Related Information to Post War Iraq

Post War Iraq - Page 3

Okay people. I gave the International Issues a break for a while...;D but here I am ready to answer some statements made.

QUOTE

LDS, Sorry to disagree with you, but I remain singularly unimpressed with Ghandi. Even the most cursory look at India today will tell you they fared far better under "British Colonialism" than under all the ones who have come since then

It's not if it's Gandhi or Bush saying it...but the words are true. People cannot be benefit out of any war Stranger....families are broken, psychological and physical impacts will affect the lives of the people FOREVER. Or you want me to remind you of the effects of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs for example?.

QUOTE

b- The pipeline was in violation of existing UN sanctions in the first place.

You confuse me Stranger. For one side, its important that the UN sanctions must be respect it but for the other say you are saying later on that the US don't care what the UN says...so...what's the real point here? you all care or not? OR you care ONLY if other countries are NOT respecting those resolutions but when its time for YOU all to respect it...then, the attitute of 'we don't really care what the UN has to say' shows up. Explain me this please.

QUOTE

1. What governs what the US can have that other countries cannot. For instance why can the US have nuclear facilities but Korea cannot.

What a great point JB. Stranger, I read your reply but it doesn't seems to me that you answer it. The US has also nuclear weapons, so the US is also a threat for the rest of the world. Who decides who is a threat and who is not?. The US itself?. When they themselves have the kind of weapons they want to make other countries to get rid of...or maybe even worst and more powerful weapons than those. Care to explain this?.

QUOTE

2- The US talks to the UN primarily to be nice. We never have accepted the body as anything other than a place to talk things over. All that is our government's efforts to play the political game with them, and give them credence, if possible.

If so, again why you all are quick to mention when a country doesn't fulfill a UN resolution and you all are ready to attack them because of that but when it doesn't suit you all, then 'we just see the UN as a place to talk things over'?? : You all contradict yourself a lot.

QUOTE

Another curiousity I see lately is everyone is so hot to blame the US for the Looting in Iraq, but no one has thought to look at the Iraqi people themselves. It is their country, and they are supposedly such a proud nation. So why are they insanely destroying their own heritage and treasures?

Think about how a person who has lived for years under the iron hand of Saddam suddenly get rid of him...they're like dogs running wild in the forest! it's obvious to me they will react in the way they're doing it. The US expected more 'thanks' or other type of attitute but it's real silly to think that...this people wanted to get rid of this guy and after all this the US wants to make an interin government to govern this people. It's crazy! I know what the US is trying to do but I don't think it's a good idea. This people don't want to be govern by anybody who is not from Iraq and it's understandable. The looting thing is an issue that happens everywhere when things are like in chaos, there are always some idiots who take advantage of that.

QUOTE

Hmmm, You want a formal statement of some sort. How about this? To Whom It May Concern: Keep your radical political activism confined to countries who are meek enough to put up with it. Mess with America and die.

Mess with America and Die?. *shaking head*I tell you I don't want to sound negative or anti-american I just hope that the USA and Pres. Bush know what they're doing. One day sooner or later countries will get together and they will kick the butt of him or the president at that time and the rest of the US. This is a fact Stranger, the US is only making enemies so far we all know that...and they cannot pretend that the same countries that are supporting this war are going to support the whole list of wars that Bush have ready in hand.

Iraq War Post

LDS,
War is a bad thing. We agree  on that. There is no solace for the dead or their loved ones. Agreed. No argument there.

I don't mean to confuse you.
I was merely pointing out that people were griping about what the UN had mandated in the first place, so why were they griping.
The US would have cut the pipeline in any case. Have you noticed how reasonable Syria has become in the last few days? And North Korea?
The cold, hard fact is that the US, including 70-80% of our population, doesn't give a fig about the UN, could care less what they think about anything.
I was merely pointing out that the people responding were griping about something they said should be done in the first place, so why were they griping?

Of course I didn't answer the nuclear question, because I can't. It is a monumental problem that has reached nightmarish proportions. I wish that we had never stumbled upon those secrets.
I am one of those who believe we should be totally nuclear free, including all industrial use. The human race is simply too stupid to sensibly handle such forces.

I am convinced that was all politics.
I said early on in this thing that it didn't make sense. Saddam was minding his own business, terrorizing and murdering his people. Business as usual.
Of course he has bio-chem weapons. He would be an idiot to get rid of them, with enemies like Iran, Syria and Israel. So who cares, right?

But Bush, all of a sudden, out of the blue, went nuts over Iraq. Somebody gave him information that hit his hot button.
Whatever it was, it was enough to convnce both Tony Blair, the Prime Minister of Spain, Australlia, the royal family of Saudia Arabia, Kuwait and twenty-five other nations.
Blair and the Prime Minister of Spain have laid their entire political futures on the block for this.
And you can bet it wasn't about a few drums of nerve gas.
All that was fal-de-rah to parade before the UN for public consumption.

Then suddenly France, Germany, Russia and China go nuts trying to stop it. Hmmmmm.

At this point, one has to begin thinking, not reacting emotionally, which is what the vast majority of the world did.

We have, as an exile in this country, Saddam's top nuclear scientist, the man who took his development to its peak until his defection about 10 years ago.

I don't know what he has told the State Department, but he has said in television interviews that when he left they were about five years away from developing a working reactor.

Was that it? I wondered. I still don't know.

Then, after we got good and cranked up, low and behold we find out Iran has not one, but two nuclear plants under construction, and nearing completion.

Iran is far more dangerous than Iraq ever dreamed of being. AND, our only land access to them IS THROUGH IRAQ.

You will note that the very first airfields out troops siezed are very close to Iran's border. Amazing coincidence, wepecially when you look at the map and see that, while all the troops were heading due north, an entire division diverted west just to grab those air fields. Ther was no other immediate strategic value to them, other than to impede Iraq from shelling Israel.
I remain cnvinced that Iran's looming nuclear posture was, in fact, the main motivation behind the invasion. But that is simply speculation on my part.

The part about the interim government isn't really an issue. What we are seeing is a people able to try and determine their own future for the first time in most of their lives. As I watch it, I am happy. They are just as vocal, argumentative and have just as many dissident voices as we do here in America.
They will ultimately decide for themselves, reject what they don't like and get on with it. It will take years to do it.

The US is making enemies?
The fact is, LDS, that no one has ever liked the US.
Europe has always been anti-American. We know it, we accept it.
The only time any European country is ever nice to us is when they want foreign aid or when they want us to save them from the latest petty dictator.

We are already despised throughout Europe. So what?
Yes, "mess with America and die". What other message will get through to insane psychopaths who love to kill people.

Once they get that in their heads, they will go back to setting off little bombs in European cities, because they can get away with that.
The point being that it is simply too costly, too risky to kill Americans. I know of nothing else that will work.

Do you have any suggestions?

Post War Iraq History & Civil Business Politics

QUOTE

I would recomment to both you and Annie that you become better informed on all this rather than rely on stereotyped opinions that you probably got from your peers. It might sound good on campus, but all that "Daddy Bush" stuff really has nothing to do with the situation.

Stereotyped opinions? Sounds like that's what you're regurgitating from the press reports. And I DO have access to all that you read too. I am on the Net. And in fact I have access to a lot more other news reports because I am not in the US. I do not just get news that are slanted to please the political masters of the day. Thank goodness there is a whole lot more of the world out there! There are differing views in other parts of the world, and it should be OKAY! That's what makes the world go round. I think if only the Americans can learn to accept what they preached .... freedom of expression. :-[  There cannot be only your way or no way. Wake up! :

Well, now that I have expressed what I want to, I guess I will lighten up again.  

Page 3 Iraq War Post

QUOTE

I was merely pointing out that people were griping about what the UN had mandated in the first place, so why were they griping. The US would have cut the pipeline in any case. Have you noticed how reasonable Syria has become in the last few days? And North Korea? The cold, hard fact is that the US, including 70-80% of our population, doesn't give a fig about the UN, could care less what they think about anything. I was merely pointing out that the people responding were griping about something they said should be done in the first place, so why were they griping?

I read and re-read this part of your message but I could not fully understand what you was trying to say, can you say it again by using other words?. Thanks.  Who are the ones that were griping?. My point before was that Pres. Bush for instance said that Saddam had been avoiding the UN resolution for the past 12 years and that was one of the reasons to bomb Iraq, to disarm them. Now tell me, isn't that hypocrital? for one side he said 'we will bomb Iraq because they don't respect the UN resolution' but by the other side he says in a way 'well, we don't really care if we have the backup from the UN or not, we will bomb them anyway'. Isn't that double speech??. The other point I was making is that the US has the same weapons and even more dangerous weapons than other countries..so why the other countries must disarm and not the US? please tell me why!. who decides who can have them or not or whether they're going to use it for good or for evil?.
Personally I'm not in disagreement with taking out of power a guy like Saddam what concerns me seriously and deeply is whether if  Bush it's going to do the same thing in other countries. That concerns me a lot. I don't know, hope to be wrong but I have the impression that he will be going all the rest of the East nations to do the same thing of Afghanistan and Iraq. It scares me to death!. And as you mentioned, all this is politics, I don't think that he will go ONLY after the dictators, he will go after any country that doesn't suit him or the interests of the United States. That's the feeling I get.  Isn't that a form of dictatorship too?.

QUOTE

The US is making enemies? The fact is, LDS, that no one has ever liked the US. Europe has always been anti-American. We know it, we accept it. The only time any European country is ever nice to us is when they want foreign aid or when they want us to save them from the latest petty dictator.

Argentina did like the US a lot when Carlos Menem was President. I personallty like the USA too, I like the good, positive things that the Government and their institutions do to help people. They have wonderful education programs and others to help the less fortunate.  I just don't like the polititians, the way they think they're invencible and that they're better than anybody else, sometimes that same thing it's being reflected in some the citizens and that's why some people around the world don't like them.
I know what Bush is trying to do but all this is creating even more hate and it will bring even more terrorists attacks like 9/11...isn't one the priorities of a President to protect the citizens? You as an US citizen feel safe if you have to travel abroad?. If I was an American I will feel afraid if I have to travel abroad knowing that I'm a target of a psychopat and hateful person.
My point is that all this will bring even more deaths and since Terrorism cannot be stopped and everybody knows that, then why to risk your citizens in such a way?.

Iraq War Post

QUOTE

b- The pipeline was in violation of existing UN sanctions in the first place.

Bush should decide once and for all, whether he wants the UN or not. If he is for the UN, then he must answer whether the sanctions has achieved its objective vis-a-vis the elimination of WMD in Iraq.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2003Apr16.html

ST. LOUIS, April 16 -- President Bush urged the United Nations today to lift economic sanctions on Iraq, and warned that the United States sees a new era of warfare in which lethal technology and secret operations allow swift, precise strikes on threatening governments.

The U.N. sanctions, imposed when Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, restrict Iraqi oil exports and place the expenditure of oil revenue under U.N. control. Their lifting was conditioned on Saddam Hussein's destruction of all weapons of mass destruction and other actions that are now moot.

The Bush administration views the sanctions' early repeal as a crucial part of Iraq's recovery and steps toward self-government as the war wanes. The administration also sees oil as an important long-term source of funds for reconstruction. Officials said they believe the United Nations will move to lift the sanctions as early as next week.

Post War Iraq

I think this is another good perspective, albeit a different one from Stranger's.



Democracy only grows from below

https://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,...,937552,00.html

Post War Iraq - Page 3

Whew!
This is a lot of answering!
Fireduck first.
I have no idea what information you have access to, thus cannot comment on it. For my part, I rarely rely on our contemporary new media for information because they almost never give any relevant- or correct facts.
And they are hardly slanted towards the Administration. Most are seriously left wing, except for Fox, which is just as right wing as the others are liberal.

However, when I see comments like "doing it for Daddy Bush" and "doing it for the oil", I know I am seeing uninformed opinions. The real world just doesn't work like that. but it would take pages to explain. If you are really interested, check into the history of the nationalization of the Arab oil industry. Then you would realize we don't have to fight over oil.
Wake up to what? Have we not been swapping differing viewpoints freely here? Have I sent a hit squad after you?
(actually I have, they just haven't got there, yet)

LDS,
You can't make sense out of what is said in political organizations like the UN because it IS double speak. It is all two-faced, lying politicians stabbing each other in the back while they smile.

Your problem is you actually take them at face value, thinking they are honest. They are not.
For instance, France decried the involvement in Iraq because they didn't want the world to know they had secret arms deals, had given technology to them, that they had violated the sanctions in a hundred different ways for money.
You simply can't take all that seriously.
First rule of thumb. Assume they are lying until proven otherwise.

The disarmament question boils down to one thing. Who has the you-know-what to enforce it. As to who is good and evil, etc., we can only hope.

The one advantage the US has is we don't let our Presidents stay in office very long, so we minimize the damage they can do. Next time around we'll probably have a wuss like Jimmy Carter for a few years and the terrorists can have a field day.

And no, Bush won't go after anybody he likes. If the people of America don't like the action he takes, they will stop it. Remember it was the people here who stopped Viet Nam. No President can act without support of the people.

I agree with you about politicians. They're the same the world over. It is the most lucrative form of Welfare I have ever seen. I have often said that wealthy men put their pampered sons in politics to keep them from messing up the family fortune.

Back to Fireduck,
Bush should decide once and for all..
He has, Fireduck. He is just blowing smoke at them like LDS and I have been talking about.
Bush is not for the UN. Neither am I and neither is anybody in the US.
Bush is simply trying to con them out of some money.
"Come join in the reconstruction of Iraq".
"Play a role, be important. And pay the bill".

Oil sanctions.
I think they should lift them. Saddam is gone. Now let the people get on with their lives.

Post War Iraq Politics Business Civil & History - Page 3

Fireduck,
My only real disagreement with that article is
"Leftist Warmongers".
That's a contradiction of terms.  The right wing are generally the hawks.

Generally, I liked the article. I have some minor disagreements, like the oil thing.

I don't believe people really know that we ALREADY control the oil. That's the slick part about it.

That's why I said check into the history. See, I remember wondering why the UK and US went to all the trouble and expense of building all that and basically just gave it away to the Arabs without a whimper.

So I did a study of the history and the process. They didn't give a thing away. They just relieved themselves of the burden of production, maintenance, overhead, etc., by giving it over to the Arabs- and still get money out of it. Today, right now. On every barrel produced.

You think politicians are slick? Baloney. The billionaires of this world are the slickest, smartest con men you could ever hope to see. Politicians are puppets, bought and sold every day.

You think OPEC controls the supply of oil? Not so.
check it out. It's a real eye-opener.

But contrary to what you might think, I liked the article.