Home Politics and Debate

We bombed Saddam himself.

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
I'm so glad. I'd hate forthe Iraqis to suffer any more than they already have.

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/71482.htm

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It said he was prob only injured!

    but why did Sadam have to suffer- for what?
    And what about the damage done to Iraq?Are you going to fit the bill? Your so full of crap!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They bombed his FAMILY, innocent civilians.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    but why did Sadam have to suffer- for what?

    You are trying to be funny ain't ya? How bout Saddam Hussein's murder of thousands of innocent civilians?
    And what about the damage done to Iraq?Are you going to fit the bill? Your so full of crap!

    What about it? Most are military buildings.

    People as ignorant as you make me sick!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They bombed his FAMILY, innocent civilians

    His family? Their as bad as him. Seems you don't really know anything about him or his family.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jay-O


    His family? Their as bad as him. Seems you don't really know anything about him or his family.

    His brothers and sons and male in-laws are as evil as him OK. But their kids and wives?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    This so illustrates the intelligence and just general awareness of people in the peace movement. You speak well for your "movement". Perfect.

    Meantime. We're really close to seizing Western Iraq...and ending any plans to hit Israel.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by pnjsurferpoet
    This so illustrates the intelligence and just general awareness of people in the peace movement. You speak well for your "movement". Perfect.

    Meantime. We're really close to seizing Western Iraq...and ending any plans to hit Israel.

    I'm sorry? were you calling me stupid for opposing a war and not wanting innocent kids KILLED by your very own unelected dictator?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Obviously pnj, there are people on both sides of the issue who speak before learning and comprehending. You yourself are in no position to point out anyone elses failings in that regard given the BS you regularly post.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Just one question:

    What do you people expect to achive if there was no war?

    Saddam to disarm in peace??
    Terror attacks to just stop?
    A friendly chat with Saddam and ask him to stop killing people for the sake of it??
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    but why did Sadam have to suffer- for what?

    Oh and Doctor Lurve, you sound pro Saddam with that stupid comment.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jay-O
    Just one question:

    What do you people expect to achive if there was no war?

    >1Saddam to disarm in peace??
    >2Terror attacks to just stop?
    >3A friendly chat with Saddam and ask him to stop killing people for the sake of it??

    >1 Yes, weapons inspections were working.

    >2 No but they will escalate if we continue to attack countries when we feel like it (I.E Why not when Saddam gassed the kurds? nobody in the US or British Govt.s blinked an eyelid when that happened) and support Israels brutal repression of the palestinians. War will merely INCREASE terrorist attacks.

    >3 Even Saddam doesn't kill for killings sake, he kills political opponents and threats to his security (remind you of anyone?).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That's more than 1 question ;)

    1. Under UN supervision and under threat of military action he was already disarming. If you add that to the fact that when inspectors left in 1998 about 90% of Saddam's arsenal had been destroyed, you can see that disarment was much much closer than warmongering Bush and poodle Blair would have us believe.

    2. No matter how many times you, pnj or any others say it, the war on Iraq and terrorism have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with each other. On the contrary my friend, this war is the best possible news for terrorists organisations who will no doubt gain thousands of new recruits as a result.

    3. Saddam is a brutal dictator and no-one is denying that. But it still begs the question what right do we have to invade a sovereign nation to stop human right abuses. Especially since the US and the UK have been a little selective when it comes to brutal dictatorships, choosing to look the other way when we have a use for the dictator in question. See Chile, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, etc etc etc ad nauseum.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No but they will escalate if we continue to attack countries when we feel like it

    Hardly just, "when we feel like". Stuff like this has gone on for ages and people can only take so much of it. There IS a valid reason for this war. You really think the PM would give the go ahead if the war was just because Bush wanted a war?
    Even Saddam doesn't kill for killings sake, he kills political opponents and threats to his security

    I really don't think innocent civllians are much of political opponent and their not a threat to his security really are they? And how about chemical attacks on villages...For what?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Under UN supervision and under threat of military action he was already disarming. If you add that to the fact that when inspectors left in 1998 about 90% of Saddam's arsenal had been destroyed, you can see that disarment was much much closer than warmongering Bush and poodle Blair would have us believe.

    And what about scuds he says he didn't have? Funny how some have been fired. How can you he be disarming when he hides those scuds. And before UN weapon inspectors came in there was lorrys carrying off stacks of arms so they wouldn't find them.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jay-O


    Hardly just, "when we feel like".

    On the contrary! This war has been timed to:

    1) Take the public's mind off the fact that Bin Laden has still not been caught.

    2) Gain political capital for Bush's re-election.

    3) Test Rumsfelds new weapons.

    and if they had wanted to then they could have toppled Saddam in Gulf War 1 but no, he was convenient to leave in power, now that they need a scapegoat to attack for 9/11 he presents himself nicely. So I say again, WHY NOW? Why not in the 60's (when he was killing people and trying to make WMD) or the 70's (when he was killing people and trying to make WMD) or the 80's (when he was killing people and trying to make WMD) or even the 90's (when he was killing people and trying to make WMD).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sim - Did you know some of the special ops troops who located him were Shiite, Iraqi Americans?

    Saddam has killed more Muslims in modern history than anyone.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by pnjsurferpoet
    Sim - Did you know some of the special ops troops who located him were Shiite, Iraqi Americans?

    Saddam has killed more Muslims in modern history than anyone.

    So? Bin Laden has probably killed more Americans than anyone else in recent history (apart from yourselves with those ridiculous phallic weapons you all insist on owning). Your point?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Were not talking about the past, were talking about the present.

    Take the public's mind off the fact that Bin Laden has still not been caught.

    There are search's for him as we speak. The army in Afghanistan is hardly there for a holiday are they? What do you think they have been doing all the while? Getting suntans? Have you ever been or seen the real Afgahni landscape? No wonder you can't find him.

    Gain political capital for Bush's re-election.

    If anything people would vote against him now.

    Test Rumsfelds new weapons.

    Your more or less saying he wanted a war to test his weapons..Not true..
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Jay-O

    1)Were not talking about the past, were talking about the present.

    2)There are search's for him as we speak. The army in Afghanistan is hardly there for a holiday are they? What do you think they have been doing all the while? Getting suntans? Have you ever been or seen the real Afgahni landscape? No wonder you can't find him.

    3)If anything people would vote against him now.

    4)Your more or less saying he wanted a war to test his weapons..Not true..

    1) So am I, the Us/uk/Spanish axis has no more reason to go to war against Saddam now than they did on the 10/9/01

    2) But they haven't got him yet have they. The populace will lose interest and Bush will lose support if they carry on not finding anything so Bush needs to keep the momentum going.

    3) No, the electorate will fete him as a war hero if this war is won relatively bloodlessly and he's not getting elected now is he.

    4) Yes I am saying that. Look at all the new weapons they're testing for the first time. Its an economic imperative; If the US Reasearches, builds and funds these new weapons and then there is nowhere to use them then they look pretty silly. Do you think the administration could justify all the extra defence budget money if there was no war?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A very good article from 2001 on your last point Simbelyne...

    http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/WarBiz.html

    Of course all too few in the US are bothering to scrutinise just who is getting fat and rich off the increased defence expenditures.

    The movie Bowling for Columbine proves the depth of the truth it reveals with every passing day. A must see for those who wish to understand how pnj and others can parade such blinkered paranoid perspectives without feeling deep embarrassment if not utter shame.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I can't believe you're defending keeping Saddam in power Old Europe Clandestine man.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Im not, but neither will I subscribe to an invsion which has long been planned for completely differing and far more insidious interests than you wish to believe.

    I simply see that Dubyah, like his father before him, and his daddy's cronies, are as dirty as the day is long.

    You on the other hand think this is some repercussion of 9/11 because that's what theyve worked hard through the media to get you to believe so they can avoid the public's scrutiny.

    Meanwhile they have managed to undermine substantive relations with many of our longest running friends and allies. The repercussions of which you have no capacity to fully understand.

    Suffice to say that following this crowd for too much longer will utlimately lead to the increased decline of our national economy and international influence which you and many of our similarly self-assured countrymen are ill prepared to face. Our day in the sun is coming to a close!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Clandestine, it seems after only 2 days of my being on these politics boards, your only real point is that blair and bush are liars.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Given that the US media is singularly failing to scrutinise Bush (can't speak for the UK press or for Blair) that is an important point that needs constant reminding.


    But as to your mere two days on these boards, I am not bothered either way with what you think my point(s) is/are or aren't if you dont bother to go back and inform yourself of the long running context and development of these discussions.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Clandestine, I was like 4 when you all started trying to contain Saddam. Am I wrong to think diplomacy isn't working?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Given that Saddam was contained and that the UN had not decreed its efforts exhausted, yes you are wrong. And we will all be that much more insecure in the aftermath of this arrogant presumption of unilateral conquest long after the dust has settled.
Sign In or Register to comment.