4 years on

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

I would love to see the proof of this. First off, the UK and your civilzed nations do NOT believe in using assassin's, and what is more, most military units will not participate in any action that targets a civilian leader. That said, Hussein wasn't really a civilian in any stretch, more like a mad dog that the SAS would have loved to put down. That said, if Mossad couldn't knock him off, I don't see how the SAS ever were close enough to do the job, and I have the utmost respect for the SAS, but I don't believe they could have done it. Where is your proof?

---

I don't have proof of that, but a USAF pilot did once tell me, in all seriousness, that his flight had a motorcade in its sights that they believed contained Saddam, and was ordered not to fire.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

As for this thread, it is just another plantive whine about how terrible Americans are and how self assured and smug all libreals are about how this has turned out. In the first 3 months, most of these self righteous libreals were awful quiet as it looked like Iraq was going to be conquered and looked after with little loss of life. As it turns out, life is never that simple, but it is easy to be a genius when you are pointing out what is wrong after the fact.

---

This is revisionist history. I, for one, and many people like me, was convinced this was going to be a disaster and always felt it looked like being even in the early days of the military campaign, because it was clear what was going to happen afterwards.

And I would add that there has always been a certain smugness on the part of those on the right and their belief in how the whole Iraqi population would be grateful to the Coalition for invading. I would contest that this has been rather more damaging.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

I thought the war was fought for the right reasons (ridding of the world of this lunatic rogue regime ) but with the wrong execution or plan for what would happen after.

---

Forgive me, but I have to ask again — where does one draw the line when it comes to removing unpleasant regimes?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cossie16

Not the sort of thing the US was saying in the early 1960's when the Berlin Wall was erected as the "antifaschistischer Schutzwall", Anti fascism protection barrier.

---

I have been thinking exactly the same thing. There is a certain irony about bringing peace to a city or country by building a wall when one thinks of Berlin. The difference, as it seems to me, is that I'm sure those who are in favour of building this wall in Iraq have such a clear view of what is right and what is wrong that they would argue that the East Germans were wrong to build the Berlin Wall, because they were an oppressive, totalitarian regime, while the Americans are right to build this wall because they are a free, democratic regime. The trouble is that not everybody thinks that way.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems...4/s1903764.htm

Maliki orders stop to Baghdad wall

By David Hardaker
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has ordered a halt to the construction of a US military-built wall designed to separate Shiite and Sunni communities in Baghdad.
Mr al-Maliki says he wants alternatives found to protect a mainly Sunni area of the Iraqi capital.
The US military said last week it would build a five-kilometre security wall around the Adhamiya quarter of east Baghdad.
Mr al-Maliki says he fears the wall might have repercussions similar to other walls, apparently referring to once-divided cities such as Berlin.
Iraqi politicians have opposed the US plans to build walls in areas of Baghdad, accusing Washington of hardening Iraq's sectarian divide.

It makes you wonder if the US bothered to speak to the Iraqis before deciding on this course of action..........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I have been thinking exactly the same thing. There is a certain irony about bringing peace to a city or country by building a wall when one thinks of Berlin. The difference, as it seems to me, is that I'm sure those who are in favour of building this wall in Iraq have such a clear view of what is right and what is wrong that they would argue that the East Germans were wrong to build the Berlin Wall, because they were an oppressive, totalitarian regime, while the Americans are right to build this wall because they are a free, democratic regime. The trouble is that not everybody thinks that way.

---

Big difference here guys, the East Germans put the wall up on their own to keep their people from defecting. IF you think East Germany was a paradise, only read the history books of the hell that was the DDR. Lets face it, if you have two warring factions who are more or less in a state of agitation with bombings and shootings but not outright warfare, a wall is one way of controlling and checking movement from one community to the other. IN the case of the DDR and Berlin, there was peace and the city of Berlin left to its own devices would have been fine. IT was only when the West got things the East didn't have, like the vote, consumer products and freedom that the people in the Stasi wanted a wall. ENTIRELY different situation, and the fact I have to tell you this seems a little silly..but if you are going to link the Berlin Wall to a Baghdad Wall, well, then you asked for it.

As for the presumption that how far does one go to get rid of a unpleasent regime, well, I don't usually advocate invading sovereign nations, but you and I both know Saddam pretty much was begging for a chance to keep tweaking the Americans. He was playing a game where he had no WMD's but wanted the world to think he might have them. A silly game....because Bushie was looking for someone's @ss to kick. Of course, Bush screwed up the peace after Saddam's ouster, but that is something that historians 50 years from now will be in a better place to assess the point in of all it.

4 years on Saddam Hussein has become a martyr and Iraqis talk about the "good old days":

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/....ap/index.html

Hundreds celebrate Saddam Hussein's 70th birthday
POSTED: 8:34 p.m. EDT, April 28, 2007

OUJA, Iraq (AP) -- Hundreds of people brought flowers and unlit candles to Saddam Hussein's tomb Saturday to mark what would have been his 70th birthday.

Children wore white, along with badges bearing Hussein's portrait, and sang songs and poems as cake was served in Hussein's burial place, an ornate building with a marble floor that he had built for religious events in this Tigris River village.

The supporters said they were mourning the state of their country along with the ousted leader, who was hanged December 30 for crimes against humanity.

"We came with candles but won't light them because the candle of Iraq, President Saddam Hussein, has gone as a martyr," said Fatin Abdul Qadir, the director of a children's charity in nearby Tikrit, 80 miles north of Baghdad. "We will light them when Iraq is liberated again."

Banners decorated buildings in the center of Tikrit, with one reading, "We congratulate the Iraqi resistance and the Iraqi people on the occasion of the leader's birthday."

Hussein's tomb was covered with flowers and an Iraqi flag.

"The martyr has gone, but he is still immortal in our hearts," Abdul Qadir said. "Baghdad flourished during his days, not like now."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

...I thought the war was fought for the right reasons ....

---

What, you mean ridding Iraq from weapons of mass destruction?...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

I First off, the UK and your civilzed nations do NOT believe in using assassin's, and what is more, most military units will not participate in any action that targets a civilian leader. .

---

didn't stop Mi5 from recruiting loyalist terrorists to carry out the desires of the fanatics within Mi5.

no doubt the CIA is performing similar tricks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schmenke

What, you mean ridding Iraq from weapons of mass destruction?...

---

Liberating Iraq, and getting rid of Saddam, and yes, ridding the man capable of using weapons of mass destruction :)

I'm in a melancholy mood, makes me think of of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5btZWbViPA

Hard to believe this is nearly thirty years ago! (Woodstock!)

Could be be used today, the yanks just don't ever learn.....................................

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by raphael123

Liberating Iraq...

---

Iraq is liberated? :confused: