|
Iraq Body Count 27,000+ & Rising (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DJ Lucas |
| tell me when it gets close to the estimated 1 million iraqi deaths under sadaam including 400,000+ in mass graves. |
|
|
| UWM |
| I know what Machiavelli was about, I read The Prince. I just wanted to take advantage of the opportunity to diss GW. That being said, I'll keep any further comments to myself since I really don't have any intention of flaming you either. |
|
|
| Orbax |
| I cant even imagine what the death toll would be if we went to war. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by money_penny
why do you keep bringing up that there are so many other horrible things going on the world are you not content and able to talk about this issue solely? |
ok fine,tell me then why the hell did Bush pick on Iraq?even though they were no threat to Americans whatsoever.
| quote: | | the fact is we cant take out all the evil tyrants at once and liberate all the suffereings of the people everywhere at once |
Good and no one is asking for a world cowboy to come save the world.
| quote: | | it would spread our forces out too thin and lead to failure to protect our own borders or the overseas interests we already partake in. |
you guys are already d,you didnt have enough troops to help Katrina,thats why I laugh when they start talking about another war when clearly they cant afford another one.
| quote: | | and as for providing sadam with weapons lol get ur facts straight we provided the taliban with weapons and military support to take out the russians in afghanistan. |
facts ok let me show you some facts kid.
Article #1
link to the name of the American companies that helped Iraq to develope emd
want more?just ask
| quote: | the iraqis are toting around russian SKSs not american rifles which are killing our troops
he never got the chance to use biological weapons b/c he buried them too deep in the sand in hopes of hiding them and hoping that France would stop the US coalition in the UN he didnt consider NATO. |
yet again your sand story,show my some real proof of this or stop making stuff up.
| quote: | | we provided Sadam with biologial weapons lol yea that may be true that we gave him biologiacal weapons but he contined the program with his own scientest after the iranian war, |
lol? wow you dont know much about history do you?
Americans used saddam to fight Iran,they gave him all he needs to destroy Iran.I think I know since I was there when the war was going on.But since my words dont matter to you here is some more proof:
| quote: |
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm
THE US and Britain sold Saddam Hussein the technology and materials Iraq needed to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction.
Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs -- which oversees American exports policy -- reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene.
Classified US Defense Department documents also seen by the Sunday Herald show that Britain sold Iraq the drug pralidoxine, an antidote to nerve gas, in March 1992, after the end of the Gulf war. Pralidoxine can be reverse engineered to create nerve gas.
The Senate committee's reports on 'US Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual-Use Exports to Iraq', undertaken in 1992 in the wake of the Gulf war, give the date and destination of all US exports. The reports show, for example, that on May 2, 1986, two batches of bacillus anthracis -- the micro-organism that causes anthrax -- were shipped to the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education, along with two batches of the bacterium clostridium botulinum, the agent that causes deadly botulism poisoning.
One batch each of salmonella and E coli were shipped to the Iraqi State Company for Drug Industries on August 31, 1987. Other shipments went from the US to the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission on July 11, 1988; the Department of Biology at the University of Basrah in November 1989; the Department of Microbiology at Baghdad University in June 1985; the Ministry of Health in April 1985 and Officers' City, a military complex in Baghdad, in March and April 1986.
The shipments to Iraq went on even after Saddam Hussein ordered the gassing of the Kurdish town of Halabja, in which at least 5000 men, women and children died. The atrocity, which shocked the world, took place in March 1988, but a month later the components and materials of weapons of mass destruction were continuing to arrive in Baghdad from the US.
The Senate report also makes clear that: 'The United States provided the government of Iraq with 'dual use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programs.'
This assistance, according to the report, included 'chemical warfare-agent precursors, chemical warfare-agent production facility plans and technical drawings, chemical warfare filling equipment, biological warfare-related materials, missile fabrication equipment and missile system guidance equipment'.
Donald Riegle, then chairman of the committee, said: 'UN inspectors had identified many United States manufactured items that had been exported from the United States to Iraq under licenses issued by the Department of Commerce, and [established] that these items were used to further Iraq's chemical and nuclear weapons development and its missile delivery system development programs.'
Riegle added that, between January 1985 and August 1990, the 'executive branch of our government approved 771 different export licenses for sale of dual-use technology to Iraq. I think that is a devastating record'.
It is thought the information contained in the Senate committee reports is likely to make up much of the 'evidence of proof' that Bush and Blair will reveal in the coming days to justify the US and Britain going to war with Iraq. It is unlikely, however, that the two leaders will admit it was the Western powers that armed Saddam with these weapons of mass destruction.
However, Bush and Blair will also have to prove that Saddam still has chemical, biological and nuclear capabilities. This looks like a difficult case to clinch in view of the fact that Scott Ritter, the UN's former chief weapons inspector in Iraq, says the United Nations destroyed most of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and doubts that Saddam could have rebuilt his stocks by now.
According to Ritter, between 90% and 95% of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were des troyed by the UN. He believes the remainder were probably used or destroyed during 'the ravages of the Gulf War'.
Ritter has described himself as a 'card-carrying Republican' who voted for George W Bush. Nevertheless, he has called the president a 'liar' over his claims that Saddam Hussein is a threat to America.
Ritter has also alleged that the manufacture of chemical and biological weapons emits certain gases, which would have been detected by satellite. 'We have seen none of this,' he insists. 'If Iraq was producing weapons today, we would have definitive proof.'
He also dismisses claims that Iraq may have a nuclear weapons capacity or be on the verge of attaining one, saying that gamma-particle atomic radiation from the radioactive materials in the warheads would also have been detected by western surveillance.
The UN's former co-ordinator in Iraq and former UN under-secretary general, Count Hans von Sponeck, has also told the Sunday Herald that he believes the West is lying about Iraq's weapons program.
Von Sponeck visited the Al-Dora and Faluja factories near Baghdad in 1999 after they were 'comprehensively trashed' on the orders of UN inspectors, on the grounds that they were suspected of being chemical weapons plants. He returned to the site late in July this year, with a German TV crew, and said both plants were still wrecked.
'We filmed the evidence of the dishonesty of the claims that they were producing chemical and biological weapons,' von Sponeck has told the Sunday Herald. 'They are indeed in the same destroyed state which we witnessed in 1999. There was no trace of any resumed activity at all.'
|
| quote: | | and he was supposed to discontinue the program along with destroying all the weapons after the gulf war.... isnt this more of reason to do what we did? |
There are many countries that are breaking UN resolutions even today.
why not go invade them?
| quote: | | Isnt that more of a reason to demand he stop the programs allow true inspections and to provide subsational proof of the destruction of the weapons... which i remind you that is pure undisputable fact that he never did. |
Saddam got rid of all his weapons in the 90's why didnt the U.S invade Iraq when they actually knew they were making weapons?
| quote: | you forgot how huge of a threat iraq was to american freedom.. hmm let me remind you.
Iraqs missles were perfectly in range of hmm lets see a American Alliance member named Israel.... do you know what would happen if Iraq had bombed Israel, to make a long story short a full out war in the middle east which quite possible might have led to WW3 based on simply the same way previous world wars started two or more nations get in a scuffle which brings in alliance members and pretty soon yea WW3. |
oh boy dont get me started with you buddy Isreal.Isreal is one of those countries that has both nukes and chemeical/boilogical weapons and they dont give a what the UN tells them.Why is it ok for them to have all those weapons?is it because they are very close to the U.S?
Iam glad at least you know why most of this whole war was for Isreals sakes not anyone elses.
If there is going to be a WW3 Iam gonna bet my money on the U.S for starting it.
| quote: | | Yea Bush really conviced congress and the house and the pentagon to go in and take out sadam purely to finish family business. |
family business did play a major role in this war,Bush is a family person and he wouldnt have stoped untill he got his revenge on Saddam.I really think thats one of the reasons he wanted to become the president to deal with Saddam.
| quote: | | False evidence lol yea really your kidding me right |
show me proof that Bush's evidence against Iraq were all real and I'll take my words back.
| quote: | | and further more your comment at the bottom of your posts, your "signature" please take it out it makes you look like a fool |
Truth hurts eh? :) :) :) :)
| quote: | | i dont recall the taliban phoning president bush or declaring to the UN that Al-Qaeda was going to hijack planes and crash them into our pentagon and the world trade towers. |
Nope,but they had lots of warnings about a huge terrorist attack but they decided to ignore it.
and here is your hero president when he heard about the attacks.
Thats what a true president really does when his country gets attack,he keeps on reading books for the kids.
| quote: | | maybe its b.c they despise not being a true super power anymore, and only remain so due to their special relationship with germany or maybe it was that the Iraqis are known for burning oil refineries when they are losing a war, which France had a considerable percent of foreign investment in iraqi oil..... hmmm who knows.... |
oh so thats the real truth huh?
| quote: | | my question to you is your not even american, your not even an iraqi, so wtf do you care? |
because I live in this world and I care unilke rednecks like you who all you care about is you and you only.
| quote: | | who is sticking whose nose into whose business now eh? Our troops died for our country's greatest cause, democracy. |
yup forcing democracy into a country that clearly doesnt want democracy is truly a great cause to die for.perhaps you can go join your friends in Iraq and kill those evil terrorists argh I mean bring freedom and democracy to the people. :rolleyes:
| quote: | | The fight for democracy at home as well as abroad is America's most noble cause. |
Iam sure it is but understand that not every country can have it,for a country like Iraq which has been under dictatorship for years you cant just expect it to work.
| quote: | | You keep saying we are trying to force democracy onto these people. We set them up with a free nation and policed it for them so they could freely setup a interim government that represented all their peoples to decide on what type of government they wished to form. |
you are right,they are a free nation with terrorists from the region can now freely go there and kill people,thanks to American invasion that is. you also talk about security,and thats exactly what is lacking there,at least back in sadam days people didnt have to worry about getting blow up or getting killed by terrorists.
but lets hope you are right,but from way things are now we looking at civil war waiting to happen.
| quote: | | We didnt force them to do anything. |
oh yes you did,you foced them accept Americans way of democracy.
| quote: | | We simply gave them what they lacked.. |
well you are right on this,They always lacked terrorism there but now they have that so thanks.
I hope you are less blind about the situation after reading this,but somehow I doubt anyone can get through to you. |
|
|
| Rostros |
I think I have started another War Off on TA.
Interesting comments here, I aint gonna try to attack either P.O.V's. Heres my conclusion on what I think on your comments.
U.S.A Vs China ? It would depend on tactics, and timing. Drop a Nuke on New York and a few other states and your gonna get a
Instant Civil War the National Guard and Army couldn't control Millions of people rioting, just take a look a New Orleans. Same if America
did the same to China dropping a Nuke (Hiroshima Style) into the heart of Hong Kong would cause Mayhem and self destruction both from
the blast and of course the radiation. Both Countries are capable today a few stealth fighters and goodbye China ! Or USA.
Back to the whole Iraq scenario, my original post was regarding the Body Count getting out of control, both for Iraq & USA / Uk troops. I remember
the first night when Americans bombed the targets I watched it on the news and i was like WTF they dont even care what they hit, there was cars,
familys still driving around, within about 2-3 hours they had launched a couple of thousands serious bomb's into the capital and it did not stop for a couple
of days, I remember switcing on the news in the morning and seeing Dead women and children who have been caught in the blast's and there familys
carring there bodys to be burried without a proper funeral. Maybe War's cost Fatalities but extra time could of been given to Hans Blixx the Chief Nuclear
Researcher who requested more time, also the U.N requested more time to review the weapons. The UK SAS Special Forces could of killed Saddam in the Gulf
War years ago also they had been in Iraq for years before all this had been happening. I dont think the Nuclear Weapons were burried either Im sure
the Americans have Metal Detectors, also finding those weapons would resolve lots of pressure on both the US & UK goverments who are still under attack
from there own people and Terrorists.
30,000 Deaths later and No Resolve of a Goverment , Police Force or any other resolution in Iraq. Both Goverments are in a load of mess. Pulling out
of Iraq would result in more terrorist attacks, staying in Iraq means more Deaths on both Side's also more money. |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by Rostros
30,000 Deaths later and No Resolve of a Goverment , Police Force or any other resolution in Iraq. Both Goverments are in a load of mess. Pulling out
of Iraq would result in more terrorist attacks, staying in Iraq means more Deaths on both Side's also more money. |
This is the problem that Bush created for himself.....he did not have a plan for how to get out of Iraq....Bush has caused this distubance and now has to find a way to clean it up. The U.S. will be in Iraq for years to come and many more people will die. In the end it will all be for not because once the Americans leave any form of government that is created will get destroyed and I am sure there are a few dictators just sitting in the background waiting for their chance. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
Okay, there's a lot of venom being thrown around here about the US and their foriegn policy. I really don't want to add to it, however, I think I can explain why the Americans don't understand the reasons people object to their actions. First, the US trully feels that they have "the white man's burdon".... they believe that it is their duty to make every state a free and democratic state (except those that operate better as puppet governments controled by the US). They believe this because of their deeply rooted sense of Manifest Destiny... that they have been chosen by God to lead the world. Subsequently, they believe they are acting in the world's best interest and cannot fathom why anyone would oppose them.
What the US fails to realize is that when one country starts to arbitrarily force their will upon another every other country starts to get a little uneassy. Every country values it's autonomy (because, whether you believe it or not the vast majority of humans do not want to be Americans). By showing that the US does not respect the autonomy of some states they suggest to the world community that they respect the autonomy on NO state. This makes us all threatened by the US. Granted, I think that for the most part this is an illogical fear as the US would have little to gain by "liberating" France from the socialists, or Canada from the "liberals", or Germany from whoever is in charge, however, it is a fear that many have as a direct result of US foriegn policy.
Truth is that this discussion is more or less useless. The US is an empire in decline. 30 years from now it will be a bankrupt and defunct collection of formerly great states. I'm not trying to be a dick here but all the economic indicators, the political culture, and the actions of the government and people point to this. I will be very sad when it happens but it will happen. I know I'll get flammed for this but it's true and I will respond in advance by stating.... Patriotism always peaks immediately before the fall of empires (Greece, Egypt, Rome, France, Britain.... all were their most patriotic right before the fall). |
|
|
| kamil |
| americans dont belong in iraq. they should pack up their and off. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by kamil
americans dont belong in iraq. they should pack up their and off. |
I disagree. They didn't belong in Iraq to begin with, however, now that there is a vacuume of power just pulling out would destabalize the situation even more so then it already is. |
|
|
| tribu |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
I disagree. They didn't belong in Iraq to begin with, however, now that there is a vacuume of power just pulling out would destabalize the situation even more so then it already is. |
If the American empire is about to collapse, then why not just pull out? The stability of the region won't affect us... |
|
|
| Rostros |
Entire World Vs USA
That would be a good scrap. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by tribu
If the American empire is about to collapse, then why not just pull out? The stability of the region won't affect us... |
That's a simplistic way of looking at it. Yes I do believe that the American Empire will collapse, I don't wish for it but it seems to be very likely. That said we're talking about 30 years down the road. With regard to pulling out.... if the US were to pull out now they would leave behind a power vacuum that would likely result in civil war and the creation of a fragmented Iraq, perhaps with sections being controled with more dislikable and unfriendly rulers then Saddam. It is highly likely that the new rulers of the former Iraq will be muslim idealogs, most likely they will have imperial aspirations toward surrounding states and a deep hatred of Isreal. This would result in further unrest in the area and greater threats against Isreal and Saudi Arabia. As we are all very well aware the US is keenly interested in the stability and security of both of these nations. In order to counter the threat created in the absence of a stable Iraq more resources would need to be put into these states possibly resulting in a higher investment in terms of money, men, and materials then the war is presently commanding. Incidently, sending more men, materials and money to the region would only hasten the collapse of the American Empire.
Personally, I think the only viable option to facilitate a pull out of US troops would be to reinstate Saddam as the ruler of Iraq and provide him with the materials to resume rule in the manner in which he had in the past. I don't like that idea but it is the only way the US could get out and not have to go back in later. |
|
|
|
|
