kallend 2,108 #26 February 6, 2007 QuoteQuoteWell, the general goal of this war was (after the WMDs didn't materialize) to liberate the Iraqis from tyranny (although no-one bothered to ask them if that was OK with them). I'm curious, what is a continuous enlistment of Iraqi young men to the Iraqi National Army and police forces working side by side with coalition forces?? What too I ask would we call millions of Iraqi citizens with purple fingers (many of them women) on more than one occasion, VOTING for the first time in their life??? I would call it Iraqi people wanting to be liberated from tyranny! Give these people a chance John, it's not like they've had much practice with the luxury of Democracy and a Representative Republic. I think they deserve it. So who took the trouble to ask them ahead of time if they wanted to be invaded and bombed and have 1000 killed each week in order to achieve this so called liberation? Wasn't it rather arrogant of us to assume that this is what they wanted? Are they free now? Was Vichy France free? Was Quisling's Norway free? Was Jaruselski's Poland or Honecker's East Germany free? Iraq has a foreign occupying army in place and a puppet government subservient to the US. They are NOT free.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyChimp 0 #27 February 6, 2007 QuoteSo who took the trouble to ask them ahead of time if they wanted to be invaded and bombed and have 1000 killed each week in order to achieve this so called liberation? Wasn't it rather arrogant of us to assume that this is what they wanted? Are they free now? Was Vichy France free? Was Quisling's Norway free? Was Jaruselski's Poland or Honecker's East Germany free? Iraq has a foreign occupying army in place and a puppet government subservient to the US. They are NOT free And who took the trouble to ask them if they wanted to be gassed by Saddam and thrown into mass graves which were found?? Wouldn't that be arrogant of us to assume that's what they desired?? Are they free now you ask...? With all due respect professor, you refuse to acknowledge the fact that Iraqi citizens had the chance to taste democracy and VOTE for who THEY felt should represent them in their free form of government. Compliments of the Iraqi Armed Forces, United States Armed Forces, and Coalition Forces. Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,078 #28 February 6, 2007 > and they are Happy to see us now. In 2006, 90% of Iraqis said they would not want the US as a neighbor; most of them think we invaded to control their oil. 66% think their situations will improve if the US leaves. 70% want them us out of there within a year, and 60% support the insurgents that attack us. http://www.iraqanalysis.org/info/55 http://www.umich.edu/news/index.html?Releases/2006/Jun06/r061406a >We have a bit of a trust issue to overcome (and we are doing that aby >continuing our support now) . . . Pretty much every poll taken shows that Iraqis think we are making things worse by staying. >in that when we left last time, we did not provide the arms and intelligence > suport to the Kurds in the North that we promised. I think Iraqis aren't so different than us. If we were invaded by a foreign force that killed hundreds of thousands of americans to depose an evil president - would you want them to stay and kill more of your friends/family (accidentally, of course) or leave? Who would you trust to set up your own government - you, or some foreigners who don't speak your language, have a bizarre religion and live in armed camps? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,078 #29 February 6, 2007 >And who took the trouble to ask them if they wanted to be gassed >by Saddam and thrown into mass graves which were found? Certainly not us! But we sold him the helicopters and chemicals to gas those people, and supported him when he was using chemical weapons against the Iranians. I find our dedication to the poor downtrodden people of Iraq somewhat hypocritical since we once supported a government who was torturing/exterminating them. But fear not; those torture chambers are open again and the rape rooms and mass graves are back, courtesy of our failed policies in Iraq. But I have a feeling that if someone (say, Iran) invaded Iraq to "liberate" them from the Iraq we created, you'd be very upset. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #30 February 6, 2007 QuoteCompliments of the Iraqi Armed Forces You're kidding right? Iraq is far worse off today than when under Saddam. The vote was a joke. A purple finger? Symbolism does not make a democracy. It is a civil war and there is nothing that the US can do about it. Do you honestly believe that the Iraqi people are praising Allah that GWB invaded their country and started the ball rolling that crushed their homes, knocked out their electricity, killed near half a million people. blew arms and legs off of their children, encouraged terrorist to come to their country, created a civil war and any number of other atrocities that they now have to live with? If you are so happy for this war, why are you not there? I am sure that the Iraqis will welcome you with open arms"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyChimp 0 #31 February 6, 2007 QuoteQuoteCompliments of the Iraqi Armed Forces You're kidding right? Iraq is far worse off today than when under Saddam. The vote was a joke. A purple finger? Symbolism does not make a democracy. It is a civil war and there is nothing that the US can do about it. Do you honestly believe that the Iraqi people are praising Allah that GWB invaded their country and started the ball rolling that crushed their homes, knocked out their electricity, killed near half a million people. blew arms and legs off of their children, encouraged terrorist to come to their country, created a civil war and any number of other atrocities that they now have to live with? If you are so happy for this war, why are you not there? I am sure that the Iraqis will welcome you with open arms Although I disagree with Professor Kallend, his arguements have substance. Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #32 February 6, 2007 I am abit confused as to why you find it that GWB... Quotecrushed their homes, knocked out their electricity, killed near half a million people. blew arms and legs off of their children, encouraged terrorist to come to their country, created a civil war and any number of other atrocities that they now have to live with? Billions of dollars have been wasted and nothing has been gained. Our own government has made the world an even more dangerous place. We have lost a level of our own freedom. The culprits of 9-11 are still free to do as they please. Yet, some still believe that Saddam was the center of terror and that the Iraqis love us like our own mothers. I am very sick and tired of hearing about how bad it will get in Iraq if we leave. It is already a bloodbath. I am sick and tired of hearing how leaving will only embolden the terrorist. By us being in Iraq we are only emboldening them and creating even more people who hate us. Face it, going to Iraq was the biggest mistake that has ever been made by any US president. You say leaving Vietnam was a mistake? Shit, read some history!!!! We could had never won that war. Leaving was the best thing we could had done for those people. The same goes for Iraq. Being there is only making it worse. If these people really want peace, they have to do it on their own. No amount of military muscle is going to do it. Killing a multitude of people will not do it. The Shiitte's and the Sunni's need to do it. Not a puppet government that is bent on revenge. The billions of our tax dollars that should be used to help Americans will not bring peace to the Iraqis. The Iraqis have to do it on their own. We need to stop using our military as a crutch and force them to stand up and fight for themselves. If they do not want to do that. To hell with them. My tax dollars would be better spent right here in America helping Americans."...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,108 #33 February 6, 2007 QuoteQuoteSo who took the trouble to ask them ahead of time if they wanted to be invaded and bombed and have 1000 killed each week in order to achieve this so called liberation? Wasn't it rather arrogant of us to assume that this is what they wanted? Are they free now? Was Vichy France free? Was Quisling's Norway free? Was Jaruselski's Poland or Honecker's East Germany free? Iraq has a foreign occupying army in place and a puppet government subservient to the US. They are NOT free And who took the trouble to ask them if they wanted to be gassed by Saddam and thrown into mass graves which were found?? Wouldn't that be arrogant of us to assume that's what they desired?? Are they free now you ask...? With all due respect professor, you refuse to acknowledge the fact that Iraqi citizens had the chance to taste democracy and VOTE for who THEY felt should represent them in their free form of government. Compliments of the Iraqi Armed Forces, United States Armed Forces, and Coalition Forces. There were elections in soviet controlled Poland, Hungary, and East Germany too. There were elections in Syrian occupied Lebanon. The Iraqi government is a puppet - it does not control its own country, we do. You cannot be free when occupied by an invading army. Washington Post Sunday, January 21, 2007; Page A01 By Michael Abramowitz and Peter Baker Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki had a surprise for President Bush when they sat down with their aides in the Four Seasons Hotel in Amman, Jordan. Firing up a PowerPoint presentation, Maliki and his national security adviser proposed that U.S. troops withdraw to the outskirts of Baghdad and let Iraqis take over security in the strife-torn capital. Maliki said he did not want any more U.S. troops at all, just more authority. The president listened intently to the unexpected proposal at their Nov. 30 meeting, according to accounts from several administration officials. Bush seemed impressed that Maliki had taken the initiative, but it did not take him long to reject the idea. So Bush overules Maliki. Now go ahead and tell me that Maliki is not a PUPPET!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,108 #34 February 10, 2007 QuoteSo Bush overules Maliki. Now go ahead and tell me that Maliki is not a PUPPET! I guess the deafening silence means that everyone agrees, Maliki IS a US puppet.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hairyjuan 0 #35 February 10, 2007 www.hermes-press.comwe are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively wishers never choose, choosers never wish Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyChimp 0 #36 February 10, 2007 And what exactly did Bush say that rejected the idea? Does anyone else find it funny that we made a SPORT out of an EMERGENCY PROCEDURE?!?! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,108 #37 February 10, 2007 QuoteAnd what exactly did Bush say that rejected the idea? Here... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
