The Iraq Thread

[foxer 0]

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/12/12/iran.nuclear/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/09/iran.nuclear/index.html

Iran may start building nuclear weapons.I doubt the US would want to deal with another north korea.

http://www.cnn.com/2002....ex.html

However russia said their not.I guess were see in a few years.

[PFC Mongoose 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (OxPecker @ April 10 2003,02:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I find all this talk of "wow, I can't believe we occupied Bagdad so easily" really interesting.

How much of a fight did you expect from a military that is about 1/3 the size now it was during the gulf war, and that is using technology approx. 30 years behind what the US is using?

Anyway, I truly hope it is all but over now, for everyone's sakes.

[cynicism]Hooray, the good guys won! The "shining beacon of democracy" triumphs again. Another country you can sell Big Macs and re-runs of Friends to! A great victory for world democracy indeed. Forgive us if we aren't all in the streets waving the star spangled banner, some of us are still a little concerned about how readily the US steamrollered the UN and international law to enforce it's own agenda. [/cynicism]<span id='postcolor'>

1.) Most people expected the Iraqis to try and pull a Grozny in Baghdad. It doesn't look like they did. If they had, do you think the Coalition would have been able to star moving in 'in force' so quickly?

2.) Sorry.. I just can't let this go.

[cynicism]Maybe, when the U.N. learns how to set a schedule, get objectives it names achieved without outside help, and enforce the resolutions it passes without almost total reliance on the U.S. military, then, then I will agree wholeheartedly. Untill then, my faith, as a Canadian, and as a formerly strong supporter of the U.N., has been rattled so much that I doubt it will be restored anytime soon.[/cynicism]

Apologies in advance for the inflammatoriness of this post.

[whisperFFW06 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 10 2003,06:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What does it matter if the war was started by Iraq or Iran Pete?  Both regimes were despotic, one a dictatorship, the other a theocracy.  If you remember, I mentioned that it would be better to replace both types with a stabile democracy in my previous post.

Radicals and terrorists cannot operate in the world with impunity unless they have the support or aqueiscence of nation-states.  Al-Qaeda recieved significant financing and support from the ruling party in Saudi Arabia.  My point was however, that these corrupt regimes allow that radicalism to survive, indeed thrive withing their borders.  The schooling process in the Koran in some of these nations completely replaces a secular education.  Some of these people are literally brought up to hate the west.  I would say those beliefs are fostered by these failed regimes because its better than the alternative.  Misdirect the hate towards those who aren't like you, and have a better life than you do, and tell those who would overthrow your ass if they knew any better, that their shitty lives are due to those in the west, and you can stay safe and continue to oppress the people.  The more you oppress them, the greater their rage for the other guy across the pond.<span id='postcolor'>

No, no and definetively no

This is assuming democracy is the best and only viable system. This is basically saying that theocracy, for example, is BAD (link it to Vatican... ), and that establishing dictatorship or theocracy means despotic regime. You assume that they are build only with "evil" in mind.

Do you know what was one of the best system of ancient Greece? Tyrany (spelling? ). They called it "enlightened tyrany", and some Greeks writers by that time were regretfull when democracy was instituted. Please stop thinking we in Occident are the only ones who know the truth. Of course, there are despotic regimes, but that does not mean that every regime based on the same system is despotic. This all depends on the leader. And democracy is not independant of is leader, far from that. The manipulating tools are numerous. See for example the huge score of nationalists in last French presidential elections, based on massive security issue coverage.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Radicals and terrorists cannot operate in the world with impunity unless they have the support or aqueiscence of nation-states.<span id='postcolor'>

oh?

Remember the Ricin found in UK and France in January of February? This was taken from informations on a French islamic terrorist cell operating around Paris. This cell is member of an european group, if I remember well of Algerian origins.

They are NOT supported by any state. They are financed by... themselves. They have the hand over credit cards trafic in Spain and Germany. That's where they get their money from.

Terrorist cells act independantly to each other, following the global mood (if OBL says something which fit their possibilities, why not do it?), and trying to be financially independant.

Resuming terrorism to AQ and financial support by Middle East is totally misunderstanding how terrorism works. AQ in itself is only a small part of global menace.

[DarkLight 0]

Looks like everyone is already making plans to attack Iran next, you know, when i heard that speech of one of those american government guys i wasn't surprised at all when he said that the war wasn't over yet, that there were also dangerous groups of Iraqi ppl that ran away, they are now outside Iraq.

Surprise surprise, do i hear another great excuse to attack ANOTHER country?

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (whisperFFW06 @ April 10 2003,12:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Terrorist cells act independantly to each other, following the global mood (if OBL says something which fit their possibilities, why not do it?), and trying to be financially independant.<span id='postcolor'>

This is inaccurate and very vague. Besides, the French themselves are not sure (or not publicizing) what was involved in the ricin find in France last month.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ April 10 2003,12:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Looks like everyone is already making plans to attack Iran next<span id='postcolor'>

I'll wager not - unless of course, Iran or any other country gets directly involved against coalition forces.

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 09 2003,13:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ April 10 2003,12:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Looks like everyone is already making plans to attack Iran next<span id='postcolor'>

I'll wager not - unless of course, Iran or any other country gets directly involved against coalition forces.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes but if you ask me, the evil evil eeevil west is thinking: Hmmm, i'm absolutely sure that Iran will "get directly involved against coalition forces", so... let's bomb the shit outta them!

Hooray! Another victory for democracy (how the hell do you spell that anyway?!

[FallenPaladin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 10 2003,12:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ April 10 2003,12:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Looks like everyone is already making plans to attack Iran next<span id='postcolor'>

I'll wager not - unless of course, Iran or any other country gets directly involved against coalition forces.<span id='postcolor'>

"Hey, you!! Do you look at me?? DO YOU FRIGGIN` LOOK AT ME??!??"

Uh oh...

[whisperFFW06 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ April 10 2003,12:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (whisperFFW06 @ April 10 2003,12:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Terrorist cells act independantly to each other, following the global mood (if OBL says something which fit their possibilities, why not do it?), and trying to be financially independant.<span id='postcolor'>

This is inaccurate and very vague. Besides, the French themselves are not sure (or not publicizing) what was involved in the ricin find in France last month.<span id='postcolor'>

A french arab origin journalist infiltrated this very cell some monthes before the ricin events. He presented himself as wanting to make propaganda movies for the islamic cause. This gave him the opportunity to record almost everything, up to the point where they gave him responsibilities and he had to stop.

A few days after he left, the leader of the cell, whom he followed as often as he could, was taken by the police, because of the ricin finding.

There is a particular scene where the leader goes to see his own leader in London, just after the ricin was found, and is not welcome because of the link which could be made between ricin and his visit.

The movie was presented 2 weeks ago on french TV...

[PFC Mongoose 0]

Crazy stuff, terrorism.

[PitViper 0]

I wonder if Robert Fisk is still saying that the Americans haven't reached Baghdad or the airport

<edit> nevermind, just saw his latest in the other thread.

[Guest]

137 more oil wells liberated for democracy - The Onion

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ April 10 2003,05:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Looks like everyone is already making plans to attack Iran next, you know, when i heard that speech of one of those american government guys i wasn't surprised at all when he said that the war wasn't over yet, that there were also dangerous groups of Iraqi ppl that ran away, they are now outside Iraq.

Surprise surprise, do i hear another great excuse to attack ANOTHER country?<span id='postcolor'>

Do you like making this stuff up?

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ April 10 2003,16:52)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ April 10 2003,05:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Looks like everyone is already making plans to attack Iran next, you know, when i heard that speech of one of those american government guys i wasn't surprised at all when he said that the war wasn't over yet, that there were also dangerous groups of Iraqi ppl that ran away, they are now outside Iraq.

Surprise surprise, do i hear another great excuse to attack ANOTHER country?<span id='postcolor'>

Do you like making this stuff up?<span id='postcolor'>

He is not. It was Rumsfeld.

One

Another

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">WASHINGTON, April 10 - As his Marines tightened up their grip on the heart of Baghdad, smiling U.S. Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld charged Wednesday, April 9, that senior Iraqi leaders are fleeing to Syria, which he claims is continuing to send military assistance into Iraq.

"Senior regime people are moving out of Iraq into Syria and Syria is continuing to send things into Iraq. We find it notably unhelpful," Agence France-Presse (AFP) quoted him as telling a press conference.

"I have accurately advised that they not provide military assistance to Iraq," he said, noting that Syria had been providing Iraq forces with equipment including night vision goggles.

Rumsfeld said intelligence pointed to Syria having been "cooperative in facilitating the movement of people out of Iraq into Syria."

"In some cases, they stay there, finding safe keeping there. In other cases, they're moving from Syria to still “other placesâ€. We've also seen people from Syria moving into Iraq, unhelpfully," he added.

For his part, U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton said Wednesday that Syria should “heed the lesson†of the U.S.-led conflict in Iraq.

"We are hopeful that a number of regimes will draw the appropriate lesson from Iraq. That the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is not in their interest," he said.

Bolton was speaking in Rome following a meeting with senior Vatican officials including Foreign Minister Jean-Louis Tauran.

"I think Syria is a good case where I hope they will conclude that the chemical weapons programme (and) the biological weapons program they've been pursuing are things they should give up.

<span id='postcolor'>

Powell has however denied that Syria or Iran are next in line.

[PitViper 0]

I don't see how Rumsfeld's quote means "Syria is next". Can we not state that we think some weapons and leadership escaped to Syria?

You people read way too much into things.

[Aeon 0]

Syria? Iran?

Let's check Bush's diary, tomorrow will be... :

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery....dad.htm

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Aeon @ April 10 2003,18:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Syria? Iran?

Let's check Bush's diary, tomorrow will be... :

http://www.strategypage.com/gallery....dad.htm

<span id='postcolor'>

LOL!

Remember that tall TV/radio antenae shot down by a tank in the first week of the war?

Must've been practice for the Eifel Tower.

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ April 09 2003,18:07)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't see how Rumsfeld's quote means "Syria is next". Can we not state that we think some weapons and leadership escaped to Syria?<span id='postcolor'>

Yes you can, but often this is followed by an urge to attack that country...

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ April 10 2003,08:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

That's a hillarious signature. It's like having a North Korean guy have a signature that says: I support Communism in France.

Not to mention the statue of liberty, which is a complete oxymoron in current U.S./France/Iraq situation.

[ralphwiggum 6]

let's be civil, shall we?

Chirac attempts another PR stunt - we welcome fall of Hussein.

(This guy is as crazy as Le Pen )

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (whisperFFW06 @ April 10 2003,11:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No, no and definetively no

This is assuming democracy is the best and only viable system. This is basically saying that theocracy, for example, is BAD (link it to Vatican...   ), and that establishing dictatorship or theocracy means despotic regime. You assume that they are build only with "evil" in mind.

Do you know what was one of the best system of ancient Greece? Tyrany (spelling? ). They called it "enlightened tyrany", and some Greeks writers by that time were regretfull when democracy was instituted. Please stop thinking we in Occident are the only ones who know the truth. Of course, there are despotic regimes, but that does not mean that every regime based on the same system is despotic. This all depends on the leader. And democracy is not independant of is leader, far from that. The manipulating tools are numerous. See for example the huge score of nationalists in last French presidential elections, based on massive security issue coverage.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Radicals and terrorists cannot operate in the world with impunity unless they have the support or aqueiscence of nation-states.<span id='postcolor'>

oh?  

Remember the Ricin found in UK and France in January of February? This was taken from informations on a French islamic terrorist cell operating around Paris. This cell is member of an european group, if I remember well of Algerian origins.

They are NOT supported by any state. They are financed by... themselves. They have the hand over credit cards trafic in Spain and Germany. That's where they get their money from.

Terrorist cells act independantly to each other, following the global mood (if OBL says something which fit their possibilities, why not do it?), and trying to be financially independant.

Resuming terrorism to AQ and financial support by Middle East is totally misunderstanding how terrorism works. AQ in itself is only a small part of global menace.<span id='postcolor'>

I'm not saying democracy is the best system, but judging the fact that you can't go to a shopping mall in Iran without being monitored by the religious police, and the Saudi monarchs keep most of the oil wealth to themselves and don't distribute it to most of their poor and uneducated countrymen, I'd say its better than those regimes. The Syrians too are a paragon of modernity, wouldn't you say? In fact the education system in many of these states, I think the schools are called Madrassahs, consists of memorizing every single phrase and verse of the Koran, and learning to hate the west. No mathematics, no grammar or writing skills, no history or sociology. Its terribly sad, but it allows their regimes to continue to oppress them.

I suppose those dudes developed and tested that Ricin in their buddy Haji's backyard then?

One independent terrorist cell does not a good example make.

What about Hamas? Islamic Jihad? Numerous other terrorists groups and groups from the past like Red Faction and Sendero Luminoso? All these groups recieve state support of some sort, whether it be active support or passive acquiescence to their existence within the state's borders.

[Schoeler 0]

Oh, and I forgot to add this:

As far as the Vatican goes, don't get me started. I'm a Roman Catholic and I'll be the first to admit that the Catholic church is responsible for just as much misery throughout history as any self-respecting despotic regime.

Remember the Crusades?

How about the Inquisition?

Enslavement of numerous indigenous peoples throughout Latin America?

Forced religious conversion of Native Americans in Arizona and in New Mexico? Look up what happened to them if they refused.

Passive aquiescence during the 3rd Reich (they recently apologized for this).

I'm sure I could find a few dozen more examples of why theocracy is not a good thing. Its why most modern governments espouse the separation of church and state.

[whisperFFW06 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ April 10 2003,19:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm not saying democracy is the best system, but judging the fact that you can't go to a shopping mall in Iran without being monitored by the religious police, and the Saudi monarchs keep most of the oil wealth to themselves and don't distribute it to most of their poor and uneducated countrymen, I'd say its better than those regimes.  The Syrians too are a paragon of modernity, wouldn't you say?  In fact the education system in many of these states, I think the schools are called Madrassahs, consists of memorizing every single phrase and verse of the Koran, and learning to hate the west.  No mathematics, no grammar or writing skills, no history or sociology.  Its terribly sad, but it allows their regimes to continue to oppress them.<span id='postcolor'>

Get in the streets of a big west city. And come back talking about redistribution of wealth.

And please, why categorizing school system to "west haters builders" and period?? Where did this statement come from? Sources, anything? This seems a huge stereotyping to me.

This was for the angry part.

No let's get relaxed

I'm not stating that these regimes are the best, are good, or whatever. They are probably terrible for some part of the population, bad for another one, good for another another one . But it is not up to me, you, your or my country to judge that, come devastating the government (with collateral effect), and putting what fits my/your ideals in place. That's very basically, from a far perspective, what has been done in Iraq. Will they accept it? What about Kurds, Chias, etc...? Does there need some land repartition?

Check the last center of wars, etc... and then check where there has been ingerence in the past of these events. You'll often see that a third, powerfull contry was involved and decided the future of the local pple. Balkans, Israel, ....

What upset me is that one permits itself to judge another, and blow it up, without any limit nor control. AFAIK, there is no external control on US policy, seeing how they dismissed UN. But they judge and apply the sentence.

I agree that this are very vague and general comments, and perhaps not accurate to the current situation, but this is the trend which worries me. Iraq events should not be repeated and becoming the "normal behaviour".

This was naive and idealistic Whisper.

Now I go for 3 days holydays.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

A respected and leading Shia figure who has returned to Iraq from exile in London has been assasinated. Allegedly by a rival religious faction.

Im not going to jump to conclusions about the future of Iraq but it certainly doesnt set a good precedent.

[Schoeler 0]

I would agree that it isn't up to any nation to tell another what form of government it should have, assuming that the people of that nation had a choice in their type of government. Where people are oppressed or forced under the rule of a despotic regime, I think its up to the legitmate and modern powers of the world to step in and give those people the opportunity to choose. I know I'm going out on a limb here, but why don't you think that there exists a basic universal level of liberty that is due to all peoples and cultures? Why can't the nations that understand and enjoy the universal right to liberty step in when its being denied to another people? I think, like it says in our Declaration of Independence that there exists certain basic, universal inalienable rights, those of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I think that governments are instituted among men by the consent of the goverened to secure those rights. If the government fails on its part of the bargain, it is not a valid government and should be overthrown by force. If the people lack the power to do so, then other free governments should step in and help. I truly do believe in Locke's social contract theory, and in John Stuart Mill's philosophy of utilitarianism. If a people can't effect a change in the government from within, when that government is tyrannical, they have the right to overthrow it, and other free peoples have a duty to aid them.

Of course this means we may have to go to war with North Korea, China, several of the African nations etc... If we can't get them to see the light through diplomatic means.

I hear people say over and over and over again, that it isn't up to any nation to tell another how to live, but they never explain why. These same people espouse international law and governing bodies like the U.N. in the same sentence. Aren't these institutions in effect operating like a world government and telling other nations what they can and cannot due according to some universally accepted moral principles?

As for the Maddrassahs, I'll see if I can find some source material for you. I saw some documentaries about them after the 9-11 attack.