Saddam is gone that's a huge positive for me. Things are calmer in Iraq than you think
US Attacks syria
- Thread starter barney
- Start date
- Replies 166
- Views 18K
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Halal Food Gastronomy | PHP 8.4 patch for vBulletin 4.2.5
- Status
So, Sadam gone - was worth all that turmoil? All those deaths?
Anyway, lets get real, the reason used to justify the war was for the protection of their own interests, against so called Weapons of mass destruction. I still wonder how they managed to fool the public, with the "Regime change" justification. Pathetic really. Iraq has been trumpled over, and all you lot got to say is - "Well Sadams gone", really, just... >.<
To be fair, I dont understand the war, I first thought it was a war against terrorism, not a war against where some of the terrorist were from.
Then I thought it was a war about Oil, because the British and US Government were money hungry.
Then it was more like a religious war which would be ridiculous because its not the religion that cause's the problems its a handfull of the people in it.
now Im not sure which one of the 3 it is if any!!?
any one want to elaborate?!
Then I thought it was a war about Oil, because the British and US Government were money hungry.
Then it was more like a religious war which would be ridiculous because its not the religion that cause's the problems its a handfull of the people in it.
now Im not sure which one of the 3 it is if any!!?
any one want to elaborate?!
The_Prince
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,279
- Reaction score
- 182
are you willing to condemn the american terrorism in Iraq? or will you ignore it and probaly say its not terrorism.
I think thats a bit steep, How can anybody trust someone that is associated with such a mortifying terrorist act?
I think whats going on in Iraq and afganisistan is a very childish retalliation act, my partner is being expected to go and fight in one of these two destination for the UK Army and he is on the verge of discharging himself because fighting for no particular reason was not what he signed up for, saving people and countries was.
Deaths caused by other muslims. Coalition death toll is actually below Saddams death toll.
You didn't answer my question. (also dubious about your statistics)
Was, all the turmoil, the destruction of the whole nation pretty much, and the hundreds of thousands of civilians killed - a good call by the US, for the removal of Sadam?
I'm willing to condemn all those that act outside of the UCMJ.
Your partner wouldn't be going to Iraq because the UK is no longer there. What would you have had the US do in response to 9/11 instead of go into Afghanistan?
You may wish to explain, what was achieved by going to Afghanistan.
To be 100% honest with you, I wouldnt know what I have done, but i certainly dont think, barging in to a coutry where the vast majority didnt agree with what happened, and shooting, bombing and what not was the best solution, in reality Im sure there were plenty of other ways of dealing with it before the drastic action. two wrongs dont make a right, surely.
As for him not going to Iraq, thats good, but it still leaves Afganistan to wrry about.
The_Prince
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,279
- Reaction score
- 182
not stay occupiers of a country for more than 7 years. its time the soldiers pack their bags and go home.
The_Prince
IB Expert
- Messages
- 1,279
- Reaction score
- 182
izyan why dont you go fight, you have a soldiers lady on this forum saying shes against it, and so is her man, and this is the majority view, hence if you support all these wars etc etc then really why dont you go to afghanistan and do Bush and Cheyneys dirty work.
Im not againts stopping terrorism, I and I speak for my partner on this aswel, am just against the way its being done. My partner, is a muslim, (syed-hussain) and if he has to go before his honourable discharge is set then there is nothing he can do about it, but he is totally against it! as am I!
I think Vladimir Putin quite acutely discerned precisely what the problem was, when you look at the Syrian incursion comparative to Russia's confrontation with Georgia. Don't loose sight of the fact that we are now just days away from possibly the most crucial US presidential election for many years.
The global economy is in a tailspin, with US resources over-stretched by trying to bail out reckless financial institutions, and waging a war on 2 fronts with no end in sight. Amidst all this smouldering political and economic carnage is the incontrovertible truism that the Republicans no matter what, will want to hold on to power.
Clearly in the Republican camp, there's a critical paucity of a tangible, genuine reformist agenda, or, anyone who can execute it. Historically, their get out of jail card has always been national security. Something Karl Rove has been keen to asseverate. That in mind, the Syrian operation must have been to play up McCain's national security "experience", especially when he's taking debilitating blows in the polls.
Nothing else makes a more plausible case.
The global economy is in a tailspin, with US resources over-stretched by trying to bail out reckless financial institutions, and waging a war on 2 fronts with no end in sight. Amidst all this smouldering political and economic carnage is the incontrovertible truism that the Republicans no matter what, will want to hold on to power.
Clearly in the Republican camp, there's a critical paucity of a tangible, genuine reformist agenda, or, anyone who can execute it. Historically, their get out of jail card has always been national security. Something Karl Rove has been keen to asseverate. That in mind, the Syrian operation must have been to play up McCain's national security "experience", especially when he's taking debilitating blows in the polls.
Nothing else makes a more plausible case.
Very simple:
Extensively review it's foreign policy, and cease extending unconditional support for the Zionist regime in israel, which as everyone knows, is a de facto proxy for american hegemony in the Middle East.
- Status