i think the war is wrong ma uncle is in the week ta's and they have noo been handed oot there army id cards so they could be called oot at anytime and it is not ur war its amercas so y are so many of our troops over there.
http://www.caithness.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=2677Originally Posted by Rheghead
In summary:
There are two parts to answering this.
1 – What went on
We went to war in Iraq on the back of false reasoning and flimsy evidence. We went against the wishes of the international community, against the advice of a great many experts and against the tide of public opinion. We went for ever changing and never certain reasons: was it WMD?; was it for humanitarian reasons?; was it because of terrorism? The politicians changed their minds nearly as often as the Tories change their leader.
We were given scare stories of an imminent threat. The papers told us we could be hit within 45 minutes of Saddam giving the order. The government did nothing to correct this lie. In fact, Blair didn’t even know it was a lie. He’d forgotten to ask the most basic question – “What type of weapons will the troops be facing if we go to war?”.
That we are now there doesn’t change any of this. Some people say that the questions should have stopped as soon as the order to invade was given. They seem to think that to question the government is to question our troops. That’s simply not the case. Members of the armed forces are dying to enforce the will of the government. Watching on unquestioningly as that happens day after day after day isn’t support in my book.
I’m not naïve. There’s no withdrawal for our troops in the immediate future. We made a mess and we’ve got to stay and clean it up. That is going to mean more death and more destruction. But we now know that there were no WMD. We know that Saddam was being contained by the sanction imposed by the UN. We know that Iraqis are now 58 times more likely to die a violent death than they were under Saddam. We know that Blair either lied or was grossly incompetent.
Perhaps, even after continued diplomatic pressure and sanctions, Saddam would have kept power for some time and continued to abuse his people. Perhaps, even after Blix reported that Saddam had no WMD and was weaker than he led people to believe, there would still be no uprising and he would continue to resist pressure for change. Perhaps it would still have been necessary to go to war. We’ll never know because our government didn’t use war as it should be used – as the LAST option. They need to answer for that.
2 – What’s going on
The war in Iraq is part of a bigger picture; the war against terror. It’s a notion so bizarre that it would be laughable if it weren’t so serious.
We have Bush running around the world on a mixture of post-9/11 revenge and a lust for power (not quite sure which is the stronger) unleashing the might of the American armed forces on anybody who stands in his way. We have terrorists targeting the western world and somebody, somewhere decided that shooting them, torturing them and bombing their homes would cause them to have a change of heart.
Instead the world is, arguably, a more dangerous place and terrorism is on the increase. A war waged against a single dictator and his followers is fast turning into a guerrilla war with each side claiming God amongst their numbers. The sympathy for America after 9/11 has been replaced by mistrust, fear and, for some, fanatical hatred.
Blair, rather than use his position to counsel caution, seems to have thrown out all of the hard-learned lessons of Ireland and is joining Bush on his quest. Perhaps Blair too has caught the scent of fear in the air and recognised its potential. Certainly we are turning a blind eye to things that would previously have had us marching in the street.
In some instances caution is most definitely warranted, but this abject fear that is gripping the nation is more dangerous for our way of life than any suicide bomber.
.Orger
i think the war is wrong ma uncle is in the week ta's and they have noo been handed oot there army id cards so they could be called oot at anytime and it is not ur war its amercas so y are so many of our troops over there.
Senior Member
So certain politicians and sections of the media keep saying. But then again, they said the same things about Afghanistan.
All the Afghans were going to starve to death during the first winter because of America. That was many winters ago and I'm still waiting for it to happen.
What happened to all the "starving babies" in Iraq. Nobody seems to have noticed them lately either. Then, of course, there was the huge humanitarian disaster in Fallugia, but that disappeared without trace.
Of course, it should all have been left to the UN thy would have solved the problem eventually. Ask the people in the south of Sudan about the effectiveness of the UN and their diplomatic solutions. Two Aid Agencies providing food and care for the displaced persons driven out by the Government sponsered Thugs have been thrown out by the Authorities. Their offence? They had the cheek to complain openly about Government Aircraft dropping bombs next to their feeding centres recently. The UN version of the situation in Sudan? Well, all is under control, the Sudanese Government promised to behave.
Press and media? The silence is deafening! Except for the complaints when it started the "America should do something!"
Animals I like, people I tolerate.
Senior Member
Godfather, if you bother to check I rather think you will find that the reason Hitler was threatening Britain was that Britain and France declared War on Germany because they had invaded Poland! What, pray tell had Poland got to do with us?
Who gave us the right to interfere in an affair between Germany and Poland?
Neither Germany or Poland asked us to we just barged in without reason!
Animals I like, people I tolerate.
.Orger
play the good guy jjc? just walk away? grow up.And on that truly despicable note I bring any debate (and I use the term loosely) between us to a close.
muslims, islamic, black, white, pakistani whatever. do you think all races should be treated the same? the answer is no. if we were all to be treated the same way we would have all been created the same way. i'm not a racist but i don't consider myself the same as a black, chinaman, pakistani and i feel a black shouldn't be treated the same as me, a chinaman or a pakistani. we are all treated differently. it's not racism. we don't live in a perfect world and never will so get over it.I pray to god that you will never leave you house. Your type of igroramous having the internet is bad enough. I think you need to go and visit that Mosque in Glasgow that is having an open week or did you not hear about that on the news? Would you trust that Iraqi doctor in the hospital to treat you. I dont think you would.
.Orger
i'm not saying we have to go back to the days of slavery etc. when someone says 'treated differently' why do people always assume it's worse. i treat different races the same as i treat everyone. but what annoys me is that if anyone cracks a racist joke they get there ass kicked. is it more acceptable to make jokes about fat people? people with glasses? ugly people? than it is to make jokes about another race?
who decides?
Jaws,
Once again, you seem to be saying that there is no humanitarian crisis in Iraq. Is that your position?
You don’t think there have been reports of bodies in the streets? How about the words of Muhammad al-Nuri, spokesman for the Iraq Red Crescent Society?
Want malnutrition in children?A convoy carrying thousands of food parcels, blankets, tents and medical supplies arrived in Fallujah with the help of the US-led forces who gave authorisation to the IRCS to deliver and allowed for one of the clinics to be converted into a temporary hospital for treating the injured.
"Bodies can be seen everywhere and people were crying when receiving the food parcels. It is very sad, it is a human disaster," Muhammad al-Nuri, a spokesman for the IRCS, told IRIN in Baghdad.
Source: UN Office for the coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
Perhaps you’re a visual person and you need pictures?”Latest reports are showing that acute malnutrition among young children has doubled since March 2003. This means that hundreds of thousands of children are today suffering the severe effects of diarrhoea and nutrient deficiencies. The lack of clean water and adequate sanitation leads to the quick spread of disease, and greatly exacerbates the impact of malnutrition. As always, young children are the most vulnerable.”
UNICEF Executive Director Carol Bellamy – November 16th
You’re right… no problems there at all
Nope, nothing about different races there.
Your wrong RH, all races should be treated the same. After all what's in a race. Almost no genetic diference.
So you would treat a muslim living in Britain differently just because George Bush says they are bad?
"We don't live in a perfect world", Shut up, using a stupid cleche to condone ignorant views. Mabey the world would be better if we didnt have fools like you spouting racist nonsence about how you should be treated differently from anyone else.
I stand by what I said before about you not leaving your house.
the beleif that each race has certain qualities or abilities = differences.
And at the end of all that you tell jcc to grow up. I pity your type.
Banned
Actually, in 1939, before the German invasion of Poland, Britain and Poland signed a mutual assistance pact agreeing that if either country was attacked the other would go to its aid.
Ha!
Senior Member
I think you will find that the pact was with Czechoslovakia and not Poland.
Hitler marched into Czechoslovakia with whom we had a treaty assuring them we would come to their aid if invaded and we did absolutely nothing other than make diplomatic overtures to Hitler who promised he had no further territorial ambitions.
I think it was about that time that Chamberlain came home waving his piece of toilet paper declaring "Peace in our Time!" because it had been signed by Herr Hitler and himself. And of course Her Hitler would never lie would he, after all he did promise? And the Press lapped up every word.
Having got away with the same thing one many occasions without any thing being done to stop him, except Diplomatic Tut-Tutting of course, Hitler decided he would try again with Poland, with whom we did not have a Treaty to come to their aid, and at that stage, much to Hitler’s annoyance, we declared War.
Hitler's own staff have since stated that he was very much annoyed with us as he felt we had acted rather unfairly and could not understand why we were so upset.
If we had a Treaty with Poland to come to their defence in case of invasion then why did we not declare war on Russia when two weeks later Stalin invaded Poland from the East and both they and the Germans stopped at the border they had previously agreed in order to split Poland between them. Perhaps our non-existent Treaty with Poland said, "But only if the Germans invade you, but not if the Russians do" I’m sure the Poles would have agreed to that.
Animals I like, people I tolerate.
Senior Member
Jjc, injured people yes, and I can take you to Children's Hospitals here where you could find babies with similar dressings. I notice that the dressings are new, clean, and obviously put on professionally. None of that was going to be possible according to the original reports so are they now going to tell me that those pictures are incorrect or where they exaggerating in the first place.
Certainly none of the people in the photos looks like they are starving. I mean starving as in Ethiopia, I mean starving as in Sudan. Tell me when you see photos of starving Terrorists, Insurgents, Freedom Fighters or whatever term is acceptable and I will then start worrying about the rest of the population. Then I really will know there are shortages.
