Dunno is if anyone's raised this already (came to this thread late, and there are too many pages), but does anyone else think that real reason for this war is Saudi Arabia, and in particular their links to 9/11 and Al-Queda which seem to be incontrovertible. It would be impossible for the US to really take them on with things as they stand. With an entirely separate (and subjugated?) supplier of oil, then attention could turn to those who are really funding the US's enemy.
Dunno where it takes you, but it seems a lot more plausible than the completely derisory attempts that have been made (publically, at least) to link Saddam directly to terrrorism. And explains why action is being taken now, rather better than a sudden decision, after 12 years of waiting, to prosecute a war to eliminate Saddam's WMD.
Dunno where it takes you, but it seems a lot more plausible than the completely derisory attempts that have been made (publically, at least) to link Saddam directly to terrrorism. And explains why action is being taken now, rather better than a sudden decision, after 12 years of waiting, to prosecute a war to eliminate Saddam's WMD.
Jakeh said:
Yes I agree. Saudi is not the only consideration but it is a major one. Once the Iraqi situation has been resolved and the oil supply secured, I expect that the US will start putting pressure on the Saudis.
I'm not making a judgement on this either way but just a comment on the way I see things developing.
Steve
Re: WE CARE.
This is a victory for despots and dictators, you mean. This is exactly what Saddam was hoping for. What has been learned by these guys is that if you hold out long enough you can dupe a sufficient number of people so you can remain in power and come back another day.
If the US goes away because of these protests, do you really think Saddam is going to either give up his weapons or decide to step down from power and allow for a democratic government?
Just what is it, exactly, you think your marches and clever slogans will accomplish? Do you really think that if we back down, Saddam will start being a good boy and stop his killing and weapons development programs? With the US gone, do you think he won't set his sights back on Kuwait? Saudia Arabia? Israel? Etc?
Some of us over here are thinking maybe we should just give up over there. If everytime we want to oust dictators and establish peaceful democratic governments we have to put up with peach protests and see our country touted as wild cowboys, I think we just ought to come home and tell Saddam he can do whatever he wants overthere - as long as he leaves the USA alone.
There, does that make you peace lovers feel better? Based on the comparaison you guys made of Bush with Saddam, I get the feeling you like a murdering dictator better than a leader who is willing to bet his presidency on giving freedom to others.
fdegrove said:
This is a victory for despots and dictators, you mean. This is exactly what Saddam was hoping for. What has been learned by these guys is that if you hold out long enough you can dupe a sufficient number of people so you can remain in power and come back another day.
If the US goes away because of these protests, do you really think Saddam is going to either give up his weapons or decide to step down from power and allow for a democratic government?
Just what is it, exactly, you think your marches and clever slogans will accomplish? Do you really think that if we back down, Saddam will start being a good boy and stop his killing and weapons development programs? With the US gone, do you think he won't set his sights back on Kuwait? Saudia Arabia? Israel? Etc?
Some of us over here are thinking maybe we should just give up over there. If everytime we want to oust dictators and establish peaceful democratic governments we have to put up with peach protests and see our country touted as wild cowboys, I think we just ought to come home and tell Saddam he can do whatever he wants overthere - as long as he leaves the USA alone.
There, does that make you peace lovers feel better? Based on the comparaison you guys made of Bush with Saddam, I get the feeling you like a murdering dictator better than a leader who is willing to bet his presidency on giving freedom to others.
Hmm,
Latest reports from inside Washington have the US NOT installing a democratic regime, but (a) inserting US military staff into key positions, effectively retainign the rest of the structure as it stands and (b) allowing Turkey to deal with the Kurds (in which respect they do not have a pleasant record).
Why? Majority of Iraqis are Shia muslims, the regime is secular but from the Sunni muslim minority. Think that the US wants another Shia country in that region?
Latest reports from inside Washington have the US NOT installing a democratic regime, but (a) inserting US military staff into key positions, effectively retainign the rest of the structure as it stands and (b) allowing Turkey to deal with the Kurds (in which respect they do not have a pleasant record).
Why? Majority of Iraqis are Shia muslims, the regime is secular but from the Sunni muslim minority. Think that the US wants another Shia country in that region?
Rambo is going to bring democracy to the world.
Bush can't sleep at nights, he wants to bring democracy to all.
He is an angel.
What Hollywood does to people's minds.
What are you drinking, I want some.
Bush can't sleep at nights, he wants to bring democracy to all.
He is an angel.
What Hollywood does to people's minds.
What are you drinking, I want some.
Jakeh said:
There is no perfect solution, but the long term goal is to have a democratic nation of Iraq. As far as the different peoples go, that is something that the peace lovers who love to protest should handle. I mean, you guys should go to Iraq (after the US spills its blood to make it free so you don't have to worry about being killed or jailed) and teach the people your peaceful ways and that all should live in peace and harmony, regardless of if they are Shia or Sunni or Christian or Jewish or what ever. No small task, but the alternative is continued killing and then war. If you guys want to do something peaceful, go do. Actually go over there and live with the people and lead by example. If all you do is walk in protest marches and chant slogans from thousands of miles away, what have you really accomplished?
leon said:
Sorry that you think world freedom is a stupid goal. I guess we should give up. I am sure your peacful protests in Europe will convince the dictators of the world to forgo their weapons of mass destruction and start being nice to their people.
Re: Re: WE CARE.
Good question. May I ask another one: what exactly is going to be accomplished by bombing Saddam out of Iraq? Does the WMDs he is supposedly to have, magically disappear? Is the new man going to be a friend of the US, in which case either he is assasinated quickly, or must rely on massive US help to stay in power.
I tell you what it accomplishes: a surge in terrorist attacks, years of occupation and not solving the basic problem. Not to speak of the human suffering.
I am willing to give Mr Bush the benefit of the doubt, that he really wants to bring peace and democracy to the Iraqi people. But how is it that with all the brain power available, all the think tanks, all the experienced politicians, the only way they come up with to do that is to bomb the bejeezes out of the people?
This is not a choice between Saddam or Democracy, no matter how cunningly it is arranged to become that way.
Jan Didden
Jeff R said:
Good question. May I ask another one: what exactly is going to be accomplished by bombing Saddam out of Iraq? Does the WMDs he is supposedly to have, magically disappear? Is the new man going to be a friend of the US, in which case either he is assasinated quickly, or must rely on massive US help to stay in power.
I tell you what it accomplishes: a surge in terrorist attacks, years of occupation and not solving the basic problem. Not to speak of the human suffering.
I am willing to give Mr Bush the benefit of the doubt, that he really wants to bring peace and democracy to the Iraqi people. But how is it that with all the brain power available, all the think tanks, all the experienced politicians, the only way they come up with to do that is to bomb the bejeezes out of the people?
This is not a choice between Saddam or Democracy, no matter how cunningly it is arranged to become that way.
Jan Didden
Are you so naive or act like on purpose?
The same people are good or bad it depends on your "moods".
The same people that you supported once now are the enemy.
I don't like Shadam. But it's another country.
Let it's people find their way. Support them as you can.
To take millitary action is the last thing to do and that (in a perfect world) when the motives are clear and everybody agrees.
And do that for every country where the human rights are denied not only where oil exists or there is profit for you (Hey I don't mean to bomb us all now).
If there was a more powerful country that didn't like Bush and
capitalism would it be right to call him evil and then start bombing your cities.
You don't do war for democracy. I don't belive you.
You'll do what you want to do but give us a break.
(Black people were not considered equal with white ones some years ago in that country (are they today?) and now this country is fighting for human rights in middle east. What a progress they made.)
The same people are good or bad it depends on your "moods".
The same people that you supported once now are the enemy.
I don't like Shadam. But it's another country.
Let it's people find their way. Support them as you can.
To take millitary action is the last thing to do and that (in a perfect world) when the motives are clear and everybody agrees.
And do that for every country where the human rights are denied not only where oil exists or there is profit for you (Hey I don't mean to bomb us all now).
If there was a more powerful country that didn't like Bush and
capitalism would it be right to call him evil and then start bombing your cities.
You don't do war for democracy. I don't belive you.
You'll do what you want to do but give us a break.
(Black people were not considered equal with white ones some years ago in that country (are they today?) and now this country is fighting for human rights in middle east. What a progress they made.)
PEACEFUL MOTIVE TO GO TO WAR...
Hi,
I am not.
Has anyone ever seen the US operate internationally in an altruistic manner?
Don't kid yourselves, if there is no profit in it they won't lift a finger.
Just my opinion,🙁
Hi,
I am not.
Has anyone ever seen the US operate internationally in an altruistic manner?
Don't kid yourselves, if there is no profit in it they won't lift a finger.
Just my opinion,🙁
Jeff R said:
The only country that realy used mass destruction weapons is USA and you could have avoided it. You could have thrown the bomb to a millitary target to demonstrate it's power.
But no you made two cities disapear from the map.
And don't get me wrong.
I have nothing with the people of Usa.
I have friends and relatives there.
And I don't believe that if another country was the super power would act better, maybe it would be worse.
I just disagree.
I have nothing with the people of Usa.
I have friends and relatives there.
And I don't believe that if another country was the super power would act better, maybe it would be worse.
I just disagree.
Re: PEACEFUL MOTIVE TO GO TO WAR...
You spotted it. In fact, Mr Bush NEVER said he wants to bring democracy to Iraq. This was made up by someone and it started its own life. Mr Bush clearly has stated that his purpose is to disarm Saddam, no more, no less.
And even if he said his purpose was to bring democracy to Iraq, which he didn't, why not give all those other countries the benefit of US democracy - N-Korea, Saudi Arabia, half of South America, etc? Why single out Iraq?
See how easy it is to fool most of the people, most of the time?
Jan Didden
fdegrove said:
You spotted it. In fact, Mr Bush NEVER said he wants to bring democracy to Iraq. This was made up by someone and it started its own life. Mr Bush clearly has stated that his purpose is to disarm Saddam, no more, no less.
And even if he said his purpose was to bring democracy to Iraq, which he didn't, why not give all those other countries the benefit of US democracy - N-Korea, Saudi Arabia, half of South America, etc? Why single out Iraq?
See how easy it is to fool most of the people, most of the time?
Jan Didden
Question :
What is the best way in this moments ?
Leave Saddam in peace ?
or
Get down Saddam and make Irak a peaceful country ?
Best regards !
Dan
What is the best way in this moments ?
Leave Saddam in peace ?
or
Get down Saddam and make Irak a peaceful country ?
Best regards !
Dan
Re: PEACEFUL MOTIVE TO GO TO WAR...
I really hate to be the one who dirties a perfectly good discussion with anything as low as the truth but ...
I believe that the International Aid contributions from the USA are far, far higher than those paid by any other country.
There, I've said my piece. Please return to your "USA - spawn of the devil" discussion.
Steve
fdegrove said:
I really hate to be the one who dirties a perfectly good discussion with anything as low as the truth but ...
I believe that the International Aid contributions from the USA are far, far higher than those paid by any other country.
There, I've said my piece. Please return to your "USA - spawn of the devil" discussion.
Steve
CBS) A weekly commentary by CBS News correspondent Andy Rooney.
----
You can't beat the French when it comes to food, fashion, wine or perfume, but they lost their license to have an opinion on world affairs years ago. They may even be selling stuff to Iraq and don't want to hurt business.
The French are simply not reliable partners in a world where the good people in it ought to be working together. Americans may come off as international jerks sometimes but we're usually trying to do the right thing.
The French lost WW II to the Germans in about 20 minutes. Along with the British, we got into the war and had about 150,000 guys killed getting their country back for them. We fought all across France, and the Germans finally surrendered in a French schoolhouse.
You'd think that school building in Reims would be a great tourist attraction but it isn't. The French seem embarrassed by it. They don't want to call attention to the fact that we freed them from German occupation.
I heard Steven Spielberg say the French wouldn't even let him film the D-Day scenes in “Saving Private Ryan” on the Normandy beaches. They want people to forget the price we paid getting their country back for them.
Americans have a right to protest going to war with Iraq. The French do not. They owe us the independence they flaunt in our face at the U.N.
I went into Paris with American troops the day we liberated it, Aug. 25, 1944. It was one of the great days in the history of the world.
French women showered American soldiers with kisses, at the very least. The next day, the pompous Charles de Gaulle marched down the mile long Champs Elysee to the Place de la Concorde as if he had liberated France himself. I was there, squeezed in among a hundred tanks we'd given the Free French Army that we brought in with us.
Suddenly there were sniper shots from the top of a building. Thousands of Frenchmen who had come to see de Gaulle scrambled to get under something. I got under an Army truck myself. The tank gunners opened fire on the building where the shots had come from, firing mindlessly at nothing. It was a wild scene that lasted, maybe, 10 minutes.
When we go to Paris every couple of years now, I rent a car. I drive around the Place de la Concorde and when some French driver blows his horn for me to get out of his way, I just smile and say to myself, "Go ahead, Pierre. Be my guest. I know something about this very place you'll never know."
The French have not earned their right to oppose President Bush's plans to attack Iraq.
On the other hand, I have.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
You can't beat the French when it comes to food, fashion, wine or perfume, but they lost their license to have an opinion on world affairs years ago. They may even be selling stuff to Iraq and don't want to hurt business.
The French are simply not reliable partners in a world where the good people in it ought to be working together. Americans may come off as international jerks sometimes but we're usually trying to do the right thing.
The French lost WW II to the Germans in about 20 minutes. Along with the British, we got into the war and had about 150,000 guys killed getting their country back for them. We fought all across France, and the Germans finally surrendered in a French schoolhouse.
You'd think that school building in Reims would be a great tourist attraction but it isn't. The French seem embarrassed by it. They don't want to call attention to the fact that we freed them from German occupation.
I heard Steven Spielberg say the French wouldn't even let him film the D-Day scenes in “Saving Private Ryan” on the Normandy beaches. They want people to forget the price we paid getting their country back for them.
Americans have a right to protest going to war with Iraq. The French do not. They owe us the independence they flaunt in our face at the U.N.
I went into Paris with American troops the day we liberated it, Aug. 25, 1944. It was one of the great days in the history of the world.
French women showered American soldiers with kisses, at the very least. The next day, the pompous Charles de Gaulle marched down the mile long Champs Elysee to the Place de la Concorde as if he had liberated France himself. I was there, squeezed in among a hundred tanks we'd given the Free French Army that we brought in with us.
Suddenly there were sniper shots from the top of a building. Thousands of Frenchmen who had come to see de Gaulle scrambled to get under something. I got under an Army truck myself. The tank gunners opened fire on the building where the shots had come from, firing mindlessly at nothing. It was a wild scene that lasted, maybe, 10 minutes.
When we go to Paris every couple of years now, I rent a car. I drive around the Place de la Concorde and when some French driver blows his horn for me to get out of his way, I just smile and say to myself, "Go ahead, Pierre. Be my guest. I know something about this very place you'll never know."
The French have not earned their right to oppose President Bush's plans to attack Iraq.
On the other hand, I have.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In your logic this is true. It is the logic that calls trowing bombs on a country "Aid".
If some stupid americans feel they need to go to war, in a klingonian way, go. But leave us more civilisated humans alone with this. - earn the consequences alone. See you and Mr Bush again in court as a war criminals.
Understand once for all, all over the world the people don´t trust in this mad man Bush.
The scheme at the moment isn´t america bring aid to third world countrys. The scheme is america bombs away all the infrastructure of these country, so the president calls himshelf hero, send by god to dafe the world. Next step: america bombs another country so president can call himshelf a little bit more send by god and safer of the world, and NATO and Germany, France etc have to pay for building up new infrastructure and send help to those countrys.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.