Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
chengrob

Blix's Assessment Of Iraq

Recommended Posts

The first politician, general, whatever, who tries to sell us the 'god on our side' goods ought to be shot on the spot. It's about the value of human life and it's a paradox that we have to kill to preserve it.

You obviously haven't listened to many of our Presidents speeches Moon. :rolleyes:

 

Is your firing squad ready? :huh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I didn't know Al-Queda were in Iraq.... "

DW responds "I didn't know they weren't. "

 

I am puzzled by this. Does this mean that you think you heard from a credible source that Al-Queda was in Iraq before the war or does this mean that you think Al-Queda is everywhere and therefore a war anywhere is justified because there are terrorists there? If the former please provide a link. If the latter explain why we don't save time and attack Al Queda at a much closer place than Iraq?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Deuces Wild

Need to do better than that to convince me I am wrong  

You are correct. I scanned both articles but keyed in on the wrong things.

 

My bad. :rolleyes:

 

edit:

 

I am puzzled by this. Does this mean that you think you heard from a credible source that Al-Queda was in Iraq before the war or does this mean that you think Al-Queda is everywhere and therefore a war anywhere is justified because there are terrorists there? If the former please provide a link. If the latter explain why we don't save time and attack Al Queda at a much closer place than Iraq?

I guess you will first have to provide proof that they are not and were not in Iraq (that was the original charge). Provide that proof and I will then address your concerns. ;)

Edited by Deuces Wild

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea why the majority of the public has drawn a comparison between Afghanistan and Iraq. They are two completely different incidents. There has never been evidence in the past 10 years of Iraq participating in terrorist attacks against America. I can understand how taking out Saddam was a good thing, however if that was the United States intentions they should have stated them before hand instead of the smoke and mirrors crap that they tried to pull.

 

If their objective was to free the Iraqi people from Saddam's reign then I would have been all for Canada's involvement but instead they made up a story, and a crappy one at that, that Iraq was a threat to America and even better yet... Bush made it seem as if Saddam and Bin Laden had been plotting against America. With their #%^*! stories they had managed to alienate many of their allies and showed disloyalty to their friends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Deuces Wild

chengrob wrote:

The events of last week *could* indicate an underlying resentment of the American occupation in *all* Iraqis.  That's right I said it.  All Iraqis, not just a radical sect.  The last survey data is rather old.  If this is the case, this just could be the tip of the iceburg, and any small event could spark a mob like contagion.  

 

 

Here is a recent poll that you may want to consider Rob:

 

WASHINGTON — Most Iraqis have high hopes for the future and say their lives are going well, but they have mixed feelings about the U.S.-led invasion of their country, a nationwide poll in the country suggests.

 

Iraqis are divided over whether the invasion by U.S. and British troops a year ago humiliated their country or liberated it, concludes the poll conducted by ABC News and several other media organizations and released today.

 

They have considerable worries about joblessness, security and basic services like electricity, according to the first nationwide poll in Iraq done by news organizations.

 

"The positive attitudes and the high expectations and optimism are quite striking, with majorities telling us their lives are going well," ABC polling director Gary Langer said. "Expectations carry risks, however. If these are unmet, there could be political consequences."

 

On a personal level, seven in 10 Iraqis said things are going well for them and more than half — 56 per cent — said their lives are going better than before the war, compared with 19 per cent who said things are worse.

 

Seven in 10 said they expect their lives will be better a year from now, with more than one-third predicting they will be much better.

 

But Iraqis have concerns about the current conditions in their country: seven in 10 say the availability of jobs is poor and nearly that many said the same about electricity. Almost three-fourths gave a positive rating to local schools, however.

 

The biggest overall concern nationally is regaining public security — named as the top concern by almost two-thirds in the poll, 64 per cent. That was far higher than any other priority.

 

About half said they oppose the presence of coalition forces, but few want those troops to leave now — wanting soldiers to stay until the Iraqi government is in place or until security is restored.

 

Only 25 per cent said they had confidence in coalition forces to deliver their needs. There were far higher levels of confidence in: Iraqi religious leaders, 70 per cent; local police, 68 per cent; and the new Iraqi army, 56 per cent.

 

The poll was conducted by the Oxford Research International of Oxford, England, for ABC News, the BBC, the German broadcasting network ARD and the Japanese network NHK.

 

The poll of 2,737 face-to-face interviews in Iraq was conducted Feb. 9-28 and has a margin of error of plus or minus two percentage points.

 

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentSe...ol=968705899037

 

Looks like some mixed feelings but I believe the poll is similar to the Harvard poll taken last year.

Edited by Deuces Wild

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand now. It is guilty until proved innocent. " guess you will first have to provide proof that they are not and were not in Iraq (that was the original charge). Provide that proof and I will then address your concerns" So you think that Al-Quieda is everywhere unless it can be proved that they are not there. It would logically follow that Bush is Al Queda. He cannot prove he is not Al-Queda. I must confess that certainly would be consistent with his actions. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Deuces Wild

You can find it as funny as you want CDave and make jokes about it. I will try to remain an adult in this conversation.

 

Here are a few links you may want to read anyway:

 

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...03/527uwabl.asp

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,77618,00.html

 

http://www.warriorsfortruth.com/al-queda-i...connection.html

 

BTW: Did you happen to read the recent thread about being respectful and courteous to others when posting? If not, I would suggest you read it, espcially since you are a moderator in this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW: Did you happen to read the recent thread about being respectful and courteous to others when posting? If not, I would suggest you read it,

good advice deuces ...I hope you take it

...............................................................................................

As for Osamas bunch being in Iraq....who do you think he was executing and throwing into jails ...? , they were a direct threat to his power base ...

...............................................................................................

I was totally against the war when we started .....but where to go from now , I'm really at a loss , I don't see how we can pull out ,without an immediate civil war which I'm sure will not be contained with the borders .

 

Bush keeps harking on a mantra of political handover at the end of June ...but I cannot see how this is going to change anything ..!

 

Some US senator's keep stating that it could be another Vietnam , (eye on the elections , Ive no doubt, ) But Vietnam was fairly well contained to the country and to some extent the ones around its immediate boarders..

 

Iraq has a nasty feel of it spreading ....Plus there are some ex Soviet nukes floating around in now primarily muslim 'x USSR 'stans , all short of cash , not to mention that Pakistani nuclear physicist whose up for a buck.

 

Increasing threats of terrorism in Euroland .

 

All feels iffy

Edited by Tankus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Deuces Wild

Tankus, as you do not accept PM's I will ask you openly. Where have I been disrespectful or discourteous lately?

 

I admitted in the thread that Tracy started that I was not without sin and would improve....I have tried to do that. If I haven't perhaps you can show me where so I can continue on the road to improvement. If not then perhaps a retraction is in order on your part. :rolleyes:

Edited by Deuces Wild

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You obviously haven't listened to many of our Presidents speeches Moon.  

 

Is your firing squad ready?

No I haven't, Bruce. I've been busy beavering away trying to make all Presidents redundant. :lol: Invoking the almighty. is he ? I'll send him my old Bob Dylan albums. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope you do take it ...cause I shall to

 

If I was a catholic I would repent and do 5 hail marys ..but as I'm not to sure what thats all about I'm just going to think of the sun washing over breaking waves on an empty beach ,with seagulls calling ,and no clouds on the horizon....

 

My naked feet gently paddling in the warm water as the waves beat across my ankles, a gentle breeze in my face....

 

 

 

 

plus more beer

 

then Ill post .....................

 

 

causer I'm now the touchy feely hippy tankus

 

peace man

 

I shall endevor not to make anymore coments like that involving you ...Dueces ...!

 

Missed the thead with Tracylynn .....good on you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will not be drawn into your accusations and innuendo about my moderating DW. You may play that game with others but I choose to not play. I asked pointed questions which you declined to respond to or indicated that the absence of proof was proof. The same logic led to other equally absurd conclusions. I fail to see how that is discourteous. I would think such false accusations may be discourteous.

 

As for your links. The first link indicates that Al-Quida may have been getting money from Iraq. May is not did and is a far cry from Al-Quida being in Iraq. It is an alleged financial link with Saddam. Let me remind you that Arabia, England, and the US were believed to have provided financial support to Al-Quida through various front agencies.

 

The second link is Tony Blair saying that the BBC report that there is no link is wrong. I can't see this as a particularly strong support. What is the link? Money again? All the article says is something to the effect "take my word there is a connection".

 

The third link talks about 1988 and Saddam's links. Well that was close in time to when the US was supporting Bin Laden (officially) in his fight in Afghanistan. (the USSR left in 1988) so that article is saying that Bin Laden was being supported by Saddam at the same time the US was. I am sorry I don't follow. Is this more evidence that Bush is somehow a supporter of Bin Ladden? Or is this an argument that Bin Laden can be supported by the US for right reasons and by Saddam for terrorist reasons? How was the distinction made?

 

How does any of that put Al Quida in Iraq at any time and especially since Saddam's defeat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I don't understand ..why did the US state on prime time that a warrant for the arrest of the Shia cleric had been posted ...

 

He immediately barricaded himself in a mosque in the holiest of holys ....If the US goes in hard and get him , it will kick off ......If nothing is done it will eventually still kick off....

 

Why did they not just nab him on the quiet..!

 

Its almost as if the events and timetable is out of the coalitions hands ......we are reacting to ,and not managing the "peace"

 

How can "free and just"elections take place in this environment .....? and how would the result be accepted

 

Another month and evey group in Iraq will have one uniting cause ..the removal of all foreigners .

Edited by Tankus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just give me the wine ..! pass on the bread /cracker thingy though ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually my thread is about people making direct personal attacks on others... I dont think its possible to cut out witty sarcasm , so as long as people aren't calling each other names its a vast improvement..no arguing + no attacking = a more peaceful pit. Debates can be more harder edged than a regular discussion like "what toothpaste you use." But I think it only goes to say if you post something sarcastic you are gonna get it back in the same fashion. Like the old saying goes don't dish it if you can't take it.

But anyway... back to the subject at hand.

 

I see on the news they are firing guns and all kinds of things out of some Mosques and the milittary are doing air strikes on some of the Mosques ... so it doesn't look like they are going to avoid hitting some of these places. The attack yesterday that killed 12 Marines was by surprise attack they were fired upon with mortars and numerous weapons and at least 20 Iraqi insurgents are dead. How is the military supposed to know who the heck to fire on and attack since these people dont wear uniforms?

I am watching comments from a Bush /Blair video conference.. they are still saying this is a minority that needs to be defeated. These people don't look like a minority to me anymore! They are mobs of scary people growing in number daily. This is a very unfair thing for the military to have to contend with trying to be security for this place basically and not sure which civilian to shoot or let pass by. I would be totally scared out of my mind over there if I were in these people's position at the moment not ever knowing if somebody is gonna come up and thank you for being there or shoot you at the last minute. This mess has been made. Our people are there. A decision MUST be made and made immediately on how to handle this situation because it is getting out of control by the hour. Do they withdraw and leave the place to run wild or do they bring more troops and start to do actual battle again? One way or another do something. Our military are dying daily and I for one am not finding this so called war on terror being won, or any progress being made. Just a bunch of guys coming home in boxes and it makes me dread watching the news because there are more daily. We never officially declared war on this country but it sure seems like to me they have declared war on those guys over there trying to liberate them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say it's "unfair" that they are not wearing uniforms Tracy.

 

If someone were to invade our country and occupy it, I can assure you I would be hiding, and attacking by surprise whenever I could. I wouldn't jump up in a uniform of some kind yelling here I am waving a flag so they had an easy target. I would be scheming and plotting ways to do as much harm as I could. There is no doubt in my mind that I could and would attempt to kill anyone who tried to occupy this country.

 

I would lay in wait until the timing was right, when I could do the most damage, with the least effort. I would kill them in their sleep, while they were eating, while they were focused on something else. I'd shoot them, bomb them and burn them at every opportunity. Guerilla warfare is not like the wave of bombers, parade of tanks and trucks we watched rolling down the highways of Iraq when it all started.

 

When it all started and everyone was so confident that it would be easy, at that time I said when we get in the cities and towns and have to fight the people door to door, in the alleys and on their terms things would be much different. Yes we would win the battles, but at great loss to our side, but then even in Viet Nam and Korea we won most of the battles. Winning the "War" is a whole different thing.

 

The worst possible thing is happening, we are loosing the confidence of the people, when we loose the people we loose the war. Diplomacy is needed in the worst way, we should have had diplomats in these towns and cities working with the locals. Something needs to be done to win over the people who are are not happy. It doesn't matter if the majority is happy, because in a place like the Middle East, it is all or nothing, unless we can win over the confidence of the local leaders it is all a lost cause. If we can't do that we will be there forever, escalating the troop numbers, counting more and more body bags, and loosing sight of the purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your point Bruce... but it is unfair to the military in the fashion they are having to exist there. You never know who you are supposed to shoot and who you aren't. I mean they need to make up their minds.. is this a war? Is this a liberation and whom are they liberating the country from now? They are burning and mutilating bodies of people sent there to help, they weren't even military. And I totally agree with you, those people are questioning what the heck is going on and I also wonder if they aren't feeling a tad lost because they have no specific leader so they are turning to the ones who are seemingly strongest for answers. I think they are beginning to feel resentful and resisting what they see as an effort to "americanize" them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Mr. Bush has been clear that this is a liberation and the goal is to establish a western style democracy. I do not know if the Iraqis are getting this message.

 

It is interesting to see how the middle eastern news describes the American presence as an oppressive occupation and draws similarities to the the Israeli occupation of the West Bank.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say it's "unfair" that they are not wearing uniforms Tracy.

 

If someone were to invade our country and occupy it, I can assure you I would be hiding, and attacking by surprise whenever I could. I wouldn't jump up in a uniform of some kind yelling here I am waving a flag so they had an easy target. I would be scheming and plotting ways to do as much harm as I could. There is no doubt in my mind that I could and would attempt to kill anyone who tried to occupy this country.

 

I would lay in wait until the timing was right, when I could do the most damage, with the least effort. I would kill them in their sleep, while they were eating, while they were focused on something else. I'd shoot them, bomb them and burn them at every opportunity. Guerilla warfare is not like the wave of bombers, parade of tanks and trucks we watched rolling down the highways of Iraq when it all started.

 

Blimey Bruce, you sound like a descendant of one of the rebel Bostonians circa 1776 :woot:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blimey Bruce, you sound like a descendant of one of the rebel Bostonians circa 1776  :woot:

Well I can say without a doubt SirT, if this were the 1700's you would not be safe anywhere near me. :P Nothing like a bunch of silly guys wearing a blazing red jackets standing in a formation in the middle of field. It must have been like a carnival duck shoot. :mrgreen: Edited by Bruce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It must have been like a carnival duck shoot.

I don't know about that, it took about 30 seconds to load a musket. Once you'd fired your shot, the smoke from the powder would likely give your position away. So there you were behind the tree frantically loading your next shot while the Redcoats draw a bead on you.

 

So maybe it was like a duck shoot in slow motion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing like a bunch of silly guys wearing a blazing red jackets standing in a formation in the middle of field.

Fashion, old boy. One couldn't be seen in public in one's gardening clothes, now could one. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...