Planetarion Forums

inf · 1 Jun 2003, 21:56

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/2954830.stm

wu_trax · 1 Jun 2003, 22:04

im shocked. im sure the iraquies enjoy their freedom and democracy

Sarina_Joy · 1 Jun 2003, 22:06

The unexpected hits you between the eyes.

Gayle29uk · 1 Jun 2003, 22:08

There was a feature on 5 live earlier today about Basra and the huge Shia support for a fundamentalist muslim state. The US administration is scared ****less of the very idea of a muslim state and blatantly doesn't want Iraq to be one.

Looks like it's tough titty boys, that's what the people seem to want.

Dookie Velvet · 1 Jun 2003, 22:12

"Surprise."

Mirai · 1 Jun 2003, 22:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Gayle29uk
There was a feature on 5 live earlier today about Basra and the huge Shia support for a fundamentalist muslim state. The US administration is scared ****less of the very idea of a muslim state and blatantly doesn't want Iraq to be one.

Looks like it's tough titty boys, that's what the people seem to want.

The people don't know what they want. The people haven't had the pleasure of living in a world where there are more than one choice.

It's not that their scared ****less, it that they understand what happens in a funamentalist regime. Personal freedoms are crushed, any religious group that doesn't agree with the principals are slaughtered, and people who are of the 'type' generally have a bad time. It Iraq returning to what it was before the war.

I don't agree with this war, I never did. But as long as it's said and done, maybe, just maybe we'll be able to improve things there.

wu_trax · 1 Jun 2003, 22:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Mirai
The people don't know what they want. The people haven't had the pleasure of living in a world where there are more than one choice.

It's not that their scared ****less, it that they understand what happens in a funamentalist regime. Personal freedoms are crushed, any religious group that doesn't agree with the principals are slaughtered, and people who are of the 'type' generally have a bad time. It Iraq returning to what it was before the war.

I don't agree with this war, I never did. But as long as it's said and done, maybe, just maybe we'll be able to improve things there.

once again: iraq wasnt a fundamentalist state before the war, in fact it was further away from beeing a fundamentalist country than most of the larger countries in the area.

JonnyBGood · 1 Jun 2003, 22:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Gayle29uk
There was a feature on 5 live earlier today about Basra and the huge Shia support for a fundamentalist muslim state. The US administration is scared ****less of the very idea of a muslim state and blatantly doesn't want Iraq to be one.

Looks like it's tough titty boys, that's what the people seem to want.

Democracy can go **** itself for all I care. Right and wrong isn't defined by the person who can most easily manipulate the largest masses of the most ignorant citizens.

wu_trax · 1 Jun 2003, 22:42

the funny thing is that they now blame the iran for theirv mistakes. you got to love that us-goverment.

Mirai · 1 Jun 2003, 22:43

Quote:

Originally posted by wu_trax
once again: iraq wasnt a fundamentalist state before the war, in fact it was further away from beeing a fundamentalist country than most of the larger countries in the area.

Granted, yes. But it was still a dictatorial regime, led by a religious man, which is pretty much the same thing.

wu_trax · 1 Jun 2003, 22:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Mirai
Granted, yes. But it was still a dictatorial regime, led by a religious man, which is pretty much the same thing.

i think its an important aspect.
the usa failed to fight the fundamentalists it orginally planed to fight after 9/11 and then invaded iraq, for no reason whatsoever.

Supernova9 · 1 Jun 2003, 22:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Mirai
Granted, yes. But it was still a dictatorial regime, led by a religious man, which is pretty much the same thing.

No, it's not at all.

Iraq under Saddam was one of the most secular "muslim" states. Bin Laden, fundamentalist muslim, hated Hussein for his non-religious stance. Saddam only used the whole "Muslim world unite against the west" thing to suit his own purposes.

MrL_JaKiri · 1 Jun 2003, 22:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Weeks
I really wish the American goverment would stop making the same mistakes Britain made during their first occupation of Iraq.

Using the wrong kind of poison gas?

Gayle29uk · 1 Jun 2003, 23:01

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Using the wrong kind of poison gas?

Yes, we didn't use gas bombs because we didn't know how. So we had to use artillery shells filled with poison gas and everyone knows they're less efficient.

Quote:

The RAF asked Churchill for permission to gas the rebels. "I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas," he replied. "I am strongly in favour of using gas against uncivilised tribes."

The RAF failed to master the technology of gas bombs and they were never used. The British did, however, bombard Shia rebels with gas-filled artillery shells.
Source: Daily Telegraph

Deffeh · 1 Jun 2003, 23:03

i heard islam is a fair stable and sensible religion

Gayle29uk · 1 Jun 2003, 23:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Mirai
It's not that their scared ****less, it that they understand what happens in an unelected regime. Personal freedoms are crushed, any group that doesn't agree with the principals are ignored, and people who are of the 'type' generally have a bad time. It's like America after the last election.

Amazing what just a few little changes can do...

Tactitus · 1 Jun 2003, 23:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Weeks
These kind of remarks are the reason i really don't like the US occupying another country to try and 'help' them.

So if we occupied them with the stated objective of just raping their country, you'd be OK with that?

Quote:

I.e.

'These people don't know what they want'

Which, in my mind anyway, translates to:

'These people would love to live like US citzens do, we just have to force them to live like it. Then they'll be happy. They just don't know it yet. And anyway, we have loads of money and a good wealfair system etc, i'm sure they don't. We must know best. Where is Iraq anyway, i've never been there. Can't be that important and nice.'

Or you could just take it face value: i.e., these people don't know what they want because they have no democratic traditions. Which also happens to be true.

Quote:

Maybe this is just because of the anti-US-goverment feelings amoung most of the citizens of Europe at the moment, i don't know.

Ya think?

Quote:

I can just see this going the same way as it did all those years before. The occupying forces trying to place thier kind of structure into the country, getting all the money they can. Then leaving someone (probably trained by the occupying forces) in control after the occupying forces leave. Then histroy repeating itself once again.

Yeah the Iraq people need to be helped, but i just cannot see the US (or any other country) alone doing any good what-so-ever, mainly due to a countries main motivator for invading is money - not citizen wealfair.

I hate to break the news to you, but the Iraq war has been big economic sinkhole for the US. $75B and rising. We're never even going to break even on this deal. :/

MrL_JaKiri · 1 Jun 2003, 23:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Gayle29uk
Yes, we didn't use gas bombs because we didn't know how. So we had to use artillery shells filled with poison gas and everyone knows they're less efficient.

My point++

StaticX · 2 Jun 2003, 00:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Tactitus
I hate to break the news to you, but the Iraq war has been big economic sinkhole for the US. $75B and rising. We're never even going to break even on this deal. :/

Even more reason for a massive tax cut.

Starbucks · 2 Jun 2003, 00:40

i didnt know this was going to happed

i also didnt know that half of the government will be oil barons

wu_trax · 2 Jun 2003, 09:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Tactitus
So if we occupied them with the stated objective of just raping their country, you'd be OK with that?

at least that would be honest

Quote:

Or you could just take it face value: i.e., these people don't know what they want because they have no democratic traditions. Which also happens to be true.

why the hell is it your buisness to tell them how to live??

Quote:

Ya think?

that rise of anti-americanism is fully understandable with your current crap-goverment, which does everything possible to annoy the rest of the world.

Quote:

I hate to break the news to you, but the Iraq war has been big economic sinkhole for the US. $75B and rising. We're never even going to break even on this deal. :/

ofc you will get money out of this, you can now reconstruct a whole country. there will be lots of multi-billion-$-deals and obviously all of them go to us-companies. plus there is some oil in iraq.

MrL_JaKiri · 2 Jun 2003, 09:38

You can't go in, claim to be putting democracy and fair elections in place, then choose your own man because you don't like who the people would vote for.

But then we always knew that America was pushing more for a Capitalism than Democracy.

[edit]

America the country gets big losses.

America the oil companies that Rumsfeld, Bush and co get reinstated at after they lose an election (or 2 terms, whichever's sooner) wins big time.

menth0l · 2 Jun 2003, 10:06

Surprise++;

Was there EVER any doubt?

Radical Edward · 2 Jun 2003, 10:17

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
You can't go in, claim to be putting democracy and fair elections in place, then choose your own man because you don't like who the people would vote for.

of course you can, the US is doing it right now. though frankly I don't blame them, all those people need now is a slice of apple pie and an education from Gooood ol' uncle Sam, and their lives will be sweeet.

MrL_JaKiri · 2 Jun 2003, 10:24

They should put cartman in charge.

Sweeeet, you guyth!

menth0l · 2 Jun 2003, 10:26

<Bush> Respect my authoritaaa!

huh · 2 Jun 2003, 11:44

Hay I know, lets give all the power back to people who have no idea how to rebuild their country.

Proteus · 2 Jun 2003, 11:45

Quote:

Originally posted by huh
Hay I know, lets give all the power back to people who have no idea how to rebuild their country.

As it's their country, that seems like a rather good idea!

Radical Edward · 2 Jun 2003, 11:46

Quote:

Originally posted by huh
Hay I know, lets give all the power back to people who have no idea how to rebuild their country.

like in afghanistan?

or does afghanistan not count because they don't have any oil?

menth0l · 2 Jun 2003, 11:46

Or even better, let's assume that there is a people who have absolutely no clue about anything and treat them accordingly!

Proteus · 2 Jun 2003, 11:47

Quote:

Originally posted by menth0l
Or even better, let's assume that there is a people who have absolutely no clue about anything and treat them accordingly!

I thought Britain and the US were already doing that with every other country in the world?

Radical Edward · 2 Jun 2003, 11:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
As it's their country, that seems like a rather good idea!

not really. Japan didn't run itself after WW2, nor did Germany.

menth0l · 2 Jun 2003, 11:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
I thought Britain and the US were already doing that with every other country in the world?

insight'd

Radical Edward · 2 Jun 2003, 11:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
I thought Britain and the US were already doing that with every other country in the world?

pointless cynicism ahoy.

Proteus · 2 Jun 2003, 11:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
not really. Japan didn't run itself after WW2, nor did Germany.

They were conquered after making war on us.

We only invaded Iraq (apparently) to remove Saddam and his Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Since we have done one, and the other seems impossible given the lack of said Weapons, I see no reason why we should start running Iraq.

Unless we want its oil of course...

Proteus · 2 Jun 2003, 11:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
pointless cynicism ahoy.

The general message I got from Bush and Blair before the war was "we know best and anyone who disagrees with us is wrong".

That seems suspiciously like what they are saying to the people of Iraq.

menth0l · 2 Jun 2003, 11:53

I think this whole WMD thing is a matter of miscalculation.

ie.

The US sells Iraq 150 wmd.
Iraq uses 100 on the Kurds.
Iraq claims to have destroyed x.

150-100-x should equal 0.

It's all about how the US approximates x.

Dear god i'm making absolutely no sense at all.

Radical Edward · 2 Jun 2003, 11:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Proteus
They were conquered after making war on us.

We only invaded Iraq (apparently) to remove Saddam and his Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Since we have done one, and the other seems impossible given the lack of said Weapons, I see no reason why we should start running Iraq.

Unless we want its oil of course...

I could make a point here, but it seems too obvious to me.

wu_trax · 2 Jun 2003, 12:26

Looks like they send in exactly the right people

MrL_JaKiri · 2 Jun 2003, 12:38

Quote:

Originally posted by wu_trax
Looks like they send in exactly the right people

Quote:

It is 8 a.m. in Baghdad. His men are sitting around in Udai's living room drinking Coke and watching "Apocalypse Now." They've seen it hundreds of times, but they still think it's great.

Irony ahoy!

MrL_JaKiri · 2 Jun 2003, 12:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Weeks
It was the same with Japan and Germany. Both of those countries has no-one in it with any intelligence whatsoever, the US delegates had to teach them how to be civilised.

I would reply to this point, except it's too stupid for me to bother.

wu_trax · 2 Jun 2003, 12:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Weeks
It was the same with Japan and Germany. Both of those countries has no-one in it with any intelligence whatsoever, the US delegates had to teach them how to be civilised.

like they teached the people in central america, chile, iran, afganistan, vietnam, south korea, etc.?

MrL_JaKiri · 2 Jun 2003, 13:02

Quote:

Originally posted by Weeks
Well thanks for that comment, you've enlightened my life.

Well, it's different when you're invading actively hostile nations who attacked you, isn't it?

Radical Edward · 2 Jun 2003, 14:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Weeks
It was the same with Japan and Germany. Both of those countries has no-one in it with any intelligence whatsoever, the US delegates had to teach them how to be civilised.

what exactly do you mean by civilised?

Dante Hicks · 2 Jun 2003, 14:26

Maybe Weeks was being sarcastic.

Radical Edward · 2 Jun 2003, 14:31

Quote:

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
Maybe Weeks was being sarcastic.

Quote:

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Baby Jesus skim reads posts.

Cmdr_Cyrax · 2 Jun 2003, 18:40

I thought this thread was about cilla black ODing on cocaine; I have ten quid on that.

I'm disappointed.

Incidently did anyone see 'Here's one we invaded earlier' on UK TV?

30 million for the US embassy? shocking :eek: