Well these are a bunch of different reasons, but you still filed a wrong police report. See again? :)
And that still doesn't justify killing all truck drivers and the kid's parents.
Well..you thought the police was competent and uncorrupt..how were you to know that Boss Hogg was running the sheriff's department with Herr Das Boot, Mssr. Bertillon and COmrade Fkedupski. see now :)?
Faisal and Skhan:
At least you are now getting into the spirit of the proper dialogue. In other words, forget about pretense, talk about the merits separate and apart from pretense.
Now try to take the next step. Lay out your litany of things you think have happened in Iraq that have been so terrible as you have done in the car example. As to all of those things, weigh against it the things that would have happened with Saddam and sons firmly in control of Iraq for the next couple decades. Then try to argue that Iraq and the world would have been better off with Saddam & Sons. Methinks if you try to do that, you will end up looking like fools.
In other words, regardless of the right or wrong of the pretense for war in Iraq, the end result will be a net positive/good.
Well, no one here is defending Saddam (well, we kinda sympathize with the poor driver who almost hit 'your' child, but thats as far as I am willing to go), so the point is not whether Saddam was an angel or a monster.
The point is US misled people of the world. The intelligence was crappy and borders on incompetence and downright fiction. Admit it, fix it and move on.
No one wants Saddam back (or even in power). So thats a moot point, now. What we are looking for is an admission of misleading the world and we got it. Whether what we know now would have made a difference had we known it before the war and thus going to war, remains a matter of hypothetical conjecture and largely a matter of opinion. You can stick to yours and we can stick to ours. Happy?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *
Well, no one here is defending Saddam (well, we kinda sympathize with the poor driver who almost hit 'your' child, but thats as far as I am willing to go), so the point is not whether Saddam was an angel or a monster.
The point is US misled people of the world. The intelligence was crappy and borders on incompetence and downright fiction. Admit it, fix it and move on.
No one wants Saddam back (or even in power). So thats a moot point, now. What we are looking for is an admission of misleading the world and we got it. Whether what we know now would have made a difference had we known it before the war and thus going to war, remains a matter of hypothetical conjecture and largely a matter of opinion. You can stick to yours and we can stick to ours. Happy?
[/QUOTE]
Now you are backtracking Faisal. The question very well is whether the Iraq war is and was worth it. Whether deposing Saddam & Sons regardless of original major motive is a net benefit to the world.
Crappy and incompetent intelligence is a major issue for us to deal with because it jeopardizes our security.
The two issues are separate and distinct. IMO, the war is and was worth it AND our intelligence was crappy and incompetent. Anyone who thinks the war is not and was not worth it must be prepared to argue how an Iraq and a world with Saddam & Sons would be better than the Iraq and world we have today.
Well, glad we re-established the admission of crappy intelligence. Lets move on to your second point.
No one here is defending Saddam. If you think someone is, point it out.
Now the 10,000-dead-people question is whether despite all the proven false intelligence about his WMD and no link between Saddam and 9/11 was it still worth going to war and killing thousands of innocent Iraqis.
You think 'Yes'. Dunno whether you are sticking to that because you truly believe it or because thats the only route left for you - to defend a false war. Many others, including your own members of Congress are not too sure.
Your main point is based on the assumption that going to war and risking (and actually killing) thousands of innocent lives is the ONLY way to get rid of Saddam. You need to provide a more convincing proof of your assumption, but that probably is a new discussion, cz this one focussed on the intelligence failures by the CIA and we pretty much sync'd on that issue.
Some matters are known notwithstanding crappy intelligence.
You show me naked pyramids and I'll show you tongues removed with razor blades, people dropped live into meat grinders and mass graves.
You show me 10,000 dead Iraqis and OhioGuy will show you high multiples of that number of dead Kurds.
You show me ??? and I'll show you an invasion of Iran and Kuwait.
After ten years plus of sanctions that supposedly killed 500,000 Iraqi children but did not rid Iraq of Saddam, perhaps you could show me a more humane way to get rid of him than we chose.
[QUOTE]
I'll show you tongues removed with razor blades, people dropped live into meat grinders and mass graves.
[/QUOTE]
Plese show us.
[QUOTE]
OhioGuy will show you high multiples of that number of dead Kurds.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe OG was involved in giving away those chemcial weapons to saddam and got the opportunity to take pictures and filmed the tradgedies.
[QUOTE]
I'll show you an invasion of Iran and Kuwait.
[/QUOTE]
What does that have to do with US?
[QUOTE]
supposedly killed 500,000 Iraqi children
[/QUOTE]
Shame on your arrogant arse to dispute that, there have been dozens of independant reports that back these numbers. Sanctiosn were illegal, US was teh only country that vetoed every time a resolution came up to remove sanctions. What was the purpose of the sanctions? Remove Saddam, did it solve the problem? No, you, yes you and people like you who support these neocons killed innocnet people.
[QUOTE]
perhaps you could show me a more humane way to get rid of him than we chose
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps you can admit that going to war on false pretense was wrong and we went their for oil and nothing else. Perhaps you can admit that saddam was never a threat to its neighbors (after 1999) much less US. Perhaps you can get out of the haze and see the light, stand up and admit that US made a mistake. Is that too much to ask?
Saddam was asked to leave and he refused. The sanctions could not be removed unless Saddam was removed from power. Now if the number of those killed via "sanctions" that have been posted here and elsewhere are correct they this war by the U.S. should have been supported and demanded long ago by Muslims everywhere. Why wasn't it? Much of the arab world is taught at a very young age that America and Israel are to blame for the ills of the world and if the U.S. is doing something it must be wrong.
Back to topic, politicalizing intelligence and intelligence agencies is what’s dangerous and that is what should be 'slammed'.
Kaleem:
"Sanctions were ** illegal ???? **
Sorry bhai. But the sanctions were adopted, reviewed and reapproved time and time again by the UN Security Council in conformity with the UN Charter. So please demonstrate how the sanctions were illegal.
You write: ** "US was teh only country that vetoed every time a resolution came up to remove sanctions." **
Since you are so sure of yourself, please post the numbers of the UN Security Council Resolutions seeking to remove Iraq sanctions that the US vetoed. Come to think of it, post just a single Resolution on removing sanctions that the US vetoed. (If you promise not to come back to Gupshup until you find one, you will have to re-register under a different nickname :) ) After you conduct your search, ask yourself, "If I can be so wrong on this one, what else am I mistaken about."
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by underthedome: *
Saddam was asked to leave and he refused.
[/QUOTE]
This is truly so rude. You asked him to leave and he didn't. The bugger!
The point is Faisal that it wasn't a sneak attack. The writing was on the wall but unfortunately Saddam turned out to be dyslexic.
Illegal sanctions?
Talk about re-writing history!
Even notorious left wingers like Noel Chomsky were ADVOCATING sanctions in 1991 as an effective alternative to war! At the time sanctions were considered MORE humanitarian, and NO ONE thought that Saddam would put his people through sanctions, or that he would remain in power without someone staging a palace coup.
Now the good thing about being a commentator like Chomsky is that you can change your mind and ride whatever bandwagon is rolling down the road. Politicians have to live with the consequences of a failed policy, and do not have the luxury of changing with the winds.
Illegal Sanctions? At the time the UN was voting for them it was so that war could be AVOIDED, and the politcians were patting themselves on the back for being so humane!
I am sure Albright was showing the same humane side when she quiped that killing children was a ok.
^ You know OhioGuy, you've got to shake your head in astonishment when people come up with some of this cr*p they try to pass off as facts. The supposed "fact" becomes the articulated reason for hating/bashing America. But when you bring to their attention that the articulated "fact" is a bunch of cr*p, they don't step back to consider that since their reasons for hating/bashing America are totally false, maybe their hatred is misplaced too. Instead, it's like water off a duck's back and they happily go on justifying their conclusion with more cr*p.
Kaleem: Did you find the Resolution that the US vetoed on ending Iraq sanctions?
that is exactly what I am talking about MV. Everything that comes out of your mouth is filth and it always stinks. You have diarrhea of the mouth and keep spilling it every where you go. Did she make that statement or no? Answer the question, rather than hiding behind your filth.
Kaleem,
Please look up the context of Albrights' comments, and then note that she apogized for leaving the impression that it was somehow acceptable to have kids lives harmed. Her point was that the sanctions were tough, but a better alternative FOR the CHILDREN than war.
Now back to those "Illegal" sanctions.....
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
^ You know OhioGuy, you've got to shake your head in astonishment when people come up with some of this cr*p they try to pass off as facts. The supposed "fact" becomes the articulated reason for hating/bashing America. But when you bring to their attention that the articulated "fact" is a bunch of cr*p, they don't step back to consider that since their reasons for hating/bashing America are totally false, maybe their hatred is misplaced too. Instead, it's like water off a duck's back and they happily go on justifying their conclusion with more cr*p.
Kaleem: Did you find the Resolution that the US vetoed on ending Iraq sanctions?
[/QUOTE]
When I get home I will post some facts for your brainwashed arrognat american arse...satisfied?
Guys.. please keep it decent. Don't go into a tirade of personal insults. It was such a nice discussion till the last few posts. Gracias.