TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- US VS. Saddam
Pages (5): « 1 2 [3] 4 5 »

right on

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter I'm opposed to it on the grounds that I think the costs outweigh the potential benefits.

I totally agree with you on this one. I honestly don't believe that we have REAL information (not propaganda) that Saddam is a legitimate threat to our national security. He's gassed the Kurds in his country - he is an Arab Sunni and they hate the Kurds. But I don't believe that he would launch an attack on the US. I believe this is propaganda in its finest form. He has the weapons, but does he REALLY want to take a risk to use them with everyone watching his every move? Makes you think... I

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade If we are going to war with Iraq to stop the terror he's inflicted on his own people, why do we not go to war with other countries who have a shocking human rights record? China, Libya, Zimbabwe, North Korea and in the recent past the Phillipines, Cambodia, Indonesia (with their invasion of East Timor) and Chile? Why does the US turn a blind eye to these attrocities but only launch its "Human Rights" propoganda war against Saddam Hussein? Or are we scared that he has nukes? Is that the reason we're going in? Then why not invade North Korea, they're part of the axis of evil aren't they? Or what about Pakistan? They have nukes and we know that they've been sympathetic to Muslim terrorists in the past. So why should I be more concerned about the fact that Saddam Hussein might (note the emphasis) be able to produce a nuclear bomb in six months when we know for certain that other hostile nations have them in their posession?

yes i belive that every country with bad human rights record should be fought agianst. as i dont see the UN doing anything about anything anywherem the US is taking action once country at a time, for Bush iraq is priority #1, who knows what may come afterwards, hopefully something will be done about each of the countries you mentioned (dimplomaticaly or militarily). so on the question of why iraq vs any other 'evil' nation then the answer is each hopefully each will be dealt with one at a time (allowing greater focus to each) in order by priority in which the country trying to fix the problems see it.

quote:

Important point webmeister, and I think we have to ask ourselves where the line between terrorism and "pre-emptive" strikes are drawn. If Saddam Hussein attacked the US tomorrow, which of the two would it be?

easy distiction between terrorism and "pre-emptive" strikes. one deals with the targeting of innocent civlinians the other deals with strikes agianst of military targets.

quote:

You also have to seriously question the motivation behind a "human rights" crusade that is so ready to violate the principles it is intending to protect.

what rights are they about to violate? i see it is about to establish and protect greater human rigths for iraqi's.

quote:

Even after that, given that support for Hussein is still strong in most parts of Iraq (though obviously not in the Curdish areas)

there is no way of truly knowing that. the people have also been brainwashed for over 20 years into 'approving' saddam and his regime

quote:

It's horrendously naive to assume that ousting Saddam Hussein is likely to reduce future occurances of terrorism, stabalise the Middle-Eastern region or make Iraq into a democratic nation full of happy, Iraqi voters, sympathetic towards the American cause.

i feel that even if it is unlikey, it is a step in a better direction and definitly better then that status quo.

also someone mentioned something about the different ethnic groups in iraq that dont get along, which would cause massive fighting and instability. call me ignorant, but if that were to be the case what would be so bad in dividing iraq into three countries (kurd, sunni, and i forget the third)?

quote:

I hardly agree that the Iraqi people will allow themselves to be dictated to by US whim either. If the US installs a puppet regime of its own choosing, then, once again, I'll make the comparison of asking the US civilians here how they'd enjoy having their government selected for them by the Iraqi government? And if the US decide to install a "true" democracy (where the Iraqi people vote for their leader) who's to say that the next guy won't be just as bad as Hussein? Or the guy after him? Especially since they would be elected into an environment that will be, in all likelihood, more antipathetic towards the US then the Iraqi society that exists now?

no one really knows how a democratic arab country will be like, becuase none exsist to this day. its worth a test in my book.

quote:

These things need to be taken into account, especially given the US's rather poor record of replacing governments (should I mentioned the shambles that is the Afghani government or General Pinochet perhaps?).

i wouldnt say its as poor as you make it out to be. Pinochet, yes theres a point there. but i feel that when the interm gov in afghan matures and reaches a point where it can have power and security over its people (currently the lack the infrastructure and institutions to do this) then yes, it will have been a success. Also america has helped in the reconstruction of governments in post ww2 europe and in japan. american and german, aid helped set up israels government. in conclusion, they dont have that bad of a track record.

quote:

If the Weapons Inspection plan falls absolutely and totally through, then there may be some justification for miltary action

personal question: when do you belive military action IS nessacry?

quote:

War is war. Whether it's an American civilian, an Australian civilian or an Iraqi civilian killed in an act of war, the tragedy remains the same. If hearing about the murder of my citizens is justification enough to actively will the deaths of citizens from another country, then I fear for the future of humanity.

people in iraq are dying as a result of saddam's regime. do you belive there is a distinction between citizens dying in a war that is trying to better their condition and those citizens that die when no action is taken?

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy what would be so bad in dividing iraq into three countries (kurd, sunni, and i forget the third)?

uhh .. that works every time! Note successful cases such as: post WWII Germany, North/South Korea, North/South Vietnam, Israel/Palestine, India/Pakistan (one country until the British split them when they pulled out)....etc

quote:

Originally posted by webmeister uhh .. that works every time! Note successful cases such as: post WWII Germany, North/South Korea, North/South Vietnam, Israel/Palestine, India/Pakistan (one country until the British split them when they pulled out)....etc

um the examples you gave arent really the same as dividing a country as into ethnic groups

east/west Germany - same ethnic group, two different governments for each country
North/South Korea - same thing
North/South Vietnam - same thing

the ones you mentioned that do have seprate ethnic groups (India/Pakistan and Israel/Palestine) in my opinion would do much better as two seperat countries then one big one and massive in fighting and unstability. add to that the success of the split of croatia/serbia/montenegro (bosnia and kosovo is a mess because of the fueds between different ethnic groups), czech rep/slovakia (used to be one country), the splitting of russia allowing freedom to estonia, latvia, lithuania, belarus, ukraine... see i guess splitting countries into ethnic majorities might not be a bad idea, after all they just end up coming together in the end (EU)

there is alot of minorities in the middle east. you simply cannot have one country by ethnicity... (India has about 700-800 ethnical groups, imagine 700 new tiny countries in the space that is now known as India)

the balkanization of the middle east would leave weak entities that cannot sustain themselves. They would then be easily controlled by foreign powers...


divide and conquer.

ok, some of you guys just aren't hearing me....

1) Saddam has never at any point allowed full access everywhere to UN weapons inspectors. For awhile it was completely blocked off, just recently he opened up the majority but still has some areas "blocked off".... well what is he hiding??

2) their old weapons supplies were never completely rid of (contrary to your reports...).. don't believe me? try talking to all the troops that have been out there the last 10 years - they'll tell you. He still has many scuds pointed at US airbases and other targets (some even non-US). (yes, he still has scuds, and they are designing a system for the scud to act as the nuke-transporter).

3) you know how much it sucks to have gas-alarms ring off everyday in 100 degree heat, and you have less than a minute to don a complete chem-suit and gas mask?? you have any idea how hard it is to breathe through a gas mask and how hot those chem suits get? And to have to do this all the time b/c of threats coming from iraq. I don't care if you think saddam is the nicest guy in the world, or if you are just straight anti-USA (like most of you are)... any person who even threatens to use chemical warfare is someone who deserves to burn in hell forever. Chemical weapons are the most painful, slow death you can give people. The shit i've had to watch you have no idea...

4) I would love, repeat LOVE for the US to pull out of the middle east altogether, and a bunch of shit would hit the fan - everyone would start fighting and attacking everyone, then they'd all ask for the USA's help, and i would LOVE for the US to turn a cold shoulder... that will show all these people that have NO IDEA what we are doing for the world. You all think that the USA is causing all the problems in the middle east, but ironically you have NO idea the irony in how the USA is the only thing holding everything together over there right now - albeit by a small thread.

Until a whole lot of you are out there and see how it really is, you have absolutely NO idea whats going on, or any right to criticize. Oh yeah, and stop believing everything you "read in the paper".

I'm out of this conversation

quote:

Originally posted by ABTsportsline 4) I would love, repeat LOVE for the US to pull out of the middle east altogether, and a bunch of shit would hit the fan - everyone would start fighting and attacking everyone, then they'd all ask for the USA's help, and i would LOVE for the US to turn a cold shoulder... that will show all these people that have NO IDEA what we are doing for the world. You all think that the USA is causing all the problems in the middle east, but ironically you have NO idea the irony in how the USA is the only thing holding everything together over there right now - albeit by a small thread.

I would love it to, because right now my tax dollars are being squandered for the benefit of a group of largely ignorant, unappreciative people, and personally, I think that sucks.

quote:

Originally posted by ahlamalek there is alot of minorities in the middle east. you simply cannot have one country by ethnicity... (India has about 700-800 ethnical groups, imagine 700 new tiny countries in the space that is now known as India) the balkanization of the middle east would leave weak entities that cannot sustain themselves. They would then be easily controlled by foreign powers... divide and conquer.

in india however most all of the 700-800 ethnical groups live peacefully with one another, so there would be no real reason to split up. same for iraq or the middle east, not all ethnic groups hate one another. in fact the 'druzim' leave peacefully as both israeli, lebonese and syrian citizens.
but ya i see your point and i've thought about it to. i guess in some cases it would be a wise idea, and in some it wouldnt. would it be wiser to split an iraq or keep it unified? i honestly dont really know and it really doesnt matter as long as the result is peace and stability but i would like to hear educated opinions

quote:

Originally posted by ABTsportsline any person who even threatens to use chemical warfare is someone who deserves to burn in hell forever. Chemical weapons are the most painful, slow death you can give people. The shit i've had to watch you have no idea...

The US of course has never had any chemical weapons....

well thats okay, cause they are more responsible...?!

well Iam from Iran, I want Bush to fuckin die!!and dont care what any of you will say!!!
have you guys ever wondered how IRAQ has those weapons of mass destructions??
well it is very simple, USA gave them those weapons many years go when they were in war with IRAN!!!!thats right they used it against my people, at that time which was 1981 I believe, and 2 years after the Islamic ravolution, US didnt want Islamic extremist from my country to be powerful, and since we(Iran) had a powerful military from the past,and I could say the most powerful in middle east, so us comes along supports Iraq, gives them bio,chemical weapons, to kill my people, and here we are years later, Us is doesnt want Iraq to have those weapons,so I think Us guvernemnt should fukin get blasted by bio,chemical,or nuclear weapons just to get a taste of its own.
same thing with Bin Laden, another US creation,why? to kicks the Russians out of Afghanistan, years later Us wants Bin Laden dead.
so I think what ever has or will happen to Us, their fucked up Guvernemnt is to blame.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer well Iam from Iran, I want Bush to fuckin die!!and dont care what any of you will say!!! have you guys ever wondered how IRAQ has those weapons of mass destructions?? well it is very simple, USA gave them those weapons many years go when they were in war with IRAN!!!!thats right they used it against my people, at that time which was 1981 I believe, and 2 years after the Islamic ravolution, US didnt want Islamic extremist from my country to be powerful, and since we(Iran) had a powerful military from the past,and I could say the most powerful in middle east, so us comes along supports Iraq, gives them bio,chemical weapons, to kill my people, and here we are years later, Us is doesnt want Iraq to have those weapons,so I think Us guvernemnt should fukin get blasted by bio,chemical,or nuclear weapons just to get a taste of its own. same thing with Bin Laden, another US creation,why? to kicks the Russians out of Afghanistan, years later Us wants Bin Laden dead. so I think what ever has or will happen to Us, their fucked up Guvernemnt is to blame.

why don't you move to iraq?

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by Juricimo why don't you move to iraq? >JM<

what are u trying to say??
so because Iam against what the US guverment says or believes about middle east I have to go to Iraq??mmmm I dont think so

quote:

Originally posted by Juricimo why don't you move to iraq? >JM<

You know, if you want to be taken seriously it might help to actually read what the other person was saying before responding to them.

This is the second time I've seen you just casually dismiss someone who has a different viewpoint on the situation as being an unwitting dupe of Iraq...if you'd actually taken a big, fat minute to read the post you would have seen the guy writing is *from IRAN* and isn't happy because the weapons the US supplied to Iraq in the 80's were *USED AGAINST HIS PEOPLE*...yeah, I'm sure he wants to move to Iraq...

That'd be like me saying you should move into the home of someone who murdered several members of your family because you didn't like the guy who sold said murderer the weapon he used to commit the crimes much either.

Please think before you hit the "Submit Reply" button...

quote:

Originally posted by CortexBomb You know, if you want to be taken seriously it might help to actually read what the other person was saying before responding to them.

how did you arrive at the conclusion that i haven't read his thread?

quote:

This is the second time I've seen you just casually dismiss someone who has a different viewpoint on the situation as being an unwitting dupe of Iraq...

...and not the last

quote:

That'd be like me saying you should move into the home of someone who murdered several members of your family because you didn't like the guy who sold said murderer the weapon he used to commit the crimes much either.

you're right.
although this is what he said:

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer well Iam from Iran, I want Bush to fuckin die!!and dont care what any of you will say!!!

he warranted my response just by the above statement which is in red. another anti-US/Bush statement makes me wanna wish all writers of such statements to go to Iraq to see if they would be better off there, rather then in USA, Canada (as in hardcore trancer's case) or anywhere else for that matter.

quote:

Please think before you hit the "Submit Reply" button...

same goes for you.

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer what are u trying to say?? so because Iam against what the US guverment says or believes about middle east I have to go to Iraq??mmmm I dont think so

i thought you didn't care what anyone else said.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer well Iam from Iran, I want Bush to fuckin die!!and dont care what any of you will say!!!

>JM<

quote:

Originally posted by Juricimo he warranted my response just by the above statement which is in red. another anti-US/Bush statement makes me wanna wish all writers of such statements to go to Iraq to see if they would be better off there, rather then in USA, Canada (as in hardcore trancer's case) or anywhere else for that matter. >JM<

I'm sorry, but I think that's a poor rationale for your statement...essentially you're stating that every time someone says something stupid you have an obligation to fire back with an equally inane comment...and that's what turns interesting conversations into flamewars in a hurry.

you guys are both wrong in some way, and please lets keep this place civilized, i dont want to see this place closed.

hardcore trancer - you cant wish to kill someone (in this case bush) because of something that happened 21 years ago (as is your reasoning) in which the guy had nothing to do with it. thats plainly dumb in my point of view.

Juricimo - instead of saying one line sentences that may seem senseless to most others, just back up why you think getting hardcore trancer to live in iraq would change his views on how he sees things.

quote:

Originally posted by Izzy hardcore trancer - you cant wish to kill someone (in this case bush) because of something that happened 21 years ago (as is your reasoning) in which the guy had nothing to do with it. thats plainly dumb in my point of view.

How is it dumb??? Us is saying that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, but they dont want to say how they got those weapons, and they dont want the world to know why Iraq used those weapons against Iran, because they told Iraq to use those weapons!!!
I just want USA to stay stay the hell away from middle east,I still dont see how Iraq could be such a big threat to America!!Bush is saying Iraq is a big danger to the region!!well I think USA is the biggest danger in midddle east, basically they are taking over middle east, thats how I see it,I just wonder what country is next in this game that US is playing.The only country that Iraq might attack is Isreal, which I really dont care,and I dont wanna get into that subject right now, and since Isreal is the biggest kiss asss to US, they will always be backed up by US military.So dont worry nothing will happen to them, and Iraq knows that, so chances are that Saddam wont attack them But that is another issue, and not
related to this thread!!!
so please people dont start on that issue.

quote:

Originally posted by Webmeister The US of course has never had any chemical weapons....

Of course the US has chemical weapons. Not only that but they have biological weapons too. Probably more than any other country besides Russia. What do you expect from the Cold War buildup? The difference is that the US has never had the propensity to use chemical warfare. Nor have they ever THREATENED to use it. If I recall, Iraq has not only threatened to use it ... but they HAVE used it, against the Iranians and their own people. What kind of restraint do you think they will show if they have nuclear weapons? Fine they might not use it against a country that can retaliate in kind (because they are bullies and cowards at heart), but they would most certainly use it against smaller, weaker countries without remorse.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer I dont see how Iraq could be such a big threat to America!!Bush is saying Iraq is a big danger to the region!!well I think USA is the biggest danger in midddle east

Ummmmmmm how did the gulf war start? I guess the American CIA told Iraq to invade Kuwait. Then the CIA told Iraq to start threatening to invade Saudi Arabia. Then the omnipotent CIA coerced the Saudis to set up bases for US troops as a guise for the PROTECTION of Saudi Arabia. Then, in secret, the CIA convinced the United Nations that the benevolent Iraqis were a hostile threat to the region and that they should set up a coalition force to oust the Iraqis from the countries they invaded. Then, the warmongering United States, despite having the ability to completely destroy Iraq, inexplicably decided to sign a peace treaty returning the countries to their natural borders. How out of character. Finally, the godless Americans have the audacity to get upset over the peace loving Iraqis after they refuse access of several research areas to the UN weapons inspectors ... who are agents of Satan (America). I would back up my arguments with facts but that's old school ... everybody nowadays just blurts out whatever they think.

BTW

I've always wondered why the majority of Muslims support Iraq? Iraq is the most secular state in the region. And religion in general is the furthest thing from its agenda. For example ... why did they invade Kuwait? It wasn't to unite all Arabs and Muslims ... it was because they were cash strapped from the Iran-Iraq war and they needed the rich oil fields of Kuwait to get out of debt. Also why did they destroy and sabotage all the oil refineries in Kuwait? It wasn't to hurt the US. The US gets most of its oil from Canada, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia. It mostly hurt the Kuwaities and the environment. It was seriously a maliscious act against a fellow Arab/Muslim country in response to a losing battle. I find it disconcerting that countries can be just as childish and maliscious as some of its constituents.

Re: BTW

quote:

Originally posted by occrider I've always wondered why the majority of Muslims support Iraq? Iraq is the most secular state in the region. And religion in general is the furthest thing from its agenda. For example ... why did they invade Kuwait? It wasn't to unite all Arabs and Muslims ... it was because they were cash strapped from the Iran-Iraq war and they needed the rich oil fields of Kuwait to get out of debt. Also why did they destroy and sabotage all the oil refineries in Kuwait? It wasn't to hurt the US. The US gets most of its oil from Canada, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia. It mostly hurt the Kuwaities and the environment. It was seriously a maliscious act against a fellow Arab/Muslim country in response to a losing battle. I find it disconcerting that countries can be just as childish and maliscious as some of its constituents.

i don't give a rat ass about politicians , WE (as Arabs and Muslims) support the Iraqi people , not saddam or anyone else

Re: Re: BTW

quote:

Originally posted by fastmp3 i don't give a rat ass about politicians , WE (as Arabs and Muslims) support the Iraqi people , not saddam or anyone else

Ok but at the same time the Iraqi people support their politicians right? I mean Sadam just did get 100% of the vote right? Hahhaha next time watch him get 150% of the vote. But anyway ... despite the election thing being clearly faked, it seems that a majority of the people DO support sadam which is why he's in power. So let me ask you something ... if we the American people supported Bush wholeheartedly would you support the American people? Would you support the German people in 1939 when they supported Hitler? To place all blame of a country on a single person or institution is naive and ignorant. There's a reason why that institution or that peroson is in power and there's a reason why they are tolerated.

Re: Re: Re: BTW

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Ok but at the same time the Iraqi people support their politicians right? I mean Sadam just did get 100% of the vote right? Hahhaha next time watch him get 150% of the vote. But anyway ... despite the election thing being clearly faked, it seems that a majority of the people DO support sadam which is why he's in power. So let me ask you something ... if we the American people supported Bush wholeheartedly would you support the American people? Would you support the German people in 1939 when they supported Hitler? To place all blame of a country on a single person or institution is naive and ignorant. There's a reason why that institution or that peroson is in power and there's a reason why they are tolerated.

-if u don't vote for Saddam ur a dead man
-if just the idea of getting opposed to saddam crosses ur mind you're a dead man too
-the majority supports saddam because they have a strong feeling of pride you guys will never understand , they prefer saddam who's causing them to suffer instead of the US governing the country
-you don't even know 1 ounce of how the politics work in arab countries , there's no democracy , dictators are doing whatever they want wether the population likes it or not , they're basically saying "it's my way or the high way" , therefore u can't compare Iraq and germany of 39 which was a democracy
-all arab leaders from morocco to egypt to every single arab country are suck ups to the US except lybia and iraq , and when i say they are SUCKING UP i mean they could turn their back and leave their arab brothers just for a couple of $$$ (i'm still talking about the leaders not the nations)
-with all my respect i think president bush is a total idiot but that doesn't make me think all americans are dumb
-the opposite is happening in america : saddam is evil then all iraqis are evil , most of you guys don't know how much they are suffering , how much kids died of starvation diarhea and lack of medecine , it's true it's because of Saddam but it's MAINLY because of the US embargo not letting enough food and medecine entering the country

Re: Re: Re: Re: BTW

quote:

Originally posted by fastmp3 -if u don't vote for Saddam ur a dead man -if just the idea of getting opposed to saddam crosses ur mind you're a dead man too -the majority supports saddam because they have a strong feeling of pride you guys will never understand , they prefer saddam who's causing them to suffer instead of the US governing the country -you don't even know 1 ounce of how the politics work in arab countries , there's no democracy , dictators are doing whatever they want wether the population likes it or not , they're basically saying "it's my way or the high way" , therefore u can't compare Iraq and germany of 39 which was a democracy

just a few of the reasons listed above to get rid of the fukker. i mean. people prefer saddam who is causing them to suffer smart people they are,..wait! yeah they cant do much about it anyways, so it's not their fault - they got no freedom of choice, expression.... that is fucking wrong, immoral...eh

>JM<

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.