Whos responsible

[JGallagher]

Well as was stated in a previous thread I should post here. Keep it clean.

What I more or less said is that I did not support the US led invasion in Iraq. I did not then and I do not now. The Iraqi people are in such a state that it will be at least 6 years before they can start to pull out. There was more law and order under Saddam then there is with the current force in place. Now I am not condoning the attack in NYC, though I thought that it was about time that some one sttod up against the US. They are not all big and mighty as they thought!!

[Burningtears]

The war on iraq i feel has nothing to do with Terrorism or any of the bull that George W. Bush is feeding to the american people and the world. It's not fair to the iraqi people who yes were under a facist dictator now have to life with war and more suffering. Day in and day out ppl are dying because of suicide bombs, car bombs and just the fighting in the street. over 1000 americans were killed in Iraq...but how many iraqis have suffered? the entire country. Gallagher is right...If bush pulled out earlier Iraq could have saved itself. Now with an american supported Gov't the Iraqi fighters are even more mad. The gov't installed is a puppet, and these people know it. And are upset. I mean think. Would americans or canadians not fight against a power invading their country, and siezing it claiming to be helping it? I know that i would surely pick up a rifle and shoot the first one i saw. why? cuz it is my country! The people that are fighting in the street are not terrorists, they are people that just want their own gov't not ruled by the US. The middle east hates the united states. Look at the Isreali-Palestinian conflict. That place is a warzone if the world likes it or not. WHAT ARE WE DOING? nothing. children are being killed in their schools...The US answers...they are just freedom fighters...not terrorists. The problem with the US is that they do not accept responsibility for their actions, THEY CAUSED EVERY SINGLE PROBLEM TODAY!

Afghanistan- lets give them weapons
Iraq- LETS GIVE THEM MORE WEAPONS
Palestine Isreal- Lets take this land from these people and give it to these people...they will get along fine! (Im all for a Zionist state by the way)
Russia- unavoidable, but to not call them terrorists!?!?! plz.

My main thing is that the world is standing by and letting this happen, the US and Canada and all other countries preach Democracy, the choice of the people. Its time for the people of the world to stand up and say, I'm not going to let this happen anymore, we are worsening our condition on earth. People say there is nothing we can do about it, there is, write to your MP, tell them how you feel about iraq, and get the canadian gov't to condemn the war, the world respects canada, and we have to be the ones to stand up and say NO

[JGallagher]

The problem with the US is that they do not accept responsibility for their actions, THEY CAUSED EVERY SINGLE PROBLEM TODAY!

Afghanistan- lets give them weapons
Iraq- LETS GIVE THEM MORE WEAPONS
Palestine Isreal- Lets take this land from these people and give it to these people...they will get along fine! (Im all for a Zionist state by the way)
Russia- unavoidable, but to not call them terrorists!?!?! plz.



This is correct!! No one else is to blame. They did all of it on there own. Like he said, every one is mad at them.

[JGallagher]

the Americans have flaunted their "greatness" at the world about a million fold more than needed, and it was only a matter of time before a nation not so wealthy as theirs, or with differing religious views deceided to do something about it

Said writer does not wish to be identified.

This was from some one who did not wish to be known.

[Dick]

it was about time that some one sttod up against the US. They are not all big and mighty as they thought!!How they hell is flying planes into their buildings "standing up against them"? That's just stupid! Seriously, you dont kill a couple thousand civilians in a country to stand up to them! That proves absolutely nothing. Last I checked the USA is still a superpower in the world. So I guess they're still big and mighty, huh? I suppose you'll be even happier the next time something likes this happens.

And I know one of the rules of this forum is to attack the idea, not the person, but man... I really think you should have thought this through before you go trying to prove a point.

[JGallagher]

Now I am not condoning the attack in NYC,


What did I say!!

[Dick]

Ok so what you DID say is:


though I thought that it was about time that some one sttod up against the US
So you're happy it happened. Or else you wouldnt have said "It was about time"
Can you even at least show some respect for the people that died? Cause between the two threads... you haven't even done that.

[JGallagher]

Ok so what you DID say is:


So you're happy it happened. Or else you wouldnt have said "It was about time"
Can you even at least show some respect for the people that died? Cause between the two threads... you haven't even done that.


I am sorry that all those people died. There is no dout about that.

