can to get on the first boat to America they can afford. I guess they dont quite agree with you..

[Webdude]

Originally posted by CareBear
It helps if you take the time to read properly before you hit the reply button.
"And as opposed to Iraq, some of the ones that don't like each other do have nuclear weapons."

I'm sure they're just sitting on the edge of their seats waiting to see if any of the upcoming million deaths will be their family or someone they know. I'm sure the parents of the three quarter of a million children that died due to the war and UN sanctions can't wait either.
War doesn't kill "evil people", it kills the innocent ones.

(I'm sure the US will be as humane as possible in killing Iraqi soldiers as well... like bulldozering them into the ground http://jeff.paterson.net/aw/aw4_buried_alive.htm )

Although I do disagree with burying the enemy alive (at least shoot them in the head first :devious2: ), I am concerned about where this will go. We are the country that's full of wimps concerned about the rights of mass murders and give them luxourious prison cells to live in. Soon, if not already, you will have activist groups marching that it's inhumane to shoot the enemy in battle. What would they have us do? Chunk water balloons at them??

[Daniel]

Originally posted by Webdude
Chunk water balloons at them??

This reminds me of a Simpsons episode. :D

[Dusty]

There can't be any country with more human rights abuses than...the United States. America should shut up and stop complaining about Iraq and China and look at how bad the United States has been.I fully agree with you, I used China only as an example of our double-standards. America's own history is more than spotty, it's downright black. We should acknowledge it and our first priority should be cleaning up our own act, so to speak, but that doesn't mean we should condone China or Iraq or any country just because they are making the same mistakes we have made and are making.


Gee, I sure see plenty of them running as fast as they can to get on the first boat to America they can afford. I guess they dont quite agree with you.You'll see people fleeing to and from wherever you go, regardless of whether you find the conditions good or bad. One man's paradise is another's nightmare, government notwithstanding. Because people flee from Singapore does not mean there aren't those pleased to be there. Because people flee from China does not mean there aren't those pleased to be there. Because people flee from the US does not mean there aren't those pleased to be there, you prove this yourself.

A democracy is not good to all, no more than a dictatorship is. If everyone was in agreement there would be no need of either one. Not to mention "democracy" and "dictatorship" are only words. It's foolish to think every country that calls itself a democracy is one. Even America, while it may idealize one, isn't a democracy by any stretch of the mind. Likewise, few countries governed by dictators are truly dictatorships. What works out on paper rarely does in life, true government is much more free-flowing and adaptive than that. A "dictatorship" can be just as successful as a "democracy", a "democracy" can be just as corrupt as a "dictatorship". This isn't a western, no one's wearing a white hat.

In short, the idea that people flee from dictators is a simple one and a very arrogant one. People flee from poor conditions, be it poverty or famine or social oppression-- conditions that are not localized to any one type of government and not global to all peoples of that government.


We are the country that's full of wimps concerned about the rights of mass murders and give them luxourious prison cells to live in. Soon, if not already, you will have activist groups marching that it's inhumane to shoot the enemy in battle. What would they have us do? Chunk water balloons at them?You're a very close-minded man, Webdude. I know you don't think this of yourself, I've read many of the threads you've participated in, but you truly are. You see only one side, it's always us and them. It's important that you understand there are viewpoints different from yours. You may disagree with them on all counts and believe them wholly misguided, but you must at least accept them and understand there are those that do agree with them. It's not us and them, you shouldn't close yourself off and irreverently jab at and make light of your self-made enemies. Keep an open mind and don't turn away ideas because they don't follow your own.

Everyone is guilty of arrogance; it's a flaw common to all of us, don't feel I'm singling you out. If you see it, you can get beyond it and hope to find understanding, but arrogance that goes without being acknowledged only perpetuates itself. If you ask me, this is America's problem. America is arrogant. America is very arrogant. It's easy enough for others to see it, and see it they have, but it takes a decided effort for each individual American to see it in themselves, and it's a terribly frightful sight few want to chance finding.

