At last, the American soldiers discover a friendly welcome

Exactly

Nadia- now your finally starting to get it in a way.

"to determine their fate and that of the future generations of Iraqis to come. That is up to the people of Iraq."

With Saddam in power the people of Iraq will never decide their own fate. With a freely elected gov't the people will decide. If the US did not step in Saddam could be in power for another 30 years, then his sons for another 50, then their sons....

"them to clarify whether or not they are utilizing torture practices against prisoners they are currently holding"

I believe the guy you are trying to rebuff was talking about the people of Iraq, not prisoners. I guarantee any of Saddam's cronies are being treated much better than American Soldiers executed and paraded on television.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Wada Saien: *
hehhe .... i forgot i am talking to a lawyer ... you guys can beep beep lot better than others .... :-)
[/QUOTE]

Consider yourself struck-off from AIPAC's Eid Card list.

Re: Exactly

AvgGuy,
It’s sincerely good to see you back again in the Forums. Regarding your statement that If the US did not step in Saddam could be in power for another 30 years, then his sons for another 50, then their sons… - that’s true. Someone could state the same about Kuwait, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, indeed half a dozen Muslim governments. Where does it stop? Where does regime change end - or does it end? Have we not opened a Pandora’s box? Who decides who is worthy of being overthrown, and who is not ? Is Iran next? Or Syria? If we are going to go by Middle Eastern governments that possess WMD, then do Vanunu’s statements regarding Israel’s nuclear arsenal signify anything? If our criterion is human rights violations, will we amass our troops by the Saudi border next ?

>>I believe the guy you are trying to rebuff was talking about the people of Iraq, not prisoners.<<
:flower1: No, sorry, i was not. :flower1:

I think the people you must be refering to are the prisoners at G.B.? I don’t agree that anyone should be tortured, however, I don’t think people involved in the Al Quada terrorist organisation whose express purpose is to target and murder American Civilians ever thought about the people they murdered rights to go to work, do their job and then go home to their families do you?

Whether or not those members were involved in the 9/11 attack or not. Their intention is to take away the right of life for American Civilians. They still have their lifes.

AAG, yes i was referring to the prisoners at Guantanamo.

>>Whether or not those members were involved in the 9/11 attack or not. Their intention is to take away the right of life for American Civilians.<<
Do you mind if i ask - how are you so certain regarding their intentions? First a proper independent tribunal should be established in order to determine their involvement in whatever activities they may be accused of. If the evidence proves them guilty, then yes - let us condemn them. Until then, they remain POWs in my books.

Perhaps well worth the read - an excellent article:

…] The made-to-measure mentality is supposed to be as amnesiac and forgiving as required. It is primed never to ask, should no weapons of mass destruction be found: what was this war for?

It is meant to agree that killing 1,000 civilians and countless thousand unlamented soldiers, some as young and hopeful as dead British ‘heroes’, is a down payment on a better world. It is groomed to think, against all precedence, that you can bomb a nation to democracy. Just in case the corpses do not speak for themselves, Blair is dropping some more leaflets to tell Iraqis that their new-look country will not be a Pentagon across the water. Except that it most probably will, if neo-conservatives have their way.

…] We, by contrast, are invited to despise the independent al-Jazeera, condemned by Mr Blunkett as a Saddam tool, and soak up good news images. Ignore the nastiness and think instead of the brave ‘rescue’ of Private Jessica Lynch from the hospital ward where she was being treated with all available medical skill.

The PR campaign wants upbeat stories. It does not want curmudgeons who opposed this war because pre-emptive strikes against sovereign states run counter to law and sanity. If Baghdad falls mercifully quickly, and if there is no more terrible loss of life, the mind- management machine will decree that Bush and Blair have secured a triumph. They will be just as wrong as they were last week. (A morally hollow victory).

Nadia_H,

I doubt those Al Quada wannabe’s want to give Americans :flower1:'s and :kiss: 's. I don’t believe that is what is taught at terror training camps.

Wanting to give flowers, versus wanting to orchestrate terror attacks against the US, are two entirely separate issues. i wouldn't want to give Bush a flower and neither would i ever consider implementing a terrorist attack against any country! None of them may want to give flowers or kisses, but surely - that is not the issue. The issue is whether or not they are responsible for orchestrating terrorist attacks. That is an issue that is best determined by an independent tribunal, not a military one presided over by Rumsfeld. Innocent until proven guilty.

And British forces are welcomed by Iraqi civilians.

http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2516618

British Tanks Storm Into Central Basra
Sun April 6, 2003 06:25 PM ET

By Rosalind Russell
BASRA, Iraq (Reuters) - After a two-week siege, British tanks thrust deep into Basra on Sunday, moving in on several fronts, but their commanders were cautious about just how much of Iraq’s second city was now under their control.

Three British soldiers were killed, British officials said, as were an unknown number of Iraqis. Much of the fighting pitted paramilitary militiamen against Royal Marine commandos and the Challenger tanks of the 7th Armored Brigade, the “Desert Rats.”

As this Reuters correspondent drove toward central Basra behind one British column, half a dozen British tanks lined the road, their barrels pointing down side streets where commanders believed Iraqi militiamen had been hiding.

I wonder what is proven by these hyperlinks to reports of "welcome and cheers" for the forces? What I mean is I don't understand how if at all this "cheering" legitimises a war which is illegit, in all senses of the word, to begin with or whether it actually proves the original aim (however sketchy they were to begin with) of war, i.e. WMD's has been achieved?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Rhia: *
I wonder what is proven by these hyperlinks to reports of "welcome and cheers" for the forces? What I mean is I don't understand how if at all this "cheering" legitimises a war which is illegit, in all senses of the word, to begin with or whether it actually proves the original aim (however sketchy they were to begin with) of war, i.e. WMD's has been achieved?
[/QUOTE]
Freeing an oppressed people is usually considered a good thing.

Oh, I'm no one to judge your altruism and genuine feelings for the oppressed. I am just questioning what purpose this (all these reports) serves as an indicator of "war success" based on facts, with respect to its "original objectives".

Yes it does. Now you know.

edited... not a factual picture

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Imdad Ali: *
Yes it does. Now you know.
[/QUOTE]

I do know. I wish I could say the same for you. In the end, the simple truth is that these little snippets of spin prove diddly squat about anything except to opiate the gullible. When all is said and done the glaring fact remains this was and is an illegitimate war, and will remain illegitimate no matter what the outcome.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
well i would say it's kind of a 'lukewarm' welcome.. but the American soldiers will take whatever they can get..

PA yaar I saw this pic as elsewhere as well. This isnt a coalition soldier.

These young lads might well be clapping and cheering the coalition invasion but it’s not easy to clap with your hands in the air.

FAMILY IN RAID TERROR

Apr 7 2003

TWO little Iraqi boys hold up their hands in terror as US marines force a terrified family to kneel in the street while their home is searched.

The boys, their elder sister and brother and their parents were ordered out of the house on the outskirts of Baghdad by marines barking orders and pointing M16 rifles at them.

The worried father pleaded with the men for calm as his wife and daughter sobbed uncontrollably.

The troops are not taking any chances after it was revealed that Iraqi soldiers wearing civilian clothes are ambushing soldiers and using families as human shields.

But this family turned out to be innocent.

[thumb=B]kids.JPG[/thumb]

FEAR: Innocent Iraqi boys look terrified as marines search their house

The pictures are a far cry from the ones beamed across the world 24 hours earlier of troops met by waving crowds as they rolled into Baghdad.

While they may be winning the war, the battle to win the Iraqi people’s hearts and minds is far from won.

The article says it all. “Blackmailing people into accepting food from the hands of invading soldiers, or starving to death”.

U.S. and Britain lose Arab hearts and minds](Yahoo is part of the Yahoo family of brands.)

AMMAN (Reuters) - The United States and Britain may be winning over hungry and thirsty people in southern Iraq, but they appear to be losing hearts and minds in other parts of the Middle East among Arabs angered at the war on Iraq.

Fury - not food - is fuelling the response of many Arabs to the U.S.-led war on Iraq which is now in its third week.

“There is a heart!” exclaims a Western soldier, pointing to a disembodied organ on a battlefield strewn with body parts and corpses in a cartoon in al-Dustour newspaper. “There is a mind!” says another soldier, pointing to a piece of brain.

The “Battle to Win Iraqi Hearts and Minds” cartoon, translated into Arabic from an original by Australia-based artist Nik Scott, conveys the cynicism and anger many Arabs feel about the effects of the U.S.-led war on Iraq, commentators say.

The United States and Britain say the war launched on March 20 is intended to free Iraqis from Saddam Hussein’s rule. Even as tanks and troops swept into Baghdad, forces are remaining behind in the south keen to drive that point home with aid.

But many Arabs even in countries which are close allies of the United States and Britain are up in arms over Iraqi civilian casualties, the thousands of missiles that have bombarded Baghdad, and mistrust over the stated reasons for the war.

Some have called for an end to U.S. and British military presence in Gulf states such as Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. Others want boycotts of American and British products.

Anti-western sentiments are often completely unsolicited, even in Jordan, an ally of Washington.

“Viva Iraq!” shouts an Arab man from his car window at a group of Western reporters in a cafe in Amman. “Go to hell!” a man shouts at a Western woman on the street. “Don’t tell people you are American!” warns a taxi driver.

“Nobody should buy American products any more,” says a ladies’ apparel shop owner, when asked by two American women if there was a Nine West shoe store in Amman.

“The anger is very, very deep,” said a Western-educated upper class Jordanian woman, who declined to be named.

BOYCOTTS AND BLACKMAIL

The United States and Britain also say they chose the military option to disarm Iraq after accusing it of failing to fully cooperate with United Nations weapons inspections.

“The Arab people are very angry, frustrated and agitated because (they) chose war as the way to deal with Iraq…” Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa told the United Arab Emirates al-Khaleej newspaper in remarks published on Saturday.

Jordanian political commentator Uraib Rantawi said Arab attitudes have changed "for the worse. Anti-Americanism has increased by seeing checkpoints and civilian casualties in Iraq.

“If they (United States and Britain) want to keep their long-term interests and partnerships in the Middle East, they cannot export democracy by Apache helicopter. It will all depend on public opinion at the end of the day.”

From street protests to mosques to markets, the public opinion of which Rantawi speaks is so far not promising.

“There’s nothing to rejoice when Saddam is removed because the U.S. is going to install a puppet government in Baghdad to serve its interests. We won’t see peace as they promise but a new wave of violence,” said Suleiman Ahmed, a teacher in Oman.

Abdul-Latif Janahi, a banker in Bahrain, said he thinks the war “is aiming at controlling its (Iraq’s) oil resources.”

The reaction could turn violent. Lebanese security forces found a car packed with explosives outside a McDonald’s restaurant on the edge of Beirut on the weekend, judicial sources said, the latest in attacks on U.S. and British targets.

Saudi businessmen say sales of McDonald’s in particular have been hit and that a boycott of American products initially inspired by the Palestinian independence uprising had died down but then gained fresh momentum with the war on Iraq.

“It will take a long time for this burning hatred to die down,” said Abdul-Rahman al-Zamil, a member of the kingdom’s advisory Shura Council and chairman of the Zamil conglomerate.

“I will continue to do business with American corporations but there is a growing boycott at the grassroots level. Our children are telling us not to go to McDonald’s and our wives are boycotting American products,” he said.

**Rantawi suggested the closeness of southern Iraqis to the soldiers was opportunistic. “I think with water and food they can win their stomachs, but not their hearts and minds.”

A recent Jordan Times editorial echoed the idea that loyalty can easily be bought among those who are hungry.

“Washington’s war to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqis” was “Blackmailing people into accepting food from the hands of invading soldiers, or starving to death.” **

Great pic…

Saddam statue topples

http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=focusIraqNews&storyID=2516056

But it is hard to gauge whether the enthusiasm of a few thousand is indicative of the city’s whole population. Two brothers in the crowd said they were glad to see U.S. troops here and could not understand countries which opposed the war. “Everyone who refuses this war … why? Come here and live two days with this man,” said Basil, a bearded 25-year-old, as he pointed to the toppled statue. “And then refuse this war.”

Nadia_H,

I was being cheeky. Sorry.

Your right. Innocent until proven guilty is what I believe in.

However, a military tribunal doesn’t allow for many rights. They may not have orchestrated terrorist attacks, however I believe they were in training to learn how to orchestrate terror attacks, so seems logical that these folks would be willing participants in an act of terror. Thats the murky part though.

I’m not sure if I agree with keeping them locked up without a trial, but I am also bewildered (and angry) by them for being involved in a group that would target innocent people as revenge for their unhappiness, or as a way to try and bring about some religious ideal.

Nadia_H,

Who do you think should be in charge of this independent tribunal? It was the Americans that were targeted..should they not try them? What are your ideas?

I think we are getting pretty :topic:.

Might be giving the mods a little to much work. :wink: