who is the biggest war criminal?

[EoinC]

...Nothing good comes w/o a price. I'm not devaluing any iraqi people but I would wager to say that regardless of the obvious hardships, there are more than a few iraqi's that are optimistic of the future. Eventually the u.s. will have to leave. Our people don't want to be there any more than the iraqi's want us there. They would much rather be based in germany or italy or spain or...

Neo-colonialism? Which reason are we using this time for invading a sovereign Nation? Is it the "They don't know it, but they'd be better off if we took control of them" or the "These people will think differently after they've eaten McDonalds and deep-fried Spam" or the "We felt we should help them because they're obviously not capable of helping themselves" or the "It was our job to install SH, so it's our job to remove him" or the "If we don't show them the right way, they're liable to end up becoming Muslim" or the "These people are too weak to be able to ask for help so we need to take control" or the "These people are very strong and are liable to attack the Western Nations" or is it the "These people have oil under their gardens - we like oil - let's make these people our people and their oil our oil"?
I'm still trying to recall where I read that letter saying "We, the people, ask that you come into our Country and rescue us from ourselves" - perhaps I didn't. Looking forward in great anticipation to the Allied invasions of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia for failing to comply with the West's democratic models of governance. Will it be live on CNN?

 

[darkboong]

I get this funny feeling after reading your post, i don't know; call it intuition, that you will never come around to seeing anything positive resulting from SH's ouster

I did point out that I was pleased to see some progress... It's just nowhere near enough.

Our civil war alone resulted in >500,000 casualties of our own people.

Poor example because it doesn't factor in a crushingly superior force invading the country at the same time. I would need some convincing that Iraq was engaged in full blown civil war before, during and after the invasion.

I'm not devaluing any iraqi people but I would wager to say that regardless of the obvious hardships, there are more than a few iraqi's that are optimistic of the future.

The majority of the optimisitic quotes I have seen have come from the stooge politicians, ex-pats and exiles... They are not the people who actually *have* to live there without a bunch of body guards, without 24x7 electricity, without fuel, without air-conditioning, without jobs, without money. To be fair the government stooges do get a taste of what the ordinary folks live like, they do get assassinated occasionally and they even get their houses turned over and arrested by US squaddies, without due process of course.

Our people don't want to be there any more than the iraqi's want us there. They would much rather be based in germany or italy or spain or...

FWIW I think the Iraqis would rather they were based in Germany Italy or Spain too. That would make everyone happy, so why not do it ?

 

[Carrera]

When Argentina invaded the Falklands, Thatcher decided to go to war. When asked what the reasons and motives were behind the decision, she replied that Argentina had a poor record of human rights. The idea of the British islanders being governed by an Argentinian dictator who presided over torture and state terror was something that couldn't be tolerated at the time.
Now, I wouldn't go so far as to compare the U.S. with Argentina at that time, but, in all honesty, does the U.S. have a good record for human rights where dark-skinned people are concerned?
This is what pisses me off about Geldof. He's been sucking up to George Bush on a "let's kiss cuddle and forget the past" basis, not considering Bush has presided over countless deaths of black (and white) people in his State. The U.S. executes more black people than whites and I have the statistics to prove it. This is common knowledge.
The U.S. was founded on the slave trade and continued to endorse slavery (based on Christianity) when Europe finally banned it (yet the U.S. wasn't bombed for its enslavement of African negros).
Blacks have always been marginalised in the U.S. and have been significantly poorer than the middle class whites. Only recently, and in some states, has the situation gradually improved but this is something black people had to fight tooth and nail to acquire.
So, where is this going?
Simple. The obvious question is should an Iraqi want to be governed by a Christian white administration whose history abounds with discrimination and a huge proportion of black people living in poverty (as part of gangs) and a higher proportion of blacks sitting on death row?
Would you seek to be governed by George Bush if you were an Iraqi or even a black African? Well, if I were either of Arabic or African descent, I certainly wouldn't want to be under Bush's jurisdiction. It's that simple.

I get this funny feeling after reading your post, i don't know; call it intuition, that you will never come around to seeing anything positive resulting from SH's ouster Our civil war alone resulted in >500,000 casualties of our own people. Our generals, in the civil war, went to west point together. They didn't want to fight eachother but they did. General Lee's property, a stone's throw from Washington D.C. was confiscated by the Union/Federal's (U.S. Gov't) & turned into a cemetary for Union war dead. Nothing good comes w/o a price. I'm not devaluing any iraqi people but I would wager to say that regardless of the obvious hardships, there are more than a few iraqi's that are optimistic of the future. Eventually the u.s. will have to leave. Our people don't want to be there any more than the iraqi's want us there. They would much rather be based in germany or italy or spain or...

 

[Carrera]

Italy, Germany and Spain aren't rich in oil. Plus, they are too stable to be able to justify any kind of invasion. The only way America will pull out of Iraq is once they feel sure they have a puppet style government in place that won't sell all the oil to France, Russian and Germany. The idea is that only U.S. companies will be invited, and a few scraps tossed towards France.
However, the instability, suicide bombings, protests and chaos are a testimony that these people want the U.S. out and aren't willing to just walk away and let the world believe all of this has been for the good of the country.
It's like Vietnam all over again. Sooner or later, opinion will swing away from this war and we'll be seeing more protests in Washington and New York.

I get this funny feeling after reading your post, i don't know; call it intuition, that you will never come around to seeing anything positive resulting from SH's ouster Our civil war alone resulted in >500,000 casualties of our own people. Our generals, in the civil war, went to west point together. They didn't want to fight eachother but they did. General Lee's property, a stone's throw from Washington D.C. was confiscated by the Union/Federal's (U.S. Gov't) & turned into a cemetary for Union war dead. Nothing good comes w/o a price. I'm not devaluing any iraqi people but I would wager to say that regardless of the obvious hardships, there are more than a few iraqi's that are optimistic of the future. Eventually the u.s. will have to leave. Our people don't want to be there any more than the iraqi's want us there. They would much rather be based in germany or italy or spain or...

 

[lyotard]

regarding the quote below, and yes, those who respond to it;

getting one's mind around this logic is negating the fundamental underlying reality of bush led war crime, kicked off by deception for the benefit of us intersest at the expense of the innocent.

going off on this kind of mental masturbation is nothing short of rationalizing, justifying and condoning what has come before.


what if, in the us, there were no groceries, gas, power or safety from foreign led invasion in the resultant aftermath, would we then analyze and applaud how well the lights are turned back on for us by the invaders?

but this cannot seem valid due to the arrogant nature of us superiority that those who put forth this kind of justification hold in their own minds.

it is indeed a slippery slope, now the us need only look to where else it can invade with the mental support this view permits, "after all, look at the benefits after the fact" and off the taxpayer fueled military empire goes...

there are people taking this same fundamentaly flawed view and justifying it in use against the us, perhaps with the view that, "yes, innocents were targeted and perhaps unjustly so, and my relatives died in the effort, but at least now there is an improvement in that (insert your rationale here) and this does justify the means. even though i do not personaly fight against the us i do support those that do for these reasons"

responding in kind to posts like that quoted here gives this poisonous brand of mindset a sort of validity, which then serves to cloud and minimize, if not forgive the criminal acts which the bush wars have perpetrated, leaving all the accountabilities and consequences from these wars out of perspective.

this post has now exceeded 5000 views. not that those who are pulling you all down the road are in any way knackered, but you who are sitting on are now ecouraged to move to the front and take some wind.

notice some who are pulling do have fresh legs but tend to be a bit squirrely, riding us through holes and shards...

Accomplishments:
Generated 4,518 MW on October 6, surpassing the pre-war level of 4,400 MW.
USAID is working to add 827 MW of capacity
ect

 

[davidmc]

Neo-colonialism? Which reason are we using this time for invading a sovereign Nation? Is it the "They don't know it, but they'd be better off if we took control of them" or the "These people will think differently after they've eaten McDonalds and deep-fried Spam" or the "We felt we should help them because they're obviously not capable of helping themselves" or the "It was our job to install SH, so it's our job to remove him" or the "If we don't show them the right way, they're liable to end up becoming Muslim" or the "These people are too weak to be able to ask for help so we need to take control" or the "These people are very strong and are liable to attack the Western Nations" or is it the "These people have oil under their gardens - we like oil - let's make these people our people and their oil our oil"?
I'm still trying to recall where I read that letter saying "We, the people, ask that you come into our Country and rescue us from ourselves" - perhaps I didn't. Looking forward in great anticipation to the Allied invasions of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia for failing to comply with the West's democratic models of governance. Will it be live on CNN?

You missed/omitted the "We are forcibly dragging you into the 21st century" scenario . I would've thought you were capable of coming up w/ that one on your own. You disappoint me You realize that these backwards countries are a drain on the G-8 don't you. Thier autocrats are keeping them bogged down w/ 40 yr old technology. Who's going to pay for thier modernization...you I grow weary of your "cutesy", multiple choice answer's

 

[davidmc]

FWIW I think the Iraqis would rather they were based in Germany Italy or Spain too. That would make everyone happy, so why not do it ?

I believe that the U.S. should remove ALL forces from Germany. I tire of the German leader's insolence. France's too ["cheese-eating, peace-monkey's"] (although we don't have bases there).

 

[davidmc]

regarding the quote below, and yes, those who respond to it;

getting one's mind around this logic is negating the fundamental underlying reality of bush led war crime, kicked off by deception for the benefit of us intersest at the expense of the innocent.

going off on this kind of mental masturbation is nothing short of rationalizing, justifying and condoning what has come before.


what if, in the us, there were no groceries, gas, power or safety from foreign led invasion in the resultant aftermath, would we then analyze and applaud how well the lights are turned back on for us by the invaders?

but this cannot seem valid due to the arrogant nature of us superiority that those who put forth this kind of justification hold in their own minds.

it is indeed a slippery slope, now the us need only look to where else it can invade with the mental support this view permits, "after all, look at the benefits after the fact" and off the taxpayer fueled military empire goes...

there are people taking this same fundamentaly flawed view and justifying it in use against the us, perhaps with the view that, "yes, innocents were targeted and perhaps unjustly so, and my relatives died in the effort, but at least now there is an improvement in that (insert your rationale here) and this does justify the means. even though i do not personaly fight against the us i do support those that do for these reasons"

responding in kind to posts like that quoted here gives this poisonous brand of mindset a sort of validity, which then serves to cloud and minimize, if not forgive the criminal acts which the bush wars have perpetrated, leaving all the accountabilities and consequences from these wars out of perspective.

this post has now 5000 views. i would encourage those sitting on the fence to move to the front and take some wind.

Accomplishments:
Generated 4,518 MW on October 6, surpassing the pre-war level of 4,400 MW.
USAID is working to add 827 MW of capacity
ect

So I take it you are in the "Close my eye's & hope everything work's out." camp How admirable The only adjoining country SH did not attack is Syria, correct. Damascus- world leader in: "arms black market to non-military combatant's"

 

[lyotard]

you would make a good crack dealer, if you would benefit our neighbourhood.
after all, the police are on the attack...

So I take it you are in the "Close my eye's & hope everything work's out." camp How admirable The only adjoining country SH did not attack is Syria, correct. Damascus- world leader in: "arms black market to non-military combatant's"

 

[jaguar75]

Italy, Germany and Spain aren't rich in oil. Plus, they are too stable to be able to justify any kind of invasion. The only way America will pull out of Iraq is once they feel sure they have a puppet style government in place that won't sell all the oil to France, Russian and Germany. The idea is that only U.S. companies will be invited, and a few scraps tossed towards France.
However, the instability, suicide bombings, protests and chaos are a testimony that these people want the U.S. out and aren't willing to just walk away and let the world believe all of this has been for the good of the country.
It's like Vietnam all over again. Sooner or later, opinion will swing away from this war and we'll be seeing more protests in Washington and New York.

I guess I will have to say this for 18th ****ing time...THE MIDDLE EAST IS ONLY THE 3rd SUPPLIER OF OIL TO THE US BEHIND VENEZUELA and RUSSIA...Yes, that is right, the US buys more god damn oil from Russia than it does from the Middle East...The last 17 times I asked everyone to explain the rational of the us invading any middle eastern country for oil when our oil costs are through the ****** roof...It is so easy to say ohh the US only went there to protect it's oil interests, this is the oldest and frankly, the weakest argument to stand on.

Geez...

 

[lyotard]

ah yes, the prospect of oil from the caspian sea looms large.
after all, afganistan is hotly contested for the it's terrorists, er, wait, the needed pipeline.

p.s. your last 17 times were rich at least for texan swagger value, but,
i guess the 18th time is the charm?

I guess I will have to say this for 18th ****ing time...THE MIDDLE EAST IS ONLY THE 3rd SUPPLIER OF OIL TO THE US BEHIND VENEZUELA and RUSSIA...Yes, that is right, the US buys more god damn oil from Russia than it does from the Middle East...The last 17 times I asked everyone to explain the rational of the us invading any middle eastern country for oil when our oil costs are through the ****** roof...It is so easy to say ohh the US only went there to protect it's oil interests, this is the oldest and frankly, the weakest argument to stand on.

Geez...

 

[EoinC]

...I grow weary of your "cutesy", multiple choice answer's

...as I grow weary of you invading Nations for their own good.

 

[davidmc]

I guess I will have to say this for 18th ****ing time...THE MIDDLE EAST IS ONLY THE 3rd SUPPLIER OF OIL TO THE US BEHIND VENEZUELA and RUSSIA...Yes, that is right, the US buys more god damn oil from Russia than it does from the Middle East...The last 17 times I asked everyone to explain the rational of the us invading any middle eastern country for oil when our oil costs are through the ****** roof...It is so easy to say ohh the US only went there to protect it's oil interests, this is the oldest and frankly, the weakest argument to stand on.

Geez...

Thank you jaguar75. Although, I fear your pronouncement will fall on deaf ear's

 

[davidmc]

...as I grow weary of you invading Nations for their own good.

I bet your nation participated, am i right

 

[Carrera]

Yes, I have a book written by a Russian think-tank expert. The Americans attempted to destabilise Russia under Yeltsin by encouraging the Chechnyan resistance and advising the Russians to allow separatism - which would have broken up Russia as a country and allowed U.S. companies to move in on the oil. This has been going on for some time, in relation to Georgia, Kazakhstan e.t.c. Hence - the Russians came up with Project Putin and started to reign in the oil reserves and holdings.
Let's get real here: anyone who seriously believes Bush invaded Iraq due to sleepless nights over the fate of Iraqis is living in cuckoo land. Bush couldn't give a proverbial hoot about the Iraqis since, to him, they're simply a sub-developed race who don't believe in Christianity. It's harsh stuff to say, but that's life and we need to face some of these facts.
I don't know why Dave Mc seems to have turned about face from his former stance that condemned the Iraq war. David was one of the few Americans on the forum who seemed to defend the left-wing stance and shine the welcome voice of reason from across the pond. Maybe we Brit guys have been knocking the U.S. so much in our posts, we're turning people towards supporting Bush's war?

ah yes, the prospect of oil from the caspian sea looms large.
after all, afganistan is hotly contested for the it's terrorists, er, wait, the needed pipeline.

p.s. i guess the 19th time is the charm?

 

[davidmc]

you would make a good crack dealer, if you would benefit our neighbourhood.
after all, the police are on the attack...

As a matter of fact, I am for the legalization of drug's. Where do you stand on this matter

 

[davidmc]

I don't know why Dave Mc seems to have turned about face from his former stance that condemned the Iraq war. David was one of the few Americans on the forum who seemed to defend the left-wing stance and shine the welcome voice of reason from across the pond. Maybe we Brit guys have been knocking the U.S. so much in our posts, we're turning people towards supporting Bush's war?

I have not turned a blind eye to the "sexed up" WMD pretext & nothing would gratify me more than seeing indictment's forthcoming. However, SH was a useless thug & a destabilizing influence who had no buisiness breathing the same air as I do.

 

[Carrera]

Jaguar, when I was in Russia during the Moscow bombings, according to the papers they apprehended wagons filled with armaments from U.S. suppliers all intended for the Chechnyans. It's the kind of news that doesn't make it on the B.B.C. The Russian border guards caught these folks in the act.
Venezuela has seen similar interference. Only Afghanistan seems to be a genuine military operation for security purposes.
The greed and need for oil is the motive for this so-called war for human rights. It bears no comparison with the war fought against Nazi Germany which threatened entire races with death and destruction. If Saddam had been actively wiping out his neighbours and marching on London I'd have supported the war. All he was capable of doing was firing 5 or 6 rusty SKUDS at Kuwait. Some threat!

I guess I will have to say this for 18th ****ing time...THE MIDDLE EAST IS ONLY THE 3rd SUPPLIER OF OIL TO THE US BEHIND VENEZUELA and RUSSIA...Yes, that is right, the US buys more god damn oil from Russia than it does from the Middle East...The last 17 times I asked everyone to explain the rational of the us invading any middle eastern country for oil when our oil costs are through the ****** roof...It is so easy to say ohh the US only went there to protect it's oil interests, this is the oldest and frankly, the weakest argument to stand on.

Geez...

 

[EoinC]

I guess I will have to say this for 18th ****ing time...THE MIDDLE EAST IS ONLY THE 3rd SUPPLIER OF OIL TO THE US BEHIND VENEZUELA and RUSSIA...Yes, that is right, the US buys more god damn oil from Russia than it does from the Middle East...

You're saying that a podium place has no value? You are telling us that the only reason the US is cordial in its relationship with Saudi Arabia is because it thinks it is a damn fine Country and is a bastion of democracy? I work in the oil-chasing machine (for an American company) and, from what I see, if you don't think that machine has got some serious wattage behind the cranks, then even large fonts aren't going to wake you up.

 

[Carrera]

But David we all agree with you that Saddam was an evil dictator
But was Saddam actively wiping out millions of people like ****** did? O.K. I grant you he shouldn't have been encouraging suicide bombings in Israel and Europe needed to take a strong line to stop him doing that. But Mugabee is the one who's genuinely causing misery and persecuting an entire people. Mugabee is worse than Saddam and is torturing and raping people at will - not even Saddam operated on the same scale over the last decade.
You have to bear in mind Saddam's Iraq was secular, not Islamic. Women could get educated under Saddam and the majority of people lived their lives in peace.
Now Iraq has become Islamic, filled with terrorist networks and instability. Therefore, our view is that military intervention hasn't been worth it in terms of lives lost, general instability and the idea that western countries are now seen as the bad guys. It seems to me like a mess.

I have not turned a blind eye to the "sexed up" WMD pretext & nothing would gratify me more than seeing indictment's forthcoming. However, SH was a useless thug & a destabilizing influence who had no buisiness breathing the same air as I do.