The Iraq Thread

[Longinius 1]

"A US general will run the Iraq after the war. You know. It´s for iraq´s freedom and such..."

Well, as long as they are being democratic about it

[brgnorway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ Feb. 14 2003,10:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"A US general will run the Iraq after the war. You know. It´s for iraq´s freedom and such..."

Well, as long as they are being democratic about it <span id='postcolor'>

My guess is it'll be like this: The US General says out loudly - Right folks, I vote for cerfew and razzias, and you lot in the kurdish corner stay calm and say nothing - that is - if you want to avoid a little preemptive action! And then you all accept the sworn in US appointed democratic leader.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

I just got back from the anti-war protest in Melbourne city. It was big, with an estimated 200,000 people in it.

And it was good and peaceful, with people of all ages, ethnic background, and occupations coming out to say they don't support a war on Iraq. There was even a blast on an air raid siren to show people what it would be like to be in Iraq when the planes start flying over.

As one would expect there were lots of speeches and the like. In one, a good point was rbought up-the war isn't really about Iraq. Sure, he's a dictator, but there are plenty of dictators, and plenty that have been sponsered by Uncle Sam. So whats it about? Terrorism? Who here really thinks that invading Iraq is going to help end terrorism? Mor elikely esqualate it in my opinion. Is it about WMD? More proof please. A few missiles and some canisters of supposed chemical weapons missing dosn't really add up to much in my mind. Or is it to do with oil? Yes, that dreadful dreadful accusation. But look at it for a second. What country has the worlds second largest oil reserves?

Anyway, if you oppose the war, get out there to a anti-war demostration and show the world that you say NO.

[brgnorway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Feb. 14 2003,10:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I just got back from the anti-war protest in Melbourne city. It was big, with an estimated 200,000 people in it.

And it was good and peaceful, with people of all ages, ethnic background, and occupations coming out to say they don't support a war on Iraq. There was even a blast on an air raid siren to show people what it would be like to be in Iraq when the planes start flying over.

As one would expect there were lots of speeches and the like. In one, a good point was rbought up-the war isn't really about Iraq. Sure, he's a dictator, but there are plenty of dictators, and plenty that have been sponsered by Uncle Sam. So whats it about? Terrorism? Who here really thinks that invading Iraq is going to help end terrorism? Mor elikely esqualate it in my opinion. Is it about WMD? More proof please. A few missiles and some canisters of supposed chemical weapons missing dosn't really add up to much in my mind. Or is it to do with oil? Yes, that dreadful dreadful accusation. But look at it for a second. What country has the worlds second largest oil reserves?<span id='postcolor'>

Good to see someone actually doing their part in order to object to the war.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Anyway, if you oppose the war, get out there to a anti-war demostration and show the world that you say NO.

<span id='postcolor'>

I would do that if it hadn't been for my knee. I can't bloody move it and it's painfull as hell. Anyway, I'm off to see the doctor at 1140 and hopefully she'll give me an injection - then I'll go to tomorrows protest here in Bergen.

[brgnorway 0]

A little history on Iraq for those of you that don't know much about it:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/war/iraq/britain_iraq_03.shtml

Here you'll find a context to understand why the Iraqi population won't understand US to "liberate" their country.

They already had a "king Feisal" during the 20's and would probably not go for the US version/canditate.

[brgnorway 0]

edit - double post

[brgnorway 0]

US presents evidence:

(click on "neste bilde" to see more photo's)

http://www.online.no/global....ml?http

hehe

[Major Fubar 0]

[DracoPaladore 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Col. Kurtz @ Feb. 14 2003,10:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What country has the worlds second largest oil reserves?<span id='postcolor'>

That just happens to be an awful coincidence!  

[Die Alive 0]

I'd only go to peace marches if there's gonna be a Buddhist monks setting himself on fire like they did back in Vietnam in the early 60s (and still up to this day).  These Buddhist were hardcore, sitting perfectly still, no screaming, no running around, just sitting until they fall over. I saw in one pic of the Buddhist sitting, totally engulfed in flames, and behind him, maybe 10 feet away, a south Vietnamese cop, with a unlit cigarette in his mouth, was searching his pocket looking for his lighter or matches.  hehe, like there was a guy on fire and he's looking for a flame to light up a cigarette.

Pic of peace cunts back in September in Spain What's with the mock explosives?

Anit-war (?) protesters in Pakistan.  Lovely slogan.

-=Die Alive=-

[5thSFG.CNUTZ 0]

Image > 200 kb

<span style='font-size:22pt;line-height:100%'>Do not post images > 100 kb</span>

[DarkLight 0]

Demonstration in Belgium:

http://www.stopusa.be/

[bn880 5]

5thSFG.CNUTZ get that oversized picture out of our face.

Wanna buy a vowel?

[Guest]

Ok, Blix has presented his report. Basically he said that Iraq was cooperating more now but still more is needed. He said that the inspections worked and that they were setting up a larger field office. He was optimistic about the continuing work of the inspectors.

That equals to a French/Russian/Chinese veto if the US/UK try to put a war resolution now. 11 of the 15 SC members think that the inspectors should continue.

Edit: Watching ElBaradei now, he seems very positive to Iraq. IAEA has made extensive testing on the infamous aluminium tubes. The conclusion is that they are in no way related to nuclear technology.

[Die Alive 0]

Iraq's football coach quits -- all players in army

BERLIN (Reuters) - The German coach of the Iraqi national soccer team, Bernd Stange, has left Iraq, saying there was no point in staying because all his players were being drafted into the army.

Iraq lost all 3 of it's World Cup matches it ever played in. They are ranked 52nd in FIFA rankings.

-=Die Alive=-

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

I dont think it likely that an imminent attack by Iraq on America will happen (or is even very possible except for bio weapons delivered by hand to America)

Nor do i think it likely that Iraq will (or has) passed such weapons to islamic fundamentalists (though theyde possibly try if Iraq is attacked)

Nor do i think that the US is only after oil in Iraq (although

Oil is one secondary consideration certainly). There are a few reasons the republican administration wants to go into Iraq. Iraq is a dictator who could destabilise the region, especially in relation to Israel. He has defied world opinion before, and especially America.

So they dont like him, and at the moment he is quite weak and vulnerable to attack. In other words at the moment America CAN attack Iraq, thats a major consideration.

Also It seems as though American officials always feel it neccessary to define their country as being in opposition to something else.

America always seems to need an enemy ,a bogeyman, a conflict to unite the country- first the British, then Spanish and native Indians, then all the European colonials when america aquired its own colonies (these were the slow years), Then the axis of WW1, then the interwar colonials again, then Japan, then the European fascists, then Russia, Cuba, the USSR,Vietnam, Iran ,Gaddafis Libya and a few others half heartedly .Then Saddams Iraq, then the war against drugs (they were really stretching for a foe),

Then Osama bin laden/Al-Quaida , then Iraq again, probably commie North korea next, then maybe commie China?

The War of independance (including 1812),

The War against the heathen savages(internal expansion), The War of aggressive capitalism (external expansion),

The War of saving european freedom(WW1),

The (mostly)Cold War of destroying the euro-empires whilst protecting the US one(1918-1941),

The War of revenge on the trecherous orientals,

The War of saving european freedom 2,

The (mostly)Cold War against communism,

The War against the drug lords,

The War against Terror,

The War against Rogue states and W.M.D.

The War against.....

Now-

Having said this all of the Iraqi asylum seekers i have spoken to in the UK (ie 3 people) WANT the international community to invade Iraq. They are really willing to risk their families being wasted to oust Saddam Hussein. And an independant group (ive forgotten the name but i can look it up) that recently went into Iraq to privatly interview Iraqi citizens found that almost everyone they spoke to WANTED the world community (or failing that America and Britain) to invade Iraq.

You might not understand that, but then you probably havent lived in Iraq all your life.

Of course noone wants to die under a bomb, but noone wants to live in a violent and psychotic police state either.

I think America and Britain should drop the UN/Weapons of Mass Destruction argument (though it may be too late). I dont really care about that. Everyone can see its a convenient pretext.

They should have emphasised from the start that they were in it to liberate the Iraqi people and additionally get rid of Saddam (with all of his record).

Bush should (if it wasnt too late) play it as self defence from Iraqi weapons to the american public, but to the international community emphasize the liberation of an oppressed people, a 'moral' war if anything similar to the Kosovo conflict -look at Serbia now compared to under Milosevic- not perfect, but most would agree better, and no more state perpetrated massacres.

Thats something i would support (though i doubt if Bush would.) Bush says "youre either with us or against us" in the 'fight for freedom'. So why hasnt he emphasized freedom more in the liberation of iraq?

Instead they emphasized minor and legalistic violations of the UN(something lots of countries are guilty of)

Get the Iraqi national congress into the UN reporting everything that Saddam has done to his people. Admit the west was wrong to turn a blind eye to the kurdish massacres and massivly arm Iraq (including the oh so moral Germany and France) but contend that now is better late than never.

War is evil. But sometimes it is the lesser of two evils. Go and read 1984 by George Orwell and then imagine it set in Iraq.

Dont you think people are WILLING to risk death to escape that? To see the cavalry (even foreign) rolling over the hills to save them..

The answer in Iraq by all indications is yes.

America and Britain already bomb Iraq regularly, hundreds of thousands have died from the -ineffective- sanctions.

The ONLY effective way to drastically lessen the suffering of the Iraqi people is a war(whether external or internal).

So thats the war.

Now

The US government has to get its act together. Is America the only remaining superpower or not? Because theres more to being a superpower than deploying F-15s and cruise missiles every now and then. I believe there has been and still is a fundamental lack of ambition (or vision)in US foreign policy.

Perhaps the policy makers WANT the third world to remain underdeveloped and undemocratic (weak in other words). But even if so they have been especially shortsighted and fickle with their allegiences (even compared to other western countries). That was always bound to piss a lot of people off.

Bush wants wars without having to worry about the aftermath. Thats not the way to go. There MUST be an element of nationbuilding to US strategy. If the US invested a small proportion of its defence budget in schemes helping to build up the countries it wages war on (above and beyond rebuilding what it destroyed) then those countries could begin to see great changes in the level of prosperity. They would start to welcome a US presence and be thankful US troops had set foot on their soil. As it is people around the world have seen the US interfere militarily in their countries very often without great visible improvements afterwards.

The current level of global US aid is quite pitiful.(its not keeping the whole third world from starving as some americans seem to think)

This is - ESPECIALLY- important in the countries

with US troops in. This money would represent a FRACTION of the defence budget, but could prevent the need for further conflict, improve world opinions of America and generally help to ensure peace and stability.

If America is unwilling to rise to task of being the only remaining superpower with all that that entails

then they should cease to interfere internationally except perhaps in minor UN operations, or not at all.(as the founders of USA would want)

But that has not been the way the US has gone since Pearl harbor, and now Sept 11(and the previous interfering) has made it almost impossible. So America must go all out for international involvement acting as much as possible as a benevolent empire (of influence when not occupation). As a documentary on the British empire i watched yesterday put it. The US global hegemony is the empire that dare not speak its name.

The US must face up to the role it has fallen into or stand away (and pull back) for good. Any half hearted or -entirely- selfish international commitment will do more harm than good in the long run.

Kipling had an idea of it a long time ago (in racially prejudiced language) in a poem "The White Mans Burden".

The Rich Powerful Mans Burden is perhaps more precise now but America has to decide once and for all whether or not to take it up.

However a war on Iraq with sufficient aid to the Iraqi people afterwards is something i would -conditionally- support as an easing of pain for a long suffering country.

But i think the US and Britain could have done a LOT better getting international support (or even British public support)

Without that support it does set a bad precedent.

[Pukko 0]

Good post IsthatyouJohnWayne (I like it when people collect their thoughts). We have had our arguments in the mideast thead if I recall it right, but here I agree with you - too

But do you really think that it would be a solid justification to attack Iraq over human rights? There are so many other worse nations to liberate in that case.

And dont you think that it will be extremely hard or close to impossible to maker the situation to the better, at least in the nearest decade? As I see it this war will trigger events that undoubtly will make many more humans suffer than what is the case now...

[Die Alive 0]

                               

<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Iraq Bans Weapons of Mass Destruction</span>

                               

I thought it was some kind of joke.

That it.  Crisis is over, recall the military, everyone go home, nothing to see here.  You can call off those anti-war protest now. We all can sleep better tonight, all is well in the middle east.

-=Die Alive=-

[DarkLight 0]

History repeats itself, just like it always does, sad thing is, some people are blind.

This is Gulf War 2... a large amount of soldiers will die, even more civilians will die, the country will be destroyed, civilians will get diseases caused by weapons with chemical crap in it, soldiers will die, soldiers will kill themselves when this is over, soldiers will get kids with mutilations (sp?), soldiers will get all kinds of diseases, many will die, even after the war, a large amount will suffer, not just physically, but also mentally.

And most important, just like the 'war on terrorism' in Afghanistan, again we will fail. Bin Laden is still out there we all know it, a large amount of people died, and the main goal hasn't been reached yet. Sure AQ has suffered a lot of losses but still...

Why are we humans so dumb and ignorant? Why can't we live in peace and love eachother as if every child was our son or daughter and every old person our grandpa/grandma? Why so many hatred? I simply cannot understand, i wish i could go to the jungle and live there, sad enough, even our wonderful mother nature is being destroyed by stupid people who care about nothing but themselves. Money rules this world, nobody cares about the value of life, a dead civilian is worth as much as a dead ant these days. No one seems to care.

Well fuck you, but i care, i don't want war, i don't want innocent people to die, i don't want people to realize that going to war wasn't such a good idea when it's already too late. I don't want to see hundreds of dead school children on my TV screen while i'm sitting in my nice house with all my food and money.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Having said this all of the Iraqi asylum seekers i have spoken to in the UK (ie 3 people) WANT the international community to invade Iraq. They are really willing to risk their families being wasted to oust Saddam Hussein. And an independant group (ive forgotten the name but i can look it up) that recently went into Iraq to privatly interview Iraqi citizens found that almost everyone they spoke to WANTED the world community (or failing that America and Britain) to invade Iraq.

<span id='postcolor'>

This actually is a thing that differs from man to man, i know Iraqi people who live in Belgium, they have pictures of Saddam all over their house. They came to my country because they hope to become as rich as most of the Belgian people. Can't blame them, Central Europe is a nice place to live. Anyway, these people love their leader, they think he's the best man in the world. The man that protects them against 'the Evil America'! An attack on Iraq will only make Saddam a bigger hero. Sure some people support the US, hell, why not. But there are also many people who do not support the US but also not support Saddam. Obviously they choose Saddam's side, after all, many believe that there's no bigger evil than the West.

No shit, there are people in Iraq who are afraid to say that they hate Saddam, there probable are a lot of them, but what most of us forget or will always deny is that a lot of Iraqi people don't like the US at all. They hate it. Do you understand the definition of hatred? Do you? Hating is not the same as disliking. I dislike fish, it's gross, but i don't hate it, i hate people who fuck up our world. Seriously, if you'd give me the chance to kill them without having to face what follows i'd already have done it. If Bush would be my president, and one of these ppl who rape nature would want to attack Bush, i'd defend Bush and fight for him. While actually i don't like the man at all, but still, i prefer him above some idiot that is even more dangerous.

Same for some of the Iraqi people, they don't like any of the sides but they still have to pick one.

Now we've talked about people who hate Saddam, ppl who support Bush and people who don't like Saddam, but still prefer him above teh Evil West. So there's one more left, the people who love Saddam, sure it exists. Might sound weird to you, but it's true. The Iraqi people probable wonder how teh hell the Americans can like a guy like Bush? Just like we wonder how the hell Iraq can love their leader...

So basically, IsThatYouJohnWayne, this thing can be different for every Iraqi person.

One thing is for sure, there are 2 sides to choose from, the side that support America will probable be smaller than the side that supports Saddam. The side that supports Saddam will probable be prepared to die while defending against the evil west. This isn't going to end in a nice peaceful way. This is gonna get nasty, nastier than it has been for a long time.

And still, i do not see why we should attack, I don't like Bush, the man's bloodthirsty if you ask me. My country, together with some others did not agree with something and immediatly Bush talks about us like he will bomb us next. Everything in his way will go down, i have the feeling that he knows only one way, straight forward, through all the walls that block him.

I might've mistaken, because to my great surprise the war hasn't started yet, i don't understand why not? Maybe i was wrong... maybe Bush doesn't want a war...

We'll see...

I'm scared, scared of everything around me, why don't we elect a leader that wants nothing more than peace and love, sure i sound like a fucking hippy. But i can guarantee you one thing, there's only one fucking thing that can assure our future. And that is when all of us will learn that everyone is equal and that everyone should treat eachother the same. Look at what is happenign these days, millions of people die, and no one gives a fuck. Africa and the eastern countries is far away from where i live. Funny isn't it? We are all human but for some reason, some people think they have the right to act as a superior animal.

Fuck this world, i'm not surprised that so many people kill themselves. If this world keeps on acting like complete dickheads who care about nothing but playing war and acting like big assholes. Well, if so, fuck all of you world leaders, i want a future, not a bunch of stupid countries that hate eachother.

Thank you...

See you on the demonstration for world peace!

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Die Alive @ Feb. 13 2003,20:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">                                

<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>Iraq Bans Weapons of Mass Destruction</span>

                               

I thought it was some kind of joke.

That it.  Crisis is over, recall the military, everyone go home, nothing to see here.  You can call off those anti-war portest now. We all can sleep better tonight, all is well in the middle east.

-=Die Alive=-<span id='postcolor'>

Even then, our great leaders will find another even greater excuse to attack Iraq anyway.  There's no need to think it'll end nice...

However if this is the end, i'll run around smiling for the next week. But i seriously doubt it

[Crazysheep 1]

Someone's probably already mentioned this, but this is where the oil conspiracy theory came about-left conveniently out of the news in the UK at least.

Venezuala provides 18% of USA oil. And, a few days before Bush started his vendetta against Iraq, things got bad there. I'm not sure of the politics, but the fact that the USA buys all their oil, their main export, cripples their economy in some way-I might find out if I can find a reference somewhere. So, they're on the verge of civil war and they want to burn down the oil fields-nasty economic crisis on Uncle Sams hands.

And then we have.....Iraq. Leader with a criminal record in charge of a country filled with oil. Perfect scapegoat, eh...

[Die Alive 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ Feb. 14 2003,13:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Fuck this world, i'm not surprised that so many people kill themselves.<span id='postcolor'>

This sentence reminds me of a t-shirt i saw once....

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">this world keeps on acting like complete dickheads who care about nothing but playing war and acting like big assholes.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, I DO play OFP and I'm often called an asshole...

-=Die Alive=-

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Die Alive @ Feb. 13 2003,21:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DarkLight @ Feb. 14 2003,13:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Fuck this world, i'm not surprised that so many people kill themselves.<span id='postcolor'>

This sentence reminds me of a t-shirt i saw once....

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">this world keeps on acting like complete dickheads who care about nothing but playing war and acting like big assholes.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, I DO play OFP and I'm often called an asshole...

-=Die Alive=-<span id='postcolor'>

Hahaha, well... I guess you all understand what i'm trying to say

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

"Crisis is over, recall the military, everyone go home, nothing to see here"

I think Die Alive was exhibiting signs of sarcasm.

I assure you (with as much certainty as there is on such an issue) Darklight that there are not a lot of Iraqi people who love Saddam anymore. Maybe 15-20 years ago (probably when those people with Saddam pictures in their house left) but not now.

\/this is a report (fairly balanced i think) on the views of Iraqi people -in Iraq- It seems they want a change of regime as badly as the American administration.

Its survey is not conducted under perfect circumstances ,but i think it gives a realistic idea of what the majority of Iraqis think of the situation

the report-  www.crisisweb.org/projects/middleeast/iraq_iran_gulf/reports/A400837_04122002.pdf

Oil is a consideration i think but only secondary. If America was seen publicly to snatch the oil in Iraq then the international outrage would be massive.

With the whole world watching, the US government would have to suicidal to let themselves be seen to be grabbing the oil just for US interests.

But presumably after a war some international oil companies will get deals in Iraq and who knows who will be handing them out.... a military interim government might favour US companies.... but that remains to be seen.(and would be very unpopular)

[foxer 0]

I think this will be my last post in the thread. Probably not though.

If america wouldn't have a build up forces in the middle-east iraq wouldn't be doing anything.Iraq would be saying the same stuff.I don't understand the french gov't,do they think that their powerful gov't made iraq gov't to deal ? No,Us saying they will attack iraq made them deal.Not france,not russia,not no one,except maybe brits and some nato countries.So when iraq is dealing ,because us forces are in the middle-east what happens when the Us pulls out? Move the stuff over there already cost 2 billion dollars.That's the question we should be asking ,what happens when the forces goes back home ? I don't want a war,heck if they can do something better then war they should do it.But can they ?