[Insane Power Pilot]

I see 9 things wrong with the above posts...

1. There may have been law and order in Iraq before the war, but they were unjust laws. Saddam was killing his own people every day and people were starving though his country controlled about 25% of the world's oil and built presidential palaces instead.

2. Saddam did have chemical weapons. An entire Kurdish town did not just vanish because of air pollution! What he did with the weapons before the war is beyond me.

3. The UK was responsible for Israel - Palestine...they had promised the land to both peoples.

4. Stop bringing in Iraq/Afghanistan in 1980. Your generation tends to forget that the Soviet Union could have destroyed us in a heartbeat. We would have made deals with the devil himself to stem the spread of communism.

5. If Bush had pulled out earlier, it would have left the country in anarchy, and another military dictator would have taken over, and the whole mission would have been in vane. It may be another 6 years as Jim projects, but it beats another 50 under Saddam and Uday Hussein.

6. The current Iraqi government has been appointed, but the Iraqi people have the power to elect another one if they so choose. Right now, the focus of this government is to restore the law and order.

7. "The World" could have said NO to the U.S. simply by becoming allies with Iraq and fighting the war on their side. So why didn't they? Why was this not a cause worthy of their intervention and laying the lives of their soldiers on the line?

8. People like you rise and sleep under the blanket of freedom which the US provides, and then questions the manner in which they provide it. If the US had never existed, we'd all be speaking German, or Russian, or Chinese, but we definitely would not have all the constitutional freedoms we enjoy today. I'm glad we have them as our allies. They give aid to thankless foreigners and go overseas to die for them. Frankly, I'm surprised they still bother!

9. Just so you don't think I condone everything American, I'm annoyed that they haven't taken many steps against the genocide in Sudan (same goes for the rest of the world...)

[Gunner Pyza]

I see 9 things wrong with the above posts...

1. There may have been law and order in Iraq before the war, but they were unjust laws. Saddam was killing his own people every day and people were starving though his country controlled about 25% of the world's oil and built presidential palaces instead.

2. Saddam did have chemical weapons. An entire Kurdish town did not just vanish because of air pollution! What he did with the weapons before the war is beyond me.

3. The UK was responsible for Israel - Palestine...they had promised the land to both peoples.

4. Stop bringing in Iraq/Afghanistan in 1980. Your generation tends to forget that the Soviet Union could have destroyed us in a heartbeat. We would have made deals with the devil himself to stem the spread of communism.

5. If Bush had pulled out earlier, it would have left the country in anarchy, and another military dictator would have taken over, and the whole mission would have been in vane. It may be another 6 years as Jim projects, but it beats another 50 under Saddam and Uday Hussein.

6. The current Iraqi government has been appointed, but the Iraqi people have the power to elect another one if they so choose. Right now, the focus of this government is to restore the law and order.

7. "The World" could have said NO to the U.S. simply by becoming allies with Iraq and fighting the war on their side. So why didn't they? Why was this not a cause worthy of their intervention and laying the lives of their soldiers on the line?

8. People like you rise and sleep under the blanket of freedom which the US provides, and then questions the manner in which they provide it. If the US had never existed, we'd all be speaking German, or Russian, or Chinese, but we definitely would not have all the constitutional freedoms we enjoy today. I'm glad we have them as our allies. They give aid to thankless foreigners and go overseas to die for them. Frankly, I'm surprised they still bother!

9. Just so you don't think I condone everything American, I'm annoyed that they haven't taken many steps against the genocide in Sudan (same goes for the rest of the world...)

1. First of all he wasn't killing his own people, he killed the Kurdish. And if I recall the Americans helped incite revolts in Southern Iraq, but when they needed help from the Americans, they did nothing...where the revolt was eliminated by the Iraqi forces. And how much oil do you think you can sell when you are under an embargo? As well, the 'people were starving' comment, one major reason that was occuring was due to the Persian Gulf war where Americans systematically attacked Water Purification sites and other facilities which dealt with health and agriculture.

2. Saddam did have chemical weapons, true. Who gave them these chemical weapons? United States.

5. Was there really a HUGE threat from Saddam Hussein? His country was blown to the stone age during the Persian Gulf War, there were North and South No-Fly zones created, and bombings which occured whenever the President wished. Those in the Middle East thought the United States was more of a threat than Saddam Hussein.

7. Um...though many thought of Saddam Hussein as a 'threat,' not everybody is war hungry, nor are they fed information saying that Hussein had links to '911' And a 'cause worthy of [USA's] intervention' was this when the cause was first the supposed Nuclear/Biological/Chemical weapons that Iraq had stored or when they couldn't find it and changed it to a humanitarian cause?

8. Nice quote from a Few Good Men. And I don't understand how you can compare Nazi Germany or Stalin's Russia to Iraq.

[JGallagher]

Mark, you have alot of good points. I agree with you on all of them!!

[condor888000]

1. First of all he wasn't killing his own people, he killed the Kurdish. And if I recall the Americans helped incite revolts in Southern Iraq, but when they needed help from the Americans, they did nothing...where the revolt was eliminated by the Iraqi forces. And how much oil do you think you can sell when you are under an embargo? As well, the 'people were starving' comment, one major reason that was occuring was due to the Persian Gulf war where Americans systematically attacked Water Purification sites and other facilities which dealt with health and agriculture.

2. Saddam did have chemical weapons, true. Who gave them these chemical weapons? United States.

5. Was there really a HUGE threat from Saddam Hussein? His country was blown to the stone age during the Persian Gulf War, there were North and South No-Fly zones created, and bombings which occured whenever the President wished. Those in the Middle East thought the United States was more of a threat than Saddam Hussein.

7. Um...though many thought of Saddam Hussein as a 'threat,' not everybody is war hungry, nor are they fed information saying that Hussein had links to '911' And a 'cause worthy of [USA's] intervention' was this when the cause was first the supposed Nuclear/Biological/Chemical weapons that Iraq had stored or when they couldn't find it and changed it to a humanitarian cause?

8. Nice quote from a Few Good Men. And I don't understand how you can compare Nazi Germany or Stalin's Russia to Iraq.

1) He was killing his own people, or did all those people in the prisons get there by themselves? Not the entire Iraqi prison population was kurds. Many of those that went into the prisons, never came out again. The Americans may have destroyed them, but Saddam built palaces instead of repairing them.

2) Why did the US give him the chemical weapons? To ensure that communism was stopped, that it would never take Iraq. Seems like a good goal to me.

5) If those in the middle east thought that Saddam was a bigger threat than the States, how come they attacked the States, and continue to do so?

7) Wait, you admitted that he had Chemical weapons in #2. Now you seem to say that they are "supposed" NBC weapons. Which is it? Oh, and i guess you don't see freeing a country from a despot as a valid cause?

8) Yoou don't understand the comparision? OK, Hitler killed German Jews because they were Jewish. Saddam killed Iraqi Kurds because they were Kurdish. They both used Chemical weapons to do so. Germans lived in fear that they would be taken away. As did those in Stalin's USSR and as they did in Saddam's Iraq. Stalin lived in beautiful palaces while the working classes lived in squalor. Again, the same thing in Iraq. Stalin chose to spend more money on the development of the state than on some basic neccesities of life such as feeding his population. Saddam chose to use Iraq's wealth to build things for him rather than repairing damages or even providing basic maintence in many cases. Enough reasons yet?

[Dick]

Oh, and i guess you don't see freeing a country from a despot as a valid cause?Ofcourse not! What are you, sane?

[Gunner Pyza]

1) When people refer to 'killing his own people' they are talking about the Chemical attacks on the Kurdish towns, which were American weapons. AND DURING THIS TIME, nobody spoke out about it, especially America since Iraq was helping them in trying to rid them of their enemy Iran, getting them into US's good books. If you have a problem with people dying in prision start with America's capital punishment.

2) The US gave Iraq chemcial weapons during the Iran-Iraq war. So that they could use those weapons to attack Iran, a country the US did not like. And last time I checked...Iran isn't communist.

5) I don't understand what you're saying here. I said that those in the Middle East thought that the States are a bigger threat than Saddam, not the other way around.

7) Yes he HAD chemical weapons back during the Iran-Iraq war and the Persian Gulf... not now. The only reason it was made a valid cause was because they couldn't find the first cause anywhere in Iraq.

