Bush publishes Bill of Rights for the Iraqis

BillieTheBot · May 2003

Well, it's Friday

http://www.whitehouse.org/news/2003/052203.asp

Former Member · May 2003

If it hadnt been announced today that our latest step in the conquest and domination of supposedly "liberated" Iraq has been the dissolution by Washington's newest replacement puppet maker, L. Paul Bremmer, of numerous Iraqi Ministries and, of course, the Iraqi military, your link would merely be a nicely pointed piece of humour.

So, now that we have dictated to them not only who will decide who their eventual leaders will be "permitted" by their oh so benevolent benefactors to be, we've also made it clear that they wont have any means of national defence unless we say so.

Given that my countrymen would be gunning down any federal agents who tried to take away their precious firearms, this strikes as the latest and most bold faced hypocrisy of all time.

And they call it democracy! :rolleyes:

Former Member · May 2003

And some will undoubtedly continue to ignore reality, endorse the war and actually feel good about the magnanimous US government giving freedom to the world. :rolleyes:

Former Member · May 2003

And now by hook and by crook in total control of all oil revenues*. Ahh how the pre-war predictons of those of us who opposed the invasion come to pass one by one.

*read: An internationally sanctioned means of handing out oil contracts to the Bush camp's big oil buddies and siphoning off hefty administrative "commissions" to further enrich Bush and his cronies.

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Aladdin
And some will undoubtedly continue to ignore reality, endorse the war and actually feel good about the magnanimous US government giving freedom to the world. :rolleyes:

Hey all,
I did agree with the war, as you know. I just think leaving it to the Yanks to govern Iraq was a mistake (no offence Clandestine). I'm sure you've done this topic to death by now, but surely the British would have done a much better job of policing and creating a new government in the meantime?

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Whowhere
Hey all,
I did agree with the war, as you know. I just think leaving it to the Yanks to govern Iraq was a mistake (no offence Clandestine). I'm sure you've done this topic to death by now, but surely the British would have done a much better job of policing and creating a new government in the meantime?

As if they'd take initiative to that.

The only country who'd take initiative to this, and actually did so are the States.

Former Member · May 2003

Of course, what's the value of having the strongest military in the world if you cant use it to conquer and plunder any nation that has valuable commercial resources (so long as you can find a sufficient pretext (this one not working, ok how bout this one...) to justify such militancy to an easily manipulated public?

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Jacqueline the Ripper
As if they'd take initiative to that.

The only country who'd take initiative to this, and actually did so are the States.

What a damn shame then that the good old US government didn't take initiative when Saddam was gassing his own people in the 1980s- oh wait, he was 'our' friend then.

And what a damn shame indeed that the US hasn't taken initiative either in 1,001 places from Spain in the 1950s to Chile in the 1970s to Palestine to Burma to Zimbabwe etc etc etc.

An amazing selectiveness when it comes to take the initiative and bring freedom to an oppressed people don't you think?

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Whowhere
Hey all,
I did agree with the war, as you know. I just think leaving it to the Yanks to govern Iraq was a mistake (no offence Clandestine). I'm sure you've done this topic to death by now, but surely the British would have done a much better job of policing and creating a new government in the meantime?

By dissolving the council in Basra because some of them liked Saddam? Funny way of doing it better.

But you seem to think that its still 1834- we couldnt stop the Yanks if we wanted to. Its called being a PUPPET.

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Aladdin
WAnd what a damn shame indeed that the US hasn't taken initiative either in 1,001 places...to Chile in the 1970s

But they did! They gave Pinochet the weapons to commit his genocide to stop the evil commies taking control!

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Aladdin

An amazing selectiveness when it comes to take the initiative and bring freedom to an oppressed people don't you think?

Only whens theres something in it for them ay?;)

Isnt North Korea a threat? (forgive me if im mistaken) Its probably to close to America for them to do something without fear of retaliation. That and what can they get from North Korea:rolleyes:

Former Member · May 2003

what can they get from North Korea

Millions of starving mouths to feed?

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Aladdin

An amazing selectiveness when it comes to take the initiative and bring freedom to an oppressed people don't you think?

Which country would do anything without seeing any kind of benefit in it?

The US have made mistakes sure enough, but the constant bashing seen on these boards are disgusting and totally inapropriate in my opinion.

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Clandestine
Millions of starving mouths to feed?

exactly:p

and America lets its own lower socio-economic classes live below the poverty line.

Former Member · May 2003

Thanks for your opinion jacq. However, given current US policies, the comments made reflect rightful and necessary criticism of an alarming and rapid move toward ultra-wing authoritarianism and flagrant abuse of power (both domestically as well as internationally) with little regard for the presevation of liberty or international law.

Renzo, very true indeed. So long as Bsh and his cronies can get their hefty kickbacks by milking US tax dollars via the inordinately inflated defence budget, they couldn't care less about that stratum of our society.

After all, when its all said and done, they will either get 4 more years to step all over the oil producing world or will be picked up by the ex presidents club (The Carlyle Group) and continue to enrich themselves at the nation's expense.

Former Member · May 2003

For as long as the US government/Bush administration (not America as a whole, not all Americans) continue to show utter contempt for international laws and human rights, to wage illegal wars, to lie, to bully, to blackmail, to put profit and geopolitical power before people and to being a danger to others I shall continue to criticise it.

Why do you think it is not appropriate to do so?

Former Member · May 2003

Originally posted by Kermit
But they did! They gave Pinochet the weapons to commit his genocide to stop the evil commies taking control!

Interesting article in the Guardian recently.

The US is backing the Soviet style tyranny in Uzbekistan to stop the Islamic extremists.

reverse Afghansitan, weird........

Former Member · May 2003

We've also backed (and continue to back) the brutal and repressive regime of Shevardnadze in Georgia.

So long as heads of state keep the fatcats in washington happy and do their commercial, political. or military bidding they can be as despotic and muderous as they like. :rolleyes:

Former Member · May 2003

It's to counter-balance the lack of rights offered by radical Muslim countries or tyrants.

Why begrudge Iraqis their freedoms?

I'm happy for them. I'm happy for the relatively few Afghani girls in school now too. A few is better than none.

R.I.P. Radical Muslim Movement. Once people get a taste of Western values and freedoms...they'll never follow goat screwers again. And the followers of peaceful, moderate, tolerant Muslim clerics will lead.

Former Member · May 2003

Nice and happy in your delusions pnj? Whatever you do, by all means don't bother to wake up to reality, you'd undoubtedly not be prepared to handle it.

Former Member · May 2003

Pj the US administration has given millions of dollars to the Uzbek govt which has a security regime comparable in its repression to Iraq.

The US has made some critcisms and made some efforst to promote democracy but nothing substantial and human rights workers reckon it is just a ploy to get past the senate aid requirements to keep the Uzbeks on side.........

Former Member · May 2003

The overall efforts of America and other Western countries has promoted the rise in democracies. There were only 12 before WW1. I agree with you regarding some of the creeps we've supported. But the overall effort, I hope, will make up for the bad.

And I applaud humanitarians like you Toadborg and maybe Aladdin and Clandestine who care about human rights.

The maybe part is cause you two could be spies.:razz:

Former Member · May 2003

I don't think it is right to say the overall effort might be good, the ends do not justify the means, especially when the means are not entirely necessary for the ends.

You do not have to support the repressive Uzbek govt to fight islamic terrorism.........

Bush publishes Bill of Rights for the Iraqis

Comments