The Red Crescent where complaining bitterly that they could not get into Fallugia where there were horrific Humanitarian Problems with the civilian population but we were being told at the same time that the civilian population had all fled prior to the fighting. The population were there suffering but they were no there?
Now the media have access there have been no further similar claims, or perhaps the Americans have hidden them all from the Red Crescent.
One Organisation was complaining bitterly a while ago that the Medical situation in the Hospitals was terrible where previously there had been no problems under Saddam and everything needed was available. But we were told originally that the sanctions should be stopped because people and babies were dying in their thousands for lack of medical care. They didn't have anything they required but they later had had everything they required?
The toddler paraded by the terrorists in their propaganda film dressed in combat gear and "holding" (if that is what you could call it seeing it was bigger and heavier than the child) AK47 Assault Rifle certainly did not look hungry.
What does International Law and the UN have to say about children and War?
I'm not suggesting that three year olds are used as troops, but he whole display was, shall I say, rather distasteful, if not pathetic!
Animals I like, people I tolerate.
Jaws,
Oh, I see. It’s okay if we blow the legs off young children, just so long as we dress them nicely?
Other than quote you, again, the words of the Executive Director of UNICEF, I’m not sure what more I can do here. You’ve set your yardstick to measure malnutrition as famine-level starvation. Clearly that is not occurring in Iraq, but that doesn’t mean that children are not malnourished and in want of food and clean water.
Perhaps you could tell me just what it is about UNICEF that you find unconvincing?
Really? All the civilians had fled? The only people saying that before the US military began bombing the city were spokesmen for the US military.
There have been no further claims since the media entered Fallujah? Perhaps you just haven’t been listening…
This report was posted TWO DAYS ago.
According to the Red Crescent, 60 people came out to get assistance in one street alone.
That’s strange, I thought they’d all fled? But then I guess you just ignore the reports of the Red Crescent as you ignore the reports from UNICEF…
Sorry, I'm not aware of any toddler holding an AK-47. Did you mean this toddler? If not, perhaps you could post a link to a story about this so we can get a better idea what toddler you're talking about?
Well, it doesn’t say that a vodeo of a toddler holding an AK-47 justifies blocking humanitarian aid from reaching civilians in a war zone. Other than that, I fail to see your point.
Hitler defeated Czechoslovakia in March of 1939. We did nothing.
In August 1939 Britain and France reaffirmed their guarantee of the territorial integrity of Poland.
On Friday September 1st Germany invaded Poland. On that day Chamberlain read to Parliament the message that had been sent to the German government:
“I am accordingly to inform your Excellency that unless the German Government are prepared to give His Majesty’s Government satisfactory assurances that the German Government have suspended all aggressive action against Poland and are prepared promptly to withdraw their forces from Polish territory, his Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom will without hesitation fulfil their obligations to Poland.”
On Sunday September 3rd at 09:00 we sent an ultimatum to Germany demanding their immediate withdrawal. At 11:00 the deadline on that ultimatum passed and Britain declared war on Germany.
Actually that’s precisely what the treaty said:
Secret Protocol 1(a): By the expression “a European Power” employed in the Agreement it is to be understood Germany
It was called the Anglo-Polish Alliance or, to give it its full name, "the Anglo-Polish Agreement of Mutual Assistance and the Secret Protocol" and was signed on August 25th, 1939.
Look it up. Educate yourself.
1K.Orger
The Godfather wroteI remember reading about a woman who had a lifelong passion for collecting ornamental pigs. She had lived in her house for many years and always visibly displayed them in her front window. She then started to get abuse over her collection and was forced to take them in out of sight by the Asian community.Your wrong RH, all races should be treated the same.
Was she 'treated the same' for indulging in a pastime that she deems totally innocent?
I personally find the Muslim and Jewish method of killing cattle as being disgusting and inhumane but I wouldn't try to force my beliefs on them!!
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
1K.Orger
Jaws didn't say there wasn't a treaty, only that the treaty was non-existent!
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
Senior Member
Ah, I see what you mean. I do apologise!
I must admit that I was unaware that we rushed an agreement through a few day before we decided to declare War. How very convenient, a very good excuse! The ink must have been hardly dry. Yet a long standing Treaty we just decided didn't matter.
Sounds decidedly convenient to me, especially in view of the fact that the Poles had used the Czech situation to grab their share of the Country and again we had turned our backs. Even moreso when you consider that when Germany made it's first land grab we in effect forced the Chechoslovaks to accept it by more or less telling them to just get on with it.
And it still doesn't explain our non-action over Russia.
Animals I like, people I tolerate.
Senior Member
Jjc, UNICEF is one of the more corrupt parts of the UN and as recently been investigated by them as such.
