Related Information to Post War Iraq

Post War Iraq - Page 33

Can someone tell me exactly what Saddam's being tried for?

And why does America have the right to try him? If he's going through the court systems it should either be those in his country or those of the United Nations. Since when does the US have sole authority to try anyone they find guilty of an American crime in another country? Saddam is not an American citizen and did not commit crimes on American soil. How can we just go in there, pick him up, and try him here? Different countries think differently, that's a given. Every country has it's own beliefs in right or wrong and what makes a crime and what doesn't. We do not have the right to force our right and wrong and beliefs in crime down a person of a different nationalities throat because we think they're wrong. This is just like those stupid holy wars. (ie)"My religion is right, yours is wrong, you must die".

The United Nations needs to step in and do something to stop Bush. Bush is the biggest terrorist of them all. A terrorist with money (and a powerful daddy) living in a rich country is much more powerful than a terrorist from a 3rd world country.

Iraq War Post

Wow, great responses so far. I was 'afraid' to show up and say something, so everybody calm down and do not try to beat me up

Fireduck said:

You sound prettt angry here Fireduck but I do understand what you mean and this is something I was telling a friend online last night. Most Americans I have met have a deep love for their country which I admire and respect deeply but they lack the sense of what's in the other side of the world, I do not know if its because of a lack of travelling or because they are so immerse in their own culture that they cannot see something else...I do not know....in my experience the USA have tried to impose the so called 'freedom' they enjoy in their countries in others, I don't see anything wrong with that, my point are two: the methods they use and the hypocresy in the speech. Particularly with Pres. Bush the methods that he's showing so far are far from diplomatic for the President of the most powerful nation in the world, he may get up in a mood one morning and decide to blow us up all!. He's scary to me, anyway, when I mean the hypocresy is 'oh we are doing so other countries can enjoy the freedom we do have in the USA' that's bologna to me! and I will say why, nobody, absolutly nobody (specially a country like the USA) would try to help a country for free, just to see the people happy. Look at Afghanistan for instance, the Taliban was there since 1996 and the people were suffering terrible things, what did they USA do? nothing!!! UNTIL after September 11th! Eureka! ONLY when the USA interested were in jeopardy or affected, THEN the USA decided to do something. Now, do not take me wrong, I'm not saying they are force to help other nations because they do not have to! my point is: do not come to me with a speech of humanity and trying to help other people...because is not so!. That's is what bothers me the most, the hypocresy, now after all these is politics! but I cannot understand the average American who may believe it! now that's something I don't understand.


Nighthawlk said:

Who asked the USA to do that? Please tell me.

I do not agree with this based on what I wrote above, nobody (and specially a power nation like US) would do something just to see other countries take advantage of their culture. To think otherwise is very naive. We are talking about countries, politics, agendas!. We are talking about real world, not the ideal thing.

You're misinterpreting culture with what we are speaking. I love Mc Donalds and Olive Garden but it doesn't mean I have to agree with what the Government wants to do. Plus if you have traveled before, you will see that the US have spread a lot of their culture in other countries BUT not neccesarily their way of thinking.

To rebuild something you destroyed before you forgot to add.

He made it very clear but I still wonder who is Pres. Bush to tellother countries what they can or cannot do? tell me.

Please Nighthawlk! you must be kidding! the whole speech of Bush before going to Iraq was about the WMDs! forgot the presentation to UN and all???

Now just because I am critic about some USA ways of handle things, it doesn't make me an anti-american...it makes me somebody who can see the issue from another perspective.

Post War Iraq History & Civil Business Politics

Me angry. LDS? No, not really. Just exasperated at the way the American govt, Bush & co., and some others seem to think that it's their way or no way.

One American soldier gets killed in the theater of war, it's reported by all the news wires of the world. A dozen Iraqis, including innocents, get killed it's just another byline. Nameless objects. Just another day, another few fallen nameless objects. Anyone ever seek out the story of how the parents, brothers, sisters, sons, daughters, husband, wife of those nameless objects feel about losing their loved ones out there? I am not talking about the suicide bombers, etc. I am talking about the innocent women and children that die while going about their daily life, caught in the crossfires.

But what can we do about it? Nothing. After all, when you do not put names (and along with it, personality, soul, character, human face) on those killed, it is easy to read it as just another report. We all know about Jessica Lynch, but do we know much about the other few hundred US soldiers that died? Not much, except maybe in their hometowns. And do we know anything at all about the thousands of Iraqis that died? Nameless objects!

There are more ways than one to solve problems. And according to the Chinese Tao Te Ching (just take it as Chinese philosophy), water is soft, very soft. But even a solid rock gets eroded by this subtle power over time. What may seem like a soft approach can resolve even the most hardened minds. But when you crack two hard rocks together, sparks fly.

So, whatever happened to the kinder, gentler America that one president said sometime ago. Can't remember who, but definitely not this Bush.

Page 33 Iraq War Post

"Senior US and British officials now dwell almost exclusively on the atrocities perpetrated by Saddam against his people, and the opportunity provided by his removal for a regeneration of the Middle East.

Opinion polls point to the strategy working. The US public has forgotten what it was being told every day only nine months ago about the "imminent threat" the former Iraqi leader posed to the US, while the capture of Saddam last Saturday had boosted the President's approval ratings to a healthy 60 per cent-plus."
.......................................................................................................

Nighthawk,

I did not write that two paragraphs above, but it is just so true as with you, where you have obviously forgotten about the 'imminent threat'.

Read the full article here:
https://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle...sp?story=474598

Iraq War Post

Interesting, LDS. I wrote that last post before I came across this today. Yes, we must honor the dead.
"Third, the humanitarian imperative must be to locate and name the dead, regardless of how they died"

Read this article: https://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,...1110060,00.html

Post War Iraq

I wasn't saying that there wasn't a lot of discussion of an imminent threat to the US and even the rest of the world, but that President Bush wasn't focusing entirely on WMDs the way most people seem to think he was. It was actually the media, going to all their "experts" and "talking heads" that focused on the WMDs. The administration, at least in my memory, was focused on the entire situation, which did include WMDs, as well as other types of terrorist support and activity.

Remember that when he made his speach a few days after 9/11, that he warned Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, and everyone else that the war on terror was about to start, and they could either participate in it or expect to receive it. All of them ignored him. Iraq has been, for three decades, one of the leading supporters of Hammas, Hezbollah, and all the other terrorist organizations. Iraq, under Hussein, boasted of possession of WMDs, and used forms against its own people and its neighbors. There was credible evidence that they had chemical and biological weapons recently. They defied the UN resolutions for over 12 years, indicating that they had WMDs and were ready to use them.

The Iraqi leader was an imminent threat. Now he isn't.

BTW, it worked. He is in prison, somewhere. And other owners of WMDs (Kaddafi) are beginning to see that it isn't a good thing to keep them.

NightHawk

Post War Iraq - Page 33

Nighthawk, there are many ways to look at an issue. Your views may not be wrong, and mine may not wrong either. What I do know is not to trust the media too much. After a while, kind of get the hang of smelling the rats in the reports ---- whether it's a slanted report or not.

Ok, maybe this should be in another thread:

With regards to Gaddafi. Now that is something I would WORRY about. Do you seriously think he's honest about the sudden change of heart? Gaddafi had condone, financed and voiced openly his support for the terrorists bombings etc., in the past. (btw, I don't think Saddam did, although he was very cruel in suppressing his own people). What has turned him around? A leopard doesn't change its spots, definitely not from one extreme to the other in so short a time. For a long while, he was the dangerous one in the Arab world. Very unpredictable character.

Yes, I was very disbelieving when I heard the news of him offering to dismantle all WMD that he has. I think he has something up his sleeves. The capture of Saddam changed his mind, and scare him silly? I don't think so. Remember too, that Reagan bombed Libya and his kid got killed in the bombing? How did he feel then? If anyone of those Arabs has a bone to pick with the US, it's him.

Something is wrong with the picture. Something fishy. I hope I am proven wrong!

Post War Iraq Politics Business Civil & History - Page 33

In my memory, I recall specifically that the Bush administration and President Bush himself did not focus the 'entire situation' but specifically about the WMDs, Remember Powell showing pictures, videos and places where he says these weapons were hidding? (Presentation to the UN) now, the Media did not invent that.

The world still asking where they are???

This is something that bothers me a lot, like I said hundreds of times only because fo what happened in 9/11 the US decide to bomb Afghanistan and stopped once and for all the Taliban and also get rid of Saddam, and I have my doubts that if 9/11 didn't take place, we will be talking about this. Now, don't take me wrong, I am glad they get rid of the Taliban and Saddam, what I just cannot stand is the 'speech' of doing it to save the world from terrorists because I know, we know, that everything was done just because the USA was affected, otherwise, the women in Afghanistan will still suffering the evil of the Taliban.