The Iraq Thread 2

[denoir 0]

They found the airplanes. Furthermore WMDs require a huge infrastructure. You can't bury a chemical plant. You can't bury a nuclear reactor construction plant.

Not quite, ever heard of mobile weapons labs?

Right. Give the man a Nobel prize! Would you mind informing us poor ignorant people how you can put a chemical refinery into a truck?

Quote[/b] ]

Quote[/b] ]There are international frameworks to deal with humanitarian problems. And helping a country by providing food and infrastructure is not the same thing as dropping bombs on its citizens.

It's not easy to provide humanitarian support in hostile regions without some sort of military presence, and you should be very aware of that considering your participation in Kosovo.

There is a very big difference in providing protection for humanitatrian aid and using B52s to drop bombs on a city.

Quote[/b] ]Not quite right either.  Bush only did half the right thing.  Attacking Al-Qaeda and their supporters was the right thing to do.

Yes, bombing the Afghani really did the trick! Yeah, those Taliban bastards really got their asses kicked.. too bad that they had nothing to do with the WTC attacks. Now, I do understand why you did it. Hell, we offered you full support so we're part responsible. I think however that in retrospect we can safely that hunting terrorists with B52s was a very flawed concept. Attack AQ - yes. Attack them by invading Afghanistan and Iraq - no.

September 11th could have been a postive turning point that would have led to a future favourable for America. It could have been the start of a new era for world peace. Instead we're heading down the road to a new dark age.

Quote[/b] ]No nation can clearlt allow an enemy who can conduct operations of such magnitude to continue, a government has a responsibility to protect its people, and Al-Qaeda had to go.  What should have simultaneously happened though, was to change policies and stances in international relations to prevent other such groups from cropping up or gaining support.  This has not happened yet, though one could argue that actions in Iraq can be seen as a half-assed attempt to take a step in that direction.

Yeah right. The problem is that the Arabic world is not very fond of your interaction with their sphere of interests. And your solution is to bomb and invade an Arabic country?  

Now, Bush's solution can work in theory: You invade and destroy everybody who could potentially be an enemy. But that means that you will have to invade 1/4 of the world's countries, something you're not capable of. To make it worse the places that you have attacked are now much more likely to support terrorist activity. Afghanistan is completely fucked up and you abandoned it, instead of helping it to become a normal country. Unless something radically changes, Iraq is going down the same path.

In addition of pissing off the people that don't like you, you have in only two years managed to alianate your friends. So tell me, is it a sudden unprovoked change that led to America's current unpopularity in the world, or did you have to work on it? You managed in less than two years to go from the most popular country in the world to one of the least popular. And if your friends feel that way, then you can imagine how your bitter enemies feel. US policy and actions after 11/9 have been one big clusterfuck taking America and the world into a completely wrong direction.

[Pete 1]

hi guys ;)

i still regulary read the forums here...im a little dissapointed over that nobody has mentioned the iraqi resistance as anything more than "us-casualty-makers"....does anyone have information about who they are??, what goals they have??...are they really "saddam loyalists" as bush says??

they seem to be growing in strenght and might be a strong factor in making a future iraq, something like hizbollah became...except i feel they might become much much larger and stronger.

we all know one side of the conflict very well by now (Bush and his regime), id like to know more about the other part(s) in the conflict becouse to be honest...i know nothing of them.

[FSPilot 0]

Like how to enlist?

They're either A) Saddam loyalists waiting for the US to leave so they can dust off their MiGs and fly them again, B) very disgruntled citizens who just want their power back on, or C) terrorists who just want to kill Americans. Take your pick. As far as I'm concerned they're nothing more than casualty makers. It's not like firing off an RPG then hiding in a group of civilians isn't going to create casualties.

[denoir 0]

Hardly terrorists. Terrorist target the civilian population, those that attack US troops don't. They are a classical resistance movement. They target US troops and Iraqi collaborators and hide in the general population. No different than for instance the French resistance during WW2 or the American revolutionaries who attacked the British.

[FSPilot 0]

I was basically referring to anyone who just wants to kill an American, but can't afford the plane ticket. So they drive across the border and pick up an RPG.

[denoir 0]

I'm sure that there are those too, but that's an insignificant percentage. I think you are being overly paranoid of how many people want to "just kill Americans". Getting into USA is not so difficult. If many people wanted to "just to kill Americans" then you would have serious problems with suicide bombers, which to my knowledge you don't.

[FSPilot 0]

Maybe it was that BBC "Why the world hates America" show. Or the "Hey, don't you guys hate America too?" threads.

[denoir 0]

While you may not be winning any popularity contests any time soon, there's a long leap one has to make to go from disagreeing with your politics to actually start murdering fellow human beings. There are not many people that are willing to kill innocent civilians for a political cause.

[Pete 1]

i dont think its simply becouse of the electricity.... ;)

i seen pictures of these resistance fighters, they dress in white clothes and red...ummm..headrags?

they seem to get more and more organiced and they do attack military targets and avoid civilians.

i doubt that they are "saddam loyalists" though...majority of them could very well be shiite muslims since the only "reason" i heard of so far was that they started there resistance after an amount of people got shot by americans during a protest in some town just after the war had ended.

i am very curious about these people, the organisation and the motives they have to fight americans...

they are a much bigger threat than saddam ever was, an army is fairly easy to locate and to beat...but when a resistance/querilla gets the peoples "hearts and minds"...anything can happen.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Quote[/b] ]Because we helped our friend who was being attacked

referring to the first Iraq-war

Well, that is a sunshine perspective of Iraq-war 1. Fact is that during that time actually Saddam was your political friend and Kuweit was your business-partner.

But when Saddam threatened to conquer the Kuweiti oil-fields the friendship with Saddam enden abruptly.

Still I think that terorism should not be mentioned in connection with iraq. Suicide bombers do not necessarily have to be terorists (not if they target soldiers). So the war against Iraq was not a war against teror. So any resistance fighter, who figths with an AK or just a bomb-belt remains a resist-ance fighter (wether he is a loyalist or whatever).

Or maybe I am wrong. Maybe anyone attacking a US soldier is considered as a terorist.

So what the US is facing right now is the feed-back of what the IRAQIS think of their war against Saddam. Do they seem to be greatful? Do they welcome the troops in the same way as people did in Afghanistan?

Whether this war was "help" or "delivery" must be judged by the people and not by the occupying force!

[Dogma 0]

Oh come on... Dont try to say that these "resistance fighters" are noble people who defend Iraq from those "evil Americans" These "Resistance fighters" are just cowardly terrorists, They are shooting at American boys and girls who try to bring order to their country,

If Saddam Hussein wasnt a threat to his neighbouring countries and the USA, I personally would let him stay just because those damn Iraqi's are so ungratefull, They live 34 years under a dictator and they all live in shacky houses and sometimes cant even afford food for their family while Saddam and his loyalists live in Palaces with gold sinks and candleholders etc, Furthermore he's got 32 Palaces spread over Iraq.

BTW the Americans wont ever shoot upon Iragi's just demonstrating, Im sure they fired with their weapons before American soldiers fired at them.

[Badgerboy 0]

Oh come on... Dont try to say that these "resistance fighters" are noble people who defend Iraq from those "evil Americans" These "Resistance fighters" are just cowardly terrorists, They are shooting at American boys and girls who try to bring order to their country,

If Saddam Hussein wasnt a threat to his neighbouring countries and the USA, I personally would let him stay just because those damn Iraqi's are so ungratefull, They live 34 years under a dictator and they all live in shacky houses and sometimes cant even afford food for their family while Saddam and his loyalists live in Palaces with gold sinks and candleholders etc, Furthermore he's got 32 Palaces spread over Iraq.

BTW the Americans wont ever shoot upon Iragi's just demonstrating, Im sure they fired with their weapons before American soldiers fired at them.

Have you read anything in this thread?

The Iraqi people are pissed off. Why? Several reasons. Under Saddam they had water, gas, and electricity. Now we blew the countries infrastructure to peices, they have none or very little in the way of these. When Baghdad was taken, the hospitals, museums, and schools were looted. Where were the troops? At the Oil ministry. (Even those of you who are pro-war pro-Bush have to admit that was a royal fuckup)

I think you are under the impression that all Iraqis live in shacks. They have proper houses (with A/C! ), drive cars, go to school, go to university, and now they can't do any of the above because its either been looted/blown up/no power/no petrol. (Yes, no petrol! Amazing! )

Top that with the fact that some of their friends or family may have been killed by Allied bombing, and its no surprise they are 'ungrateful'. Providing their country is fixed up, and the Allied forces then withdraw they will be better off, but at the moment they are a tad upset.

Before you babble again, actually look up some facts rather than spout the crap you see Presidential spokespersons come out with.

Edit- Would someone like to furnish him with the incidents of civilians being shot at? (the police one is a couple of pages back). Angry jumpy homesick soldiers + civilians = Lot's of trouble.

[ran 0]

Oh come on... Dont try to say that these "resistance fighters" are noble people who defend Iraq from those "evil Americans" These "Resistance fighters" are just cowardly terrorists, They are shooting at American boys and girls who try to bring order to their country,

If Saddam Hussein wasnt a threat to his neighbouring countries and the USA, I personally would let him stay just because those damn Iraqi's are so ungratefull, They live 34 years under a dictator and they all live in shacky houses and sometimes cant even afford food for their family while Saddam and his loyalists live in Palaces with gold sinks and candleholders etc, Furthermore he's got 32 Palaces spread over Iraq.

BTW the Americans wont ever shoot upon Iragi's just demonstrating, Im sure they fired with their weapons before American soldiers fired at them.

hey , nice to hear to voice of reason ...... wait .. not

wake up man

the shacky houses and the difficulties to get food and medicines have been partially caused by mainly by two things mainly made in USA : the embargo and the laser guided bombs

as a lot of people said before , terrorists attack civilians , the men actually fighting against the US forces can be considered as resistance fighters , now if you can't take any losses , your administration shouldn't have came in Iraq in the first place

the US armed forces stationed in Iraq are right now perceived as occupying forces by the Iraqis , and that's due to an exceptionnal lack of good sense from the men charged of the post-war rebuilding and military operations

[Dogma 0]

Quote[/b] ]Have you read anything in this thread?

The Iraqi people are pissed off. Why? Several reasons. Under Saddam they had water, gas, and electricity. Now we blew the countries infrastructure to peices, they have none or very little in the way of these. When Baghdad was taken, the hospitals, museums, and schools were looted. Where were the troops? At the Oil ministry. (Even those of you who are pro-war pro-Bush have to admit that was a royal fuckup)

I think you are under the impression that all Iraqis live in shacks. They have proper houses (with A/C! ), drive cars, go to school, go to university, and now they can't do any of the above because its either been looted/blown up/no power/no petrol. (Yes, no petrol! Amazing! )

Top that with the fact that some of their friends or family may have been killed by Allied bombing, and its no surprise they are 'ungrateful'. Providing their country is fixed up, and the Allied forces then withdraw they will be better off, but at the moment they are a tad upset.

Before you babble again, actually look up some facts rather than spout the crap you see Presidential spokespersons come out with.

Edit- Would someone like to furnish him with the incidents of civilians being shot at? (the police one is a couple of pages back). Angry jumpy homesick soldiers + civilians = Lot's of trouble.

tsss.

You should actually look up some facts than spout the crap you see the terrorists come out with.

So if im correct, you think you are the one who bases its message on facts?? Please dont let me laugh, America waged war because of oil? You just walk along al those hippies who say that, you should form an opinion of your own.

BTW, yes your right,Iraq was an nice country under Saddam, Hell it was even better than USA is.. Come on, dont be so naive, Iraq was an terrrible country under Saddam, you really should see some video's of Saddam's Republican garde torturing people for just saying their political views, or even if a woman slept with another man.. How dare you say Iraq was better off without Americans!

[Warin 0]

Just a friendly reminder to keep things civil. Please.

Otherwise, Post restrictions might follow, if you catch my meaning.

[Badgerboy 0]

Quote[/b] ]Have you read anything in this thread?

The Iraqi people are pissed off. Why? Several reasons. Under Saddam they had water, gas, and electricity. Now we blew the countries infrastructure to peices, they have none or very little in the way of these. When Baghdad was taken, the hospitals, museums, and schools were looted. Where were the troops? At the Oil ministry. (Even those of you who are pro-war pro-Bush have to admit that was a royal fuckup)

I think you are under the impression that all Iraqis live in shacks. They have proper houses (with A/C! ), drive cars, go to school, go to university, and now they can't do any of the above because its either been looted/blown up/no power/no petrol. (Yes, no petrol! Amazing! )

Top that with the fact that some of their friends or family may have been killed by Allied bombing, and its no surprise they are 'ungrateful'. Providing their country is fixed up, and the Allied forces then withdraw they will be better off, but at the moment they are a tad upset.

Before you babble again, actually look up some facts rather than spout the crap you see Presidential spokespersons come out with.

Edit- Would someone like to furnish him with the incidents of civilians being shot at? (the police one is a couple of pages back). Angry jumpy homesick soldiers + civilians = Lot's of trouble.

tsss.

You should actually look up some facts than spout the crap you see the terrorists come out with.

So if im correct, you think you are the one who bases its message on facts?? Please dont let me laugh, America waged war because of oil? You just walk along al those hippies who say that, you should form an opinion of your own.

BTW, yes your right,Iraq was an nice country under Saddam, Hell it was even better than USA is.. Come on, dont be so naive, Iraq was an terrrible country under Saddam, you really should see some video's of Saddam's Republican garde torturing people for just saying their political views, or even if a woman slept with another man.. How dare you say Iraq was better off without Americans!  

Hardly.

Okay, tell me why the US went to war. The reason it SAID it went to war.....

WMD's.

And none have been found, after months of looking for them. The 'liberating the Iraqi people and killing a nasty man' is not an excuse. Bush told the world that he knew that there were WMD's, defied the UN, pissed off loads of countries, invaded, lost Saddam, and now they can't find any WMD.

Best of all, they are going to have to ask the UN for help, as the current deployments in theatre can't cope. I can't wait to see Bush squirm.

As for the people attacking allied troops, Bush might call them terrorists but they aren't. They are attacking military targets, and not going kill crazy on civilians.

As for your closing tirade, if a 'two bit gangster' like Saddam can provide gas/water/etc, you would think that the the world foremost superpower could do so as well.

From an Iraqi's eyes, yes you got rid of our murdering bastard of a leader, but now we have no water/gas or electricity. Where did I mention that living under Saddam was a paradise? You seemed to think that 'ungrateful shack dwelling Iraqi's should be happy we are there'. I was merely poking holes in your statement, I can't help it if you are incapable of perceiving facts that a child could understand. Hmm, lets try again.

Living with Saddam = Bad!

Living with Yanks = Bad!

The bit that led the former to the latter = Fucking awful!

I'd be a bit pissed really.

[denoir 0]

Oh come on... Dont try to say that these "resistance fighters" are noble people who defend Iraq from those "evil Americans" These "Resistance fighters" are just cowardly terrorists, They are shooting at American boys and girls who try to bring order to their country,

If Saddam Hussein wasnt a threat to his neighbouring countries and the USA, I personally would let him stay just because those damn Iraqi's are so ungratefull, They live 34 years under a dictator and they all live in shacky houses and sometimes cant even afford food for their family while Saddam and his loyalists live in Palaces with gold sinks and candleholders etc, Furthermore he's got 32 Palaces spread over Iraq.

BTW the Americans wont ever shoot upon Iragi's just demonstrating, Im sure they fired with their weapons before American soldiers fired at them.

I was sure that this was some form of joke, a parody of sorts. Now I'm no longer sure.

It's interesting how people can live in a complete fantasy world that has nothing in common with the real world.

Or perhaps this is just the ramblings of a 10 year old kid.

Nevertheless the view is so twisted that it is pretty much a waste of time to engage in a debate.

[Badgerboy 0]

Edit - Rant retracted temporarily.

[DracoPaladore 0]

Government cutting pay to US troops

[Tamme 0]

Government cutting pay to US troops

Well that's just wonderful. Nice way to reward those troops wo have suffered and done all the hard work.

[Badgerboy 0]

Government cutting pay to US troops

Well that's just wonderful. Nice way to reward those troops wo have suffered and done all the hard work.

Looking at it, I think its more bad timing than anything. The scheme will be extended in my opinion,or Bush will get it in the neck.

[FSPilot 0]

Albert Schweizer

Quote[/b] ]Still I think that terorism should not be mentioned in connection with iraq. Suicide bombers do not necessarily have to be terorists (not if they target soldiers). So the war against Iraq was not a war against teror. So any resistance fighter, who figths with an AK or just a bomb-belt remains a resist-ance fighter (wether he is a loyalist or whatever).

Or maybe I am wrong. Maybe anyone attacking a US soldier is considered as a terorist.

Again that's not what I meant.  I was talking about people who want to kill any American they can get their hands on, but can't afford the plane ticket to America.

Quote[/b] ]

Government cutting pay to US troops

Well that's just wonderful. Nice way to reward those troops wo have suffered and done all the hard work.

They don't do it for the money you know.

[Die Alive 0]

US company plans Iraq war footage game

Quote[/b] ]Government cutting pay to US troops

Reuters: No Pay Cut for Troops in Iraq, Afghanistan-Pentagon

-=Die Alive=-

[Warin 0]

BadgerBoy

Quote[/b] ]

Government cutting pay to US troops

Well that's just wonderful. Nice way to reward those troops wo have suffered and done all the hard work.

They don't do it for the money you know.

You've said some inane things, but this is one of the silliest!

If you think the paycheque doesnt matter, go talk to some of the military families living paycheque to paycheque.

While being a defender of Truthâ„¢, Freedomâ„¢, and Theâ„¢ Americanâ„¢ Wayâ„¢ might fill the cockles of ones heart with gladness, it doesnt feed your family.

I'd say Bush better look at extending hte current pay scheme, or he's going ot create a lot of political enemies among the little people that are normally too indifferent to vote...

Edit: Hee hee hee. Okie, mebbe he did!

[PiNs_Da_Smoka 0]

BadgerBoy

Quote[/b] ]

Government cutting pay to US troops

Well that's just wonderful. Nice way to reward those troops wo have suffered and done all the hard work.

They don't do it for the money you know.

You've said some inane things, but this is one of the silliest!

If you think the paycheque doesnt matter, go talk to some of the military families living paycheque to paycheque.

I'd have to agree here. I don't have a family to support or any of that, but i have problems just as big to take care of. And i am leaving for a tour in iraq on Oct 1. And that money waiting for me when i get out is very, VERY, important to me. I need my tax free pay check AND that on top of the danger pay just to come close to pay off mt debts. If it was lowered or put back to where it was, i don't know wtf i would do.

Thinking that we don't do it for the money is stupid. Granted, i know alot of guys in my company (18th Engineer Co. "Sappers Foprward!") that are all gung-ho patriots, but if we didn't get payed, i know a few people that would go awol. I hate to say it, but sometimes its money that drives us. And thats just the facts of life. You can give me the "typical american money grubbing dog" bullshit if you must, but thats ok. The truth hurts, and i'm used to the pain.