I hope you understand and don't take offense. Even if you do take offense outwardly, I hope you've at least had pause.

[tommyjh02]

well, so many people posted that sadam doesn't have nuclear tools. They found war heads that he said he didn't have to. Also, people say why are we acting now. Well, he has had since 1992. Also, he is a threat and is untrustful, unlike these other countries. Although, I to would say no war, until they found the war heads.

[tommyjh02]

we aren't a democracy? I would say we are. Democracy meaning rule by the people. Sure, we elect people to make our choices. But we elect lots of people to make our choice, therefor popular opinion is democracy. it's not possible for everyone to make their own choice and have it in to effect. we should put a certain amount of trust into those people we elected and if they do something we don't agree with, we should remove. As far as the war, I think in our minds, we both feel we are fighting for the good of all. However, I still fail to see where persecution can ever be reasonable.

[murat]

Originally posted by Dusty
... America's own history is more than spotty, it's downright black...
cmon.
look at europe and usa
while afroamericans just had less rights, jews in europe werent allowed to live

hey perople, just imagine you live in iraq.
you MUST be muslim. your wives/kids MUST wear these big things and werent allowed to show their face in public, if you are unlucky or a part of the kurdish population in northern iraq, you would get killed. if you wouldnt vote for saddam, you family and you would get killed, if you dont like him, the same will happen

and sure, people will die. thats war. but if saddam wont cought, he will kill more people then a war would kill
just watch at germany 1945, the world had to kill people to make the population free

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by murat
cmon.
look at europe and usa
while afroamericans just had less rights, jews in europe werent allowed to live


The African-Americans not only had less rights - they were slaves! The treatment of the Jews in Europe was certainly vile, but was slavery better? And don't forget, the US was involved in the assassinations of two world leaders and the overthrowing and destabilizing of many others.



you MUST be muslim.

That doesn't matter. Pretty much everyone is Muslim already. :rolleyes:



your wives/kids MUST wear these big things and werent allowed to show their face in public,

That's not true at all. Most of Iraq, including Hussein, are Sunni Muslims. They are much more liberal than countries such as Pakistan. Because wearing veils is a Muslim tradition, women do so anyway, even without being told to do so - for fear of looking disrespectful in front of their peers. Why don't you go tell the Jews to stop wearing those beanies? It's the same question.



if you are unlucky or a part of the kurdish population in northern iraq, you would get killed. if you wouldnt vote for saddam, you family and you would get killed, if you dont like him, the same will happen
That happens in Africa everyday. Why don't you go complain about these African leaders? Saddam is far more moderate in terms of killing people than they are.



and sure, people will die. thats war. but if saddam wont cought, he will kill more people then a war would kill
just watch at germany 1945, the world had to kill people to make the population free
The fact is, Saddam Hussein is not committing that many human rights abuses. If the US truly cared about the welfare of the people around the world, they should go knocking on Africa's doors first - NOT the Middle East.

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by Dusty
I fully agree with you, I used China only as an example of our double-standards. America's own history is more than spotty, it's downright black. We should acknowledge it and our first priority should be cleaning up our own act, so to speak, but that doesn't mean we should condone China or Iraq or any country just because they are making the same mistakes we have made and are making.

Yes, I totally agree! I truly believe that China has a long way to go in terms of human rights, but America has seemed to ignore all their faults while criticizing others.



You'll see people fleeing to and from wherever you go, regardless of whether you find the conditions good or bad. One man's paradise is another's nightmare, government notwithstanding. Because people flee from Singapore does not mean there aren't those pleased to be there. Because people flee from China does not mean there aren't those pleased to be there. Because people flee from the US does not mean there aren't those pleased to be there, you prove this yourself.

Well, what I think Webdude needs to understand is that Chinese people flee to US because they want to make more money. Competition is fierce in China, the most populated country in the world. Therefore, there's much more opportunity in the United States. I would say that the majority of Chinese people couldn't care less about politics and freedoms - their first concern is always money. If they were given a choice between China and Kenya (a democratic country that is equally poor), how many do you seriously think would choose to live in Kenya? In fact, I bet you can come up with an exact number. Webdude was brought up in a society where nobody goes hungry - that's why he can't understand how they feel.



A democracy is not good to all, no more than a dictatorship is. If everyone was in agreement there would be no need of either one. Not to mention "democracy" and "dictatorship" are only words. It's foolish to think every country that calls itself a democracy is one. Even America, while it may idealize one, isn't a democracy by any stretch of the mind. Likewise, few countries governed by dictators are truly dictatorships. What works out on paper rarely does in life, true government is much more free-flowing and adaptive than that. A "dictatorship" can be just as successful as a "democracy", a "democracy" can be just as corrupt as a "dictatorship". This isn't a western, no one's wearing a white hat.
Democracies tend to be work very well in Western countries, but as far as I can see, it has failed miserably in Asia, Africa, and South America. Dusty said it perfectly: democracies can be just as bad as dictatorships can be. The problem is that one shoe size doesn't fit all. China has finally found a match in blending a capitalist economy with a Communist government. The United States has progressed throughout the years, sticking firmly to the road of democracy (or so they say, hmm... :D). Uganda has put a damper on their AIDS crisis thanks to an emerging dictator who has devoted himself to promoting the welfare of his people. Even Somalia, of all countries - at the moment a semi-anarchy - their infrastructure is improving. As for the struggling countries, they are still trying to find the perfect fit, but with the US using food aid as "ransom", that process has been slowed. China doesn't go around the world imposing a Communist government on everyone - Europe and the US shouldn't either.



Everyone is guilty of arrogance; it's a flaw common to all of us, don't feel I'm singling you out. If you see it, you can get beyond it and hope to find understanding, but arrogance that goes without being acknowledged only perpetuates itself. If you ask me, this is America's problem. America is arrogant. America is very arrogant. It's easy enough for others to see it, and see it they have, but it takes a decided effort for each individual American to see it in themselves, and it's a terribly frightful sight few want to chance finding.
I will admit to being arrogant. :p Anyway, I have talked to a large variety people in my school - from Americans to Europeans and Asians in my school - and it seems that pretty much everyone (except the Americans) seem to agree that Americans are self-conscious, proud, overweight dimwits. Now, of course, I am offended by this, being American myself, but I think that America and Americans have represented themselves rather badly. I'm not suggesting that Europe or Asia is any better (I think that's a subject better left for another time ;)), but Americans really need to take a look at themselves. From choosing the Star-Spangled Banner as our national anthem to building the most powerful military in the world - is war really the symbol that represents us?

[murat]

The African-Americans not only had less rights - they were slaves! The treatment of the Jews in Europe was certainly vile, but was slavery better? And don't forget, the US was involved in the assassinations of two world leaders and the overthrowing and destabilizing of many others.

call me a slavefreehistory of any nation
and dont forget, the europeans brought the slaves to america, and after they melt in the pot, the americans stopped this slave thing
facism was started by europeans and stopped by americans


That doesn't matter. Pretty much everyone is Muslim already. :rolleyes:

well, iam not


That's not true at all. Most of Iraq, including Hussein, are Sunni Muslims. They are much more liberal than countries such as Pakistan. Because wearing veils is a Muslim tradition, women do so anyway, even without being told to do so - for fear of looking disrespectful in front of their peers. Why don't you go tell the Jews to stop wearing those beanies? It's the same question.

i remember to something i saw in turkish tv, 2 iraqi girls got killed by iraq regime coz they didnt wear this things and loughed in public


That happens in Africa everyday. Why don't you go complain about these African leaders? Saddam is far more moderate in terms of killing people than they are.

america cant be everywhere, after the taliban, they ll clean out iraq after that north korea and then somalia


The fact is, Saddam Hussein is not committing that many human rights abuses. If the US truly cared about the welfare of the people around the world, they should go knocking on Africa's doors first - NOT the Middle East.

do you dislike africans ? or why you the usa to
well, i dont know much places in africa where the usa could change something...

[merickson]

Every body seems to be dodging my question;

How many kids are we going to kill?

Everyone seems to be skiping past that question and arguing whether there is a justification for war. Which side is purer? Who started it?

Its easier to justify war when we talk about human rights and democracy and such.

Its really hard to justify any war when we look at a dead body.

"War is not healthy for children and other living things."

[murat]

and how many people saddam is going to kill if we wont stop him ?

[Webdude]

Ok...so it is better to avoid war and let a dictator kill the kids at his whim, instead of us taking out his government and possibily killing kids unintentionally? In the long run, I think less kids would die if we went to war.....unless nukes get involved. God I hope all sides avoid using nukes. Once one launches, the rest wont be far behind.

It's true I grew up where no-one goes hungry, for the most part. The worst case I've been in was being down to a 1/3 jar of peanut butter and some crackers. Things got worse, I was on the streets as a teen. I am arrogant because I was smart enough to get myself out of that situation. I searched for the answers and found my way out instead of crying "woe is me." I was as poor at that time as anyone anywhere. There were a few times I had rabbit for dinner in the woods at a campfire....I became quite a good shot with chunking rocks :D Fact is.....I was smart enough to find my way out of that situation. I didnt ask for help from anyone, and I didnt get help. Maybe that affects my judgement. I think people dont try hard enough, give up, and just live with their situation. I am happy where I am now because I put myself here. However, although I may be arrogant, I am not heartless. I will help someone if I can, and if they are in real need.

I have no problem in helping people move to the U.S. as long as they promise to work hard, make something of themselves, and not abuse our welfare systems. However, I am more inclined to help people in my own country because I feel I have the obligation to do so rather than someone in some other country.

I also think my arrogance is more pride in how I have lived my life, where I was, and that fact I got to where I am now by my own means, not someone else's. Arrogance is a pride where you look down your nose at others, I dont do that. I believe all people are equal.....and in reality maybe I dont think even Saddam is all that bad considering our media is only going to report our side. We go into those countries bullying our agenda's onto them....I wouldnt sit back and take it either if I was Saddam. I do know that now people are put to death there for such things as stealing a fruit, but that's a side effect of our sanctions on them. I think the People of the U.S. want to do the right thing, but our Government is going about it all the wrong way. I'm not saying that Saddam is good, but I sure would like to go to Iraq and see it all for myself, not what the media reports. Then I could decide for myself who is in the right. I'm sure both sides do a lot of good, both sides do a lot of bad. Those things are so tied up into each other that we can never decide who's right. On a simplistic level....a husband and wife argue about what color the walls should be. Who is wrong? AFter their eventual divorce, both sides tend to exaggerate about the other's bad side, it's propaganda. I dont believe for a second Saddam goes around killing children at his own whim.....or many of the other things our Government claims he does either. He talks bad about us to his people....but our Governments do the same with us.

Ok, I'm done now :p

[keith]

Originally posted by Dusty
I find it odd his "evil" suddenly matters now when no one seemed to mind just a short while ago.that "no one" was bill clinton, the most wreckless and irresponsible president in american history.

[Dusty]

Clinton dropped many bombs in the so-called "no fly zones" and enforced utterly barbaric sanctions in Iraq. He's not blameless, I never said he was. My non-support of Bush does not have any bearing on whether I supported Clinton. Be that as it may, after the Gulf War, little was done beyond periodic air raids and largely unpublicized spy operations. No one cared-- not us, not Clinton, not even Bush. Bush said nothing about Iraq or the "evils" of its president until his 9/11 high began to wane. What's so pressing now that was unimportant then?

I'd hold off on awarding the reckless irresponsibility award. Clinton was no snow-white lamb, but there were worse presidents before him and after him... well, a certain someone seems to be vying for the crown-- but I sincerely hope for everyone's sake he's not quite as imbecilic and sadistic as he appears to be.

[keith]

imbecilic and sadistic? please explain.

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by murat


call me a slavefreehistory of any nation
and dont forget, the europeans brought the slaves to america, and after they melt in the pot, the americans stopped this slave thing
facism was started by europeans and stopped by americans


It took America a century to eliminate slavery, and even afterwards, whites still mistreated blacks. The KKK was formed after the Civil War, and killed countless amounts of minorities. In fact, whites in the South continued to ritually torture blacks in the street until the Civil Rights Movement. The treatment of the Jews was not any better.



well, iam not


But you're Turkish! I was referring to the Iraqi being Muslim.



i remember to something i saw in turkish tv, 2 iraqi girls got killed by iraq regime coz they didnt wear this things and loughed in public

Really? That's interesting. For some reason, I don't believe it. It's possible that the media was twisting the story or the policemen simply shot the girls without permission from higher authorities.



america cant be everywhere, after the taliban, they ll clean out iraq after that north korea and then somalia

do you dislike africans ? or why you the usa to
well, i dont know much places in africa where the usa could change something...
I don't dislike Africans. In fact, I feel just the opposite. I feel that Africans deserve more attention for their suffering. Seriously, the Iraqi people aren't suffering that much. They still have some food on the table, and they have jobs. In Africa, famines have ravaged the continent, and the United States refuses to publicize such important news. For example, I bet you wouldn't know that it hasn't rained in many parts of southern Africa for two years. A million people will die in Zambia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, and Tanzania by March (and that's not including death tolls from wars)...and yet we don't care. It's time to set our priorities straight.

[conkermaniac]

Originally posted by Webdude
Ok...so it is better to avoid war and let a dictator kill the kids at his whim, instead of us taking out his government and possibily killing kids unintentionally? In the long run, I think less kids would die if we went to war.....unless nukes get involved. God I hope all sides avoid using nukes. Once one launches, the rest wont be far behind.


God, I sure hope they don't end up using nukes. That would certainly be the start of a new world war...and I'm not sure if too many people will side with America. :(



I have no problem in helping people move to the U.S. as long as they promise to work hard, make something of themselves, and not abuse our welfare systems. However, I am more inclined to help people in my own country because I feel I have the obligation to do so rather than someone in some other country.


I actually agree with that for the most part, except I would much rather see my money being used to help illegal immigrants than those lazy-assed people who refuse to work and live off of social welfare.



I also think my arrogance is more pride in how I have lived my life, where I was, and that fact I got to where I am now by my own means, not someone else's. Arrogance is a pride where you look down your nose at others, I dont do that. I believe all people are equal.....and in reality maybe I dont think even Saddam is all that bad considering our media is only going to report our side. We go into those countries bullying our agenda's onto them....I wouldnt sit back and take it either if I was Saddam. I do know that now people are put to death there for such things as stealing a fruit, but that's a side effect of our sanctions on them. I think the People of the U.S. want to do the right thing, but our Government is going about it all the wrong way. I'm not saying that Saddam is good, but I sure would like to go to Iraq and see it all for myself, not what the media reports. Then I could decide for myself who is in the right. I'm sure both sides do a lot of good, both sides do a lot of bad. Those things are so tied up into each other that we can never decide who's right. On a simplistic level....a husband and wife argue about what color the walls should be. Who is wrong? AFter their eventual divorce, both sides tend to exaggerate about the other's bad side, it's propaganda. I dont believe for a second Saddam goes around killing children at his own whim.....or many of the other things our Government claims he does either. He talks bad about us to his people....but our Governments do the same with us.

Well said.