The pictures might impress you but I have seen similar in real life, not on the TV.
The picture of the dressed up toddler possibly is the same one except the one on the video was holding the barrel of an AK47 with the butt dragging on the floor behind him.
If you can't see that using a child of that age under those circumstances as a call to War then you have less conscience than me and I have none at all!
What would your reaction be if our forces or more especially those of the Great Satan did that?
The pictures of the injured children, horrific though they are, do not in any way indicate what happened to them. I do niot dispute the injuries or that they came by them as a result of military action but the implication is, and always have been, thay only the actions of one side injures children, the armaments of others always seem to avoid such incidents.
With respect to Kevin Sites, I admit I do not know his background, what I was questioning was the version that there had been no military action at that particular time and that everything had occured the previous day. I think you said that the Mosque had been "cleared" the previous day. "Cleared" means that all live people have been removed and all that are left are the dead! Anybody who was not killed in the original assault should have been moved into the open and the building left as if it were completely empty. My assumption would be that once a building had been declaired "clear" then anybody in that building who was alive had gone there at a later time and therefore could not be guaranteed to have been searched and be unarmed.
With respect to the reporting of the War, I heard the first broadcasts at the time of the first "target of opportunity" bombing the night previous to the indicated “First Day” and the announcement by Bush that it was exactly that and not the initial action of the full attack.
The reaction of the reporters, if the situation had not been as serious as it was, was quite entertaining.
Firstly they were wrong footed because it was unexpected and confused their schedule. Then they decided that the War really had started without them and there was a rush to disturb peoples sleep because they hadn’t been warned not to go to bed. Then there was a Press Conference but they didn’t know just when, then they went to the White House Reporter but nothing was happening. More confusion. Then the short announcement by Bush. Then he went back into the White House but something else was bound to be going on but it wasn’t. Then the President went to bed, but that couldn’t be right. And on and on and on.
The one thing they could not get through there thick heads was that being told that there was nothing further meant exactly that and nothing else. Their carefully worked out script had just been torn up and they were lost.
And before anybody starts talking about American Media I will tell you that I was listening to the great American Propaganda Machine the BBC World Service.
The first day of the War the bombing started at 1800 BST prompt! On the second day the BBC had a countdown to the bombing starting like it was the countdown to the start of a sporting event and right on time went over to the cameras in Baghdad for the “display”, nothing happened, confusion again, “But it started at this time last night!” Fret, worry, fret some more, “What’s gone wrong? It should have started by now!”
How damned inconsiderate of them, fancy not running a War to the TV News schedule, after all they had gone to all the trouble to create a slot for the entertainment and excitement of their audience!
And you wonder why, when they say “Good Morning”, I check the position of the Sun in the sky before I believe them?
And before anybody asks, No, I have absolutely no moral conscience whatsoever. I’ve been around people too long to be shocked by anything. However badly you think humanity can behave you will be wrong, it can be much worse than you can ever imagine!
Rant over for the time being. (Hell I feel better for that!)
Animals I like, people I tolerate.
So you simply discount whatever they have to say on the subject? How incredibly convenient for you…
The same as my reaction is in this situation. I think it’s a disgusting abuse.
Now, explain to me how the picture of this child holding an AK-47 in any way justifies the things we are discussing here. How does this picture relate to the execution of a wounded insurgent? How does this picture equate to the reported malnutrition?
I'm quite sure that both sides in this conflict have been responsible for such injuries on children. Once again, can you explain how that makes it right? Is "They did it too" really a valid argument for turning a blind eye?
Of course these things are going to happen in war. That's one of the reasons why war is a last resort and not a road you go down once you get bored of the current stalemate. But just because they are going to happen, doesn't mean we shouldn't be horrified. Simply shrugging your shoulders and flicking the telly back over to Eastenders really doesn't cut it.
That may be your assumption, but it isn't what happened. What happened was that the marines disarmed the injured men the day before and left them there for collection. Should they have been removed and given treatment? Absolutely. But they weren't and, according to Kevin Sites, the marines knew that.
However you might feel about journalists, Kevin Sites was also an eye-witness to the event and was carrying a video camera which recorded the whole thing. I understand why you'd want to question new reports – you'd be a fool not to – but when you simply discount everything a journalist says as 'spin' you might as well find a cave somewhere and go back to nature.
Okay. How about Medact?
Their report 'Enduring Effects of War: Health in Iraq 2004' was published this month:
32% of children are chronically malnourished? 32%?There is an alarming recurrence of previously well-controlled communicable diseases including diarrhoeal diseases, acute respiratory infections and typhoid, particularly among children.
One in four people still depend on food aid and there are more children underweight (17%) or chronically malnourished (32%) than in 2000.
But I guess Medact is corrupt too, eh?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks