He'll most probably be prosecting when I meet him.
Yup the US means no ill to the Iraqi people, the Eagle just wants nations under it's wing.
aw, thanks, Thap. :flower1:
i am much quieter in real life than the impression i give off in these Forums.
Here are some pictures of the effects of ‘shock-and-awe’ - i trust that this is intended to reduce the likelihood of more terrorists being born and to decrease feelings of hostility towards the US:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030320/170/3kkgg.html
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030320/170/3kkds.html
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/030320/170/3kkbg.html
Iraq's 51st Infantry Division has surrendered. 8,000 soldiers near Basra.
Just a couple of links:
‘Baghdad is in flames’](BBC NEWS | Middle East | 'Baghdad is in flames'), BBC, 21 March 2003
“More or less, every single building is in flames” ~ BBC’s Paul Wood [video link]
…our lord and savior and an all around champion of rights of the little people everywhere, our brother Saddam Hussein…
:konfused: Is that how Donald Rumsfeld described his old pal when he shook his hands and dined 'n wined at his palace in the 80s? Did he like the Iraqi falafels Saddam Hussein gave him to eat?
Words of a BBC World Service reporter who is currently in Baghdad - Waiting for the bombs, BBC, 21 March 2003:
Children - especially those who witnessed the 1998 bombings - are so scared. My own eldest child is 11 years old. She is scared to death.
In 1998 one of the missiles passed by the entrance of our house - a small villa in northern Baghdad. It fell about half a kilometre away and the blast was very strong. It broke some of the windows.
From that day on she has been in such a condition you cannot imagine it. When she is asleep and hears a door banging she wakes up shouting.
This is my own daughter, but other children are the same. She also watches the news all the time. We try to keep her away from it, but it is very difficult.
…] Sorry - my wife is shouting, the bombardment has started.
This time the raid has started before the air-raid siren. The windows are shaking. I have to go.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
"More or less, every single building is in flames" ~ BBC's **
[/QUOTE]
I know these are not your words, but are you trying to imply that "more or less every single building" in Baghdad is in flames? I bet it's "less", a lot less. Nadia, is the entire city of Baghdad being systematically destroyed? Or are military and government targets being hit? Which is it? Does it make a difference? I think it makes a huge difference.
Storch, finally we agree on something. i think it makes a substantial difference, as well. How do you know that it is “less” - you are accurate that those are not my words, they are the words of a BBC reporter who happens to be in Baghdad and has a relatively first-hand view of what is occurring - probably far better than the view you and i are receiving via our tvs. If you are certain that it is “less”, then i believe that your faith and trust in your government is your right, your entitlement. Subsequent to particular events in previous years (such as al Ameriyah, Afghan wedding parties, and Iraqi shepherd children being blown to bits), i would prefer to wait until the Red Cross or Unicef officials enter the country again, and we get an independent assessment. Until then, i tend to believe first-hand reports from BBC reporters.
[quote]
** Subsequent to particular events in previous years (such as al Ameriyah, Afghan wedding parties, and Iraqi shepherd children being blown to bits...**
[/quote]
Didn't take long to find pictures of the few injured civilians. I wonder if pictures of the dead and deformed Kurds are as readily available? Or we aren't as concerned for those victims? What makes their blood any less cherished?
All the American accidental killing of civilians you list added together are only a tiny fraction of just the civilians that Hussein's gassed, never mind those he's killed by other means.
I tried the link on his story, but it didn't work. I guess I was under the impression that the author may have said something like, "more or less every single building in the presidential compound is in flames" which I find plausible. I think the attempt to frame this conflict as an impending "slaughter" of innocents or an attack on the nation (read innocent populous) has been so very successful around the world and in the U.S. It's really a shame.
When I see pictures of Halabja, babies clutched in parents arms as a direct result of a cogent decision by a single man, I know where the true madness and inhumanity lies. So direct a line of cause and horrendous, torturous effect cannot be drawn to Bush or the U.S. Govt. vis a vis the effect of sanctions on the Iraqi people. That line(s) is a spider web that touches your beloved Canada, the U.S., Europe, Asia and has Saddam squarely in the middle.
The goal is not to lay waste to all of Iraq. The goal primarily from the U.S. standpoint is to halt proliferation of WMD in Iraq in particular. An Al Queda connection is not required. It's not a new concept, the U.N. in its wisdom agree that Saddam's disarmament is desirable. It's happening, and this truly awful human being is going to be punished. Allow the ingrained anti-Americanism, and its attendant rhetoric to just wash away for a moment and mentally bludgeon Saddam. I know you say you have stated repeatedly that you don't support despots anywhere. This is a weightless disclaimer, as you never really seem to take him to task in your posts. He holds no responsibility in your posts. Just the disclaimer. Hammer away at Saddam! He personally-made babies suffer, vomit uncontrollably and die alongside their parents. George Bush I think owned a baseball team at the time.
Why is criticism of Saddam never a part of the argument? He must be. He richly deserves to be considered when forming an opinion on this conflict. How can his behavior not be a part of the context as if his presence does not influence the decsions made by those who seek his ouster? It is frightening that he is mostly regarded as inconsequential.
People who actively murder innocents, particularly children, with malice and happen the leaders of countries harbouring dangerous arsenals cannot be ignored when seeking the real truth in this matter. Nadia, you don't have to convince me of your position that the death of an innocent person is a tragedy...that wars are cruel and unjust.
Can I convince you that Saddam has a whole lot to do with the mess were in?
P.S. I know the U.S. didn't act when many of his misdeeds occurred. I know Rumsfeld met with him. Would action against Saddam at that time been justified? If not, why is this meeting bleated about constantly? Rumsfeld was one of the authors of the policy later envisioned to contain and or rid the region of him. Does that exonerate Rumsfeld from shaking his hand on a diplomatic visit years earlier?
Or we aren't as concerned for those victims?
No, that is not true Seminole. i think i have concern for every civilian's life, whether Kurdish/Iraqi/Indian/Australian/African etc.
Storch, If i may so, i almost felt sick after reading your reply. What type of a person do you think i am - don't you think i know that Saddam Hussein "made babies suffer, vomit uncontrollably and die alongside their parents" - thanks for the subtle implication that i have my head stuck in the sand in all of this. Thanks for the subtle suggestion that, besides posting disclaimers about SH, i really don't bother myself about his actions. Thanks for all the generalizations. Deeply appreciated.
>>Why is criticism of Saddam never a part of the argument?<<
Why is focus towards the people of Iraq never a part of the argument? You are so obsessed with this one man, you yourself have attached so much seeming importance to this one dictator - there is a whole country of civilians apart from this one man. Does that ever figure into your equation?
>>Would action against Saddam at that time been justified?<<
Of course. Why not?
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by storch:
P.S. I know the U.S. didn't act when many of his misdeeds occurred. I know Rumsfeld met with him. Would action against Saddam at that time been justified? If not, why is this meeting bleated about constantly? Rumsfeld was one of the authors of the policy later envisioned to contain and or rid the region of him. Does that exonerate Rumsfeld from shaking his hand on a diplomatic visit years earlier?
[/QUOTE]
It's quite simple actually. Here is a list of facts for you to counter:-
Saddam had been using chemical weapons as way back as 1983 (against Iran), but Donald Rumsfeld still met him in that year and a year later in 1984. The US continued it's ecomomic and military relationship with Saddam regardless.
The Kurds were gassed some 15 years ago in 1988, and the US government was fully aware of that fact. But they prevented Congressional condemnation of this act. The US continued it's ecomomic and military relationship with Saddam regardless.
After the Gulf War in 1991, Bush Snr called upon the Iraqi people to rise up against Saddam, and when the Shia's did they allowed tens of thousands of them to be slaughtered in Southern Iraq, even though the US army were sitting just miles away. In fact US planes took pictures of Saddam massacring the Shia's with helicopter gunships it allowed him to use in the ceasefire agreement.
Now tell in the last 15 to 20 years when Saddam has been using chemical weapons, gassing his people and gunning them down with US-authorised helicopter gunships what did the US government do? Has Donald Rumsfeld or any Reagan and Bush Snr officials come forward and apologised for their collusion, support and cover up with and for Saddam?
Here is the video of Rummy and Saddam as chums:- Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein
how conveniently people changed their belief.
the war was against terrorism
now it is to liberate Iraq because SH has gassed Kurds, killed own people etc.
he killed his own people, so we have are okay to bomb out civilians.
and in order to eliminate evil, we shall become more evil. 
DOHA, Qatar (CNN) – Six British crewmembers and one American have been killed in a mid-air collision between two British Navy Sea King helicopters over the Persian Gulf, UK Central Command in Qatar says.
Halabja is beyond sickening, Nadia. It's truly inhuman. As I've said, none of you need to convince me of the also sickening results of sanctions on Iraqi kids, the tragedy of "collateral damage". I'm with you. These are senseless tragedies. What is so profoundly frustrating is that Saddam's culpability does not seem to be a serious consideration when weighing the issue. It leaves many of us to believe that in many cases it boils down to a bizzare allegeiance to Saddam if only because he is at odds with the U.S. or because of cultural ties. How else can we interperet the failure to hold him in any way responsible for the state of Iraq prior to this conflict and now that we are in the midst of it?
The Iraqi people are indeed factored into my feelings. Innocent civilians are most certainly on my mind. I really hoped that first night that bombing that house was going to be the end of it. Iraq needs to be rid of Saddam.
So, I would argue that my consideration of the topic does include many of your concerns about the loss of innocent life. On the other hand, I have not seen a willingness on your part to hold Saddam accountable in any substantive way. I don't agree with your position that an attack on the regime can be interpreted as a murderous, thoughtless attack on the civilians of Iraq.
I will never be accused of being overly polite in my posts. I'm not deferential and use no smilies or flowers. I think I hound you every once in a while because it seems to me you have cultivated a persona here of resident empath, reasonable and open minded. In fact I have learned much on this board and altered my views on some issues. However, on the issue of Saddam's responsibility to the people of Iraq I think you're quite wrong not to give it due consideration.
Harsh, I know. But I feel the need to be plain and direct on this issue particular.
**‘You’re late. What took you so long? God help you become victorious’
‘I want to say hello to Bush, to shake his hand’ **
James Meek in Safwan
Saturday March 22, 2003
The Guardian
Yesterday afternoon a truck drove down a side road in the Iraqi town of Safwan, laden with rugs and furniture. Booty or precious possessions? In a day of death, joy and looting, it was hard to know.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by storch: *
Halabja is beyond sickening, Nadia.
[/QUOTE]
What is your defination for Hiroshima and Nagasaki
Live BBC CAM: (Umm Qasr)
CAMP AS SAYLIYAH, Qatar - A U.S. Patriot missile may have shot down a British Royal Air Force plane that was reported missing near Kuwait on Sunday, U.S. and British officials said.