8) Hitler gased Jews killing approximatly 6 million due to the fact that they were to blame for Germany's poor economy. Saddam launched chemical weapons at Kurds because they were going to rebel against his authority. Hitler wanted to take over the world, and was in control of much of Europe. Saddam attacked Iran, with US's help and attacked Kuwait in belief that it was one of Iraq's previous territories. And ss that not how it is everywhere? That's how the class system is...the upper, middle and lower. Tell me when President Bush got down and slept in a box in New York City. What's the point of rebuilding a country which is constantly being attacked?

[condor888000]

1) Ah, but he was killing his own people, since the Kurds are Iraqi citizens and so is he. And so we're on the same page, I was, and still am, for capital punishment.

2) Yes, the US provided NBC weapons to Iraq and supported it in the Iraq-Iran war. Guess what? They did the same to Iran, minus the NBC weapons. I refered to stopping Communism because of who Saddam was getting his weapons from. It was the USSR. The Iraqi army used Migs, SU's and T-52 tanks. All Russian. Also, many of the Arab countries around him were linked to the Soviets, ie: Communists. Countries like, Egypt, Jordan and Syria. That's what I was refering to.

5) Misread, my mistake.

7) You have no proof that they were gone. Most of Iraq is uninhabited desert where such weapons could be hid relatively easily. And in my mind desposing of a despot is ALWAYS an importent cause.

8) How were the jews a drain on the economy, many were creators of jobs such as shop owners. And yes that's how it is to a certain degree. Bush doesn't sleep in a card board box, but he doesn't force people to live there. Saddam did. He took public money and used it for himself. Think Sponership Scadel a billion times worse with no way to complain or stop it.

[Hizzy]

i'd like to point out that Hitler's massacring of Jews was not his only objective. His ultimate goal was to basically let the Arian race take over. jews (semites) happened to be the first available victims. after he was finished with them he would have taken out the middle east (who are also semites) and africa, etc etc. Of course the german public can't be forced to support a campaign unless they see a reason for it. That's where "they're a drain on our economy comes in". Once the average person hears that there's a good cause behind something, nothing else matters. it's basically "you're either with us for a good cause, or you're unpatriotic."

Saddam didn't have world domination on his to-do list. and he certainly did not have the resources. One would have a much easier time finding similiarities between Bush and Hitler than they would with Saddam. (note: im not saying Bush is like hitler, im just saying he'd be easier to compare)

[Piercey]

Well as was stated in a previous thread I should post here. Keep it clean.

What I more or less said is that I did not support the US led invasion in Iraq. I did not then and I do not now. The Iraqi people are in such a state that it will be at least 6 years before they can start to pull out. There was more law and order under Saddam then there is with the current force in place. Now I am not condoning the attack in NYC, though I thought that it was about time that some one sttod up against the US. They are not all big and mighty as they thought!! I'm really sorry, but you shouldn't really be talking about this. A debate only happenes when you "throw facts back and forth." You are throwing around your assumptions. If you want an optinion on something, say it. Stop adding to the conversation unless you have facts to support your post of jibber-jabber. :)

My opinion on this is that Bush did the right thing. Think of it this way. What would we be doing now if some country stole our geese and bevers? Would we just let it slide and go "oh well eh?" Or, would we attack them with pitch forks and clubs?

[Burningtears]

My opinion on this is that Bush did the right thing. Think of it this way. What would we be doing now if some country stole our geese and bevers? Would we just let it slide and go "oh well eh?" Or, would we attack them with pitch forks and clubs?


what in god's name are you talking about? no one stole anything from anyone...asides from bush stealing the happiness and law and order of an entire country...but thats it.

and yes if someone stole my geese and beavers i would...y cuz its my country...and thats what these people are doing! and we call them terrorists...riiiight so i guess im a terrorist and every person in here is a terrorist cuz they would stick up for their country!

[JGallagher]

Some on in a higher post wanted me to say some thing so I will. The USA in my opinon is a terroist country. They are invaders of other countries. Bush is just as bad as Saddam and Bin Laden. He him self orcestrated the deaths of more people then on September 11 2001. Look at all those in Iraq that have been killed due to the US. They are just as bad as Saddams sons. Look at what happend at the prison in Iraq. Do not tell me that it was a isolated incident. That is a load of crap. Just cause you did not hear about it in other prisons dont mean it is not happening. The America people since September 11 2001 have had a major hatred against muslims. So they are going to take it out on them there. It is the way of the world.

[Earlam]

I think what some people are trying to get across here is the following:
Question: What did Iraq have to do with the September 11th attacks?
Answer: Nothing.

Since this was one of Bush's reasons for attacking Iraq, the answer will, of course, raise a few eyebrows.
It doesn't mean that ruining Saddam's **** was a bad thing, but it does mean that Bush should've checked his facts (or just admitted that he wanted to get Saddam because he was a bad guy, and standing in the way of US foreign policy. Enough with the threat-to-America and Saddam-orchestrated-11Sep01 crap).


I think that some of the arguments here have been oversimplified to the point of being ridiculous.

The US arming the Mujahideen a bad thing? Sure, it would be, were they not an ally against a common Communist enemy. They didn't just give them all the AK-47s and Stingers they could for no reason.

The US giving Saddam NBC weapons? I think a little more questionable than the Mujahideen, but it was the best way to advance their foreign policy at the time. Nation's don't run on morals, no matter what the propaganda says. They run on interests.

Circumstances decide what a nation does. In different circumstances, they'll do different things. In different circumstances, they're different nations. The US of today isn't the US of 1979, and the US of tomorrow isn't the same as the US of today.
Then, it was a good thing to arm bin Laden and Saddam. Now, it's a good thing to hunt them like dogs. Tomorrow, the West will arm some other crackpot dictator (not that we've stopped, but we have been turning on and taking out most of them), and the next day, they'll execute him.
That's the way the world turns.


I disagree that the Kurds were Saddam's people. I doubt if they identify themselves as Iraqis (unless to differentiate themselves from the Turkish Kurds, who are oppressed by a more US-friendly government), and I'm not sure if during his regime they would get citizenship like ethnic arab Iraqis.
He didn't just kill Kurds, though. He was in power for over two decades, and the Ba'ath party for (I think) about four. During that time, they killed thousands.

On Piercy's last post, I must disagree. Take out Al Qaeda because of 9-11? Of course!
But Iraq? They had nothing to do with 9-11 (although they approved...... but alot of people were clapping bin Laden on, and we haven't bombed them back into the stone age yet).



I apologise for this post being all-over-the-place. But I don't agree with anyone in this thread, and shooting in every direction is complicated for those without coffee.

[Insane Power Pilot]

Look at all those in Iraq that have been killed due to the US.

Most of them were killed because they were shooting at the U.S. soldiers or blowing themselves up...


Just cause you did not hear about it in other prisons dont mean it is not happening.

And just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean it IS happening either. That's hearsay...


The America people since September 11 2001 have had a major hatred against muslims.

I think that's a very questionable assumption. The American people since September 11, 2001 have had a major hatred against one man who happens to be muslim.

[Tomtom]

Don't let the media get the best of you Jim. (and others)

A lot happens over there, and the media only "sees" the stuff that sells ratings and papers.

[Piercey]

what in god's name are you talking about? no one stole anything from anyone...asides from bush stealing the happiness and law and order of an entire country...but thats it.

and yes if someone stole my geese and beavers i would...y cuz its my country...and thats what these people are doing! and we call them terrorists...riiiight so i guess im a terrorist and every person in here is a terrorist cuz they would stick up for their country!
Sence of humor anyone?

[Hizzy]

Nation's don't run on morals, no matter what the propaganda says. They run on interests.

I apologise for this post being all-over-the-place. But I don't agree with anyone in this thread, and shooting in every direction is complicated for those without coffee.
heh yeah I couldnt quite figure out whether you were backing up the US or not, but the thing that stuck out the most for me is the 'interests' line, mainly because I think that's the only reason the US is in Iraq.

apology accepted ;)


And just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean it IS happening either. That's hearsay...
Actually, hearsay is when you hear about something happening and perceive it to be true without seeing it yourself. Like gossip, for example.

[piper]

Just remember that everything you get from the media is biased in some way or another, you can almost never get a straight story. So keep that it mind (not to bash the media, but bias is present in anyone, no matter how well intentioned they are to get out the truth). Also remember, the more sensational it is, the higher up on the list it is to be reported. Blood and gore sells papers. So your not always getting the full story. Keep that in mind when you make your opinions based on the media reports (which most of us do).