Did you agree with the Iraq sanctions and no fly zone?

Joe98 · Jun 12, 2007

islamirama said:
Do they hate us because of who we are? Or do they hate us because of what we do?.........

……including 10 years of bombing and sanctions that brought death to thousands of Iraqis

Saddam invades Iran and causes the death of millions of Muslim soldiers. Saddam invades Kuwait and kills thousands of Muslims.

After that war, the people of Northern and Southern Iraq rise up to attack Saddam. But he uses aircraft to kill thousands of Muslims and end the uprising. The US imposes a no fly zone in these areas to stop the killing.

Do you agree with the no-fly zone?

After the war in Kuwait, it is clear Saddam cannot be allowed to purchase any more weapons. There are sanctions placed on Iraq to stop the purchase of weapons.

It is made clear that Iraq can purchase food and medicines. Saddam decides if he cannot purchase what he wants he will not purchase medical and medical equipment. Thousands of Muslim children die.

Do you agree with Saddam’s decision?
-

Keltoi · Jun 12, 2007

I think it would have saved everyone alot of grief if the U.N. coalition that kicked Iraq out of Kuwait would have had the mandate to go into Iraq and depose Saddam. How many soldiers were available during the Gulf War?...300,000 on the low end? That was the problem with the Iraq War, the Pentagon expected 150,000 troops to police and supply stability to a country the size of Texas.

Gangster No.1 · Jun 12, 2007

I dnt understand what you are asking and what you are talking about, please explain abtit more. cheers.lol

islamirama · Jun 12, 2007

Iraq and Iran war had US meddling in it all the way. It stired both sides up and it secretly promised both sides against the other and gave weapons to both sides, 10yrs of war with US dirt hands all over it, So who really is behind all those Muslim deaths?

North and south Iraq rise up? provide proof plz.

Kuwait is a city of Iraq, it belongs to iraq and saddam had every right to try to take it back to keep national unity. It's like TX saying I want to be a country of my own and not be part of USA anymore. Anyways, US officials said what a sovereign nation does in its land (including Kuwait) is none of other nation’s business. And US gave saddam ok to attack Kuwait (a deception) and then US attacked iraq to defend Kuwait. All this is available online too if you wish to research. 10yrs of sanctions with no fly zone and over a 1million kids starved to death, when asked if it was worth it and the secretary of state, Albright, says on national TV that it was worth. Iraq had the most powerful and largest army in the ME. Thanks to sanctions of 10yrs and deceptions and war on Iraq with nonstop bombing by US destroyed that nation to a weak mule like state and then under the lies of WMD it invaded iraq. A plan they had planned out since daddy bush was in power and long before than.

The oil for food was a sham, so many western companies and gov’t involved in it have recently come into light and being prosecuted for corruption and embezzlement of millions of dollars. Western companies charging 5x the normal cost of food and meds and what not under the program. It was a whole sham to rob the country more of its resources.

All in all, the destruction of iraq is all on westerners, their gov’ts and their corporations. Saddam was a leader defending his land against outsiders, and was brutally dealt with by greed bully powers of the kuffars.

Do you think starving 1million iraqi kids to death, as Albright said, worth it?

Bittersteel · Jun 12, 2007

they should have finished the whole thing 15/16 years back.
How come Kuwait was a part of Iraq?I guess what Joe is trying to point out what we think about Muslims killing Muslims,right?Yes Joe I hated Saddam,he was a tyrant,for the shiites atleast.

Do you agree with Saddam’s decision?

Its hard to think someone like Saddam will do such a thing,buying medical supplies instead of military spare parts.

Muezzin · Jun 12, 2007

People, please try to stick to agreeing or disagreeing with what is actually being said, rather than going off on a tangent.

Cognescenti · Jun 12, 2007

islamirama said:
Iraq and Iran war had US meddling in it all the way. It stired both sides up and it secretly promised both sides against the other and gave weapons to both sides, 10yrs of war with US dirt hands all over it, So who really is behind all those Muslim deaths?

Just to be clear. We are talking about the current iteration of the universe..not some imagined past or future version? Iran had some US weapons left over from the time of the Shah, but they absolutely did not receive weapons from the US during the confilct. They may have been able to smuggle in a few F-14 parts from somewhere, but there was no measurable contribution. Similarly, the claim that Iraq had US weapons is preposterous. Overwhelmingly, their stuff was French or Russian. Iraq and Iran didn't need any help to go to war. All the world can now see what the Shia and Sunni think of each other. I don't know whether you really believe this propaganda or are just sporting with us.

North and south Iraq rise up? provide proof plz.

Remember the pictures of Kurdish grandmas and toddlers crossing snow-coverd mountains into Turkish refugee camps. That is what we are talking about.

Kuwait is a city of Iraq, it belongs to iraq and saddam had every right to try to take it back to keep national unity. It's like TX saying I want to be a country of my own and not be part of USA anymore. Anyways, US officials said what a sovereign nation does in its land (including Kuwait) is none of other nation’s business. And US gave saddam ok to attack Kuwait (a deception) and then US attacked iraq to defend Kuwait.

:rollseyes Even Tarik Aziz couldn't say that without choking back the heartburn. "Province 19", wasn't it? I think we can now guess where you get some of your ideas.

Zman · Jun 12, 2007

Joe98 said:
Saddam invades Iran and causes the death of millions of Muslim soldiers.

The U.S. and it's Arab allies directed Saddam to invade Iran, in order to stop the Iranian revolution from spreading...

Saddam invades Kuwait and kills thousands of Muslims.

Our Ambassador to Kuwait or Iraq, April Gillespie, gave Saddam the greenlight to invade Kuwait.

Saddam summoned her and had an audience, where he asked her if the U.S. would have a problem with him dealing with the Kuwaiti issue, and if it would interfere with U.S. interests, and she said no problem.

After that war, the people of Northern and Southern Iraq rise up to attack Saddam.

Bush Sr. incited the Kurds and Shia to "rise up," and promised U.S. military aid, but once Saddam attacked, Bush renegged on his deal, and left them to be slaughtered.

They would have never risen up en masse, if it weren't for Bush Sr...

But he uses aircraft to kill thousands of Muslims and end the uprising.

Under the First Gulf Wars cease fire agreement, Saddam wasn't allowed to fly his planes. Any planes that flew, were shot down.

His helicopters, however, were excluded from this agreement by General Norman Schwarzkoph.

That's how Saddam was able to end the uprising, quickly...

The US imposes a no fly zone in these areas to stop the killing.

The U.S./UK, imposed the no-fly zone before the uprising, not after for the Kurds' & Shias sake.

The no fly zone was implemented as an initial instrument in the dismemberment of Iraq...

Do you agree with the no-fly zone?

Absolutely not...

After the war in Kuwait, it is clear Saddam cannot be allowed to purchase any more weapons. There are sanctions placed on Iraq to stop the purchase of weapons.

The sanctions weren't purely military in nature. They were all encompasing. It affected all Iraqi's and their daily life...

It is made clear that Iraq can purchase food and medicines.

Many medicines were excluded. They were considered dual use That means, they could be used for military & civilian purposes.

Some of those medicines that were excluded were: pain killers, some anti biotics, even ambulances weren't allowed in...

Saddam decides if he cannot purchase what he wants he will not purchase medical and medical equipment.

Completely wrong...

Thousands of Muslim children die.

Thanks to the West, the UN, and the spineless Arab governments...

Do you agree with Saddam’s decision?-

It wasn't Saddam's decision, to begin with...

MTAFFI · Jun 12, 2007

islamirama said:
Iraq and Iran war had US meddling in it all the way. It stired both sides up and it secretly promised both sides against the other and gave weapons to both sides, 10yrs of war with US dirt hands all over it, So who really is behind all those Muslim deaths?

So by this logic I guess Iraq and Afghan is Irans fault since their hands are so dirty, and lets not forget S.A. and whoever else. This sort of logic is nonsense, just because the US supplied weapons to one side or the other doesnt make the US responsible for the war or the deaths of that war. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

islamirama said:
North and south Iraq rise up? provide proof plz.

Shi'a and Kurds

islamirama said:
Kuwait is a city of Iraq, it belongs to iraq and saddam had every right to try to take it back to keep national unity. It's like TX saying I want to be a country of my own and not be part of USA anymore. Anyways, US officials said what a sovereign nation does in its land (including Kuwait) is none of other nation’s business.

What?! Kuwait has been its own country since the 18th century

islamirama said:
And US gave saddam ok to attack Kuwait (a deception) and then US attacked iraq to defend Kuwait. All this is available online too if you wish to research.

There was never an actual "OK" given, the words were "we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts" and that the U.S. did not intend "to start an economic war against Iraq". No one ever specifically state to Iraq that it was "OK" to attack Kuwait.

islamirama said:
10yrs of sanctions with no fly zone and over a 1million kids starved to death, when asked if it was worth it and the secretary of state, Albright, says on national TV that it was worth. Iraq had the most powerful and largest army in the ME. Thanks to sanctions of 10yrs and deceptions and war on Iraq with nonstop bombing by US destroyed that nation to a weak mule like state and then under the lies of WMD it invaded iraq. A plan they had planned out since daddy bush was in power and long before than.

Below you will find actual copies of the UN sanctions against Iraq, you will find that no one stopped the flow of food, medical or humanitarian aid from coming into Iraq except Saddam Hussein who refused it until he was able to trade freely (obtain materials needed for war). It is no one elses fault that these people were starving and dying except Saddams and that in part is the reason he was removed by the war we are in now. He was commiting a genocide by starving his people to death, he was a weak and stubborn mule and now he is dead because of it. To think that the US anticipated a ruler of a country refusing food and medicine for his people shows your bias. As far as the invasion on the basis of WMD, perhaps you forget that WMD arent necessarily nuclear, they can be the same WMD that Saddam used against his own people, why would we leave someone in power who we know had this technology that could easily convey it to the terrorist who are in Iraq today?

http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0661.htm

http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/575/10/IMG/NR057510.pdf?OpenElement

http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/575/11/IMG/NR057511.pdf?OpenElement

http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/575/12/IMG/NR057512.pdf?OpenElement

islamirama said:
The oil for food was a sham, so many western companies and gov’t involved in it have recently come into light and being prosecuted for corruption and embezzlement of millions of dollars. Western companies charging 5x the normal cost of food and meds and what not under the program. It was a whole sham to rob the country more of its resources.

Untrue, please provide reliable proof for this as the audits have not been made public. Also remember that not all of the money went straight to food, much of it went into reparations

islamirama said:
All in all, the destruction of iraq is all on westerners, their gov’ts and their corporations. Saddam was a leader defending his land against outsiders, and was brutally dealt with by greed bully powers of the kuffars.

Complete and total lunacy, the destruction of Iraq is on the former dictator and the guys (al-Qaeda) running around blowing up infrastructure everyday, just like yesterday there were 2 bridges blown up that provided the in's and out's of baghdad. You may wish to pin this on the west, but taking an unbiased approach to the history of it, it is very evident that Saddam made his bed and now he is hanging in it.

islamirama said:
Do you think starving 1million iraqi kids to death, as Albright said, worth it?

I guess we will never know, since saddam wasnt permitted to continue producing his chemical and nuclear weapons will we? It is sad 1 million children died and regretable, but how many would have died had he been allowed to continue? How many were brutally killed in Iran, Iraq, where would it have stopped? The man was attacking everyone around him

islamirama · Jun 12, 2007

MTAFFI said:
So by this logic I guess Iraq and Afghan is Irans fault since their hands are so dirty, and lets not forget S.A. and whoever else. This sort of logic is nonsense, just because the US supplied weapons to one side or the other doesnt make the US responsible for the war or the deaths of that war. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

In the early 1950s, oil was used as a political weapon for the first time -- _by_ the United States and Britain and _against_ Iran. Iran had nationalized its British-owned oil company which had refused to share its astronomical profits with the host government. In response, Washington and London organized a boycott of Iranian oil which brought Iran's economy to the brink of collapse. The CIA then instigated a coup, entrenching the Shah in power and effectively un-nationalizing the oil company, with U.S. firms getting 40 percent of the formerly 100 percent British-owned company. This was, in the view of the _New York Times_, an "object lesson in the heavy cost that must be paid" when an oil-rich Third World nation "goes berserk with fanatical nationalism." Source

The CIA did a coup, put shah in power in Iran as a puppet regime to protection corporation greed and stealing of Iranian oil. Th e1979 revolution was against the oppressive shah who was 100 times worst then Saddam. And to payback Iran for the revolution, US supported Iraq in the 10yr war against Iran as a punishment for the people to stand up for their rights and freedom.

The United States implemented a policy of support for Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War as a counterbalance to post-revolutionary Iran. At various times, the support took the form of technological aid, intelligence, the sale of dual-use and military equipment, and direct involvement and warfare against Iran.

After the Iranian Revolution, enmity between Iran and the U.S. ran high. Realpolitikers in Washington concluded that Saddam was the "lesser of the two evils", support for Iraq gradually became the order of the day.
"In June, 1982, President Reagan decided that the United States could not afford to allow Iraq to lose the war to Iran. President Reagan decided that the United States would do whatever was necessary and legal to prevent Iraq from losing the war with Iran. President Reagan formalized this policy by issuing a National Security Decision Directive ("NSDD") to this effect in June, 1982," said the "Teicher Affidavit," submitted on 31 January 1995 by former NSC official Howard Teicher to the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida.[3] Source

What?! Kuwait has been its own country since the 18th century

There was never an actual "OK" given, the words were "we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts" and that the U.S. did not intend "to start an economic war against Iraq". No one ever specifically state to Iraq that it was "OK" to attack Kuwait.

According to the book Unholy Babylon by Adel Darwish and Gregory Alexander (Gollancz Paperback 1991):

The US before the first Gulf War gave Saddam to understand that it would not interfere in its quarrel with Kuwait. US Ambassador April Glaspie conveyed the message to Saddam that the US 'had no opinion' on Iraq's future intentions with regard to Kuwait. (Kuwait as a state separate from Iraq was a creation of the British to protect their oil interests.) The book makes the situation painfully clear: Washington sent many messages to the Iraqi leader, all of them with the same theme. 'We won't interfere. We apologise for anything the nasty journalists have written about you, we prefer you to those fanatic Iranians.' This is the 'how' of American diplomacy. Source

Kuwait it’s own country sine 18th century, HAHAHAHA wonder what hat you pulled that out of with all the other lies you opinionate here without any evidence to back them up. Go to the source above and see how Saddam was tricked into attacking Kuwait and the lies and deceptions of US involved in it. Oh btw, Kuwait was a state created to PROTECT British oil interests, Saddam had every right to invade it and take it back as I stated before!

Below you will find actual copies of the UN sanctions against Iraq, you will find that no one stopped the flow of food, medical or humanitarian aid from coming into Iraq except Saddam Hussein who refused it until he was able to trade freely (obtain materials needed for war). It is no one elses fault that these people were starving and dying except Saddams and that in part is the reason he was removed by the war we are in now. He was commiting a genocide by starving his people to death, he was a weak and stubborn mule and now he is dead because of it. To think that the US anticipated a ruler of a country refusing food and medicine for his people shows your bias. As far as the invasion on the basis of WMD, perhaps you forget that WMD arent necessarily nuclear, they can be the same WMD that Saddam used against his own people, why would we leave someone in power who we know had this technology that could easily convey it to the terrorist who are in Iraq today?

Untrue, please provide reliable proof for this as the audits have not been made public. Also remember that not all of the money went straight to food, much of it went into reparations

UNITED NATIONS -- In a scathing final report documenting massive corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program, investigators Thursday accused more than 2,200 companies, and prominent politicians, of colluding with Saddam Hussein's regime to bilk the humanitarian operation of $1.8 billion.
It meticulously detailed how the $64 billion program became a cash cow for Saddam and more than half the companies participating in oil-for-food _ at the expense of Iraqis suffering under U.N. sanctions. It blamed shoddy U.N. management and the world's most powerful nations for allowing the corruption to go on for years.

All those corrupt companies and gov’ts paid Saddam dirt cheap to buy his oil, taking advantage of the nation being under sanctions for 10yrs. Only people to benefit from the program were the corrupt companies and gov’ts and sadddam. The Iraqi people starved to death, including over 1 million children, and that is all for the “national security” of the US. Only national security US has is its national interest in the Middle East oil, and it will destroy those nations, regime change, and oppress the people thru illegal wars and sanctions to have it its way. There is no stinken WMD invasion thread or crap like that. It’s all for US and it’s allies greed and plundering of Muslim resources. If these kuffars weren’t as powerful like before then they would’ve made proper deals and treaties and paid the price the owners of oil demanded like other nations do.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/10/27/213527.shtml
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec04/oil-for-food_12-3.html
http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/in_our_opinion/oil_for_food_new_details.htm
http://www.reliefweb.int/rw/RWB.NSF/db900SID/YAOI-6XJ32C?OpenDocument

Complete and total lunacy, the destruction of Iraq is on the former dictator and the guys (al-Qaeda) running around blowing up infrastructure everyday, just like yesterday there were 2 bridges blown up that provided the in's and out's of baghdad. You may wish to pin this on the west, but taking an unbiased approach to the history of it, it is very evident that Saddam made his bed and now he is hanging in it.

That’s complete ignorance your part. Destruction of Iraq began during the Gulf War when Saddam stopped listening to the West and doing it’s bidding, the sanctions were to weaken it by daddy so retard son could invade it today. It was all planned out. Saddam and al-qaed don’t even get along to be in the same country. Today the chaos in Iraq is because of US being there on faulty intelligence waging illegal wars and illegal occupation of that land to put another puppet regime there as it did with Iran. You can continue to deny the facts all you want, we don’t really care as this is what we believe and we continue to hate the west more and more and a war with Iran will only make your life living hell outside out of the US for the atrocities your gov’t does in the name of “national security” when all it wants is more oil and puppet regimes to please it.

I guess we will never know, since saddam wasnt permitted to continue producing his chemical and nuclear weapons will we? It is sad 1 million children died and regretable, but how many would have died had he been allowed to continue? How many were brutally killed in Iran, Iraq, where would it have stopped? The man was attacking everyone around him

Saddam had always been in power and he had is goods and his bad. So does every other leader. And for your information Saddam allegedly killed around 250,000 people in 20yrs where as your retard president killed 700,000 in 3yrs! Now who has killed more Iraqis? Oil greed daddy kills 1million child then georgy the retard son comes and kills close to a million more Iraqis. Like father like son huh, both devils of the west.

MTAFFI · Jun 12, 2007

islamirama said:
In the early 1950s, oil was used as a political weapon for the first time -- _by_ the United States and Britain and _against_ Iran. Iran had nationalized its British-owned oil company which had refused to share its astronomical profits with the host government. In response, Washington and London organized a boycott of Iranian oil which brought Iran's economy to the brink of collapse. The CIA then instigated a coup, entrenching the Shah in power and effectively un-nationalizing the oil company, with U.S. firms getting 40 percent of the formerly 100 percent British-owned company. This was, in the view of the _New York Times_, an "object lesson in the heavy cost that must be paid" when an oil-rich Third World nation "goes berserk with fanatical nationalism." Source

The CIA did a coup, put shah in power in Iran as a puppet regime to protection corporation greed and stealing of Iranian oil. Th e1979 revolution was against the oppressive shah who was 100 times worst then Saddam. And to payback Iran for the revolution, US supported Iraq in the 10yr war against Iran as a punishment for the people to stand up for their rights and freedom.

The United States implemented a policy of support for Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War as a counterbalance to post-revolutionary Iran. At various times, the support took the form of technological aid, intelligence, the sale of dual-use and military equipment, and direct involvement and warfare against Iran.

After the Iranian Revolution, enmity between Iran and the U.S. ran high. Realpolitikers in Washington concluded that Saddam was the "lesser of the two evils", support for Iraq gradually became the order of the day.
"In June, 1982, President Reagan decided that the United States could not afford to allow Iraq to lose the war to Iran. President Reagan decided that the United States would do whatever was necessary and legal to prevent Iraq from losing the war with Iran. President Reagan formalized this policy by issuing a National Security Decision Directive ("NSDD") to this effect in June, 1982," said the "Teicher Affidavit," submitted on 31 January 1995 by former NSC official Howard Teicher to the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida.[3] Source

What is your point? None of this supports your initial comments that the war was caused by the US, the US simply picked a side, they didnt cause the border dispute or the history of hatred between the two nations.

It seems you lost this part of the discussion

islamirama said:
The US before the first Gulf War gave Saddam to understand that it would not interfere in its quarrel with Kuwait. US Ambassador April Glaspie conveyed the message to Saddam that the US 'had no opinion' on Iraq's future intentions with regard to Kuwait. (Kuwait as a state separate from Iraq was a creation of the British to protect their oil interests.) The book makes the situation painfully clear: Washington sent many messages to the Iraqi leader, all of them with the same theme. 'We won't interfere. We apologise for anything the nasty journalists have written about you, we prefer you to those fanatic Iranians.' This is the 'how' of American diplomacy. Source

Kuwait it’s own country sine 18th century, HAHAHAHA wonder what hat you pulled that out of with all the other lies you opinionate here without any evidence to back them up. Go to the source above and see how Saddam was tricked into attacking Kuwait and the lies and deceptions of US involved in it. Oh btw, Kuwait was a state created to PROTECT British oil interests, Saddam had every right to invade it and take it back as I stated before!

The site www.rense.com is a biased site that is not enough to form a solid conclusion of the situation. I admit that the US did in ways decieve Iraq but the US never said it condoned the invasion of Kuwait or that it didnt.

As far as the issue of Kuwait, Kuwait was actually under the rule of the ottoman empire, Britain after crippling the ottoman empire, declared Kuwait to be "independent sheikhdom under British protectorate", and since the ottoman empire lost the war, Britain was fully within its rights to do so. So you claiming that Kuwait was ever a part of Iraq, is wrong, it was originally settled by traders and tribes, and then was declared by the ottoman empire and then was eventually Britains property. None of this makes it OK for Saddam to just claim the land was his because it is a small wealthy nation and he needed to recover from his war with Iran.

islamirama said:
UNITED NATIONS -- In a scathing final report documenting massive corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program, investigators Thursday accused more than 2,200 companies, and prominent politicians, of colluding with Saddam Hussein's regime to bilk the humanitarian operation of $1.8 billion.
It meticulously detailed how the $64 billion program became a cash cow for Saddam and more than half the companies participating in oil-for-food _ at the expense of Iraqis suffering under U.N. sanctions. It blamed shoddy U.N. management and the world's most powerful nations for allowing the corruption to go on for years.

All those corrupt companies and gov’ts paid Saddam dirt cheap to buy his oil, taking advantage of the nation being under sanctions for 10yrs. Only people to benefit from the program were the corrupt companies and gov’ts and sadddam. The Iraqi people starved to death, including over 1 million children, and that is all for the “national security” of the US. Only national security US has is its national interest in the Middle East oil, and it will destroy those nations, regime change, and oppress the people thru illegal wars and sanctions to have it its way. There is no stinken WMD invasion thread or crap like that. It’s all for US and it’s allies greed and plundering of Muslim resources. If these kuffars weren’t as powerful like before then they would’ve made proper deals and treaties and paid the price the owners of oil demanded like other nations do.

Isnt it funny you should quote this and leave this little part out

Most of the contracts went to Russian and French companies and individuals, who were rewarded for their governments' outspoken opposition to the sanctions. Still, even firms in countries supportive of the sanctions, such as the United States, found ways to manipulate the system illegally - sometimes by using Russian firms as middlemen.

That is from the very first link I followed of yours. IT was not GB Sr. benefitting or the US it was greedy corporations and those who OPPOSED the sanctions, which would have included saddam. Do you ever wonder how his country was so crippled yet he was living as one of the richest people in the world? Do you ever wonder how they found literally stockpiles of money in some of his homes? You simply cant blame Saddams corruption or the the corruption of those he dealt with on the US, the starving Iraqis were starving because Saddam was taking all of their food and their money for himself, as shown through your own sources

islamirama said:
That’s complete ignorance your part. Destruction of Iraq began during the Gulf War when Saddam stopped listening to the West and doing it’s bidding, the sanctions were to weaken it by daddy so retard son could invade it today. It was all planned out. Saddam and al-qaed don’t even get along to be in the same country. Today the chaos in Iraq is because of US being there on faulty intelligence waging illegal wars and illegal occupation of that land to put another puppet regime there as it did with Iran. You can continue to deny the facts all you want, we don’t really care as this is what we believe and we continue to hate the west more and more and a war with Iran will only make your life living hell outside out of the US for the atrocities your gov’t does in the name of “national security” when all it wants is more oil and puppet regimes to please it.

I think that bolded sentence sums you up quite nicely, it doesnt matter what the facts are you are going to manipulate them to where it works out so you can hate the US more and more. I highlighted the second half of the sentence just to show how scatter brained you are, where did that come from?

As far as the beginning of that post, Iraq could have been rebuilt but Saddam kept the money for himself because he was a greedy pig. As for the part about this all being planned out for money and oil....lol.. yeah still visiting your conspiracy theory sites right? :laugh: I am not even going to respond to it further than that because it is just stupid and ignorant.

islamirama said:
Saddam had always been in power and he had is goods and his bad. So does every other leader. And for your information Saddam allegedly killed around 250,000 people in 20yrs where as your retard president killed 700,000 in 3yrs! Now who has killed more Iraqis? Oil greed daddy kills 1million child then georgy the retard son comes and kills close to a million more Iraqis. Like father like son huh, both devils of the west.

What did he do good? Saddam didnt "allegedly" kill 250k he did, and then some if you add in his war with Iran. How many died in that because of his arrogance and tyranical processes? The blame died with him. Then you go on with your 700,000 people killed, please provide evidence outside of the Lancet report, that did not identify the US as the one who actually killed these people. Perhaps 750,000 have died, I dont know, what I do know is that many of the deaths (many many many more than caused by US soldiers) are caused by sectarian violence and insurgent groups with suicide bombs. THe claim that the US is directly responsible for all of these deaths is just stupid and shows that you will go to any length to put the blame on the US, because as you have said yourself you hate the US. As far as "daddy Bush" killing 1 million, again, that was Saddam and the history books as well as the facts that you can find for yourself online right now reflect that very clearly. Although I am sure you will deny it until the end of time, so we must agree that you are oblivious to facts and dumb and that I actually read the facts along with the rest of the people in the world......oh woops I mean we should agree to disagree!

islamirama · Jun 12, 2007

MTAFFI said:
What is your point? None of this supports your initial comments that the war was caused by the US, the US simply picked a side, they didnt cause the border dispute or the history of hatred between the two nations.

It seems you lost this part of the discussion

I said meddling in their affairs, read my post again. First west over threw iran gov't to put shah in power cuase the current gov't nationalist the west oil company that didn't want to share profits that rightfull belonged to iran. then people of iran tired of the oppressive dictator show revolted and so US supported iraq in killing iranians. Seems like you often miss the obvious. West killed iranians thru oppresive brutal regime of shah they put in place and then punished iran for their freedom fight by siding with iraq and killing millions on both side by what you call "killing two birds with one stone". So west is the killer of Muslims despite what you believe.

The site www.rense.com is a biased site that is not enough to form a solid conclusion of the situation. I admit that the US did in ways decieve Iraq but the US never said it condoned the invasion of Kuwait or that it didnt.

US did condone the invasion of kuwait, i wasn't interested in doing intensive research for you since its waste of time but i've done it for another moron on another forum. The information is out there, you can find it if you look for it.

As far as the issue of Kuwait, Kuwait was actually under the rule of the ottoman empire, Britain after crippling the ottoman empire, declared Kuwait to be "independent sheikhdom under British protectorate", and since the ottoman empire lost the war, Britain was fully within its rights to do so. So you claiming that Kuwait was ever a part of Iraq, is wrong, it was originally settled by traders and tribes, and then was declared by the ottoman empire and then was eventually Britains property. None of this makes it OK for Saddam to just claim the land was his because it is a small wealthy nation and he needed to recover from his war with Iran.

US is a country (empire) that is divided into 50 states, which is further divided into different cities in each state. Ottomon empire was a country united by different nations (states). Iraq was one of the states and kuwait was one of the cities of Iraq. There goes your debate of kuwait as a nation since 18th century.

"Kuwait as a state separate from Iraq was a creation of the British to protect their oil interests"

That is from the very first link I followed of yours. IT was not GB Sr. benefitting or the US it was greedy corporations and those who OPPOSED the sanctions, which would have included saddam. Do you ever wonder how his country was so crippled yet he was living as one of the richest people in the world? Do you ever wonder how they found literally stockpiles of money in some of his homes? You simply cant blame Saddams corruption or the the corruption of those he dealt with on the US, the starving Iraqis were starving because Saddam was taking all of their food and their money for himself, as shown through your own sources

The US imposed sanctions for 10yrs for what? every country in the world has a right to nuclear technology so long as they follow UN laws and yet US was punishing Iraq for trying to get them and now Iran, yet this same country with its allies secretly not just let Israel but gave it all the technology. Don't blame Saddam for taking advantage of the corrupted oil for food program, the initial blame goes to those who imposed sanctions in the first place and then no tv said it was worth killing 1 milion kids (so they can secure their oil interests).

What did he do good? Saddam didnt "allegedly" kill 250k he did, and then some if you add in his war with Iran. How many died in that because of his arrogance and tyranical processes? The blame died with him. Then you go on with your 700,000 people killed, please provide evidence outside of the Lancet report, that did not identify the US as the one who actually killed these people. Perhaps 750,000 have died, I dont know, what I do know is that many of the deaths (many many many more than caused by US soldiers) are caused by sectarian violence and insurgent groups with suicide bombs. THe claim that the US is directly responsible for all of these deaths is just stupid and shows that you will go to any length to put the blame on the US, because as you have said yourself you hate the US. As far as "daddy Bush" killing 1 million, again, that was Saddam and the history books as well as the facts that you can find for yourself online right now reflect that very clearly. Although I am sure you will deny it until the end of time, so we must agree that you are oblivious to facts and dumb and that I actually read the facts along with the rest of the people in the world......oh woops I mean we should agree to disagree!

The war in Iran was a contribution of US. If US didn't lend all the money, intelligence, weapons and other stuff the war would've ended in a few months and not gone on for a decade. The blood and deaths are on US hands more, its them who wanted to punish iran for wanting freedom from their oppressive puppet regime. why over throw saddam when you put some an oppressive regime in iran? US doesn't care about oppressive regimes, it puts them in place. Why else are the muslim rulers like egyt's still in power and being protected?

The fact is that US is a terrorist nation that killed 1million kids by sanctions and starvation, then again over 700,000 in 3yrs compared to what saddam did in 20yrs. US continues to wage wars in Muslim lands, make policies that are anti-muslim in all ways and continue to oppress and kill Muslims. I know you will deny as you deny everything that is brought before you. You believe what you want but know that this is what Muslims believe and until you understand why you will never see why east hates the US. (for that answer see Presidential debate on Why do they hate us)

But back to the topic. Kuwait belonged to Iraq and that nation had every right to take it back. No fly zone and sanctions were imposed by the west who had no right to be over there at all but was there and is there for oil and continues to make enemies cause of it.

MTAFFI · Jun 12, 2007

islamirama said:
I said meddling in their affairs, read my post again. First west over threw iran gov't to put shah in power cuase the current gov't nationalist the west oil company that didn't want to share profits that rightfull belonged to iran. then people of iran tired of the oppressive dictator show revolted and so US supported iraq in killing iranians. Seems like you often miss the obvious. West killed iranians thru oppresive brutal regime of shah they put in place and then punished iran for their freedom fight by siding with iraq and killing millions on both side by what you call "killing two birds with one stone". So west is the killer of Muslims despite what you believe.

US did condone the invasion of kuwait, i wasn't interested in doing intensive research for you since its waste of time but i've done it for another moron on another forum. The information is out there, you can find it if you look for it.

US is a country (empire) that is divided into 50 states, which is further divided into different cities in each state. Ottomon empire was a country united by different nations (states). Iraq was one of the states and kuwait was one of the cities of Iraq. There goes your debate of kuwait as a nation since 18th century.

"Kuwait as a state separate from Iraq was a creation of the British to protect their oil interests"

The US imposed sanctions for 10yrs for what? every country in the world has a right to nuclear technology so long as they follow UN laws and yet US was punishing Iraq for trying to get them and now Iran, yet this same country with its allies secretly not just let Israel but gave it all the technology. Don't blame Saddam for taking advantage of the corrupted oil for food program, the initial blame goes to those who imposed sanctions in the first place and then no tv said it was worth killing 1 milion kids (so they can secure their oil interests).

The war in Iran was a contribution of US. If US didn't lend all the money, intelligence, weapons and other stuff the war would've ended in a few months and not gone on for a decade. The blood and deaths are on US hands more, its them who wanted to punish iran for wanting freedom from their oppressive puppet regime. why over throw saddam when you put some an oppressive regime in iran? US doesn't care about oppressive regimes, it puts them in place. Why else are the muslim rulers like egyt's still in power and being protected?

The fact is that US is a terrorist nation that killed 1million kids by sanctions and starvation, then again over 700,000 in 3yrs compared to what saddam did in 20yrs. US continues to wage wars in Muslim lands, make policies that are anti-muslim in all ways and continue to oppress and kill Muslims. I know you will deny as you deny everything that is brought before you. You believe what you want but know that this is what Muslims believe and until you understand why you will never see why east hates the US. (for that answer see Presidential debate on Why do they hate us)

But back to the topic. Kuwait belonged to Iraq and that nation had every right to take it back. No fly zone and sanctions were imposed by the west who had no right to be over there at all but was there and is there for oil and continues to make enemies cause of it.

everything you are saying here has been refuted in my previous posts I will not waste anymore time trying to prove something to you that is fact as your mind is in to small of a box to realize that the US is not the root of every problem in the world. If you wish to think it is, then go ahead, but you have lost this discussion

islamirama · Jun 12, 2007

MTAFFI said:
everything you are saying here has been refuted in my previous posts I will not waste anymore time trying to prove something to you that is fact as your mind is in to small of a box to realize that the US is not the root of every problem in the world. If you wish to think it is, then go ahead, but you have lost this discussion

Right back at ya! you lost the discussion and either say this or you start going in circles again parroting what limited feeding you go from your media. An your opinions hardly count as evidence or refutation material.

MTAFFI · Jun 12, 2007

islamirama said:
Right back at ya! you lost the discussion and either say this or you start going in circles again parroting what limited feeding you go from your media. An your opinions hardly count as evidence or refutation material.

me parroting? LOL that is especially funny coming from you, since you use the same lancet study, the same speech from Ron Paul, etc over and over on thread after thread on this forum. Your first post and your last post in this discussion are basically the same, all of which I proved to be either incomplete, wrong or misguided. You on the other provided your opinions, where I provided the actual UN sanctions, you provide faulty figures and fail to provide otherwise as requested. Therefore you lose, plain and simple, however this isnt a matter of winning or losing it is fact and fiction, you can believe what you wish though, you have proven you have a thick head and no amount of arguing will change that. Talk to ya next time!

NobleMuslimUK · Jun 13, 2007

Well ok according to you guys the USA is always playing the good guys, cowboys and indians mentality.
No Fly zone was doing more damage than it was preventing, just like the illegal and unjust invasions. Some arabs that I know are actually brainwashed into thinking the US is in Iraq to liberate the Iraqis. Of course with the power vacumn there will be bloodshed for power. Iraq is more divided up than ever, and US/Israel is to blame for all this bloodshed. Ever since european jews have come to the middle east theres been nothing but trouble, especially when they believe zionism is part of judaism. Now before everyone jumps on me for blaming only the non muslims, I will say the muslims are also to blame to some extent but overall its the non muslims in that region, whether jews, or arabs or foreigners such as US and British.

Joe98 · Jun 14, 2007

NobleMuslimUK said:
.........but overall its the non muslims in that region, whether jews, or arabs or foreigners such as US and British.

Why do you live in the UK? Do you love the freedom of the UK? Or is it the rain?

snakelegs · Jun 14, 2007

answers: no. and no.

NobleMuslimUK · Jun 14, 2007

Joe98 said:
Why do you live in the UK? Do you love the freedom of the UK? Or is it the rain?

I would criticise the injustice done by any country regardless where I live, if you think UK has such freedoms to offer as you claim then you are wrong. The UK is like a police state where everything is controlled and monitored. Day by day the draconian laws are becoming rather apparent. The UK usually follows what the US do, so go figure the US is in a much worse state.

islamirama · Jun 14, 2007

NobleMuslimUK said:
I would criticise the injustice done by any country regardless where I live, if you think UK has such freedoms to offer as you claim then you are wrong. The UK is like a police state where everything is controlled and monitored. Day by day the draconian laws are becoming rather apparent. The UK usually follows what the US do, so go figure the US is in a much worse state.

thinking of US and UK reminds me of "V for Vendetta", their gov'ts wage terrorism on their own soil to have more power and police state.

Did you agree with the Iraq sanctions and no fly zone?

Account Disabled

IB Legend

Esteemed Member

Account Disabled

IB Expert

Bat-Mod

Account Disabled

IB Veteran

IB Expert

Account Disabled

IB Expert

Account Disabled

IB Expert

Account Disabled

IB Expert

Elite Member

Account Disabled

IB Legend

Elite Member

Account Disabled

Similar Threads