I'm not bothering reading all the posts in this thread. As an American I believe the war and this presidency is a sham and half of this country is brain dead for voting for Bush. My fellow American's OBAMA 08!
Printable View
I'm not bothering reading all the posts in this thread. As an American I believe the war and this presidency is a sham and half of this country is brain dead for voting for Bush. My fellow American's OBAMA 08!
Really........... :sQuote:
Originally Posted by klm-607
so instead of german,russian or japanese,we are speaking English,doesn't it mean the same thing
The Iraqi people disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by harsha
Ah, you enjoy brutality, so you are a masochist. If I had your addy, I could arrange something appropriate for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by harsha
Okay, when someone demonstrates an incredible level of ignorance, there is only one solution! <PLONK>Quote:
Originally Posted by SOD
:s mokin:
Quote:
Originally Posted by agwiii
tell me where in my previous posts did i say that i enjoyed brutality...don't twist my words...i just said that i'd rather have peace in the region even if a tyrant like Saddam in charge rather than complete chaos with your self righteous war....
He wont be. He is judged by history, and to many, has botched this war. That said, (god here we go again explaining what people don't want to see) Saddam Hussein was killing over 20000 people a year just running the nation. Amnesty International (not people who take sides with George W Bush) has records on what a turd Mr. Hussein was. He just didn't merely kill, he did it for style points. Rape rooms, torture, feeding people into plastic recycling shredders, the whole lot. Gassing a few thousand Kurd's who didn't agree with him. OH ya, he and ole Dubya ought to be roasting marshmallows in hell together if I asked you. Problem is, All Dubya did was try to enforce a UN resolution or two...make it 14. Fourteen resolutions that were to be either followed or have force taken to enforce them.Quote:
Originally Posted by harsha
These resolutions were not for whether Saddam had clean laundry, or had been a nice dad, these were resolutions to get rid of his WMD's, and let the UN inspect the country unencumbered by Saddam's restrictions so the UN could be confident that he didn't have them and then the sanctions against his country could be lifted. These were terms AGREED to by Saddam to save his sorry @ss when he screwed up the last time and the US military and a strong international force were running up the highway to Baghdad. Now 11 years later, he played one game after another, then told the UN to take a hike. What was the world supposed to do? Well, if a few of you were asked, nothing...because most of you would do nothing when faced when making a tough choice.
Listen, I thought this invasion thing was botched and I thought it was not thought out well, and I was against it when they went in. I am glad Canada was NOT involved, but not for the limp wristed reasons most of you have. I am glad because I didn't think the plan for rebuliding Iraq was sound. I didn't think they had a good plan. Saddam could rot in hell as far as Iam concerned. His actions have been DIRECTLY responsible for a lot more death's than most of you are too chicken to admit. HE enjoyed killing people, and he didn't care who he killed either. Now for you guys to get all verklept is a joke. I said it to Eki, I have said it to Tomi and a few others, and I am now telling you Harsha and a few others who still don't want to see what happened for what it was that Saddam Hussein could have avoided all of this, and Iam not sorry he is dead. Heck, I am against the death penalty but in this case, it had to be seen to be done.
Saddam could have just played nice boy in the UN, he would still be in power and what is more, he would be alive today. Not only that, but he would still be killing and suppressing both his Shiite and Kurdish minorities, looting the country, and none of you would waste the outrage you are on a democratically elected president who for all his faults, is at least trying to do the right thing. You know, democracies, that country all of you have the luxury of living in where you can shoot your mouth's off while not applying logical thought to your argument. Saddam would have hung the lot of ya without batting an eyelash and before his next sip of coffee......
i am not denying the fact that Saddam Hussein was a Tyrant,Despot.......but just the fact that the US and it's allies went into the war "without UN Sanction" acting as if they were the guardian angels of this world .............
Harsha, I think you have good intentions towards your fellow man. I admire that you aren't a violent nasty guy, but don't be getting all stupid over this. You wouldn't want to live in his nation, or have his kind of Peace. There was no peace with Saddam, he invaded Iran first, and then Kuwait. If it wasn't for the fact the UN and NATO forces in the gulf were not on top of him all the time, he likely would have invaded Kuwait again, or maybe god forbid Saudi Arabia.Quote:
Originally Posted by harsha
Listen, your kind of thinking was prevalent in the UK and in the US in the late 1930's. Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini took full advantage of it. Hideki Tojo pushed his Japanese regime in to China and Mongolia, but since the victims were not white, no one seemed to care. Stalin killed over 20 million in pogroms and ethnic clearances in the Ukraine, and all the "peaceful" people said he was a great guy. No one said anything, save for a few crackpots. You know, that Winston S. Churchill fellow. He was a "warmonger" and Neville Chamberlain made "peace" with Hitler. Peace in our time....next year Neville had to declare war because the writing was on the wall. With people like Saddam Hussein, it was ENGRAVED on the wall after his wreckless and cruel invasion of Kuwait. They should have taken him out then, so why is is wrong that he is gone now? I disagree with how the rebuilding of Iraq has gone, but that doesn't alter the fact that in 100 years, Hussein being taken out was an example to every other repressive thug.
You cannot tolerate ANY form of violent or repressive regime in the name of peace and then turn around and call George W Bush a criminal. It is hypocracy of the highest form. Saddam was a murderous thug. I cant say that enough. Dubya on the other hand was crying practically talking to a wounded soldier the other day. I think he knows he has not handled the peace well, but it doens't alter the fact that Iraq has a chance to rebuild their country under some form of democracy, and 80% of them came out to vote in a nation where people were trying to kill those who voted.
There is a HUGE gulf between Bush and Saddam, and I despise those who play this moral equivalency crap. I despire that because it is not intellectually honest. If you decry the deaths after Bush's invasion, you should of been posting on here how terrible Saddam was then. You should be posting long threads about Darfur and the Sudanese's tolerance of genocide. How about the Chinese in Tibet? Maybe the government of Myanmar (Burma) and their regime? Oh wait a minute, you aren't posting on those because the US isn't the bad guy. Hypocracy is a funny thing. When you knock one tyrant, you should condemn them all equally, yet you pick on the one leader you want to because you don't like the country he comes from or the party he leads. Never mind he was elected. Never mind his nation defends the freedom's you would use to condemn him.
George W Bush is not a great president. There I said it, and history will judge this Iraq adventure as not a great idea. That said, he had the guts to stand up Saddam and enforce the will of the UN, when the UN itself of course has no balls. Saddam was a threat to the middle east, and he likely would have been a threat to the US if left alone. Bush is no different than any other western leader, except he wasn't willing to just sit there while we played Saddam's little games of mocking the UN and the resolutions he was to follow. Now you may say he had ulterior motives, I can argue that most of those are unproven, and weak arguments, and you could say he is a cowboy, and you would be wrong. Democratic members of Congress backed this war, and now want out when it isn't going well. They didn't want to be standing by the roadside if it went well, so they ok'ed it just to try to pander for votes. You want to talk cynical hypocrites, write a few of them letters.
George Bush isn't a war criminal, but Saddam Hussein surely was.......
If Saddam had just stuck to oppressing his own people and followed the UN resolutions to the letter, he is alive today.
now...go back to your blather about how bad George is...I am waiting...
America defending my freedom :sQuote:
Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa
India is a World Power in its own right,an apart from the Civil Nuclear Deal between India and the US,i can't see when the US actually helped India fight against Terrorism.Everyday we get news over here of some Indian Soldiers being killed because of insurgents from Pakistan.One of my friends is an officer posted in Kashmir,The first thing i do whenever i see that paper is look for the names.
US has more of hindered rather than helped India in its war against terrorism,and the US government fails to see that Pakistan is the center of Islamic Terrorism today
It is really simple. UN sanction means squat. The UN wont sanction any incursion to any nation for ANY reason, because the Security Council doesn't give a rats behind about peace. China and Russia were both in bed financially with Saddam, and they are in bed with people just as bad as Saddam. The French were buying illicit oil on the black market that Saddam was using to get around the "oil for food" program. Those nations who voted against the US and the UK are the real hypocrites, making money off the backs of those Saddam enslaved and was starving while he built another palace.Quote:
Originally Posted by harsha
At some point, every now and then a leader decides he has had enough BS and lies and calls someone on their little game. If Saddam lets the UN inspectors see whatever they needed to see, he is still alive and in power today, as ugly as that would be for the people of Iraq. Bush didn't tell Saddam to flip the world the finger....he did it all on his lonesome precisely because too many people like you would tell him he is nasty, but we only want peace. Peace sometimes only comes after bloodshed. WW2 proved that....sometimes evil has to be confronted.
You may not like the UK and the US and the 53 nations of the "willing" did this, but it comes down to the point where words are useless. Note how Qaddafi gave up his WMD's in Libya right after Iraq fell. He couldn't get rid of them fast enough. You think this little invasion didn't make a lot of dictatorial thugs nervous???