PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Deadly Hamster on May 07, 2004, 01:41:34 PM
-
-----------------------------
ANTIOCH, California (Reuters) - Three U.S. military policemen who served at Baghdad\'s Abu Ghraib prison said on Thursday they had witnessed unreported cases of prisoner abuse and that the practice against Iraqis was commonplace.
"It is a common thing to abuse prisoners," said Sgt. Mike Sindar, 25, of the Army National Guard\'s 870th Military Police Company based in the San Francisco Bay area. "I saw beatings all the time.
---------------------------------
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?floc=NW_1-T&oldflok=FF-RTO-rontz&idq=/ff/story/0002%2F20040507%2F0741856132.htm&sc=rontz
Sounds like this stuff wasn\'t as isolated as everyone originally thought, pretty scarey that this might be happening at other prisons too!
-
Hopefully only good will come out of this, in the end.
And hopefully the bitches that did this will get what they deserve, crimes against humanitarian law should have serious punishment.
Also, I admire the man who stepped forward and let the light shine on this (most likely) big problem.
-
As long as he is singing to be a good human instead of saving his own ass.
-
to hell with the iraqi prioners
how did they treat our pow\'s?
how do they treat foriegn news correspondants? oh yeah, they slay them, strip them naked and drag them down the street with a car
:rolleyes:
-
Sorry, but "an eye for an eye" went out with The Code of Hammurabi (http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/CODE.HTM)
-
Uh huh.... you use that as a reason to invade iraq then you justify the same thing when it\'s done by us? (talking to mm)
-
peronally, if i was in charge, i wouldn\'t have touched iraq
let those degenerates genocide themselves like they\'ve done for centuries
-
I guess that means you won\'t be voting for GW Bush. :)
PS Check out the cover of The Economist, I just got mine:
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.economist.com%2Fimages%2F20040508%2F20040508issuecov.jpg&hash=31d925ffebac207016c5b52adf11ef58027ebcb0)
-
I think that every country will eventually stabelize itself and form some sort of government where atleast a weak-form of equality exists, some places just might take longer.
Trying to shove the process a long only creates problems.
-
im not voting for either, im registered independant
like it matter anyways
-
I don\'t understand why ppl are making a big deal of this. This isn\'t something new. There\'s just more camcorders in the world today.
-
Probably because it is wrong. Just like when our soldiers or contractors over there are treated like shit.
-
wrong? show me the 1500 mile march thru the snow, or the gas ovens, or the cross lines roads, or even the mass burial pits
now thats wrong
-
Headlines in Arab newspapers tomorrow:
"mm says: What\'s the big deal? At least we\'re not as bad as the Nazis!"
:rolleyes:
-
^^^
Nice.
I\'ll tell you what is wrong with this. We, Americans, are being labeled as hypocrites. Bush spoke of peace and love for those people and what do they get?
It doesn\'t say much when you back up cruel events like that with "so they did it too!" statements. It doesn\'t say much about us, our country and our values.
-
i\'ll make sure i shed a tear for the poor iraqi prisoners tonight, my heart bleeds for thier comfort while they attempted to kill our soldiers (or blow up buses full of innocent people)
-
mm\'s reasoning is not too different then what most of American\'s think.
What do they think?
Americans > Iraqis
not
Americans = Iraqis
BUT
1 American soldier > 10 Iraqi Civilians
I don\'t see how one human is any higher then another
-
wrong
coalition soldiers > iraqi soldiers
iraqi soldiers < iraqi civilians
strapping bombs to kids to detonate in public markets is hardly "human"
-
I just don\'t like the news of 2 coalition soldiers getting killed get front page news but 60 civilians being blown to bits by a suicide bomb just runs along the bottom of the screen
BTW, more Iraqis are getting killed by the suicide bombers then Americans
-
because the 60 civilians being blown to bits by a suicide bomb just runs along the bottom of the screen is a daily event over there
it\'s thier way of life
-
Originally posted by mm
to hell with the iraqi prioners
how did they treat our pow\'s?
how do they treat foriegn news correspondants? oh yeah, they slay them, strip them naked and drag them down the street with a car
:rolleyes:
Ever heard the phrase "two wrong\'s , don\'t make a right"? I sure hope you have. We are suppose to be the civil people, but we are acting far from it over there.
-
LIC please dont confuse a soldier with a normal person
especially a soldier over thier fighting against those animals.
i don\'t know another way to say this, but THIS IS WAR
patton would kick your lilly ass if he saw you guys crying over the poor, dirty iraqi soldiers. you know they give guns to 8 year old children and tell them allah will reward them for shooting US citizens?
this is NO civility during war, especially a fukn jihad. ask the 911 victims where the thier civility is
you think the coalition soldiers that are captured are put up in a 5 star hotel?
as i said before, when\'s the last time you EVER saw a US troop take a forigen news correspondant hostage and kill them (like the iraqi troops do repeatedly)
oh..never :rolleyes:
civility, my ass. there\'s not even human
-
Originally posted by mm
as i said before, when\'s the last time you EVER saw a US troop take a forigen news correspondant hostage and kill them (like the iraqi troops do repeatedly)
I haven\'t...but I have seen U.S. troops take Iraqis to prison and make them have oral sex.
But I guess the forigennews correspondant thing is worst so its all good
-
Originally posted by alliswell
mm\'s reasoning is not too different then what most of American\'s think.
What do they think?
Americans > Iraqis
not
Americans = Iraqis
The website "the daily telegraph" proves my point...
Good ol\' girl who enjoyed cruelty
By SHARON CHURCHER in Fort Ashby
May 7, 2004
POINTING crudely at the genitals of a naked, hooded Iraqi, the petite brunette with a cigarette hanging from her lips epitomised America\'s shame over revelations US soldiers routinely tortured inmates at Abu Ghraib jail near Baghdad.
Lynndie England, 21, a rail worker\'s daughter, comes from a trailer park in Fort Ashby, West Virginia, which locals proudly call "a backwoods world".
She faces a court martial, but at home she is toasted as a hero.
At the dingy Corner Club Saloon they think she has done nothing wrong.
"A lot of people here think they ought to just blow up the whole of Iraq," Colleen Kesner said.
"To the country boys here, if you\'re a different nationality, a different race, you\'re sub-human. That\'s the way girls like Lynndie are raised.
"Tormenting Iraqis, in her mind, would be no different from shooting a turkey. Every season here you\'re hunting something. Over there, they\'re hunting Iraqis."
In Fort Ashby, in the isolated Appalachian mountains 260km west of Washington, the poor, barely-educated and almost all-white population talk openly about an active Ku Klux Klan presence.
There is little understanding of the issues in Iraq and less of why photographs showing soldiers from the 372nd Military Police Company, mostly from around Fort Ashby, abusing prisoners has caused a furore.
Like many, England signed up to make money and see the world. After her tour of duty, she planned to settle down and marry her first love, Charles Graner.
Down a dirt track at the edge of town, in the trailer where England grew up, her mother Terrie dismissed the allegations against her daughter as unfair.
"They were just doing stupid kid things, pranks. And what the Iraqis do to our men and women are just? The rules of the Geneva Convention, do they apply to everybody or just us?" she asked.
She said she didn\'t know where her daughter was being held, but had spoken to her on the phone.
"She told me nothing happened which wasn\'t ordered by higher up," she said.
"They are trying to pin all of this on the lower ranks. My daughter was just following orders. I think there\'s a conspiracy. "
A colleague of Lynndie\'s father said people in Fort Ashby were sick of the whingeing.
"We just had an 18-year-old from round here killed by the Iraqis," he said.
"We went there to help the jackasses and they started blowing us up. Lynndie didn\'t kill \'em, she didn\'t cut \'em up. She should have shot some of the suckers." [/b]
-
Originally posted by mm
i\'ll make sure i shed a tear for the poor iraqi prisoners tonight, my heart bleeds for thier comfort while they attempted to kill our soldiers (or blow up buses full of innocent people)
Nobody wants your tears, why are we there in the first place? to liberate them? did they ask for it? or did Uncle Bush have a hard-on for getting into Iraq when his administration began?
If the USA didn\'t invade Iraq, no American soldier would have been killed there. No civilians in Iraq would be killed, nobody would have been kidnapped.
-
but saddam would be be committing genocide without noone to repremand him for it
I haven\'t...but I have seen U.S. troops take Iraqis to prison and make them have oral sex.
oh really!, i had no idea you were over there
bro, im not beleiving shit from a website called "the daily telegraph".
-
Originally posted by mm
but saddam would be be committing genocide without noone to repremand him for it
oh really!, i had no idea you were over there
bro, im not beleiving shit from a website called "the daily telegraph".
there are other countries committing genocide & you don\'t see the u.s. rushing to aid them...point is the u.s. are supposed to be the civilized party & yes it is war, but those soldiers are supposed to maintain a level of professionalism regardless if the iraqi prisoners are yelling profanities or what have you..and lets not forget why we went to war in the first place..for wmd\'s... my oh my whatever happened to that topic?,...not to liberate the iraqi people..:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by mm
but saddam would be be committing genocide without noone to repremand him for it
oh really!, i had no idea you were over there
bro, im not beleiving shit from a website called "the daily telegraph".
Since you apparently didn\'t know, The Daily Telegraph is a respected english newspaper that has been published since 1855. It\'s known as a conservative news source in the UK, so it should be to your liking.
The pro-war contingent in this forum and in the US seems to enjoy using whatever excuse is convenient to justify our agression in Iraq. First it was a fictional connection to Al Qaida, then a fictional stockpile of WMDs, followed by a pressing need to oust a dictator... Please don\'t expect me to believe for a minute that you care about Saddam\'s oppression of the Iraqi people. You already called them "animals" and said "they\'re not even human" in this very thread. This must be how you\'re able to ignore and downplay war crimes like those our own military forces have been committing.
I think the whole reason so many people claim to still support this war is because they (like mm) can\'t admit that WE SCREWED UP. It becomes more personal, because every one of these Bush war supporters has to admit not just that US policy blew it, but they personally blew it. They voted for Bush, they swallowed his lies, along with all the other BS spewed by Rumsfeld and Powell and Rice, they argued the points with their friends. Now in the face of all logic and reason, they have to continue bailing water out of a sinking ship because to do otherwise would make them look like a COMPLETE IDIOT. Some people have a hard time admitting when they\'re wrong.
-
Now come on clips we can\'t help everyone. Iraq has a vital resource so they get first priority ;)
-
Originally posted by Coredweller
Since you apparently didn\'t know, The Daily Telegraph is a respected english newspaper that has been published since 1855. It\'s known as a conservative news source in the UK, so it should be to your liking.
The pro-war contingent in this forum and in the US seems to enjoy using whatever excuse is convenient to justify our agression in Iraq. First it was a fictional connection to Al Qaida,
I stopped reading here ^.
No offense Core, it started out as a good post, but the connection to terrorism has already been established - whether it be Al Qaida or some other offshoot.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
I stopped reading here ^.
No offense Core, it started out as a good post, but the connection to terrorism has already been established - whether it be Al Qaida or some other offshoot.
I believe in my original post I said "fictional connection to Al Qaida" not "fictional connection to some terrorist offshoot." I was trying to call attention to the Bush administration\'s LIES that Saddam\'s government had a connection to the very organization that executed the 9/11 attacks. Our executive branch made undeniable statements to this effect, contrary to what their own intelligence reports were telling them, all in an effort to increase public support for the impending war. Some people believed the lies, and now to give up support for the war would require them to admit they were suckered.
BTW, if there\'s proof of some other terrorist connection, please post it. I may be behind in my news gathering.
-
"While the influence of foreign fighters has become a problem during America\'s occupation of Iraq, it\'s not a new one. One of the Bush team\'s arguments for invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was the presence of the Ansar al Islam group, who dominated a region in northeastern Iraq near the town of Halabja, by the Iranian border. And Ansar was a problem. During the war, teams from the 3rd Army Special Forces group fought pitched battles against Ansar, destroying their terrorist training camp after four days of fighting."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/993622/posts
It is a conservative news source, but in its defense it is dated October of 2003.
In any event, Ansar al Islam who is connected to Al Qaida was operating in Iraq prior to the war.
-
Plus, the ricin plant and the funding of terrorist groups...
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
"While the influence of foreign fighters has become a problem during America\'s occupation of Iraq, it\'s not a new one. One of the Bush team\'s arguments for invading Iraq and deposing Saddam Hussein was the presence of the Ansar al Islam group, who dominated a region in northeastern Iraq near the town of Halabja, by the Iranian border. And Ansar was a problem. During the war, teams from the 3rd Army Special Forces group fought pitched battles against Ansar, destroying their terrorist training camp after four days of fighting."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/993622/posts
It is a conservative news source, but in its defense it is dated October of 2003.
In any event, Ansar al Islam who is connected to Al Qaida was operating in Iraq prior to the war.
but giga that does not mean saddam knew about it..the same can be said for idle cells that are residing in the u.s. right now...does the pres. know about it? of course not..would the pres. condone them bein\' here? again no...as far as saddam is concerned i don\'t know whether he knew about it or not, it\'s probably along the lines of he didn\'t give a f**k...but that doesn\'t connect him to al queda...
-
Terrorists are Terrorists, and there are Terroists who we pay no attention too. If you want to fight terrorism you have to fight ALL terrorism, not only those who target you or your allies.
-
Dont ever poop your pants in Iraq, take it from me.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Now come on clips we can\'t help everyone. Iraq has a vital resource so they get first priority ;)
So is it just coincidence that we almost only get involved when we have something to gain?
http://www.psx2central.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=33590
-
Originally posted by clips
but giga that does not mean saddam knew about it..the same can be said for idle cells that are residing in the u.s. right now...does the pres. know about it? of course not..would the pres. condone them bein\' here? again no...as far as saddam is concerned i don\'t know whether he knew about it or not, it\'s probably along the lines of he didn\'t give a f**k...but that doesn\'t connect him to al queda...
It was known that Saddem despised Bin Laden and the feeling was more than mutual by ol\' Bin Hidin\'
As for terrorist cells within Iraq, he probably didnt car as long as they didnt affect his money or power.
-
So Saddam didnt\' know about it? That\'s a laugh... he was a dictator with an elaborate internal security network... don\'t insult our intelligence clips. They wouldn\'t have been there if Saddam didn\'t want them there.
Tsina why should America give a damn about another country if it doesn\'t benefit us? To hell with other countries - why does it seem only worthwhile to liberals when it doesn\'t benefit the US. Being the most GENEROUS country in the world has gotten us nowhere. That is a little fact people like you tend to forget - the amount of foreign aid, the amount of money we pay to various UN agencies, the amount of humanitarian aid is staggering - yet it isn\'t enough for people like you.
I have yet to see one positive thing posted about the US by liberals on this board. It is sickening that if you are on the left side of politics in this country these days that you have such a negative outlook on your own country. Prisoner abuse? It has gone on since the beginning of time and every civilization and country has done it to some extent - why is the US held to such high standards and no other country? This so called abuse of prisoners doesn\'t effect my perception of this country and the military and frankly I couldn\'t give a flying f*** what the rest of the socialist world thinks. Be thankful for what freedoms and opportunities you have in this country and stop worrying about what our perception is with other countries.
-
giga even if saddam did know i don\'t think he would have cared..like tsina said as long as he wasn\'t cuttin in on his action saddam probably didn\'t care...on the point of why should america give a damn about another country....you\'re right they shouldn\'t that\'s why the u.s. shouldn\'t try to run that weak rhetoric that they care about the iraqi people when they do not...they could care less about the iraqi people...they just want to make sure they have soild hold on the region....
and on your 3rd point i already have pointed out countless times why the u.s. doing this to those prisoners hurts them more than them saying "look they have done it to us!" you can\'t say we are liberators--which you pointed out indirectly by stating we have an interest in iraq...then turn around & do shit like that..it\'s common sense..i can\'t belive i\'m entertaining this for like the 8th time....it\'s like spies..the u.s. russia everybody has \'em but if one gets caught it\'s kind of a bad pr for that country...so yes it happens but like i said before if you get caught you just have to suck it up & face the music...maybe that last example with the spies isn\'t the greatest but maybe you get my point....
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Tsina why should America give a damn about another country if it doesn\'t benefit us? To hell with other countries - why does it seem only worthwhile to liberals when it doesn\'t benefit the US. Being the most GENEROUS country in the world has gotten us nowhere. That is a little fact people like you tend to forget - the amount of foreign aid, the amount of money we pay to various UN agencies, the amount of humanitarian aid is staggering - yet it isn\'t enough for people like you.
I have yet to see one positive thing posted about the US by liberals on this board. It is sickening that if you are on the left side of politics in this country these days that you have such a negative outlook on your own country. Prisoner abuse? It has gone on since the beginning of time and every civilization and country has done it to some extent - why is the US held to such high standards and no other country? This so called abuse of prisoners doesn\'t effect my perception of this country and the military and frankly I couldn\'t give a flying f*** what the rest of the socialist world thinks. Be thankful for what freedoms and opportunities you have in this country and stop worrying about what our perception is with other countries.
I never said we should one way or another. That\'s exactly where we agree, the hell with other countries. We should help ourseleves before ANYONE else and we hardly do. We say we are but in fact aren\'t really doing shit for ourseleves when we get involved overseas. Afghan. was understanable as that was basically al-queda\'s "homeland"
People like me??? You talk about me and my assumptions/generalizations, yet it is you that does it this time no? I say we cut most of them completely off. We should feed our people, then when we have very few starving people, then we can start to worry about feeding other countries. Once again, people like me? I dont agree or condone with anything you stated in that first paragraph. Sorry for ya.....
I have a negative outlook on our country as we attempt to be the end all on how people should act, but in reality rarely do we act any better than anyone else short of suicide bombings. We are held to those standards as those are the same standards we demand of most everyone else in the world.
I love what we have compared to other nations and Im saddend by what they regulate so strongly in certain instances. The only time I care what we look like to the rest of the world is when we try to impose that same standard on others like we dont have to follow our own advice.
-
Originally posted by TSina
I never said we should one way or another. That\'s exactly where we agree, the hell with other countries. We should help ourseleves before ANYONE else and we hardly do. We say we are but in fact aren\'t really doing shit for ourseleves when we get involved overseas. Afghan. was understanable as that was basically al-queda\'s "homeland"
Warning contradiction coming... I dont agree or condone with anything you stated in that first paragraph. Sorry for ya.....
I have a negative outlook on our country as we attempt to be the end all on how people should act, but in reality rarely do we act any better than anyone else short of suicide bombings. We are held to those standards as those are the same standards we demand of most everyone else in the world.
I love what we have compared to other nations and Im saddend by what they regulate so strongly in certain instances. The only time I care what we look like to the rest of the world is when we try to impose that same standard on others like we dont have to follow our own advice.
You contradict yourself in saying you agree with me in your second sentence and then in your second paragraph you say you "don\'t agree or condone ANYTHING I stated in that first paragraph" Are you on medication?
Our current situations abroad are in the best interest of this country. Why not fight Islamic fundamentalists on their home territory as opposed to here? Also something I find interesting... clips - has anyone else noticed the number of coordinated attacks on our soldiers has dropped since these "abuse" :rolleyes: stories have come out? Of course nothing positive could come out of such terrible disgusting torture... :rolleyes:
So much for facing the music... really - where are you guys when these people commit REAL human rights violations?
-
giga it is clear that you support bush no-matter what..even tho i was against the war, there have been a few times where i was actually in favor of some of the coalition deeds...numerous times i\'ve stated these insurgents just need to relax and let the u.s. do their thing...i look at both sides of the spectrum..they would love you over at fox news...as far as the topic at hand, nobody is going to deny these insurgents have committed atrocious acts..but you have to remember not all iraqis hate the u.s. some are greatful that we are there..
so these same iraqis that are fond of us bein there were just as upset when those soldiers were hung & dragged in the streets..that said what do you think the reaction will be when they see the u.s. (the so-called liberators:rolleyes: ) turn around and do s**t like that...there should be swift discipline to those that committed these acts & move on to the next stage of the war...
-
Originally posted by clips
giga it is clear that you support bush no-matter what..even tho i was against the war, there have been a few times where i was actually in favor of some of the coalition deeds...numerous times i\'ve stated these insurgents just need to relax and let the u.s. do their thing...i look at both sides of the spectrum..they would love you over at fox news...as far as the topic at hand, nobody is going to deny these insurgents have committed atrocious acts..but you have to remember not all iraqis hate the u.s. some are greatful that we are there..
so these same iraqis that are fond of us bein there were just as upset when those soldiers were hung & dragged in the streets..that said what do you think the reaction will be when they see the u.s. (the so-called liberators:rolleyes: ) turn around and do s**t like that...there should be swift discipline to those that committed these acts & move on to the next stage of the war...
No I don\'t support Bush "no matter what". I don\'t care who is in office - this is regarding supporting our troops and the situation in Iraq. I don\'t like indecisive people and these times and the current situation call for decisive actions.
I just find it disturbing that a significant number of Americans want to see us fail and relish any bad news that comes out the region. I am not the die hard Republican you think I am... if I was I would most certainly change my avatar to this:
:rolleyes:
-
i do support our troops that is not even an issue..the issue with me is that i do not support the war..but you can\'t sit there and blindly believe that the war was necessary,..clearly it wasn\'t,..saddam wasn\'t a threat to anybody & the sanctions was keepin him in check..british & u.s. fighter planes were bombing strategic targets from time to time...i can understand afganistan (spell) cause clearly me and just about everybody else wanted some action after 911...and it was a FACT that bin laden was in the immediate area...
it\'s ok to support the troops but it\'s not ok to blindly follow the pres..into a war that was not needed...numerous times he\'s back peddled from saddam having wmd\'s to wmd programs to having the ability to make them, then out of no-where we became liberators:rolleyes:...
-
Originally posted by clips
it\'s ok to support the troops but it\'s not ok to blindly follow the pres..into a war that was not needed...numerous times he\'s back peddled from saddam having wmd\'s to wmd programs to having the ability to make them, then out of no-where we became liberators:rolleyes:...
I beg to differ - the war was needed and it was not about WMD. He has backpeddled numerous times? It was the CIA that made that claim of WMD and the President can only rely on the information he receives. The war was about removing a dictator who did pose a threat to region. Since most of the world\'s crude comes from that region and the industrialized nations rely on it so heavily, I do think it was important.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
You contradict yourself in saying you agree with me in your second sentence and then in your second paragraph you say you "don\'t agree or condone ANYTHING I stated in that first paragraph" Are you on medication?
Our current situations abroad are in the best interest of this country. Why not fight Islamic fundamentalists on their home territory as opposed to here? Also something I find interesting... clips - has anyone else noticed the number of coordinated attacks on our soldiers has dropped since these "abuse" :rolleyes: stories have come out? Of course nothing positive could come out of such terrible disgusting torture... :rolleyes:
So much for facing the music... really - where are you guys when these people commit REAL human rights violations?
Actually, I was on meds yesterday and drowsy as hell. I\'ve been sick for the last 2 days :D
I\'m also now used to just arguing with you.
I just re-read everything I wrote and some of it was kinda hard for me to read, I\'ll fix it soon.
I think you get what I was saying, but instead you choose to split hairs again.
Half or more of the fanatics we are fighting now, we wouldn\'t have had to fight unless we didn\'t invade Iraq. Did you think about that?
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
I beg to differ - the war was needed and it was not about WMD. He has backpeddled numerous times? It was the CIA that made that claim of WMD and the President can only rely on the information he receives. The war was about removing a dictator who did pose a threat to region. Since most of the world\'s crude comes from that region and the industrialized nations rely on it so heavily, I do think it was important.
so you\'re sayin the pres didn\'t soley state this war on the fact that saddam had wmd\'s? i\'m surprised you\'re sayin this..from what you just stated above it seems like the u.s. went to war for the oil after all....the wmd factor was bush\'s main reason for invading iraq. it was almost as if he made iraq an imminent threat & it wasn\'t like iraq had the oil franchise on lock..there was the oil for food program that was bein enforced...now i know you are going to say even that program was corrupted..maybe it was but the fact still remains he wasn\'t keepin the oil to himself...
if saddam was a threat to anybody it was his own people...and if that\'s the way he runs his country so be it...
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
I beg to differ - the war was needed and it was not about WMD. He has backpeddled numerous times? It was the CIA that made that claim of WMD and the President can only rely on the information he receives. The war was about removing a dictator who did pose a threat to region. Since most of the world\'s crude comes from that region and the industrialized nations rely on it so heavily, I do think it was important.
It wasn\'t needed at the time we went to war. We should have continued to focus of afghan. He has backpeddled. I know you support Bush with anything he does, but even you have to remember the things he said and abruptly changed.
CIA or not that gave him the info, he is our president, he needs to be damn sure of what is relayed is true or get better info gatherers out there. These are lives and billions of dollars he is playing with.
You are correct, it WAS about removing a dictator after WMD\'s was found to be basically a figment of their imaginations. Then after the dictator was removed. No it\'s about maintaining control. What will it be about next?
Just like I tell the people t hat say this was about oil. WHy do the prices continue to rise even though production of crude has been stepped up?
It would have been important if there was any real link to what was happening on our shores directly being tied to Iraq, but there wasn\'t untill after we set foot into Iraq. We didn\'t have to worry about this crazy cleric untill then. I dont remember his name ever being mentioned untill they wanted us out of that shithole.
-
Originally posted by clips
there was the oil for food program that was bein enforced...now i know you are going to say even that program was corrupted..maybe it was but the fact still remains he wasn\'t keepin the oil to himself...
if saddam was a threat to anybody it was his own people...and if that\'s the way he runs his country so be it...
Slow down gymshoe, oil for food has been corrupted shortly after it was started and they found away around it.
Even I have to agree with that one. :) sorry.
Saddam could run his country anyway he wants to short of invading people again as far as Im concerned. I wouldnt want anyone to come over here telling us our leader is no good for us. I have the option to try to over throw with the rest of the angry, or just leave.
-
Originally posted by TSina
It wasn\'t needed at the time we went to war. We should have continued to focus of afghan. He has backpeddled. I know you support Bush with anything he does, but even you have to remember the things he said and abruptly changed.
CIA or not that gave him the info, he is our president, he needs to be damn sure of what is relayed is true or get better info gatherers out there. These are lives and billions of dollars he is playing with.
You are correct, it WAS about removing a dictator after WMD\'s was found to be basically a figment of their imaginations. Then after the dictator was removed. No it\'s about maintaining control. What will it be about next?
Just like I tell the people t hat say this was about oil. WHy do the prices continue to rise even though production of crude has been stepped up?
It would have been important if there was any real link to what was happening on our shores directly being tied to Iraq, but there wasn\'t untill after we set foot into Iraq. We didn\'t have to worry about this crazy cleric untill then. I dont remember his name ever being mentioned untill they wanted us out of that shithole.
Do a search I never said it was about WMD\'s. ;)
Also you rely on other people for information. If you have ever been in a leadership position you would know this - I don\'t fault Bush for the CIA\'s mistake. I didn\'t know that being omnipotent was a prerequisite for being President. As for your claim that I support everything Bush says - you need to reread some of my posts.
That nutty cleric would have been around regardless whether it was in Iraq or in another Middle Eastern country.
-
Originally posted by TSina
Slow down gymshoe, oil for food has been corrupted shortly after it was started and they found away around it.
Even I have to agree with that one. :) sorry.
Saddam could run his country anyway he wants to short of invading people again as far as Im concerned. I wouldnt want anyone to come over here telling us our leader is no good for us. I have the option to try to over throw with the rest of the angry, or just leave.
i know saddam used the food to feed only his immediate family & his soldiers...the point i was making is that oil was still coming out of iraq and that he wasn\'t keeping the oil to himself...oil was still being purchased by the civilized world...
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Do a search I never said it was about WMD\'s. ;)
Also you rely on other people for information. If you have ever been in a leadership position you would know this - I don\'t fault Bush for the CIA\'s mistake. I didn\'t know that being omnipotent was a prerequisite for being President. As for your claim that I support everything Bush says - you need to reread some of my posts.
That nutty cleric would have been around regardless whether it was in Iraq or in another Middle Eastern country.
exactly YOU didn\'t say it was about wmd\'s the pres did...even colin powell didn\'t agree with the findings at first..they just molded him into playing for the home team...
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
Do a search I never said it was about WMD\'s. ;)
Also you rely on other people for information. If you have ever been in a leadership position you would know this - I don\'t fault Bush for the CIA\'s mistake. I didn\'t know that being omnipotent was a prerequisite for being President. As for your claim that I support everything Bush says - you need to reread some of my posts.
That nutty cleric would have been around regardless whether it was in Iraq or in another Middle Eastern country.
When I am in that position, I make sure to the best of my ability that said info is the correct info. I just don\'t see Bush doing that. I also didn\'t hear of too many heads rolling after said mis-information, which would also be a fault of Bush right? Nothing was done about this whether he thought it was the correct info or not.
That nutty cleric was also not a problem untill when? Untill we invaded Iraq to oust Saddam. He may have not liked the US, but he was a sleeping dog. I see plenty of dogs behind fences that look mean or are mean, I dont throw rocks at them or poke them with sticks.
-
Originally posted by clips
exactly YOU didn\'t say it was about wmd\'s the pres did...even colin powell didn\'t agree with the findings at first..they just molded him into playing for the home team...
But didn\'t you say I agreed with everything Bush said? :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by TSina
WHen I am in that posistion, I make sure to the best of my ability that said info is the correct info. I just don\'t see Bush doing that. I also didn\'t here of too many heads rolling after said mis-information, which would also be a fault of Bush right? Nothing was done about this whether he thought it was the correct info or not.
That nutty cleric was also not a problem untill when? Untill we invaded Iraq to oust Saddam. He may have not liked the US, but he was a sleeping dog. I see plenty of dogs behind fences that look mean or are mean, I dont throw rocks at them or poke them with sticks.
The President isn\'t soley responsible for checking information and "punishing" those who provide incorrect data. Congress also has the power to "make heads roll" - stop the blame game Tsina - your weak excuse for being on meds hasn\'t made your arguments any clearer.
Hindsight is always 20/20. This cleric isn\'t nearly the threat you are making him out to be. He has the support of a small percentage of Shiites.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
The President isn\'t soley responsible for checking information and "punishing" those who provide incorrect data. Congress also has the power to "make heads roll" - stop the blame game Tsina - your weak excuse for being on meds hasn\'t made your arguments any clearer.
Hindsight is always 20/20. This cleric isn\'t nearly the threat you are making him out to be.
His opinions or actions aren\'t seriously taken into consideration? No responsibility has been taken by anyone.
Im not on meds now anyway, that was yesterday. I won\'t be taking any untill later, thanx for your concern.
Thats what the bush people always say..hindsight..blah blah. Im not saying he is all at fault. But why hasnt any responsibility been taken?
Are you assuming Im making him into a big threat? He is however a threat at the moment. He wasnt a threat beforehand.
-
Originally posted by TSina
His opinions or actions aren\'t seriously taken into consideration? No responsibility has been taken by anyone.
Im not on meds now anyway, that was yesterday. I won\'t be taking any untill later, thanx for your concern.
Thats what the bush people always say..hindsight..blah blah. Im not saying he is all at fault. But why hasnt any responsibility been taken?
Are you assuming Im making him into a big threat? He is however a threat at the moment. He wasnt a threat beforehand.
Right - so why are you blaming Bush and not Congress as well? The fact is you are exploiting what you already know and blaming a politician you don\'t like - don\'t try and pawn it off as only "Bush people". John Kerry is the king of indecisiveness and irresponsiblity. I suppose in hindsight he shouldn\'t have said he committed atrocities in Vietnam or thrown his medals away that are now strangely hanging in his DC office.
Just think we will have four more years of Bush even if the people in West Palm beach can read a ballot this time around.
-
Originally posted by GigaShadow
But didn\'t you say I agreed with everything Bush said? :rolleyes:
:laughing: that is classic giga right there! in your theme of speech it seems you find no faults with how the war has unraveled just ignore all the bad situations & support our troops...to make an accuasation (spell) with the threat of war..your info better be correct..how would you feel if russia stated "we know you have that star wars project..disarm it or else" those are strong words and just imagine how the people if iraq must have felt in the hours before the bombs dropped....
something like that will seriously work on your mental...if bush didn\'t believe saddam when he stated he didn\'t have wmd\'s he should have let the inspectors do their thing..even then if he didn\'t believe them they could always resort to all that image capturing from space that showed them moving the dreaded wmd\'s :rolleyes:
-
In all fairness, the inspectors weren\'t really doing shit.
If anything, they should have had HEAVY US armed support. I would have went for that, but without war.
I do agree with the satellite imagery though, but that also has downsides.
These satellites can cleary see a dime on the ground.
Yet if they are constantly moving things to places, sometimes under camo- covers, you really can\'t see anything anyway.
-
it also seems north korea magically fell off the map..i remember them threatning the u.s. with "we will bring death to the u.s.!" but bush responded "uhm..let\'s find a diplomatic solution with them..:rolleyes: " yea i know n.korea has nukes but still thats how you respond to a threat like that? when we had no problem tossin bombs over a weak military like iraq....
*tsina i agree with you as far as the satellite images are concerned since they are looking down on objects that tends to be true..but i feel the inspectors should have been given more time....who knows maybe those the soldiers of the war (past & present) wouldn\'t have had to sacrifice their lives...
-
Well, they had plenty of time in the past.
Time with the new administration pushing for a war however, no.