Iraqi shoe thrower couldnt stand Bush's Icy Smile

Donkey said:
The world is a lot better off with out Saddam. Not just the US intelligence agency thought he had weapons, capabilities, and the willingness to use them most all countries did. Even Saddam himself thought he had WMD (his underlings would lie to him to avoid death).

We invaded Iraq to finish what we started in '92 and should have finished.

Regardless I just found some tongue and cheek humor in the fact that this man did what he did because he now can and no one in the news media pointed that out.

Another note about some of the previous comments. If you think the only places the US Military is in the world is the "sandbox" you need to do some serious research. The US Military is in just about every country in the world in various forms from humanitarian aide, building schools, cleaning water, assisting in the training of military/police units, etc.

Just Google it you will find schools built, aide to all those third world countries you speak of, and more just in 2008 alone.

It goes on and on and on and on....
Click to expand...
Number 1, if you read my posts, you will see that I certainly agree that Sadaam was an inherently evil person and that the world IS better off without him around. Regardless of what we think of him, we are not ones to judge and put other people's in danger because of someone we THINK is evil. That's "above our paygrade."

Donkey said:
We invaded Iraq to finish what we started in '92 and should have finished.
Click to expand...
First things first... We didn't invade Iraq in the beginning. It was, and I quote, "A wholly defensive mission" for the country of Saudi Arabia. The votes to invade Iraq were the closest in Congress since the War of 1812. Not exactly wholehearted back up there...


Number 2, I KNOW the United States has influence all over the world... But there's a large difference providing humanitarian aid and providing lives. Building schools and handing out food packages is a lot less dangerous than combating insurgents who will do anything and EVERYTHING to make sure you don't get back home.
 
Rob Henderson said:
Number 2, I KNOW the United States has influence all over the world... But there's a large difference providing humanitarian aid and providing lives. Building schools and handing out food packages is a lot less dangerous than combating insurgents who will do anything and EVERYTHING to make sure you don't get back home.
Click to expand...


Ya know Oh wise one. You really need to do some research. Aid workers get hit, kidnapped and generally farked up all the damn time, doing "Humanitarian" work.

Insurgents, guerilla's, rebels, freedom fighters or whatever the PC term of your choosing like aid workers.......they are soft friggin targets.
 
We wouldn't stop. America is too self-righteous. We feel that we HAVE to police the world. The world got on just fine without America before we were founded, what gives us the right to control the world?


USMC, I realize that humanitarian aid isn't exactly a desk job, but you cannot deny that there are more fatalities and injuries in active combat zones than there are when you build a school.
 
Where are you building this school? You are not building it in any country thats a hot zone. Your not building it in Iraq, Astan, Rwanda, Somalia, certain parts of the Phillippines, Dafur and not running the risk of happy bunny hugging Aid workers weeping and crying on Al Jazzera right before Mister Abduhl I Hate infidels of Mister You Should Not Support My Rival Clan/Tribe saws their melon off with a dull knife.
 
03USMC said:
Where are you building this school? You are not building it in any country thats a hot zone. Your not building it in Iraq, Astan, Rwanda, Somalia, certain parts of the Phillippines, Dafur and not running the risk of happy bunny hugging Aid workers weeping and crying on Al Jazzera right before Mister Abduhl I Hate infidels of Mister You Should Not Support My Rival Clan/Tribe saws their melon off with a dull knife.
Click to expand...
Okay, I realize that Iraq and Afghanistan are not the same place, but it's the same theater for war we're in...


These two articles show the number of humanitarian aid worker deaths in Afghanistan versus the number of soldier deaths in Iraq in August of 2008. (Just one sample month)

For those of you who don't want to read the whole article, the article on the humanitarian aid workers says that 4 died in August. The soldier article says 22 died in the month of August.

Humanitarian Aid: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2008/11/18-10


Soldiers: http://engram-backtalk.blogspot.com/2008/08/casualties-in-iraq-august-2008.html


That is NOT NEARLY the same in terms of fatalities.
 
Rob Henderson said:
We wouldn't stop. America is too self-righteous. We feel that we HAVE to police the world. The world got on just fine without America before we were founded, what gives us the right to control the world?
Click to expand...

Let's see empires, kingdoms, crusades, lack of religious freedoms, the Dark Ages. The world must have been paradise.

The world was doing just peachy in 1914 and then again in 1939. America has not been very good at world domination, America could not even take over an island the size of Cuba 90 miles away. And who is we?:rolleyes:

NO PERSONAL ATTACKS. REREAD THE ROE'S AND REENGAGE-03
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chukpike said:
Let's see empires, kingdoms, crusades, lack of religious freedoms, the Dark Ages. The world must have been paradise.

The world was doing just peachy in 1914 and then again in 1939. America has not been very good at world domination, America could not even take over an island the size of Cuba 90 miles away. And who is we?:rolleyes:

Questions for you Rob. Did you ever go to school? If you did, did you ever pass a course?
Click to expand...
I did actually... And if you recall... The French Enlightenment was doing just fine. America's "freedoms" ideals weren't even our own! We took lines directly from Enlightenment philosophes like Montesqeu and Locke... That whole "life liberty property" business... NOT Thomas Jefferson.


By the way.... WE is America. I am an American. Therefore I include myself in the general term of the country. Quite frankly, you're right... I shouldn't associate myself with those who would attempt to exert some supreme authority just because they can.


"America has not been very good at world domination"

We have footholds in almost every nation in the world... You can't tell me that's not trying to police the world.
 
Rob Henderson said:
Chukpike said:
Rob Henderson said:
We wouldn't stop. America is too self-righteous. We feel that we HAVE to police the world. The world got on just fine without America before we were founded, what gives us the right to control the world?
Click to expand...

Let's see empires, kingdoms, crusades, lack of religious freedoms, the Dark Ages. The world must have been paradise.

The world was doing just peachy in 1914 and then again in 1939. America has not been very good at world domination, America could not even take over an island the size of Cuba 90 miles away. And who is we?:rolleyes:

Questions for you Rob. Did you ever go to school? If you did, did you ever pass a course?
Click to expand...

I did actually... And if you recall... The French Enlightenment was doing just fine. America's "freedoms" ideals weren't even our own! We took lines directly from Enlightenment philosophes like Montesqeu and Locke... That whole "life liberty property" business... NOT Thomas Jefferson.


By the way.... WE is America. I am an American. Therefore I include myself in the general term of the country. Quite frankly, you're right... I shouldn't associate myself with those who would attempt to exert some supreme authority just because they can.


"America has not been very good at world domination"

We have footholds in almost every nation in the world... You can't tell me that's not trying to police the world.
Click to expand...

The American Revolutionaries incorporated a lot of European ideas in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Not just the British Philosopher John Locke or the French Baron de Montesquieu(think this is who you meant, might check your spelling).

They also rejected European practices such as King George III tried to impress upon them.

NO PERSONAL ATTACKS PERMITTED. CHECK YOUR ROE'S
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chukpike said:
The American Revolutionaries incorporated a lot of European ideas in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Not just the British Philosopher John Locke or the French Baron de Montesquieu(think this is who you meant, might check your spelling).
Click to expand...
Very good. You can spell it. And yes, that IS who I meant. And notice that neither of them are American philosophes, because America DIDN'T EXIST when those ideals were being practiced. See how that fits in nicely with "the world got along just fine before America"?
Even though YOU are the one who began this entire conversation on the history of the world before America with your accusing me of never passing a course in school.


I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT YOU ALSO STOP TRYING TO MODERATE AND I'M WARNING YOU AGAIN .....AND FOR THE LAST TIME STAY IN YOUR LANE. 03
 
Last edited by a moderator:
THE PERSONAL ATTACKS AND INSULTS WILL CEASE AS OF NOW BETWEEN YOU TWO (CHUKPIKE & HENDERSON &ANYBODY ELSE THAT CARES TO JUMP INTO THIS).

I AM NOT EDITING ANOTHER POST I AM NOT SENDING OUT INFRACTIONS.

SUFFICE TO SAY THAT I HAVE A VERY ITCHY TRIGGER FINGER AND THE NEXT PIZZING CONTEST WILL RESULT IN TEMP BANS FOR ALL INVOLVED.

BOTH OF YOU WILL CHECK AND CEASE FIRE AS OF NOW.
 
03USMC said:
THE PERSONAL ATTACKS AND INSULTS WILL CEASE AS OF NOW BETWEEN YOU TWO (CHUKPIKE & HENDERSON &ANYBODY ELSE THAT CARES TO JUMP INTO THIS).

I AM NOT EDITING ANOTHER POST I AM NOT SENDING OUT INFRACTIONS.

SUFFICE TO SAY THAT I HAVE A VERY ITCHY TRIGGER FINGER AND THE NEXT PIZZING CONTEST WILL RESULT IN TEMP BANS FOR ALL INVOLVED.

BOTH OF YOU WILL CHECK AND CEASE FIRE AS OF NOW.
Click to expand...

Now thats power, Kowabunga Dude!!!! :rockin:
 
Last edited:
Hmmm said:
Then who asked us to remove Saddam? IIRC the Iraqis did.
Click to expand...
No one really did... in a meeting post 9/11 of top military and government officials the topic was brought up to find a connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. The CIA spent about a month looking for one and came up empty handed. When they reported this to the Bush Administration the response was akin to "sorry, wrong answer." When the OSP, the new Pentagon version of the CIA created by Paul Wolfowitz that was completely untested found Rafid Ahmed Alwan, a man who had initially found political asylum in France for embezzling Iraqi money, but now claimed he had worked for a chemical plant producing biological weapons. He did attend schooling to become a chemical engineer, however he barely passed and did not any jobs. The German government who now held him did not trust him, and called him "crazy ... out of control", and the CIA seemed to think that he may have also been a heavy drinker. Yet this was the solid evidence that the OSP used, and the CIA finally relented as well, under immense pressure from the Bush Administration. "Believe me, there are literally inches and inches of documentation" including "dozens and dozens of e-mails and memos and things like that detailing meetings" where officials sharply questioned Alwan's credibility, Tyler Drumheller said, the chief of the European division of the CIA. He also said the CIA had "lots of documentation" to show suspicions about Alwan were ignored widely within the agency. He said they included warnings to the director's office and to the WINPAC, the Arms Control center, who was responsible for many of the incorrect prewar statemnets about Iraq. This man was also the administration's exit strategy. He claimed he was well known within the country, so the Bush administration planned for him to be the face of the country, and that when elections were established that he would be the candidate with the most publicity and international support. However when he arrived back in Iraq the truth came out; no one knew who he was.

That is who asked us to remove Saddam. An Iraqi, yes, but a drunken, lying one who claimed he was much more than the backstage TV guy he actually had been.
 
Hmmm said:
Then who asked us to remove Saddam? IIRC the Iraqis did.
Click to expand...

Not the Iraqi people, a bunch of manipulative self-serving exiles living in London who hoped Bush would be kind enough to throw out Saddam out and put them in power in his place.

Remember much of the WMD "evidence" came from these individuals, people like Ahmed Chalbi who leesh was being held personally by Rumsfeld. The Neocons, so hooked on their own ideology didnt even bothering to check these peoples motivations bought the line hook line and sinker, despite the fact that all of these people had huge credibility problems. I mean at the same time the US was talking WMD to Chalbi, the Jordanians were trying to get him extradited as he had been convicted in absentia for bank fraud.

These were the people who "begged" us to liberate Iraq.
 
mmarsh said:
Not the Iraqi people, a bunch of manipulative self-serving exiles living in London who hoped Bush would be kind enough to throw out Saddam out and put them in power in his place.

Remember much of the WMD "evidence" came from these individuals, people like Ahmed Chalbi who leesh was being held personally by Rumsfeld. The Neocons, so hooked on their own ideology didnt even bothering to check these peoples motivations bought the line hook line and sinker, despite the fact that all of these people had huge credibility problems. I mean at the same time the US was talking WMD to Chalbi, the Jordanians were trying to get him extradited as he had been convicted in absentia for bank fraud.

These were the people who "begged" us to liberate Iraq.
Click to expand...

I also wonder if there was not a large element of guilt in the corridors of power? Having encouraged the Shia to rebel during The Gulf War, then leaving them alone to suffer the consequences (at least 10K killed, millions homeless etc) Was it felt that this was the time to finish what they felt should've been done and repay any favours done previously? I dunno, I'm sure that there are plenty of other ideas out there, but why would the US & UK govt just listen to Chalabi? He was pretty much discredited until 11 Sep. I've got my suspicions but that's all they are..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top