Planetarion Forums

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 11:26

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/2908827.stm

see, it is easy to go on about what is happening at the moment, but at least the above will not happen anymore. People will die in this war, innocent and guilty, that much is certain. Whether we should have gone to war or not is now irrelevant, what people should really be focussing on is how to get rid of this sort of thing.

incidentally, does Al Jazeera report any of these sorts of finds? I'd love to know.

Tietäjä · 2 Apr 2003, 11:30

Propaganda?

Does ANYONE really give true information on the war?

I doubt.

As much as Al Jazeera shows propaganda, I believe the American/European channels do too, the American ones propably in VERY large scale.

Slidey · 2 Apr 2003, 11:33

im waiting on the people in here to give excuses and reasons for this...

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 11:33

oh of course everyone is suffused with propaganda.. though these days most of that probably revolves more around what you aren't told rather than lying about what you are told. something like tose torture rooms is very real, and hardly deniable.

Actually this embedded journalism is a concern of mine, it allows too much military controlling of what is being said. I much prefer independent journalism, even if the news is a day or two late.

Monkehpimp · 2 Apr 2003, 11:35

noones denying that Saddam isn't brutal, but then the 'daisy cutter' isn't exactly nice either....

ChubbyChecker · 2 Apr 2003, 11:41

Saddam Hussein has undeniably oppressed and terrorised his people throughout his reign. Regardless of whether we find WMDs or not it will be a "good thing" to get rid of him.

Question is, do the Iraqis really appreciate this? Will they look back in 5 years time and say "Yes, the coalition forces did a good thing"? Or will they resent the West? Already across the Arab world there is huge opposition to the war. In Turkey public opinion is 95% against the war.

In the long run fewer Iraqis will die thanks to the military action. But, can the coalition really take the moral high ground if the people they are liberating do not appreciate it?

ChubbyChecker · 2 Apr 2003, 11:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Tietäjä
As much as Al Jazeera shows propaganda, I believe the American/European channels do too, the American ones propably in VERY large scale.

Have you watched the American coverage of the war? I'm guessing no.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 11:46

Quote:

Originally posted by Monkehpimp
noones denying that Saddam isn't brutal, but then the 'daisy cutter' isn't exactly nice either....

there is no real comparison that I can see between a daisy cutter and a couple of rubber tyres and a live electric cable.

Emperorn · 2 Apr 2003, 11:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
there is no real comparison that I can see between a daisy cutter and a couple of rubber tyres and a live electric cable.

I suggest you do some reading up on the use of electricity on prisoners in the US justice system.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 11:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Emperorn
I suggest you do some reading up on the use of electricity on prisoners in the US justice system.

which I disagree with strongly.

your point being?

Tietäjä · 2 Apr 2003, 11:57

Quote:

Originally posted by ChubbyChecker
Have you watched the American coverage of the war? I'm guessing no.

Only CNN.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 11:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Tietäjä
Only CNN.

I hate CNN... all that 'impartial reporting' rubbish in their little promo slots.

Emperorn · 2 Apr 2003, 12:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
which I disagree with strongly.

your point being?

If the 'liberators' themselves condone that sort of practice, and actually are the worlds biggest exporter of electric torture devices, what leads you to believe this sort of thing is not going to happen again?

Tietäjä · 2 Apr 2003, 12:06

I suppose I could watch say, BBC or something else too, but I'm stuck on CNN.

wu_trax · 2 Apr 2003, 12:32

Quote:

Originally posted by ChubbyChecker
Saddam Hussein has undeniably oppressed and terrorised his people throughout his reign. Regardless of whether we find WMDs or not it will be a "good thing" to get rid of him.

Question is, do the Iraqis really appreciate this? Will they look back in 5 years time and say "Yes, the coalition forces did a good thing"? Or will they resent the West? Already across the Arab world there is huge opposition to the war. In Turkey public opinion is 95% against the war.

In the long run fewer Iraqis will die thanks to the military action. But, can the coalition really take the moral high ground if the people they are liberating do not appreciate it?

thats exactly the problem.
if people hat you for 'liberating' or whatever them, this whole war will be pretty much useless.
and the current policy of the us-army does not seem to help at all in 'winning their hearts'. other than that i dont think that any new goverment in iraq will be much better than saddam. the usa itself doesnt give that much about human rights anyway.
i still think the whole war will go terribly wrong.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 12:37

Quote:

Originally posted by Emperorn
If the 'liberators' themselves condone that sort of practice, and actually are the worlds biggest exporter of electric torture devices, what leads you to believe this sort of thing is not going to happen again?

oh it will still happen in some places, for sure, but it won't happen to them in that manner though. removal of a regieme that condones and even utilises that sort of thing is a plus. whether the US exports tasers or electrocutes people is a separate issue.

ChubbyChecker · 2 Apr 2003, 12:39

Quote:

Originally posted by wu_trax
if people hate you for 'liberating' or whatever them, this whole war will be pretty much useless.

This is the reason why I have recently gone from being pro-war to anti.

Not that I think we should pull out, now that we've committed ourselves we basically have to keep going until Saddam is dead/captured.

Emperorn · 2 Apr 2003, 12:43

Just to be clear, I was not referring to the electric chair, it is common practise in the US prison system to discipline inmates with electric current strong enough to make them **** themselves.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 12:45

Quote:

Originally posted by Emperorn
Just to be clear, I was not referring to the electric chair, it is common practise in the US prison system to discipline inmates with electric current strong enough to make them **** themselves.

that still doesn't detract from my point though. if you can stop the terrorising of the populous by a brutal regime, then that is a good thing. if you want me to admit that the US also has a poor human rights record, then I am more than willing to do that.

wu_trax · 2 Apr 2003, 12:46

Quote:

Originally posted by ChubbyChecker
This is the reason why I have recently gone from being pro-war to anti.

Not that I think we should pull out, now that we've committed ourselves we basically have to keep going until Saddam is dead/captured.

thats another problem: you cant stop now or saddam will be much stronger than before, he would have the whole middle east behind him, just for throwing the us out.
but then, i still think its easier to deal with a stronger saddam than with a bush who thinks its his duty 'to free the world from all evil'

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 12:47

Quote:

Originally posted by wu_trax
i still think its easier to deal with a stronger saddam than with a bush who thinks its his duty 'to free the world from all evil'

a whole middle east full of annoyed people might be tricky, though we already have that now.

hopefully bush will only be temporary. especially if the economy over there really falls through the floor.

wu_trax · 2 Apr 2003, 12:48

he can still do a lot of damage in the rest of his term.

Slidey · 2 Apr 2003, 12:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Emperorn
If the 'liberators' themselves condone that sort of practice, and actually are the worlds biggest exporter of electric torture devices, what leads you to believe this sort of thing is not going to happen again?

they sell more cables with no appliances at the end and old tires?

Slidey · 2 Apr 2003, 12:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Emperorn
Just to be clear, I was not referring to the electric chair, it is common practise in the US prison system to discipline inmates with electric current strong enough to make them **** themselves.

there is a difference between doing this to violent/undisciplined prisonors, and doing it to people that say something bad about the ruler of the country..

Tietäjä · 2 Apr 2003, 12:51

Quote:

Originally posted by wu_trax
he can still do a lot of damage in the rest of his term.

Oh yes. And he will. Who are we talking about again?

Slidey · 2 Apr 2003, 12:51

Quote:

Originally posted by wu_trax
thats another problem: you cant stop now or saddam will be much stronger than before, he would have the whole middle east behind him, just for throwing the us out.
but then, i still think its easier to deal with a stronger saddam than with a bush who thinks its his duty 'to free the world from all evil'

deal with him? you mean allowing him to go on torturing and/or murdering people in his country for another 10 years ?

wu_trax · 2 Apr 2003, 12:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Tietäjä
Oh yes. And he will. Who are we talking about again?

Bush?

Emperorn · 2 Apr 2003, 12:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
that still doesn't detract from my point though. if you can stop the terrorising of the populous by a brutal regime, then that is a good thing. if you want me to admit that the US also has a poor human rights record, then I am more than willing to do that.

Ofc I agree that would be a good thing.

But the Iraqi's don't seem to do so. I believe they don't take kindly to being bombed either.

It seems many Iraqi's prefer even a bad Iraqi goverment to an American one. It was an American general or amiral I think who once said "My country, right or wrong."

wu_trax · 2 Apr 2003, 12:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Slidey
deal with him? you mean allowing him to go on torturing and/or murdering people in his country for another 10 years ?

so what? is it your buiness? and will you make things any better for the people in iraq if you replace of dictator by another one (which will happen, i have absolutly no doubt about that)?

Emperorn · 2 Apr 2003, 12:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Slidey
there is a difference between doing this to violent/undisciplined prisonors, and doing it to people that say something bad about the ruler of the country..

How about doing it to a unviolent defendant in the middle of open court for verbally interrupting the judge?

lokken · 2 Apr 2003, 12:54

I sense the only time we'll be able to judge the situation is after Saddam is hopefully gone, as then the Iraqi people have a chance to properly express themselves.

Given a choice of a fear of being shot, or a choice of having some rights and freedoms, I know which one I'd rather have. I don't oppose the war in the sense that it will probably help the Iraqi people in the long term, it's the fact that the arab world is going to hate us and cause further problems, along with the huge damage to international diplomacy that's worrying.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 12:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Emperorn
Ofc I agree that would be a good thing.

But the Iraqi's don't seem to do so. I believe they don't take kindly to being bombed either.

It seems many Iraqi's prefer even a bad Iraqi goverment to an American one. It was an American general or amiral I think who once said "My country, right or wrong."

which is why the country shouldn't be run by the US after the conflict is over... though it is looking more and more likely that the US will indeed be running the place, regardless of what they tell the British Government.

Slidey · 2 Apr 2003, 12:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Emperorn
How about doing it to a unviolent defendant in the middle of open court for verbally interrupting the judge?

sure, i bet it happened exactly like that

ChubbyChecker · 2 Apr 2003, 12:56

Quote:

Originally posted by Slidey
deal with him? you mean allowing him to go on torturing and/or murdering people in his country for another 10 years ?

The point is that the Iraqis won't be grateful once Saddam is got rid of. The people in nearby countries will be even less grateful.

So, what's the point in stopping Saddam if you're stopping him from doing bad things to people who won't even thank you once you've stopped him???

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 12:56

Quote:

Originally posted by wu_trax
so what? is it your buiness?

marvellous comment. "people are being tortured but it isn't my business."

Slidey · 2 Apr 2003, 12:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
which is why the country shouldn't be run by the US after the conflict is over... though it is looking more and more likely that the US will indeed be running the place, regardless of what they tell the British Government.

tbh, if the yanks do the hard work, why should they not have the 'spoils of war' as it were? the french wont even agree on a bloody humanitarian thing in the un, so why should they try with them?

Emperorn · 2 Apr 2003, 12:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Slidey
they sell more cables with no appliances at the end and old tires?

Oh but you see, there are these sanctions imposed on Irag. Otherwise they would be using state of the art US torture equipment too, now they have to improvise.

Slidey · 2 Apr 2003, 12:58

Quote:

Originally posted by wu_trax
so what? is it your buiness? and will you make things any better for the people in iraq if you replace of dictator by another one (which will happen, i have absolutly no doubt about that)?

'its nothing to do with me'

didnt people say that about the jews before teh second world war in nazi germany ?

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 12:58

Quote:

Originally posted by ChubbyChecker
The point is that the Iraqis won't be grateful once Saddam is got rid of. The people in nearby countries will be even less grateful.

I am sure many will. applying a blanket assumption like yours to an entire country that has been under the iron fist of a barbaric dictator for decades, who brutally supresses any uprisings, and dispenses with anyone who he even thinks is opposing him, is rather flawed.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 13:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Slidey
tbh, if the yanks do the hard work, why should they not have the 'spoils of war' as it were? the french wont even agree on a bloody humanitarian thing in the un, so why should they try with them?

It is not "spoils of war" we should be thinking about, it is "what is right for the people"

ChubbyChecker · 2 Apr 2003, 13:03

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
I am sure many will. applying a blanket assumption like yours to an entire country that has been under the iron fist of a barbaric dictator for decades, who brutally supresses any uprisings, and dispenses with anyone who he even thinks is opposing him, is rather flawed.

Sure, I don't know that the Iraqi majority will not appreciate it, any more than you know that they will.

What we do know is that the overwhelming majority of the Arab world is against this war. They aren't being oppressed by Saddam Hussein, their government isn't telling them to be against this war. So I think it's safe to say they are giving us their true opinions.

This reason alone is good enough (in my mind) to say that this war should not have started in the first place.

Slidey · 2 Apr 2003, 13:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
It is not "spoils of war" we should be thinking about, it is "what is right for the people"

i meant it in a 'contracts to rebuild iraq' sense as opposed to 'who gets the gold they find there' type thing.

personally i think the americans will give it up for the un to sort out once saddam is removed, however they'll give it on their own terms. they'll want other countries of the world to put money up, and they'll want their companies to have first dibs on rebuilding work..

the french will get involved, as their industry will tell their government they have no choice but to

Emperorn · 2 Apr 2003, 13:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
I am sure many will. applying a blanket assumption like yours to an entire country that has been under the iron fist of a barbaric dictator for decades, who brutally supresses any uprisings, and dispenses with anyone who he even thinks is opposing him, is rather flawed.

Most regimes in this world would brutally supress any uprisings. Many other do not have freedom of speech either. As dictators go, Saddam is at least secularized and holds fairly modern views, providing good health-care and education (before the sanctions, at least.) Saddam is bad, but he could be a lot worse.

I would also like to see some factual number on his alleged killings sometime, other than the sweeping 'millions' or famous "gassing of the kurds" to which no-one objected at the time.

That he has a bad human rights track record is just convient atm, I do not for a second believe it is the cause of this war.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 13:11

Quote:

Originally posted by ChubbyChecker
What we do know is that the overwhelming majority of the Arab world is against this war. They aren't being oppressed by Saddam Hussein, their government isn't telling them to be against this war. So I think it's safe to say they are giving us their true opinions.

are their opinions really the important ones though? many iraqis have expressed their annoyance at tha arab world for sitting on their backsides while Saddam gets on with the buisiness of torturing and murdering. If at the end of it, the iraqis are as a whole pleased, and the arab world still annoyed, then stuff them, because as you have pointed out, they aren't the ones being oppressed.

Nusselt · 2 Apr 2003, 13:14

how can it be good news for those iraqis?!?!!?!

they're dead!!!

'You're FREE...oh...you're dead'

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 13:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Emperorn
That he has a bad human rights track record is just convient atm, I do not for a second believe it is the cause of this war.

nor I. to be honest, I disagree with the whole way this war came about, with pro-war people screeching "WOMD" and anti war peopel screeching "Blood for Oil". I am still going to leave my judgement of whether the war was a "good thing" for several years, until all the dust has settled, and the reasons more apparent. Getting rid of Saddam though is a good thing - the next issue is what comes next.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 13:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Nusselt
how can it be good news for those iraqis?!?!!?!

they're dead!!!

'You're FREE...oh...you're dead'

somehow I think that there will be some iraqis left over who won't get tortured to death because they expressed an opinion that saddam isn't actually a very nice man.

Kumnaa · 2 Apr 2003, 13:23

BAD WAR

ChubbyChecker · 2 Apr 2003, 13:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Radical Edward
are their opinions really the important ones though? many iraqis have expressed their annoyance at tha arab world for sitting on their backsides while Saddam gets on with the buisiness of torturing and murdering. If at the end of it, the iraqis are as a whole pleased, and the arab world still annoyed, then stuff them, because as you have pointed out, they aren't the ones being oppressed.

I have seen many an interview with exiled Iraqis on TV (and heard them on the radio) since the war began. You would expect exiled Iraqis to be the last people to be against this war. Even their opinion is divided. I saw an interview with a guy who's uncle had been killed by Saddam's men and even he was against the war. Also note that there are many Iraqis who have benefited (wrongly benefited, but still benefited) from the regime who won't be too pleased with its collapse.

Take into account the fact that any new regime will possibly have very shakey foundations, the increase in anti-Western feeling in the Middle East, and the increase in terrorist activity that will be a result of this war and then it starts looking like this war will do more harm than good.

Even if you're looking at it from only the Iraqi people's perspective (which you shouldn't) they may not be better off. After all, Iraq was in chaos before Saddam came along, I see no reason to believe that it won't revert back to chaos once he's gone.

Radical Edward · 2 Apr 2003, 13:25

Quote:

Originally posted by ChubbyChecker

<snip>

this is why I will reserve my judgement on this war until after the event.