Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

why the war protestors are full of s***

Their main argument seems to be that Bush and Blair are the murderers and thousands of civilians will die needlessly.
Bush and Blair don't routinely execute innocent people on a daily basis. Bush and Blair have never tested chemical or biological weapons on their own populace.
If Saddam remains where he is, more Iraqis will die, maybe not all at once, but over many years.
And for all you smart alecs out there who agree that Saddam needs to be removed, but war isn't the answer, pray tell what the answer is.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«13

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    assassination. now that the war is officially on, the US can assassinate saddam, because he is the leader of the enemy's armed forces, not just it's head of state
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Then by those arguments you fall into the moralist camp and shoot your own warmongering claims in the foot Whowhere. If we follow your reasoning to the ultimate conclusion, we should expect to see you out there in front of #10 screaming for Blair and Bush to invade every country that has an evil despotic regime and overthrow them all.

    Then we can expect you to chant that both Bush and Blair publicly accept the shame for their own financing and support for said regimes before they are carted off to the ICC to face charges of crimes against humanity for having aided and abetted in the innumerable victims of torture and execution at the hands of their former puppets.

    Sorry pal, your own narrow mindedness and lack of perspective is showing!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I don't recall any information about Blair financially supporting dictatorships ever existing, as for Bush, who cares?
    I don't support Bush, he's a mental midget, at least Blair tried to go for diplomacy.
    What do you sugest we do? Sit back and watch as people in the UK start dying from poison gas and god knows what else? No thanks.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Start dying from poison gas, hows that exactly?

    Since coming into power the Blair govt has sanctioned sales of weapons to several countries whose human rights records are not exactly the purest.

    Indonesia for example.........
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Youd better open your eyes to the real world Whowhere. People in the US and UK will be at greater long term risk of such attacks now that Bush and his lapdog decided to snub the collective will of the international community and wage a unilateral war of aggression and greed.

    The Muslim world will respond sooner or later, don't become as smug as pnj and think it wont happen if it doesnt happen today or tomorrow, we are all less secure thanks to the axis of idiots than ever we were prior to today.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    How long do you think it would have taken Saddam to develope sufficient technology or ability to detonate some sort of device in london......

    As for sales of arms, I dont have any knowledge of that, I just know that selling weapons to (admittedly supposedly) democratic countries and testing VX on a few thousand londoners are slightly different.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Whowhere
    How long do you think it would have taken Saddam to develope sufficient technology or ability to detonate some sort of device in london......


    Like what?

    How could he have done that exactly.

    Are you talking about a man with a suitcase or a missile?

    neither have any chance.........
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And what are you basing that on? How easy would it be for an Iraqi agent or sympathiser to enter this country undetected?
    We're not talking about boat people here, we're talking about one or more persons entering the country at a deserted stretch of beach and making their way to London or the closest major city and detonating some sort of device.

    Doesn't take much to kill a few thousand people, especially if the bomb was detonated in an area with a high residential population, as opposed to setting one off in a city centre like everyone assumes will happen.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2110081.stm

    How ethical..........:rolleyes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Interesting to see what they are saying when those arms sales are used to massacre hundreds if not thousands of innocent civilians as well. Will they then be prepared to prove their consistency and invade India or Pakistan or even Israel?

    Given the fact that these countries have substantial arsenals at their disposal unlike Iraq I wouldnt bet on it.

    We should rename this coalition the Coalition of Cowards!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yes it does seem strange that the right are so quick to brand the French etc 'cowards' when we are going to be fighting one of the most one sided wars ever, not the bravest policy ever....
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree Whowhere. On some profound level, there is something incredibly immoral about the peace movement...and traitorous. It goes beyond the people and extends to the "liberal" press such as the Mirror and BBC. Anything the press could do to put a wedge between the UK and America...just to hurt Tony Blair...they did.

    The protesters don't want to hear about all of Saddam's tortures. They flat out lie about France - the oil deals they have and the business deals involving spare parts to mirage jets and helicopters as well as pestisides for use in chemical weapons. Oh no, tell a bunch of lies about America's interests, ignore the 3,000 lives we lost, lie about the lack of evidence regarding Bin Laden's ties to Iraq, even though prisoners in Cuba separately said they had Iraqi instructors for the training on how to use chemical weapons.

    Whowhere, these people have their own agenda. It has nothing to do with appreciating their living in a great country like the UK. It has everything to do with acting morally, self superior...surrounded by PC lies.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Bullies are usually always cowards. Just think back to your school days at how often the "tough kid" ever bothered to beat on someone unless he/she had his/her buddies around as well.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    War protestors are protesting for a cause that many of them [mostly the schoolkids] dont have any real opinion on. We had the school over the fence from ours running round town, hitting each other, running down to our school and getting chased off by the teachers, some getting arrested by the police etc. And this is war protesting?

    Some people on these boards have made claims that saddam has no weapons. You people should be very quiet right now as saddam was using scuds he swore blindly he diddnt have this morning.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Scuds aren't WMD and they have a rather low range.

    Some kids don't take it very seriously, good argument.......:rolleyes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    point out the mass destuction bit for me please, as i dont remember typing it? :rolleyes:

    i know they have quite a low range, but said he diddnt have them. He lied. If hes lied about that do you seriously think its wise to think thats all hes lied about?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Some kids don't take it very seriously, good argument.......

    And some adults dont treat "kids" as people, rather as children with baseless opinions. :rolleyes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    He lied lets kill him! :crazyeyes

    i get your point but i don't think that any anti-war people serious believe that you can trust him, this though is not suffiicent to prove he is a threat wouldn't you say?

    Not sure what you mwan by the second bit, i am only 19....
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I believe that if someone lies about one thing chances are he'll lie about something else. I agree it is not sufficient proof but it does give a good idea.... if you get me...

    and by the second part, it was in reply to this:

    Some kids don't take it very seriously, good argument.......:rolleyes:

    maybe i took it the wrong way?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And I said that in response to your suggestion that:
    War protestors are protesting for a cause that many of them [mostly the schoolkids] dont have any real opinion on.

    granted you identify schoolkids but i was suggesting that they are possibly not representative of the anti-war movement?

    I do think that Saddam is a liar and that he has lied about his weapons but the inspectors were doing OK and I cannot see how a war is needed in this situation........
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Well then we'd best start shining the spotlight on the lies of our own leaders shouldnt we? hmmmm?

    Both Bush and Blair have closets full of lies. Well, Bush and his cronies certainly do.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Clandestine
    Well then we'd best start shining the spotlight on the lies of our own leaders shouldnt we? hmmmm?

    Both Bush and Blair have closets full of lies. Well, Bush and his cronies certainly do.

    yes, but when put on the spot blair will at least tell half the truth.

    saddam swore again and again he had no weapons
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    You have a very naive view of what our leaders would do. I can guarantee you that Bush would continue lying and more than likely hide behind the oft used shield of "national security" to avoid any responsibility for his actions.

    Remember, Blair's government has come to rely just as heavily on spin as Washington does, so don't think youll get them to face up to their own lies that easily.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    well maybe my view is a little naive but your anti war opinions are even more so. Think of the benefits of saddams demise:
    • iraq liberated
    • saddams regime removed, and iraq civilians vote in their own leader
    • no more starvation\torture
    • any WOMD found and destrooyed
    • iraq economy used better as the oilfields [assuming the paras save the oilwells] would belong to iraq, rather than saddam.
    • there would be little need for compulsary enlistment
    • more reasons im too tired to remember

    the sooner iraq is liberated, the less chance saddam has of getting hold of materials for major WOMD.

    When you state of national security as a shield, do you really think that it would be wise to allow saddam to continue producing WOMD, to go on and maybe use them on america? I believe bush has got some truth in his words.

    Saddam has got nowhere to run or hide. If he stays in iraq, when it is liberated saddam is stuck in a country with no powers or soldier force. If he exiles, he will most probably be killed or handed over. Sounds like a justafiable war to me.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And once again to think that Iraq will be liberated by the US is itself naive. This is not liberation, it is however liberation of Iraq's control over its oil by the grasping big oil interests of US/UK.

    Having set up a puppet regime in a country which has never in history been successfully run by foreign installed regimes, the US/UK forces will have to remain if it wishes to prop up its illigitimate puppets, none of whom have any consituency in Iraq and many of whom are former members of Saddam's government who are likely just as corrupt and power hungry in their own right.

    Now if we remain to prop up a puppet regime we are conquerors not liberators, and if we dont stay then the factious nature of Iraq will reassert itself with each faction vying for control until the strongest arises to subjugate the rest. That is what Iraq is about.

    I strongly suggest you educate yourself on the nature of Iraqi society and its historical internal conflicts before trusting in the pipedreams of an administration which has shown zero comprehension of diplomacy and which has systematically alienated itself from our most important friends and allies.

    Unless my countrymen wake up and put the blame for our increasing isolationism squarely on those truly responsible. i.e. the Bush admin, rather than blindly following along with Washington's diversionary scapegoating, they will blindly slip further downhill into an economic crisis which they are not prepared to face.

    I only pray they wake up before that dire condition is realised.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    clandestine,

    Sorry old boy but it was the French who supplied Saddam with most of his military hardware including a reactor to make weapons grade plutonium.

    It is the French who have a corner on about 25% of the Iraqi oil; business.

    It is the Americans who are going to take away his ability to use any weapons supplied him by the French.

    I suppose the Yanks gave Saddam those SCUDS.

    Clandestine, you should note that if you spoke about Saddam as an Iraqi as you do about Bush as an American you would be in very big trouble. So I guess the evil George and Tony group will have to continue on without your blessing.

    Everyone knows that the Americans are brutal oppressors. Ask the Japanese and the Germans!:wave:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Murph,

    Sorry ol boy but you can close your eyes to the truth if you wish, but we supplied him with far more in the way of chemical and biological precursors and WMD production expertise than any other nation. We also provided him with considerable conventional hardware as well.

    http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/12/Saddam_Rumsfeld.html

    Excerpt (on conventional weapons):
    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 1984, according to The LA Times, the State Department-in the name of "increased American penetration of the extremely competitive civilian aircraft market"-pushed through the sale of 45 Bell 214ST helicopters to Iraq. The helicopters, worth some $200 million, were originally designed for military purposes. The New York Times later reported that Saddam "transferred many, if not all [of these helicopters] to his military."

    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.

    So scapegoat all you like. You only paint yourself as a willing accomplice to villainy which this admin has oh so effectively diverted from the media spotlight and questioning. Wouldnt do to show Rumsfeld for the colluding scum he is, nor for that matter where the Bush family made most of its wealth.

    No, you go right ahead and follow our narrowminded, self-serving, and substantially zionistic administration on its collision course with ruination and talk to me of your platitudes when the house of cards come crumbling down around us all. Ill be there to give you a much deserved "I told you so".
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Do you really believe that with all this global pressure on us\uk to liberate iraq, that they will not? Iraq is going to have to have some way of keeping their economy stable, so they will most probably be using the oilfields themselves.

    You seem to have a passionate hate for george bush. It seems that you place the blame of everything in this war to bush and blair. Can you not accept that saddam has done extremely evil and cruel things, to his own people? How can you use iraq history as an example that "puppet regimes" as you call them will not work? its been years since saddam was first at power. Things may, and most probably will have changed by now. With all this torture, starvation and testing of weapons on his own people, given the chance to start again do you not think they will be more careful this time?

    I stand by my opinion on what i believe will happen with this war. I truly think that, admittedly with the help of us\uk forces iraq will work out for the better.

    might i add that you argue your case well clandestine.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Saddam is evil and everyone acknowledges that. What they dont acquiesce to is the Bush doctrine that it is America's right to flagrantly spit in the face of the international community (a community that Bush is supremely ignorant of being a neo isolationist himself).

    Nor does the international community believe that a full scale attack was warranted or necessary now, especially given perfectly viable means and methodologies remaining to enhance the containment and disarmament originally claimed as the purpose of this whole crisis.

    But what we have now is the revelation of what many have known was the truth all along, that those in Bush's cabinet whome he listens to most were planning this overthrow and conquest for the sake of big oil interests and for the benefit of an as yet unadmitted Israeli agenda of regional domination over its Arab neighbours on the back of US military might.

    I don't believe that my countrymen should be fighting and dying for another country's agenda, sorry pal. Especially a country which has systematically refused to honour UN resolutions against itself. Hypocrisy of the highest order for which many innocents will now undoubtedly die or be displaced while Sharon and Bush gloat.

    But as to Iraq itself, I can only urge you to do some study on the nature of the people and the nation rather than sit here naively believing that Bush can institute any model democracy there. That country is thousands of years old and steeped in tribal and factional traditions which do not gel with your Western conceptualisation of free society. That Saddam has been in power since the mid 70's is not long at all in terms of Iraq's millenia of history and no, things havent changed as youd like to believe.

    Bush and co will discover that all too soon...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    id like to see some proof that americas just in it for the oil. None of this "cause his dad wanted it so he does too" and "its easy to tell" kind of crap. I mean actual proof. You seem to be certain of this, so you must have some kind of backing.

    I truly believe that when saddam is removed from power, and a new governing body installed with US and UK support, that it will work.

    might i ask clandestine, what nationality are you? you refer to your countrymen a lot so i assume you are English?
Sign In or Register to comment.