View Full Version : Iraq, a Strategy for Peace.
Now perhaps common sense can prevail, we've shown the way, if it works in Basra it can work in Baghdad.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1815802007
Boozeburglar
17-Nov-07, 11:45
Our staged withdrawal from Basra is working as well, for the women of Basra, as our non-intervention in Zimbabwe is working for the oppressed there.
Way to go Fred.
Our staged withdrawal from Basra is working as well, for the women of Basra, as our non-intervention in Zimbabwe is working for the oppressed there.
Way to go Fred.
I was just reading this statement (http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071111/FEATURES15/71109001) by an American G.I. last week saying the exact same thing.
Blazing Sporrans
17-Nov-07, 16:08
fred, we have enjoyed the odd verbal sparring (or outright pugilistic) session, however I find myself in 100% accord with the sentiments you express here. Iraq was only ever about oil and about US 'interests'. I am sickened that the UK ever had a part in it, however I do genuinely believe that our intelligence services were hoodwinked by the US in order to coerce the UK government into becoming their very necessary allies.
And this should not be taken as any kind of detrimental comment against our military forces, who carry out their duties bravely and in accordance with their oath and conditions of service. They all have my fullest support, however as my son's best friend now finds himself in Helmand province, we are worried sick and can only hope for his safe return.
fred, we have enjoyed the odd verbal sparring (or outright pugilistic) session, however I find myself in 100% accord with the sentiments you express here.Did you follow the inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly? Every day during the trial they placed that day's evidence on the web. What became clear is that Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell were responsible for hardening the statements and claims in the so-called 'dodgy dossier'. The original document produced by the security services was much more circumspect. These are the conclusions I, as a hopefully unbiased observer, reached and I was truly horrified. I was a Blair supporter until that summer and I had somewhat reluctantly accepted the case for going to war to depose Saddam. What became clear to me was that Blair was doing his damnedest to put the case for war to the British people, for whatever reason, and a circumspect report from his own security services needed to be revamped by hook or by crook.
To this day, I don't know what drove Blair to war. I don't believe it was just oil. He is driven by his beliefs and I think he genuinely believed he did what he had to do to depose Saddam and to keep up, or even strengthen, Britain's supposed special relationship with the USA, and to hell with the opinions of his electorate and his European allies in Paris and Berlin. We all know that attacking Iraq had nothing to do with the 'war on terror', Saddam had no time for Bin Laden style terrorists, they threatened his very existence.
Moi x
fred, we have enjoyed the odd verbal sparring (or outright pugilistic) session, however I find myself in 100% accord with the sentiments you express here. Iraq was only ever about oil and about US 'interests'. I am sickened that the UK ever had a part in it, however I do genuinely believe that our intelligence services were hoodwinked by the US in order to coerce the UK government into becoming their very necessary allies.
No, both the US and British intelligence services were fed false information from both Israel and from Iraqi exiles who stood to gain from the removal of Saddam Hussein but they knew and made clear to our governments that the information was unreliable. Blair chose to believe it anyway six months before the invasion but we now know from the publication of Robin Cook's memoirs (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1166479.ece) that two weeks before the invasion Blair knew for a fact the Saddam had no usable weapons of mass destruction.
Thanks for reminding me about Robin Cook's book fred. I'll put in on my Christmas list.
I should have said that I was doubting Blair long before the summer of 2004 but I'd reluctantly given him any benefit of the doubt before then. Ha! So much for my trusting generosity. [disgust]
Moi x
Matt Howard gave this statement at a recent protest at the Statehouse.
In 2003 I illegally invaded the sovereign nation of Iraq with 1st Tank battalion 1st Marine Division. My commander in chief unleashed the world's fiercest fighting force upon the country and people of Iraq, and now those of us used and betrayed by him are demanding justice.
Four and a half years after our opening "shock and awe" Bush's lies are known throughout the world, and yet he continues to act with impunity. Four and a half years later the Bush regime has unleashed a hell upon the country of Iraq that only those who have been there can truly understand.
As a two-tour combat veteran of this brutal war, I have a responsibility to speak honestly and openly about what has been done and what continues to be done in our name. We veterans know that this war is not the one being sanitized on the nightly news. It has nothing to do with the liberation of the people of Iraq; instead it has everything to do with the subjugation and domination of these people in the name of U.S. imperial economic and strategic interests.
We did not go to war with the country of Iraq, we went to war with the people of Iraq. During the initial invasion we killed women. We killed children. We senselessly killed farm animals. We were the United States Marine Corps, not the Peace Corps, and we left a swath of death and destruction in our wake all the way to Baghdad.
Let me say again so that there is no misunderstanding. I stand here today as a former U.S. Marine saying we are killing women and children in Iraq. This is the true nature of war. War lends itself to atrocities. Don't think you can use an organization designed to kill other human beings for anything humanitarian. That has never been our mission. That was crystal clear from the moment I was forced to bury the crate of humanitarian food given to me in Kuwait.
Four and a half years later we as soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines are done. We are done being told under threat of court martial to run over children that get in the way of our speeding convoys.
We are done raiding and destroying the homes of innocent Iraqis on a nightly basis.
We are done abusing and torturing prisoners.
We are done being hired thugs for the 160,000 contractors and U.S. corporate interests in Iraq.
We are done being poisoned by depleted uranium, the unspoken Agent Orange of this war.
We are done coming home broken, from two, three, four tours of duty – only to find our commander in chief has actually tried to CUT funding to the Department of Veterans Affairs. To find our doctors being told to diagnose us with pre-existing personality disorders instead of post traumatic stress syndrome.
We are done killing for lies.
So Iraq Veterans Against the War is taking back our history – the history that has been robbed from us. We are dispelling the myth that the Vietnam war ended when the Democrats started voting against it. Instead we are spreading the truth about how the American War in Vietnam ended.
The Vietnam War ended when soldiers put down their weapons and refused to fight; when pilots dropped their bombs in the ocean.
We are re-educating the public to let them know that the power ultimately lies with the people. Just take a look at the thousands of pages of internal documents from the Department of Defense explicitly detailing how at the end of the Vietnam war the military had collapsed. It was literally in a state of mutiny. And that movement is slowly starting again. Because ultimately in every war waged throughout human history, those forced to fight quickly realize they have much more in common with those they are being told to kill than with those telling them to do the killing.
And we are re-educating the public about the true nature of sectarian violence. No, the middle east is NOT inherently violent. In fact, in the 1,400-year schism between Sunnis and Shias – there has NEVER been a civil war fought. They have always lived in the same neighborhoods and even intermarried. The United States has caused this civil war using the classic colonial techniques of divide and conquer.
George Bush is a war criminal who has violated international law, the Geneva convention and the Nuremburg standards and needs to tried accordingly for crimes against humanity.
I ask every red-blooded American today: What would you do if your homeland was savagely invaded and occupied by another country? The Iraqis will continue to resist and fight until the last American has left their homeland. Period. End the violence in Iraq? End the occupation.
We veterans are speaking out to stop the violence being perpetrated in our name. When we voted in the Democrats on an anti-war mandate, the Bush regime expanded the war. As we are marching against further occupation, the Bush regime is making threats against Iran.
And we will not continue to be silenced by the mainstream media. Top generals and bottom privates are all speaking in unison now. We know the truth about the slaughter of upwards of one million Iraqis. Why is no one listening? We will not stand by as this regime tricks the country into thinking that if you oppose the war you do not support the troops. We ARE the troops and we have never felt support from this administration. Stop mindlessly supporting the troops. Start demanding that we come home – and maybe think about apologizing to us when we get back.
Matt Howard attained the rank of corporal in the United States Marine Corps. He is head of the Vermont chapter for Iraq Veterans Against the War.Hear him, Hear him!!!;)
Royster1911
18-Nov-07, 16:04
Spot on. I`m glad I am a Veteran ( but not of this conflict).
Our staged withdrawal from Basra is working as well, for the women of Basra, as our non-intervention in Zimbabwe is working for the oppressed there.
Way to go Fred.
Camel Spider
18-Nov-07, 18:10
Personally I am glad that we pulled out of Basra. With the city due to be handed over to Iraqi control next month then as long as we have a reliable and competent Police Force who are not controlled by militias then all should be well.
Oh dear .. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/11/18/wiraq218.xml
So we have a Police Force (and its intelligence network) infiltrated by the militias and the man in charge says that there is hardly a crime committed that doesnt involve a member of the Police Force or one of its vehicles (well, the ones that havent been nicked), the only reason that the militias havent kicked off against each other is because Al Sadr is the more powerful by a long way. What will happen if he gains control of the Police Force by stealth and decides to get rid of his enemies ??, will we have a repeat of this situation (but without the British Army to sort it out) .. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/26/wirq26.xml .. bear in mind this was less than a year ago.
I dont think Basra is as stable as people think, it will be interesting to see what happens after the Handover.
Personally I am glad that we pulled out of Basra. With the city due to be handed over to Iraqi control next month then as long as we have a reliable and competent Police Force who are not controlled by militias then all should be well.
The militias are the Iraqi people, a police force controlled by them has a better chance than a police force controlled by the American government. The militias may not be loved but at least they are respected.
Camel Spider
18-Nov-07, 22:30
The militias are the Iraqi people, a police force controlled by them has a better chance than a police force controlled by the American government. The militias may not be loved but at least they are respected.
Firstly it was the British who had Jurisdiction in Basra and not the Americans.
I doubt the 127 people liberated form the Police station last December respected their captors very much, many showed signs of torture and were to be executed by the Policemen. This is why this Police unit was disbanded and the station raided. These Policemen were also about to sell two captured British soldiers to Insurgents, is this the actions of a competent Police Force ??, the militia's are fighting for control of Basra and without a competent and impartial Police Force who is going to stop what would basically become a civil war ?? Your claim that Basra is somehow a peaceful place and all tickety boo is a bit wide of the mark as the Iraqi Police Chief himself has admitted the force is corrupt and incapable of operating. What will happen after next month if Al Sadr (leader of the largest militia) starts taking out his opponents using the Police Force ??
As for saying that the militia's are respected (have you been to Basra lately or are you speculating ??) then by whom ??, surely if the militias are as you say the "Iraqi People" they are by definition on one the side of one militia or the other ??, and what about the Iraqi's who may be totally impartial ??, who is going to protect them from a Police Force that has been infiltrated by both sides ??
I'm sorry to say that I think Basra along with most of Iraq will sink into anarchy.
There are two arms of Islam that are rivals,there is also the rise of the old tribal system where those that were oppressed under the Saddam regime are seeking revenge.
This is a country that neither understands,embraces or would welcome what we call democracy as for so many years it has been a total anathema to them and to some extent cannot be squared with Islam.
It would be unique it they could embrace the freedoms that we enjoy as no other Islamic state has managed to do so to date, mainly thanks to the fanatics and fundamentalists who see western liberalism as a heresy.
I would like to think that it could happen and that these people who have suffered so much over the last years could achieve the balance and security that they so deserve, saddly I don't think it will happen for several generations if it ever does.
The militias are the Iraqi people, a police force controlled by them has a better chance than a police force controlled by the American government. The militias may not be loved but at least they are respected.You are right there fred. They are respected in much the same way that the Gestapo, the KGB and the Stazi were "respected" by their respected societies.
You could say that to consider doing anything other than “respect” them is a deadly serious business.
Firstly it was the British who had Jurisdiction in Basra and not the Americans.
I doubt the 127 people liberated form the Police station last December respected their captors very much, many showed signs of torture and were to be executed by the Policemen. This is why this Police unit was disbanded and the station raided. These Policemen were also about to sell two captured British soldiers to Insurgents, is this the actions of a competent Police Force ??, the militia's are fighting for control of Basra and without a competent and impartial Police Force who is going to stop what would basically become a civil war ?? Your claim that Basra is somehow a peaceful place and all tickety boo is a bit wide of the mark as the Iraqi Police Chief himself has admitted the force is corrupt and incapable of operating. What will happen after next month if Al Sadr (leader of the largest militia) starts taking out his opponents using the Police Force ??
As for saying that the militia's are respected (have you been to Basra lately or are you speculating ??) then by whom ??, surely if the militias are as you say the "Iraqi People" they are by definition on one the side of one militia or the other ??, and what about the Iraqi's who may be totally impartial ??, who is going to protect them from a Police Force that has been infiltrated by both sides ??
You seem to be under the impression we handed Basra over to the authorities we installed, we didn't, we handed Basra over to the Mahdi army. They are the ones policing Basra now, they are holding courts, they are running social services, they have the power not the governor or the police force.
It was us who caused the problems we can't be the solution to them.
You are right there fred. They are respected in much the same way that the Gestapo, the KGB and the Stazi were "respected" by their respected societies.
You could say that to consider doing anything other than “respect” them is a deadly serious business.
Well no, I was thinking more along the lines of how the French Resistance Movement were respected and the Nazi invaders and the collaborators despised.
I'm sorry to say that I think Basra along with most of Iraq will sink into anarchy.
There are two arms of Islam that are rivals,there is also the rise of the old tribal system where those that were oppressed under the Saddam regime are seeking revenge.
This is a country that neither understands,embraces or would welcome what we call democracy as for so many years it has been a total anathema to them and to some extent cannot be squared with Islam.
It would be unique it they could embrace the freedoms that we enjoy as no other Islamic state has managed to do so to date, mainly thanks to the fanatics and fundamentalists who see western liberalism as a heresy.
I would like to think that it could happen and that these people who have suffered so much over the last years could achieve the balance and security that they so deserve, saddly I don't think it will happen for several generations if it ever does.
There have been two arms of Islam that have been rivals for the last 1,400 years, that isn't the problem. They have a lot more in common with each other than they have differences, they know how to cooperate as well as how to disagree, they've had centuries of practice.
The French Resistance were not prone to slaughtering Frenchmen just because they didn't like the Nazis or killing the French Police using the excuse they were all collaborators. Neither did the French Resistance go around massacring other Frenchmen because they happened to be of the wrong branch of Religion.
I rather suspect that members of the French Resistance would be horrified at the comparison you make. They certainly didn’t get the respect they so rightly deserved by using the presence of the Nazis as an excuse to carry out terror tactics against their own Countrymen.
Camel Spider
19-Nov-07, 02:19
You seem to be under the impression we handed Basra over to the authorities we installed, we didn't, we handed Basra over to the Mahdi army. They are the ones policing Basra now, they are holding courts, they are running social services, they have the power not the governor or the police force.
It was us who caused the problems we can't be the solution to them.
No Fred .. I am perfectly aware of the situation there I was merely responding to your first post with an article that was brought to my attention today regarding the Police Force in Basra. It was sent to me by a former colleague who has done a tour in that neck of the woods.
Your first post said "weve shown the way" but you now maintain that "It was us that caused the problems we cant be the solution to them", I would suggest you are contradicting yourself there by championing a course of action in something you suggest we have no right to be involved in.
As for the Mahdi army having all the power well that may be true to an extent but that power has to be exercised through the courts and the Police doesnt it ??, as the articles I posted up show the Police are corrupt and basically infiltrated at all levels by militia who are only interested in their own ends and not the effective policing of the area. Where do you think the stolen resources are ending up ??, Once the handover is completed in a month or so I fear that we may be in a situation like the one that occured last December, the 127 men were lucky then.
JAWS had it spot on when he said that to do anything other than fear these groups is to bring them down upon you like a ton of bricks, last time I checked the French Resistance didnt go around torturing and killing their own countrymen who disagreed with them, and they didnt use children as "come ons" in ambushes to get close to checkpoints.
I maintain that without a competent and impartial Police Force with control on the ground the area cant be seen as secure by any means.
Hear him, Hear him!!!;)
It is a bit rich of him to declare himself to be a war criminal then say he was ordered to do it. I wonder where we've heard that one before. Did he have no common sense of humanity? To me he is worse than Bush.
The French Resistance were not prone to slaughtering Frenchmen just because they didn't like the Nazis or killing the French Police using the excuse they were all collaborators. Neither did the French Resistance go around massacring other Frenchmen because they happened to be of the wrong branch of Religion.
I rather suspect that members of the French Resistance would be horrified at the comparison you make. They certainly didn’t get the respect they so rightly deserved by using the presence of the Nazis as an excuse to carry out terror tactics against their own Countrymen.
Ah but they did all those things. The French resistance wasn't one movement, there were several often with no love lost between them, the Gaullists hated the Communists and the Communists hated the Gaullists. The police force set up by Germany was called the Milice, they killed many thousands of their fellow countrymen and the French Resistance did kill many of them purely because they were collaborators. It's estimated that around 10,000 Frenchmen were executed for being collaborators not including the 1,500 sentenced to death by the Commissions d'épuration in 1945.
The only difference is in the way it was reported and the way you choose to see it.
I maintain that without a competent and impartial Police Force with control on the ground the area cant be seen as secure by any means.
If you look back through this forum you will see that on several occasions I have said that the occupying forces were the cause of the unrest in Iraq not the cure. See how many times I have pointed out that Iraq had never had a suicide bombing in it's history till we got there. You will also see the responses I have recieved which usually are along the lines of "fred knows nothing, he just sits at his computer googling and has no idea what is really happening in Iraq".
Now, in the first month since the withdrawal of our troops from Basra there has been a 90% fall in acts of violence.
The damage we have caused can't be undone overnight but there is nothing we can do about that. The Iraqis will truly have to stand up for themselves because any Iraqis lifted up by us will sooner or later have to fall again. Iraq had a stable society before we got there and given the chance they can have a stable society again. Chances are it will be based on sharia law because that is something the people can understand and trust, it is already written not invented by American puppet politicians and backed by American puppet police.
The ordinary people of Iraq just want clean water, sewerage, hospitals, electricity and to be able to go about their daily business without being shot or blown up. After four and a half years we have shown we can't give them those things, they will fall in behind anyone who can.
Margaret M.
19-Nov-07, 15:08
You will also see the responses I have recieved which usually are along the lines of "fred knows nothing, he just sits at his computer googling and has no idea what is really happening in Iraq
Fred, where do you get your info if not on the Internet like most others? Have you been to Iraq?
Fred, where do you get your info if not on the Internet like most others? Have you been to Iraq?
Good point Margaret M, yes Fred when were you last in Iraq or Iran? I have been to both, admittedly not recently, but I have been there!!!!
Fred, where do you get your info if not on the Internet like most others? Have you been to Iraq?
Information is everywhere, it's knowing what is reliable and what is important that matters not where you are, it's knowing how to look and knowing how to see.
Here's an article by John Pilager in the New Statesman that just about sums the situation up, much of it may sound familiar to you.
http://www.newstatesman.com/200711150033
Information IS everywhere. The information that agrees with MY opinion is the information that is important AND reliable. Anything that disagrees with MY opinion is the dodgy and trivial stuff.
I think that sums up the way pundits use the net.
Good point Margaret M, yes Fred when were you last in Iraq or Iran? I have been to both, admittedly not recently, but I have been there!!!!
Which just proves the point, the people who have been there are often the people who know least.
You can get really good information from the net. You have to be careful though as some of it can be set up to "look" convincing but may be a pack of lies spun by someone with no scruples.
Which just proves the point, the people who have been there are often the people who know least.
LOL, Fred surely you can do better than that, your slipping [lol]
Margaret M.
20-Nov-07, 00:39
Information IS everywhere. The information that agrees with MY opinion is the information that is important AND reliable. Anything that disagrees with MY opinion is the dodgy and trivial stuff.
Exactly, Scorrie! Everyone can find dozens of articles to back up their view on any issue. No-one here is more equipped than anyone else to determine the accuracy of the information -- not even you, Fred.
Excuse me. i thought this thread was about Iraq, just how did The French Revolution get into it?
I accept what you say Fred, but I still stand by the fact that Islam has more sides than a tetrohegon.
When it come to Islam there are more factions than enough. it's a bit like European history some 500 years ago when there were the wars between The Potestants and The Catholics.
We have moved on. maybe not always to the good, but at least we are not stuck in the past.
helenwyler
20-Nov-07, 10:11
Excuse me. i thought this thread was about Iraq, just how did The French Revolution get into it?
Did you mean French Resistance?;)
An analogy between Iraqi militias and the Gestapo, KGB and Stasi had already been drawn by another poster.
I have to say I agree with both Fred and Lizz.
All the Iraq war and subsequent occupation has done for the Iraqis is remove Saddam and unleash on the country far more deaths than he ever managed and allowed the religious divide that he kept under control full reign.
And what our presence isn't doing is improving life for the ordinary Iraqi.
Whether we get all troops out tomorrow or in ten years, we have laid the groundwork not for western style democracy but for internal conflict........and all for oil.
I have to say I agree with both Fred and Lizz.
All the Iraq war and subsequent occupation has done for the Iraqis is remove Saddam and unleash on the country far more deaths than he ever managed and allowed the religious divide that he kept under control full reign.
Saddam is not the innocent ruler you seem to think Oddquine, I certainly would not have liked to be a Marsh Arab under his regime
http://www.indict.org.uk/targetdetails.php?target=Saddam
Excuse me. i thought this thread was about Iraq, just how did The French Revolution get into it?
I accept what you say Fred, but I still stand by the fact that Islam has more sides than a tetrohegon.
When it come to Islam there are more factions than enough. it's a bit like European history some 500 years ago when there were the wars between The Potestants and The Catholics.
We have moved on. maybe not always to the good, but at least we are not stuck in the past.
You don't have to go back 500 years for wars between Protestants and Catholics, you just have to go to Northern Ireland.
We have our own factions no different than those in the Middle East, there is no difference between killing people in Vietnam over our belief that Capitalism is superior to Communism and their belief that their version of Islam is superior to other branches. The war in Iraq wasn't caused by factions of Islam, it was caused by western ideologies, like the American belief in Manifest Destiny, in the hands of one of our factions called Neocons. They have the backing of the Religious Right who believe their beliefs are true and the Muslim's beliefs false. They are in league with Israel who, like you, see the Arab and Persian as inferior and believe it is their God given right to rule over the Middle East. These factions, like the factions of Islam inside Iraq, put their ideals above human life and suffering, they, like the factions of Islam inside Iraq, are killing for control of the oil fields for the wealth they bring and the power to impose their ideologies on the world.
No we haven't progressed that much in 500 years, we just found more efficient ways of killing people. No we are no different from the people of Islam. Our ways seem natural to us and theirs strange because our ways are the ways we were brought up with, the ways we were taught are right but we are doing the exact same things they are for the exact same reasons.
We have, however, made some progress, I was pleased to see the resolution for a moratorium on the death penalty passed at the UN last week which shows the majority of countries have learnt something from history. We have a way to go to convince the more barbaric countries of the world like China, Iran, Sudan and America who voted against though.
Saddam is not the innocent ruler you seem to think Oddquine, I certainly would not have liked to be a Marsh Arab under his regime
http://www.indict.org.uk/targetdetails.php?target=Saddam
Nobody is saying Saddam was a saint.
But considering how many more Iraqis we have killed than he did what does that make us?
Nobody is saying Saddam was a saint.
But considering how many more Iraqis we have killed than he did what does that make us?
By we, I take it you mean the UK troops? I would be delighted if you could furnish us with the figures. Saddam arranged to have thousands of Iraqis disposed of in one way or another.
Seems I'm anti-islamic (?) so won't get involved in this one, but "for wars between Protestants and Catholics, you just have to go to Northern Ireland" - thought that was Republicans and Loyalist?
Camel Spider
20-Nov-07, 16:07
Nobody is saying Saddam was a saint.
But considering how many more Iraqis we have killed than he did what does that make us?
Fred I respect your right to an opinion and I do respect your opinion even though I could only get further away from your views if I left the planet. I enjoy the verbal joust but you lost all credibility with me when you said that sometimes the people who have been there know the least. I posted an article on the thread with an article about the Basra Police sent to me by a friend and former colleague who has done one tour in Iraq and is going back for another. He was involved in training the Iraqi Police .. Im going to stick my neck out and say he knows a bit more about that than you. He maintains that trying to rebuild a goverment with the country so religiously divided is an uphill task and can only be achieved by showing the people the militias do nothing for the people but spout rhetoric and slogans. When was the last time we saw Al Sadr handing out bread or Medical supplies to the people ??, My mate is also involved in campaigning for Iraqi's who are under threat from the militia's simply because they worked for "us", their own experiences and views with the militias that you claim are so "respected" can be read here .. www.weoweittothem.com (http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://www.weoweittothem.com) .. British Forces dont leave people behind.
As for Iraq and the claim that we invade for their Oil .. well where is it ??, its been four years and why isnt there a pipeline carrying it out of the country to us greedy western capitalists ??, why pump money into the country and rebuild an infrastructure, train police, feed and water the population when we can just take what we need and leave them to it ??
As for the Troops we have there .. well I personally know from comments you made to me as an ex serviceman I know exactly how you feel about them but thats fine, the people I served with are still my best mates and at the end of the day opinions vary. There is no point in me defending them as you would just disagree but your claim that we have somehow killed more of the population than Saddam Hussein did is ludicrous.
As for the Iraqi People .. Well I have been in the Middle East and I respect a lot of the culture and attitudes, much to admire but a lot that confuses me still. I went to a small country called Kuwait that was invaded by its neighbour .. erm .. Iraq .. for its Oil (sound familiar) and its resources which were then looted and/or destroyed. Torture, rape, and murder were frequent occurences. People simply went missing (just like Iraq at the time), interestingly though Saddam Hussein never set foot in Iraq. The torture dens we saw were made by the Iraqi's themselves, regular Iraqi people did it. But then they had plenty of practice prefecting techniques on the prisoners from the war with Iran. So before you start assuming they are holier than thou you may want to consider the actions of these people towards the citizens of Kuwait. These were the same people who were surrendering as soon as we engaged, big brave men eh ??, In some ways though I wish your claim that those who were there know the least really was true .. there are a few things and places I really wish I had never seen.
Saddam is not the innocent ruler you seem to think Oddquine, I certainly would not have liked to be a Marsh Arab under his regime
http://www.indict.org.uk/targetdetails.php?target=Saddam (http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://www.indict.org.uk/targetdetails.php?target=Saddam)
And where did I say he was innocent, golach?..........but he was America's man in Iraq.........and was still America's man up until the invasion of Kuwait, getting funds and weapons, chemical and hardware from the US, UK etc.
The harshness of his regime was not a problem when he was doing their bidding.
All atrocities and war crimes are acceptable, it seems ...just as long as they fit in with the US global aims.......and do not threaten the US oil supplies.
As for Iraq and the claim that we invade for their Oil .. well where is it ??, its been four years and why isnt there a pipeline carrying it out of the country to us greedy western capitalists ??, why pump money into the country and rebuild an infrastructure, train police, feed and water the population when we can just take what we need and leave them to it ??
There is less oil being produced than before the invasion...because the "please come in and relieve us of the dictator, and take our oil..........just give us western democracy...........grovel, grovel!" scenario dreamed up by GWB didn't happen.....and the oil wells are now in a worse state than they have ever been.
The money being pumped into the country is mostly Iraqi oil money.....at least that small part of it which hasn't found its way into the back pockets of US developers.
I'm sure there would have been a pipeline.......if there hadn't been the reaction they didn't expect.
Fred I respect your right to an opinion and I do respect your opinion even though I could only get further away from your views if I left the planet. I enjoy the verbal joust but you lost all credibility with me when you said that sometimes the people who have been there know the least. I posted an article on the thread with an article about the Basra Police sent to me by a friend and former colleague who has done one tour in Iraq and is going back for another. He was involved in training the Iraqi Police .. Im going to stick my neck out and say he knows a bit more about that than you. He maintains that trying to rebuild a goverment with the country so religiously divided is an uphill task and can only be achieved by showing the people the militias do nothing for the people but spout rhetoric and slogans. When was the last time we saw Al Sadr handing out bread or Medical supplies to the people ??,
But that is exactly what he is doing, that is his main priority. The social services in Basra are now run from the Sadr Office. They have distributed millions of dollars to the poor in the south to buy cattle and stock grocery stores and they have been distributing food and medicine.
As for Iraq and the claim that we invade for their Oil .. well where is it ??, its been four years and why isnt there a pipeline carrying it out of the country to us greedy western capitalists ??, why pump money into the country and rebuild an infrastructure, train police, feed and water the population when we can just take what we need and leave them to it ??
Here is a map (http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/map.html) showing the pipelines out of Iraq. The Kirkuk Ceyan pipeline is pumping over half a million barrels a day.
We haven't done much to rebuild any infrastructure. Plenty of money has been handed over to American contractors but they haven't produced much in the way of goods. Iraq is still in a worse state than before the invasion and after 12 years of sanctions it was in a bad way then. 28% of children are suffering from malnutrition compared with 19% before the invasion, 11% of babies are born under weight compared with 4% in 2003. 70% of Iraqis don't have an adequate water supply, 80% don't have adequate sanitation. 90% of hospitals don't have basic medical supplies. There was an outbreak of cholera this year which has reached Baghded.
As for the Troops we have there .. well I personally know from comments you made to me as an ex serviceman I know exactly how you feel about them but thats fine, the people I served with are still my best mates and at the end of the day opinions vary. There is no point in me defending them as you would just disagree but your claim that we have somehow killed more of the population than Saddam Hussein did is ludicrous.
Even before the invasion our sanctions killed over a million Iraqis, our decision to deprive Iraq of the chemicals needed for their water treatment plants was particularly devastating. We did, however, supply Saddam with the chemical weapons he used to kill Iraqi Kurds.
Latest estimates are that around 1.2 million Iraqis have died as a result of the invasion, these are based on standard methods of counting the casualty rate in a war zone and research carried out by a respected British company, Opinion Research Business.
As for the Iraqi People .. Well I have been in the Middle East and I respect a lot of the culture and attitudes, much to admire but a lot that confuses me still. I went to a small country called Kuwait that was invaded by its neighbour .. erm .. Iraq .. for its Oil (sound familiar) and its resources which were then looted and/or destroyed. Torture, rape, and murder were frequent occurences. People simply went missing (just like Iraq at the time), interestingly though Saddam Hussein never set foot in Iraq. The torture dens we saw were made by the Iraqi's themselves, regular Iraqi people did it. But then they had plenty of practice prefecting techniques on the prisoners from the war with Iran. So before you start assuming they are holier than thou you may want to consider the actions of these people towards the citizens of Kuwait. These were the same people who were surrendering as soon as we engaged, big brave men eh ??, In some ways though I wish your claim that those who were there know the least really was true .. there are a few things and places I really wish I had never seen.
Actually the reason Iraq invade Kuwait was to stop them stealing Iraqi oil, they had a line of rigs along the border and were slant drilling into Iraqi oil fields. They were then selling the oil cheap, they could afford to. Iraq, however, after an expensive war with Iran needed the revenue.
As for the torture dens have you seen the photos that came out of Abu Ghraib? The ones that couldn't be put in the newspapers? I don't think we have any right to be condemning others.
There were sanctions placed on the regime by The United Nations but there was never an embargo on medicines and food.
Saddam chose not to spend the monies on food and medicines as he cared not a jot for his people only for absolute power.
Unfortunately when you have a repressive dictator, the people are disempowered and when they are faced with any sort of democracy they have no idea how the system works.it will take a special kind of courage and may be several generations before The Iraqis are ready to take their proper place in the world.
They have their own destiny to sort out, we cannot impose it on them and whatever route they decide to follow it will eventually be of their choosing.
There were sanctions placed on the regime by The United Nations but there was never an embargo on medicines and food.
In December 1999 the British Board of trade blocked a shipment of vaccines to protect children from diptheria and yellow fever. Kim Howells told Parliament they had been blocked because they could be used in weapons of mass destruction. They were used as weapons of mass destruction, by us to kill Iraqi children.
Now here is an official document from 1991 planning the murder of Iraqi children and old people by denying Iraq chemicals and parts for their water treatment plants. It shows pre-meditation, that we knew exactly what we were doing.
http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/declassdocs/dia/19950901/950901_511rept_91.html
Both these acts were illegal under the Geneva Convention.
You may want to believe that it was that evil Saddam Hussein who killed all the children in Iraq but unfortunately that isn't the truth, it was us.
Camel Spider
21-Nov-07, 12:55
Fred that report is simply an asessment of Iraq's Water Supply. There are no intentions stated such as in an ATO.
So you claim that we sold the component parts for Chemical Weapons to Iraq .. and thats bad. (Actually it was mostly the French and Germans)
And not selling chemicals used for Water Production but which could be used for Chemical Weapon production .. is bad.
So we cant do anything right can we ??
And by the way how on earth can not selling components that can be used for the production of Chemcal Weapons be against the Geneva Convention ??, the Geneva Convention governs warfare not free trade.
And as I work in the Offshore scheme of things I would just like to say that I have never heard of Slant Drilling except in an episode of the Simpsons. Mr Burns turns the School into a Drilling rig to tap into a well under Moes Bar .. cracking episode.
I originally posted on this thread as it was about the Basra Police and I had something constructive to add but once agin it has denegrated into another round of the same.
Iraq had Chemical Ali .. we have Chemical Fred and I dont see the point in posting any further and feeding the flames.
Lunchtime methinks .. ;)
Fred that report is simply an asessment of Iraq's Water Supply. There are no intentions stated such as in an ATO.
This doesn't look too ambiguous to me, we knew that depriving Iraq of chemicals and parts for water treatment plants was tantamount to biological warfare against a civilian population.
3. FAILING TO SECURE SUPPLIES WILL RESULT IN A SHORTAGE OF
PURE DRINKING WATER FOR MUCH OF THE POPULATION. THIS COULD LEAD
TO INCREASED INCIDENCES, IF NOT EPIDEMICS, OF DISEASE AND TO
CERTAIN PURE-WATER-DEPENDENT INDUSTRIES BECOMING INCAPACITATED,
INCLUDING PETRO CHEMICALS, FERTILIZERS, PETROLEUM REFINING,
ELECTRONICS,PHARMACEUTICALS, FOOD PROCESSING, TEXTILES, CONCRETE
CONSTRUCTION,AND THERMAL POWERPLANTS.
Now forward to 1996 when over half a million Iraqi children had already died, see what American Secretary of state Madeleine Albright had to say on the subject.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK_QshS2EW8
And by the way how on earth can not selling components that can be used for the production of Chemcal Weapons be against the Geneva Convention ??, the Geneva Convention governs warfare not free trade.
Don't you have a spark of humanity in you anywhere? We are talking about hundreds of thousands of infants under the age of 5 who died horrible deaths from diseases like cholera and typhoid. Next time you're driving past a nursery take a look, look at their faces and think how you would feel if it were them, if it were even one of them not hundreds of thousands.
I originally posted on this thread as it was about the Basra Police and I had something constructive to add but once agin it has denegrated into another round of the same.
You denied we had killed more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein.
Fred: "You denied we had killed more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein."
Does this 'we' include you fred?
I think I read Chemical Fred on this forum is that because alongside Ali; refuses to acknowledge the obvious?
I also read that you state that if a person has been to Iraq they know less? Hmm.
Loath as I am to use the BBC news, could not resist TODAY:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7105216.stm
"An estimated 1,000 people a day are returning across Iraq's borders having previously moving abroad to escape the violence, Iraqi authorities say
An improving security situation - but also the lack of job opportunities for Iraqis in Syria - may account for the move, correspondents say."
I say celebrate! this is really very good news!
Fred: "You denied we had killed more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein."
Does this 'we' include you fred?
I think I read Chemical Fred on this forum is that because alongside Ali; refuses to acknowledge the obvious?
I also read that you state that if a person has been to Iraq they know less? Hmm.
Yes the "we" does include me, that's what the word means, if it didn't I'd have used the word "they".
Yes the "we" does include me, that's what the word means, if it didn't I'd have used the word "they".
Wow fred, now that is some admission coming from you, so all this time you have been blaming G W and Tony and their prospective governments. and now you admit you have been involved as well, if this is so I think you shoud hang your head in shame [disgust]
Camel Spider
21-Nov-07, 16:49
Yes Fred ..
Wheres your Humanity ??
Wow fred, now that is some admission coming from you, so all this time you have been blaming G W and Tony and their prospective governments. and now you admit you have been involved as well, if this is so I think you shoud hang your head in shame [disgust]
We live in a democracy golach, that means we all have a share of the power and we all get a share of the responsibility.
Fred: "Yes the "we" does include me, that's what the word means, if it didn't I'd have used the word "they".
No need to be abrupt Fred, but it is refreshing to read your honesty, that you too take the blame - what are you doing about it? off to Iraq?, BUT if you go there you will know less than others! bit of a conundrum.
Fred: "Yes the "we" does include me, that's what the word means, if it didn't I'd have used the word "they".
No need to be abrupt Fred, but it is refreshing to read your honesty, that you too take the blame - what are you doing about it? off to Iraq?, BUT if you go there you will know less than others! bit of a conundrum.
Why do you think it strange that people outside a country often know more than those in it?
How many people here do you think would have known about us depriving the children of Iraq from life saving vaccines if I didn't tell them? It happened in our parliament.
The entire population of Iran knows about it.
I smell twisted facts and conspiracies here.
I'm not sure where you are fred but some how I feel you are not in the same world as many of us mere mortals.
Sorry to have to say that but some times the things you post would do credit to "The Da Vinci Code!"
We live in a democracy golach, that means we all have a share of the power and we all get a share of the responsibility.
Sorry Fred, I have no dead Iraqis on my concience, I do have a lot of dead British Service men on mine though
I smell twisted facts and conspiracies here.
I'm not sure where you are fred but some how I feel you are not in the same world as many of us mere mortals.
Sorry to have to say that but some times the things you post would do credit to "The Da Vinci Code!"
Everything I wrote was true, we deliberately caused the death of over half a million Iraqi infants with the purpose of making life for the ordinary Iraqi so intolerable that they would rise up and overthrow Saddam Hussein, or if not so that when we invaded they would welcome us.
If Saddam had been accused of this crime you would have had no difficulties believing it, the newspapers would not have hesitated to splash the word "GENOCIDE" across every front page.
At least check for yourself, there is a wealth of information at your finger tips, see if you can find anything to disprove the things I say. Or is the reason you don't believe that you don't want to believe?
northener
23-Nov-07, 23:46
You are right Fred, there is a lot of information out there.
Unfortunately, information can be made to suit many purposes and theories.
I can pick any conflict on the face of the planet and scrape out enough information to further my own cause, regardless of whether it is correct or even within the realms of reality.
The problem is, Fred, laying the blame, pointing and accusing ad nauseum and playing semantics won't change a damned thing. I'd be more interested in some clear thinking on the way forward, not the constant regurgitation of blamepolitik.
Everyone is a soddin' expert after the event, lets move on!
Let's get some original thought on the following:
How would you have dealt with the invasion of Kuwait?
How would you have dealt with Saddam post - Kuwait?
If Saddam was in power now, how would you deal with him?
How do you suggest we bring stability to Iraq and it's neighbours (bearing in mind this thread was about stability)?
How would you reconcile the Shi'ite and Sunnis'?
How would you deal with the Iranian nuclear programme?
How would you stop the Turks and the Kurds from knocking seven bells out of each other?
Come on Fred, let's have some original thought here and get beyond the 'armchair expert on past events' baloney.
You are right Fred, there is a lot of information out there.
Unfortunately, information can be made to suit many purposes and theories.
I can pick any conflict on the face of the planet and scrape out enough information to further my own cause, regardless of whether it is correct or even within the realms of reality.
The problem is, Fred, laying the blame, pointing and accusing ad nauseum and playing semantics won't change a damned thing. I'd be more interested in some clear thinking on the way forward, not the constant regurgitation of blamepolitik.
Everyone is a soddin' expert after the event, lets move on!
Let's get some original thought on the following:
How would you have dealt with the invasion of Kuwait?
How would you have dealt with Saddam post - Kuwait?
If Saddam was in power now, how would you deal with him?
How do you suggest we bring stability to Iraq and it's neighbours (bearing in mind this thread was about stability)?
How would you reconcile the Shi'ite and Sunnis'?
How would you deal with the Iranian nuclear programme?
How would you stop the Turks and the Kurds from knocking seven bells out of each other?
Come on Fred, let's have some original thought here and get beyond the 'armchair expert on past events' baloney.
You just don't listen do you?
We aren't part of the cure we are part of the disease.
That's what this thread is really about and until people start facing up to the fact the carnage will go on and on.
What would I do about it? I'd try and convince people that the lives of a million innocent children is more important than a penny in the pound off income tax and hope they remember come election time.
What would I do about it? I'd try and convince people that the lives of a million innocent children is more important than a penny in the pound off income tax and hope they remember come election time.
I thought northener asked for some "original thought". All you have done is to repeat the same tired old mantra everybody has heard before a million times!
We know all about the tired old "Our soldiers are just Baby Killers" chant repeated by some at every opportunity for the last forty years. It's time to get a new record, that one has been reissued time and time again in the hope it would become a hit, and it's still the same rubbish as it was the first time round.
Still, it’s nice to be nostalgic occasionally, altogether now, “Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh!” Ah, those were the days. Did you know that in his youth he used to drink in the Haymarket in London?
I thought northener asked for some "original thought". All you have done is to repeat the same tired old mantra everybody has heard before a million times!
That's a bit rich coming from someone who still looks for reds under his bed every night.
Are you privy to some inside information fred?
Reds under the beds?
Did he mean freds under the beds?
northener
24-Nov-07, 09:36
You just don't listen do you?
We aren't part of the cure we are part of the disease.
That's what this thread is really about and until people start facing up to the fact the carnage will go on and on.
What would I do about it? I'd try and convince people that the lives of a million innocent children is more important than a penny in the pound off income tax and hope they remember come election time.
This is a laughable reply to my request.
Fred, I'm very disappointed.
Although I disagree vehemently with the majority of your postings I had assumed you were someone interested in intelligent debate. I am obviously wrong.
As people keep pointing out, all you do when asked for your opinion is churn out the same backward - looking, one -sided 'mass murder' tune. I have repeatedly asked you for your views on a number of subjects regarding the Middle East. You have not answered any of them.
This is not debate, Fred, this is 'The World According To Fred'.
You started this thread to discuss stability, or am I missing something?
Any chance of some original forward looking thought on the M.E? (he said, knowing full well the answer...)
Although I disagree vehemently with the majority of your postings I had assumed you were someone interested in intelligent debate. I am obviously wrong.
Oh I enjoy intelligent debate, if I can find someone intelligent to debate with.
We created Saddam Hussein, before we helped him to power and supplied him with weapons of mass destruction he worked for the CIA, we created Al Qaeda. The root cause of much of the troubles in the Middle East, Israel, we created, if you want a nuclear free Middle East disarm Israel. Sunni and Shia weren't fighting each other before we went to Iraq, all we had to do to reduce violence by 90% in Basra was to take our troops out.
Now have you got enough intelligence to open your eyes and see the world as it really is or will you continue with your blind irrational dogmatic beliefs that we are somehow the good guys who solve problems not cause them?
When you have as much grief and outrage over the deaths of a million infants in Iraq as you do about 52 people in London then we have a chance for peace, the ball is in your court, every one of you.
northener
24-Nov-07, 20:21
Oh I enjoy intelligent debate, if I can find someone intelligent to debate with.
We created Saddam Hussein, before we helped him to power and supplied him with weapons of mass destruction he worked for the CIA, we created Al Qaeda. The root cause of much of the troubles in the Middle East, Israel, we created, if you want a nuclear free Middle East disarm Israel. Sunni and Shia weren't fighting each other before we went to Iraq, all we had to do to reduce violence by 90% in Basra was to take our troops out.
Now have you got enough intelligence to open your eyes and see the world as it really is or will you continue with your blind irrational dogmatic beliefs that we are somehow the good guys who solve problems not cause them?
When you have as much grief and outrage over the deaths of a million infants in Iraq as you do about 52 people in London then we have a chance for peace, the ball is in your court, every one of you.
Ref 1st paragraph (and a bit of the 3rd):
Disagreement does not equate to intellectual inferiority.
Though if you insist in describing those who disagree with you as as being less intelligent, then I grovel before your superior intellect.
Ref 2nd paragraph:
Regurgitation in the main, nothing there we haven't heard before God knows how many times -move on, move on, - apart from the bit where you state removing Israels' nuclear programme will stop other countries.
You're getting there slowly Fred. Now expand on that bit of the statement and tell me why you think it would work.
Ref 3rd paragraph:
I can't decide whether you are an incompetent mindreader or you are just ranting here.
I've never stated that we are the 'good guys'. I have never stated that we can solve the Middle Easts' problems. Fact.
Ref 4th paragraph:
You don't know how I feel about any of this, so cut out the cheap handwringing and engage in some debate about the way forward. Try expanding on your comment on Israels nuclear programme without attaching blame.
If you can, of course.
You don't know how I feel about any of this, so cut out the cheap handwringing and engage in some debate about the way forward. Try expanding on your comment on Israels nuclear programme without attaching blame.
If you can, of course.
You want to talk about Israel talk away.
If you can of course.
northener
24-Nov-07, 20:57
Fred, expand on your original statement, it's very simple.
Fred, expand on your original statement, it's very simple.
You seem to be suffering from delusions of grandeur.
You don't tell me what to do sunshine, find someone else to push around.
northener
25-Nov-07, 13:33
Unfortunately I can see this dragging on into infinity, Fred. As far as I'm concerned this must be pretty tedious reading for anyone else out there who is still mentally alert.
I make a reasonable request for you to expand your thoughts on a given topic, you repatedly blank me and when pressed you simply resort to playground responses.
I genuinely thought you were capable of better.
In future, I'll just post a link back to this as a response every time you descend into sulking mode. I can't be bothered any moreto try and get an enjoyable discussion out of someone who just takes their bat home when pressed.
No doubt you will see this as some sort of victory.
Life is too short, my friend.
northener
25-Nov-07, 13:46
Back on topic.
There's another side to the withdrawal from Basra.
Although it is correct to say that attacks have dropped 90% (or whatever the figure may be) since the pull out, this implies that the troops should have stayed out of Basra in the first place.
Any Commander will tell you that if you do not secure your objective, you will never control the area. If the troops had stayed out, the opposition would have an ideal base to operate from.
That's why in any war, towns, cities etc are always taken as quickly as possible. The alternative would be to allow the enemy to consolidate their position in the town - resulting in a long and bloody siege.
Once the town is secured, the problem arises of control against a non-uniformed enemy. This is when the suicide bombers/ death squads/ freedom fighters start rubbing their hands. Once you feel you are sufficiently in control you can then start discussing withdrawal - which is where we are now.
In Helmand provence, one of the main frustrations for the troops is having to withdraw from unsecured towns and villages, only to have to take them again a couple of weeks later. Not Good.
Hopefully, this withdrawal is a good thing, but I wouldn't want to bet on it just yet.
No doubt you will see this as some sort of victory.
No, I see this as me letting you know you don't tell me what to talk about.
Oh and I don't respond to juvenile dares like "if you can, of course" either.
Although it is correct to say that attacks have dropped 90% (or whatever the figure may be) since the pull out, this implies that the troops should have stayed out of Basra in the first place.
I don't think there is any doubt we should have stayed out of Iraq in the first place but we didn't and one child dies every five minutes as a result of it.
You talk as if we have some sort of God given right to march into other peoples countries and "secure our objectives", we don't.
northener
25-Nov-07, 17:11
I don't think there is any doubt we should have stayed out of Iraq in the first place but we didn't and one child dies every five minutes as a result of it.
You talk as if we have some sort of God given right to march into other peoples countries and "secure our objectives", we don't.
Just to clarify, Fred.
I'm talking about troops staying in Basra as opposed to troops moving out of Basra and the relationship between the levels of violence experienced in the city.
Which is the topic of this thread if i remember correctly.
Which is the thread that you started.
Just to refresh your memory, old chap:
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/inte...?id=1815802007 (http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/inte...?id=1815802007)
Hoisted by your own petard, methinks......[lol]
Just to refresh your memory, old chap:
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/inte...?id=1815802007 (http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/inte...?id=1815802007)
Which shows that the violence was caused by the presence of the troops not, as many would like to believe, radical Muslim extremists trying to take over the world.
Hoisted by your own petard, methinks......[lol]
Grow up.
Camel Spider
25-Nov-07, 20:11
No, I see this as me letting you know you don't tell me what to talk about.
Oh and I don't respond to juvenile dares like "if you can, of course" either.
Fred,
First Point .. You are quite happy to dictate and tell the rest of the Forum we are wrong (even though some of us have been there, or have relatives and friends there), tell us our opinions are wrong and what we should do and think. And lets face it you dont know ANYTHING about Iraq you havent picked up from the Internet, CNN or Al Jazeera. If it wasnt for Google what would you actually know about it Fred ??, do you have one opinion that isnt based on someone else's ??
Second Point .. It isnt a "juvenile dare" to ask you to defend your position, Northerner asked you to expand your statement last night and this is what you came back with .. "You have delusions of Grandeur .. You dont tell me what to do .. Find someone else to push around" .. :eek:
The fact is your argument has consistently fallen apart right through the thread, this has been proved by your own reactions whenever anyone questions your posts.
All Northerner has done is challenge YOUR claims.
northener
25-Nov-07, 20:19
Grow up.
No thanks, i'm not ready for a sense of humour bypass quite yet:D
northener
25-Nov-07, 20:32
Which shows that the violence was caused by the presence of the troops not, as many would like to believe, radical Muslim extremists trying to take over the world.
The reason the violence decreased so rapidly isn't as simple as it looks.
You don't think that the 'freedom fighters' ( I'll call them that to avoid the inevitable diverting response I know I'll get if i call them anything else) have just thought "Ooh, the Brits have left the building, lets have a nice pot of tea and go back to our peaceful co-habitation with fellow Persians and Arabs", do you?
It's got more to do with you can't easily wipe out a couple of score of civilians with a suicide bomb on a military airfield. You will struggle to get your best shots within distance to have any effect on the base itself and you would be an idiot or very brave (which some of them are) to launch an all out assault with any chance of success.
Still haven't seen any ideas on how you would deal with the Israeli nuclear programme (or anything else for that matter), remember, you brought up the subject. I asked for more details. That's how it works.
I await your response with bated breath.
Fred,
I don't debate with people who send me threatening and abusive PMs.
The reason the violence decreased so rapidly isn't as simple as it looks.
Yes it is, the violence was from ordinary Iraqis directed at an army of occupation. Remove the army of occupation and the violence stops. It's that simple.
I await your response with bated breath.
You can get something from the chemists for that.
Camel Spider
25-Nov-07, 20:53
I don't debate with people who send me threatening and abusive PMs.
You dont debate Fred .. you dictate.
At no point did I threaten you Fred but feel free to post it up the PM .. I stand by my opinions of you.
And as for being abusive .. you have referred to me in the past as a Nazi Sympathiser simply because I was an ex Serviceman, and you did this on the forum. Then you openly questioned my Humanity .. again on the forum. At least I had the decency to convey my thoughts to you privately.
And just for the record .. I held back.
northener
25-Nov-07, 21:06
Yes it is, the violence was from ordinary Iraqis directed at an army of occupation. Remove the army of occupation and the violence stops. It's that simple.
But the Occupying Army is still there! They haven't been removed!
It's not simple Fred, real life never is.
OK. Lets take out all the troops tomorrow.
Fred is now The Supreme Being in Iraq.
How are you going to deal with it Fred?
Come on Fred, this is your big chance. Right or wrong, I don't care, let's see what you would do. Let's have some positive, constructive dialogue as opposed to negative accusation and dodgy history lessons.
Go for it!!!!
We can always discuss the other outstanding issues ( Iran, Zionism, Nuclear programmes,Oil etc)after we've sorted out Iraq.
My breath is still bated.
Yes it is, the violence was from ordinary Iraqis directed at an army of occupation. Remove the army of occupation and the violence stops. It's that simple.
Fred, 90% of the killings are ordinary Iraqi against ordinary Iraqi, not against the occupation troops, how do you explain that? As you have stated many times I and others on the message boards are less intellectually qualified to have an a opinion than you, and some of us may even have halitosis, although I dont know what that has to do with the subject under discussion
Fred, 90% of the killings are ordinary Iraqi against ordinary Iraqi, not against the occupation troops, how do you explain that?
It isn't true, that's how I explain that. There were assassinations of people seen as collaborators just as in any occupation but the violence is still directed at the occupying forces, without them there are no collaborators.
You dont debate Fred .. you dictate.
At no point did I threaten you Fred but feel free to post it up the PM .. I stand by my opinions of you.
If I posted that PM I'd be breaking several org rules.
If you can't behave in a civilised manner without becoming abusive I reserve the right not to debate with you.
How are you going to deal with it Fred?
I'm not going to deal with anything, it's no more my place to deal with anything than it was Tony Blair's.
Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people.
If I posted that PM I'd be breaking several org rules.
If you can't behave in a civilised manner without becoming abusive I reserve the right not to debate with you.
If you have a serious allegation of PM abuse then take up the issue with a MOD who will investigate and take appropriate action. Simply making unsubstantiated allegations over the forum is not very appropriate either.
northener
25-Nov-07, 23:04
I'm not going to deal with anything, it's no more my place to deal with anything than it was Tony Blair's.
Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people.
Strange, you've been telling everyone else where they are going wrong for a long time now, yet as soon as you are challenged you run away.
I can honestly say this has been the most amusing exchange of my online life. I can't stop laughing every time you throw your teddy out and refuse to play.
Trouble is Fred, you're too predictable. So easy to play along.
I just give you a gentle poke and you go off into one. Losing control is a good way to show the world how shallow and inept your stance is. What a hoot!
Fred, never get involved in a debate in the real world, you would be ridiculed out of existance.
Remember what I said:
http://forum.caithness.org/showpost.php?p=301244&postcount=70 (http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://forum.caithness.org/showpost.php?p=301244&postcount=70)
Bye Fred, thanks for the laughs.
I win[lol][lol].
Bye Fred, thanks for the laughs.
I win[lol][lol].
And every five minutes another child dies.
fred it is a fact of life that children die, whether because they or their families do not have access to the medicines, doctors etc. that we are so lucky to have.Have you ever done any direct thing to help? Are you prepared to put your money where your mouth is?
Whilst I regret the loss of any life, I fail to see how I can be culpable, I did not vote for Blair or Brown, I am ashamed of where they took us but in a democracy we have to put up with things that our government does until we get the chance to vote them out of power.
Where I can help I do both in cash and kind.
It isn't true, that's how I explain that. There were assassinations of people seen as collaborators just as in any occupation but the violence is still directed at the occupying forces, without them there are no collaborators.
Are you suggesting this is a conspiracy?[lol]
[quote=LIZZ;301589]fred it is a fact of life that children die, whether because they or their families do not have access to the medicines, doctors etc. that we are so lucky to have.Have you ever done any direct thing to help? Are you prepared to put your money where your mouth is?
Whilst I regret the loss of any life, I fail to see how I can be culpable, I did not vote for Blair or Brown, I am ashamed of where they took us but in a democracy we have to put up with things that our government does until we get the chance to vote them out of power.
Where I can help I do both in cash and kind.[/quote
so Did I Lizz and i am ashamed of Where Blair and Brown took us
fred it is a fact of life that children die, whether because they or their families do not have access to the medicines, doctors etc. that we are so lucky to have.Have you ever done any direct thing to help? Are you prepared to put your money where your mouth is?
Whilst I regret the loss of any life, I fail to see how I can be culpable, I did not vote for Blair or Brown, I am ashamed of where they took us but in a democracy we have to put up with things that our government does until we get the chance to vote them out of power.
Where I can help I do both in cash and kind.
Take a look at today's BBC website.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7112256.stm
Tony Blair dare not talk about his beliefs because he was afraid of public opinion.
He dare invade and occupy a country illegaly, he dare help cause the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent children with no worries about what the public might think about him.
Says it all doesn't it?
Come on Fred as it's been said that if you have an allegation of a threatening PM which you have accused someone of, you must substantiate it, come on then?
And as for someone asking what Fred is doing/going to do about the dying children in Iraq, well the answer is 'nothing' he was asked this same question a long time ago about getting 'involved' and the silence was deafening. This is quite usual; something about empty barrels?
And as for someone asking what Fred is doing/going to do about the dying children in Iraq, well the answer is 'nothing'
He could do a lot by selling up and going to Iraq and starting up a mission with the money to help those unfortunate children. Anything else is just hollow words, right?
Come on Fred as it's been said that if you have an allegation of a threatening PM which you have accused someone of, you must substantiate it, come on then?
Must I?
I don't take orders from you either.
Fred: "I don't take orders from you either." Re my: "you must substantiate it, come on then?" - No fred no emphasis on the 'must' that's not an Order, but I guarentee that YOU have NEVER been in a disciplined force (of any kind - not cubs ior beavers mind you) in that you would take orders; am I correct?, go on Fred honest answer. It would give me an indication.
Fred: "I don't take orders from you either." Re my: "you must substantiate it, come on then?" - No fred no emphasis on the 'must' that's not an Order, but I guarentee that YOU have NEVER been in a disciplined force (of any kind - not cubs ior beavers mind you) in that you would take orders; am I correct?, go on Fred honest answer. It would give me an indication.
I'm not here to talk about me I'm here to talk about the issues.
If you had any sort of an argument against the issues I have raised you wouldn't be trying to focus attention on me instead.
Fred: "I'm not here to talk about me I'm here to talk about the issues. If you had any sort of an argument against the issues I have raised you wouldn't be trying to focus attention on me instead."
Ok you've made it plain that you've NOT been in a disciplined force, which kinda negates your various arguments as to Tasers and how you would deal with a serious/dangerous situation, you have still not stated what YOU are going to do with the kids dying in Iraq, you've still not made a complaint about a threatening PM, (any chance of the Mod permitting this; especially if both parties agree?) so what's 'tup Fred?
"Remove the army of occupation and the violence stops. It's that simple." Are you real Fred? So in Sadam's day all was lightness and peace? Hmm Marsh Arabs? Kurds?
"Remove the army of occupation and the violence stops. It's that simple." Are you real Fred? So in Sadam's day all was lightness and peace? Hmm Marsh Arabs? Kurds?
You keep ignoring the fact that the West helped Saddam to power, American intelligence even supplied him with a list of his political opponents so he could assassinate them, we backed his invasion of Iran and supplied him with the chemical weapons he used against the Kurds.
Fred: "You keep ignoring the fact that the West helped Saddam to power, American intelligence even supplied him with a list of his political opponents so he could assassinate them, we backed his invasion of Iran and supplied him with the chemical weapons he used against the Kurds."
And your point is....? You said violence would stop so Please keep to the point.
Fred: "You keep ignoring the fact that the West helped Saddam to power, American intelligence even supplied him with a list of his political opponents so he could assassinate them, we backed his invasion of Iran and supplied him with the chemical weapons he used against the Kurds."
And your point is....? You said violence would stop so Please keep to the point.
as opposed to his "other" political opponents who fed American and other intellegence (sic) services with duff info on WMD..........anyone remember the TV programme SOAP........you really couldn't make this stuff up.
And your point is....? You said violence would stop so Please keep to the point.
Major General Graham Binns of the British Army said that violence in Basra has been reduced by 90% by removing British troops. He also said that the presence of British troops in Basra was the single largest trigger for violence.
Are you calling him a liar?
Major General Graham Binns of the British Army said that violence in Basra has been reduced by 90% by removing British troops. He also said that the presence of British troops in Basra was the single largest trigger for violence.
Are you calling him a liar?
Did he say that all troops should be removed from Iraq forthwith, fred?
Did he say that all troops should be removed from Iraq forthwith, fred?
He didn't say they shouldn't.
I'm sure he never said a lot of things fred:)
I fail to see what Tony Blair's faith has to do with this thread and the link seems a total irrelevance, unless you are trying to say that as a practising Christian he should obey the laws of his beliefs?
I fail to see what Tony Blair's faith has to do with this thread and the link seems a total irrelevance, unless you are trying to say that as a practising Christian he should obey the laws of his beliefs?
Well now just imagine Alistair Campbell putting his arm round Tony Blair's shoulder and saying "don't worry about it Tony, killing a few thousand babies in Iraq isn't going to affect the way anybody votes...just whatever you do don't tell them you go to church".
Doesn't that say something about the society we live in?
Fred: "don't worry about it Tony, killing a few thousand babies in Iraq isn't going to affect the way anybody votes...just whatever you do don't tell them you go to church".
One of your more silly statements I think
One of your more silly statements I think
What even sillier than when three years ago I said America was planning permanent bases in Iraq? Oh no they said, America has said over and over again they had no plans for permanent bases in Iraq.
Well just look what Bush signed yesterday without even consulting Congress.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/11/20071126-11.html
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.