I thought Iraq didn't have any WMD

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by August

We were told there were no WMD's in Iraq. Obviously that isn't true.

Well you should know what Iraq had at that time, he received it all from you and the NATO. And how we liked Saddam very much while he kept on attacking his neighbours, until he turned towards Saudi Arabia. Also Iraq and Turkey had tried to gas the Curds, along their frontiers. Is that gas a weapon of mass destruction ? I think it depends on whether you are a weapons contractor, the UN or a Marine, or an ordinary man with common sense.
Indeed i think the normal population had a more civilized life back then, than it has now. Saddam did not care about religion at all, he was a good, dependable dictator for decades, all doing business with him and sending him weapons of all kinds. Just like with Ghaddafi. Ahem.

"We were told .."
Exactly, you know people are always being told instead of thinking and making proof themselves. What about middle/south America back then

Now, for Iran ...

[MH]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Indeed i think the normal population had a more civilized life back then, than it has now. Saddam did not care about religion at all, he was a good, dependable dictator.
.

You must be kidding right?

Now they have democracy....is that good?

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by MH

You must be kidding right?

Right.

Now they have democracy....is that good?

At least no one is tortured anymore, at least not that i know of. However daily life and a civilian society will take time to be established, along with the avarage standard of living as it was before .. if those religious weirdos do not ruin it all again.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Right.


At least no one is tortured anymore, at least not that i know of. However daily life and a civilian society will take time to be established, along with the avarage standard of living as it was before .. if those religious weirdos do not ruin it all again.

Ill go to racist cultural thing by saying that Iraqi themselves ruin their own life.
They need to change their priorities.

[Catfish]

But that would be racist.
I, myself, blame it on the heat in those countries.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Right.


At least no one is tortured anymore, at least not that i know of. However daily life and a civilian society will take time to be established, along with the avarage standard of living as it was before .. if those religious weirdos do not ruin it all again.

An easy Websearch will show you how wrong you are there. There is not only torture still in Iraq, at least two years ago there was even more torture than there ever was under Saddam. So again, at least until 2010, torture became worse than it was before. Torture and secret torture rooms maintained by the government are still reported until today. So are death squads and secret police executions.

Crime also is high. Abductions, blackmailing, ethnic cleansing, and the kicking out of non-Muslims anyway.

And just today they reported that the killing in Iraq currently has hit the highest peak again since two years.

And while somewhere someboy mentioned Uday and his special taste for woman treatment, that creature was a sick piece of s###, yes. But by numbers his victim record did not compete with what they have today, it seems.

To say that the Iraq war helped to install a government with less torture, is like saying that the Afghanistan war has led to a democratic non-corrupt government where bribery is no issue anymore. Like in Iraq, it seems that bribery and corruption became worse under Karzai. And like in Iraq, there are many open bills that still wait to be payed out.

These are the kinds of wars Western soldiers get thrown away for like empty PET bottles, by criminal politicians without morals and without scruples. Not only were these wars absurd - they were a betrayal of said soldiers and treachery towards own nations and its people that until today gets fed lies and polit burea propaganda.

This makes me sick today - and from another perspective feeling lucky that 27 years ago I decided against a military career. This Western politics is not what I considered and was willing to serve for - this it was not.

[MH]

Originally Posted by Skybird

To say that the Iraq war helped to install a government with less torture, is like saying that the Afghanistan war has led to a democratic non-corrupt government where bribery is no issue anymore. Like in Iraq, it seems that bribery and corruption became worse under Karzai. And like in Iraq, there are many open bills that still wait to be payed out.
.

All those things are issues that usually don't disappear just by the fact that the country had an election.
No one claimed this i think.
The country is a mess but there are signs of actual co - operation between Sunni and Shi'tes.
The government also tries to distance it self from extremism,it has complied constitution and there are no signs of pushing sharia laws from the top....
How it eventually works out it is hard to say but surly doom gloom is what people like to hear
Also question is how SA and Iranian affairs will influence the future of Iraq.

Ohh wait... some American companies cant wait to start pumping the oil at last.


...............

[JU_88]

Originally Posted by MH

Now they have democracy....is that good?

In a bitter sweet sort of way, I guess the question is would you like to live though almost a decade of war, in order to be able to cast a ballot?
If you have lost your livelyhood and/or home and/or loved ones, im guessing the answer is probably maybe not.

An invasion of Iraq had been on the cards since 2000 (feel free to look it up)
I do not believe for a second we went in to iraq to spread democracy or to find WMDs, those were 'excuses' not legitimate reasons.
And even if theywere, if foreign troops invaded our nations to disarm us and replace our Political leadership? How would we feel about it?
We'd be somewhere between 'outraged' and 'a bit skeptical' I imagine.

However you dress it up, its still a case 'We think our system is superior to yours. so we will force you to live like us AND! expect you to thank us for it.
Now how democratic is that? And where in the U.S consitution does it say this is acceptable?

Bottom line is, if Iraq wanted democracy, that was something they needed to do by themselves.

[MH]

Originally Posted by JU_88

In a bitter sweet sort of way, I guess the question is would you like to live though almost a decade of war, in order to be able to cast a ballot?
If you have lost your livelyhood and/or home and/or loved ones, im guessing the answer is probably maybe not.

An invasion of Iraq had been on the cards since 2000 (feel free to look it up)
I do not believe for a second we went in to Iraq to spread democracy or to find WMDs, those were 'excuses' not legitimate reasons.
And even if theywere, if foreign troops invaded our nations to disarm us and replace our Political leadership? How would we feel about it?
We'd be somewhere between 'outraged' and 'a bit skeptical' I imagine.


However you dress it up, its still a case 'We think our system is superior to yours. so we will force you to live like us AND! expect you to thank us for it.
Now how democratic is that? And where in the U.S consitution does it say this is acceptable?

Its total BS, Bush & Blair used 9/11 fear mongering to sucker us in to supporting their dodgy deeds. Quite a nasty pair - those two.

Invasion of Iraq was in part to change geopolitical map of middle east.
Democracy and pro western government is one of the ways to do it...im not WMD story buyer but general behavior of Saddam Hussein called for such war.by 2000 he was re-establishing his position as regional bully.
9/11 opened wndow to finish the job.


Iraqi's Sadam Hussein deserved very much his ass to be kicked out of power the only miscalculation was about the chaos thereafter.
Iraqis had been no lovers of Saddam Husein as some welcomed Americans...the problem had been and is the tribal mentality and the meddling of neighboring countries like Iran and Syria or SA which looked toward destabilising any chance of civil life....by supporting all sorts of fractions that went along their own interests.
Iran for example would hate this experiment to succeed next door...same SA or Syria.
USA found it self in the middle of that taking all the heat.
Most of casualties in Iraq are due to tribal wars and terrorism against own population to create atmosphere of total chaos...terror at its best which in turn caused US forces to adopt some though polices.
It seems more act of terror had been conducted against own population or representatives of post Saddam government that actual US forces in Iraq...
Yet USA has been generally more successful in Iraq that in Afghanistan...as for now.
Question is how long it will hold with Iran trying to gain more influence over the region.
As it turns out ME is not Germany or Japan lol.





.........

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Indeed i think the normal population had a more civilized life back then, than it has now. Saddam did not care about religion at all, he was a good, dependable dictator. Ahem.

Except those poor girls who got Uday Hussein's interest.

I general I agree. I would like to point out that Iraq is mostly Shia nation (figure vary but 65% is quite common). This means that in religious point of view there is one natural ally - Iran. Besides I'm quite sure that Iraq will collapse into civil war within next 20-30 years.

[August]

Originally Posted by Catfish

Well you should know what Iraq had at that time, he received it all from you and the NATO.

What exactly did the US Government supply them?

[JU_88]

Originally Posted by August

What exactly did the US Government supply them?

Google "United States support for Iraq during the Iran - Iraq war"
And scour through the 69,900 results until you can find a source you like.
But dont expect articals from major US main stream media outlets
(for obvious reasons)

The major superpowers (past and present) play smaller nations off against each other for their own advantage, its nothing new or surprising we have been doing it for decades. Or in our case (The UK) for centuries.

[August]

Originally Posted by JU_88

Google "United States support for Iraq during the Iran - Iraq war"
And scour through the 69,900 results until you can find a source you like.
But dont expect articals from major US main stream media outlets
(for obvious reasons)

So in other words it's more foreign bull crap.

[JU_88]

Originally Posted by August

So in other words it's more foreign bull crap.

To you it is yes.
Think of it this way, any negative artical that the U.S media writes about China - is just 'foreign bull crap' to a patriotic chinese man, doesn't mean he is automatically correct though does it?.
Is that fair?

[August]

Originally Posted by JU_88

To you yes, to everyones else, maybe not.
Think of it this way, any negative artical that the U.S media writes about China - is just 'foreign bull crap' to a patriotic chinese man, doesn't mean he is automatically correct though does it?.
Is that fair?

I have no reason to doubt that most of it is. On the other hand foreign media have a proven track record of distortions and outright lies when it comes to my country. Wasn't it you just the other day trying to tell me that a little Ron Paul rally drew thousands of veterans when it was just a couple hundred guys claiming to be vets? Isn't it you who keeps trying to make a case that 911 was an inside job? Why should we believe anything you say?

Now i'm sure that a US company or three had it's hand in Saddams cookie jar but whether they did it with the permission and approval of the US government is another thing. AFAIK the only thing we gave Saddam (along with a bunch of other countries) is some Anthrax samples as part of a vaccine development program. Kind of a dumb idea in hindsight but that does not equal giving them *all* their WMD like you claim.