Videotape Shows Saddam's Men Torturing Iraqis :(

[Seoulstriker]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,101689,00.html

go to the article and click on the link to the tape. :( :( :(


WASHINGTON — A grisly videotape showing acts of torture carried out by Iraqi Republican Guard and Saddam Fedayeen militiamen has been declassified and obtained by Fox News.

After the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime in April, an Iraqi in Baghdad gave the tape to the U.S. Army's 308th Civil Affairs Brigade, V Corps. He told the soldiers he had more videos and was directly involved in their taping, having been ordered to do so by the Republican Guard.

The 23-minute long tape contains several scenes of Saddam Fedayeen (search) fighters carrying out corporal punishment and at least one execution, probably of a Saddam Fedayeen member.

• Video: Saddam's Men Torturing Iraqis

Sources told Fox News that the man who handed over the current tape is cooperating with U.S. troops and will provide more tapes.

The punishments include fingers being chopped or shot off, tips of tongues being cut off, wrists being broken by sharp blows from a wooden rod, lashes by whip or cane, a bound man being tossed off a building, a beheading involving a sword and a knife and a man being humiliated by riding a donkey backwards.

Several scenes show charges being read out, ranging from disobeying an order to desertion, before punishments are inflicted.

The filming locations appear to be public squares and military installations. In attendance are dozens of black-clad Fedayeen, uniformed Republican Guard (search) members, civilians and children.

The U.S. military thinks the tape was most likely recorded at a military installation near Baghdad sometime between 1998 and the fall of the regime, but could have been made as early as 1995.

Tom Malinowski, a director of Human Rights Watch (search), a New York-based advocacy group, said the tape provided a clear picture of how the former government instilled fear in the Iraqi people.

"It reminds us that Saddam's regime took sadistic pleasure in documenting the horrors it perpetrated on the Iraqi people," Malinowski said. "In fact, they wanted people to know this, because the purpose of this treatment was to terrorize the population so no one would even think of opposing Saddam."

The tape quality is poor; there is no audio in some parts and very faint sound in others.

Military intelligence sources told Fox News they believed the tape was authentic, adding that it was by far the most graphic example of the fallen regime's torture practices.

Similar tapes have been found in Iraqi prisons, military facilities and even the private video collections of Uday and Qusay, Saddam's sons, who were killed by U.S. forces in a dramatic July shootout. Copies of several tapes have become brisk sellers in Baghdad marketplaces.

Pentagon officials have been pushing to get the recovered tapes declassified, a process now starting to happen. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz has requested they be released to the public.

Speaking to local television stations around the United States Wednesday, Wolfowitz suggested former regime members had become the "dead-enders" attacking U.S. and coalition troops and cooperating Iraqis since the end of major combat.

"Thousands of vicious sadists who are left over from the old regime ... think that if they terrorize Iraqis and scare away Americans, that they can bring back Saddam Hussein and his evil dictatorship," Wolfowitz said. "Small numbers of a few thousand can make a great deal of trouble until they're cleaned up."

The Saddam Fedayeen militia — the name translates as "Saddam's men of sacrifice" — was created by Uday in 1995 but later turned over to Qusay.

The Fedayeen had a total strength reportedly between 18,000 and 40,000 troops, according to GlobalSecurity.org, and was composed of young soldiers recruited from regions loyal to Saddam.

It reported directly to the Presidential Palace, rather than through the army command, was responsible for patrol and anti-smuggling duties and operated completely above and outside political and legal structures.

Though at times improperly termed an "elite" unit, the Fedayeen was a politically reliable force that could be counted on to support Saddam against domestic opponents, according to GlobalSecurity.org.

It started out as a rag-tag force of some 10,000-15,000 "bullies and country bumpkins" but later helped protect Saddam and Uday and carried out much of the regime's dirty work. A special "death squadron" was created to carry out secret executions.

[uidotcom]

And people still wonder why we wanted to oust the regime...

[MSG Dman]

You wanted US justification for the war dicimus, well there it is prick. I don't give a crap about WMD, we are the big boy on the block and have an obligation to the world not to let this happen.

[Apogee]

I think the President should have articulated this more clearly. Our justification shouldn't have been WMD but human rights violations instead.

Although that WOULD spur the question of why we don't intervien in all of the other countries that have human rights violations.

[One?]

I have seen worst movies of Iraqi torture taking place after the southern revolution. If you ever lived in michigan talk to some of the Iraqis there. They will tell you who they were tortured. One lawyer had his father, brother and uncled hung on poles underneath the armpits. They made them bleed till death. And after they died they made him go pick them up and burry them. Thats one of the bastards methods.

[Seoulstriker]

I have seen worst movies of Iraqi torture taking place after the southern revolution. If you ever lived in michigan talk to some of the Iraqis there. They will tell you who they were tortured. One lawyer had his father, brother and uncled hung on poles underneath the armpits. They made them bleed till death. And after they died they made him go pick them up and burry them. Thats one of the bastards methods.

:( :( :(

at least we got uday and qusay. we'll get the third one very soon.

[exoninja]

Thank god there is a country called "USA" to stop the f**king regime.

[Seoulstriker]

Thank god there is a country called "USA" to stop the f**king regime.

thank goodness we have a president who is willing to face some public scrutiny and do the right thing.

[Vance]

Thanks for the thread, and your replies guys. It really shows what I beileve was the TRUE reason we went in Iraq.

[Seoulstriker]

Thanks for the thread, and your replies guys. It really shows what I beileve was the TRUE reason we went in Iraq.

and what was shown in the video was only a part of what went on. we know of other cases of feeding people to lions and tigers (and bears oh my), electricity to the scrotum, acid baths, mass executions, chemical and biological weapons, etc.

:(

[Apogee]

while it may not have been the 'true' reason for going in, its a damn good fall back and POTUS needs to see that and articulate it to the media. Without doing that our only measure of success in Iraq is two things, finding Weapons of Mass Distruction and finding Sadam. Both are much more difficult than showing we've put a halt to these crimes against humanity.

[Andyman]

that is pretty horrible man :(

[Kingpin]

Ahhhha. As Wolfovitz said "WMD was just convenient reason to begin this war".

Ok. North Korea has WMD and ready to use it. And regime also tortures and kills people. Why you didn't begin from Korea?

Answer: Korea doesn't have oil and do not threat Israel directly. And it is REALLY ready to use WMD on any enemy troops invaded.

[Vance]

Ahhhha. As Wolfovitz said "WMD was just convenient reason to begin this war".

Ok. North Korea has WMD and ready to use it. And regime also tortures and kills people. Why you didn't begin from Korea?

Answer: Korea doesn't have oil and do not threat Israel directly. And it is REALLY ready to use WMD on any enemy troops invaded.
Yeah, real ****ing smart. Let's invade NK and get SK blown to kingdom come, and fight a guerilla war that will last years with more than 5 times the troops Saddam had. :roll:

[Tiger]

Thank god there is a country called "USA" to stop the f**king regime.


thank goodness we have a president who is willing to face some public scrutiny and do the right thing.

LOL rofl

No comments... :roll:

[Seoulstriker]

Thank god there is a country called "USA" to stop the f**king regime.


thank goodness we have a president who is willing to face some public scrutiny and do the right thing.

LOL

No comments...

after what you have seen in the video (i hope), you still say "LOL". that's really sad.

[Tiger]

Saddam is not the only leader in the world who use torture against his own people, you know...

[spier]

after what you have seen in the video (i hope), you still say "LOL". that's really sad.The US has supported, funded and supplied worse acts of terror(Nicaragua and Guatemala springs to mind). Oh, and the USA backed Iraq 100% back in the eighties, you know, when Saddam offed a few thousand Kurds. woot

[Argyll]

and just as an observation it wasn't just the USA who stopped the regime,thou you'd have thought that was the case ?
As many of you pointed out during the war there were over 40 countries who participated in OIF......not just the one!!

Like some have said,his is not the only regime to have carried out such acts!!!

[warchild1/27scout]

spier and tiger are on the record for defending saddam hussien. theypoint out that if we dont stop every evil dictatorship we should not stop any. and if we pick the wrong reason or lie about the reason that evil dictator was wrongly done and should be put back into power to kill and rape and slaughter more. you guys are some sorry bastards and your family's should be put in the saddam torture chambers and raped and killed and have you pay to bury them. i think thats fair. these goofballs are so removed from reality they can't see right from wrong if it hit them in thier block head.

[spier]

Those are just your emotions acting without the benifit of intellect.

[Tiger]

I DON'T defend Saddam. :fork:

I just find that were no sufficients reasons to attack Iraq...And the fact that Saddam use torture is NOT a sufficient reason to invade a country. And don't speak about WMD, please. We all know that Irak don't have WMD...


these goofballs are so removed from reality they can't see right from wrong if it hit them in thier block head.

LOL, it's me who is removed from reality ?!

What a joke... rofl

[Argyll]

shame it took 40 years to act against him then eh?

In 1999 I was in Chile when the UK decided to place Pinochet under house arrest despite the UK's promise that the would not touch him!
Now Pinochets regime was as brutal as they come,some would say a lot worse than Saddams,but there was a huge outcry when he was "arrested" from the Chileno's,who many suffered horrificly under his regime,but even at that they still felt he was still a Chilean citizen despite his brutal past,and there was a lot of ill feelings between the 2 countries.

My point? Despite his regime being brutal he was still a Chilean ,and had the country behind him,granted most wanted to see him tried in that country for the crimes he commited.............now IF Saddam is captured will he be tried by the US,or the Int Community,or by the Iraqi's themselves,if by the US why have they never sought to bring charges against Pinochet?(Remember this was a regime that tortured and killed some Americans too)

[spier]

Oh and Chile was supported by the US as well.

http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/americas/11/13/cia.chile.02/

[Seoulstriker]

spier and tiger are on the record for defending saddam hussien. theypoint out that if we dont stop every evil dictatorship we should not stop any. and if we pick the wrong reason or lie about the reason that evil dictator was wrongly done and should be put back into power to kill and rape and slaughter more. you guys are some sorry bastards and your family's should be put in the saddam torture chambers and raped and killed and have you pay to bury them. i think thats fair. these goofballs are so removed from reality they can't see right from wrong if it hit them in thier block head.

excellent. i couldn't have said it better. woot woot

[Haiw]

some people really gotta get a clue...
or get that screw fitted...eh warchild?

i know the whole torture thing is horrible, but to class it as 'the big reason for invasion'....if that wud be so we could propably invade half the countries in the world, so it's rather hypocrithical to invade on country for torture, while supporting the other torturing country....

[khukuri]

some people really gotta get a clue...
or get that screw fitted...eh warchild?

i know the whole torture thing is horrible, but to class it as 'the big reason for invasion'....if that wud be so we could propably invade half the countries in the world, so it's rather hypocrithical to invade on country for torture, while supporting the other torturing country....


Word!


I am myself an iraqi. I was pro the war to remove saddam, but i am not naive beleiving that US invaded iraq to help the iraqis, i think it was other reasons. Should i be thanksfull to america? For whatm putting sanctions against my country so that 500.000 children could die (un figures)

[Seoulstriker]

some people really gotta get a clue...
or get that screw fitted...eh warchild?

i know the whole torture thing is horrible, but to class it as 'the big reason for invasion'....if that wud be so we could propably invade half the countries in the world, so it's rather hypocrithical to invade on country for torture, while supporting the other torturing country....


Word!


I am myself an iraqi. I was pro the war to remove saddam, but i am not naive beleiving that US invaded iraq to help the iraqis, i think it was other reasons. Should i be thanksfull to america? For whatm putting sanctions against my country so that 500.000 children could die (un figures)

where do you now live?

[hood]

Sweden

[Mortimer]

i reckon the reason they are showing it is becuase, the havn't found WMDs so they need another justifaction, HR. while it is true that HR abuses were taking place its not the main reason the US went in.

So the media is now using "shock tactics" to make people go 'wow thats pretty insane, lucky we invaded'.

just my $0.02

[hood]

There's a giant laundry list of reasons why the we invaded. WMD was just one in that long list. Does it really matter that one of those reasons in that long list didn't pan out? Is all intelligence accurate? I'm still not seeing how this affects the greater picture here. Is America only supposed to take actions that specifically go against benefitting us all of the time just make guys like you happy? I seriously doubt even that would be good enough. As if someone else wouldn't step into the void of countries who'd profit from our actions or inactions? Those that focus on one or 2 factors and don't see whole canoli have blinders on.

[Jack Mehoff]

some people really gotta get a clue...
or get that screw fitted...eh warchild?

i know the whole torture thing is horrible, but to class it as 'the big reason for invasion'....if that wud be so we could propably invade half the countries in the world, so it's rather hypocrithical to invade on country for torture, while supporting the other torturing country....


Word!


I am myself an iraqi. I was pro the war to remove saddam, but i am not naive beleiving that US invaded iraq to help the iraqis, i think it was other reasons. Should i be thanksfull to america? For whatm putting sanctions against my country so that 500.000 children could die (un figures)
First, US sanction against Saddam is because he would used that money to buy more weapons for his own private army and his own thousand palaces. It's not our fault that he didn't gave a damn about the Iraqis. It's not our fault that he spent all Iraqis money to build his own private palaces and his own army. Maybe you should spend more time blaming Saddam instead of U.S.

Maybe you should support US to remove Saddam because thats the only way for us to lift up sanction against Iraq.

[Mortimer]

There's a giant laundry list of reasons why the we invaded. WMD was just one in that long list. Does it really matter that one of those reasons in that long list didn't pan out? Is all intelligence accurate? I'm still not seeing how this affects the greater picture here. Is America only supposed to take actions that specifically go against benefitting us all of the time just make guys like you happy? I seriously doubt even that would be good enough. As if someone else wouldn't step into the void of countries who'd profit from our actions or inactions? Those that focus on one or 2 factors and don't see whole canoli have blinders on.

no WMDs means none of Americas goddamn business.

theres this thing called international law and state sovereignty, which means no matter how much you hate the way a country runs you can't interfere.

HR are not a pretext for invading a country, and even if it was,the UN uses that discretion, not the US.

The US is not the worlds sheriff. Iraq culd have soughted itself out eventually, its not like the US waited 20 years to do anything about it...whats another 10 or 20?

The sole reason the US invaded Iraq was because of their huge, un-utilised oil supplies end of story and you guys are suckers for letting your gov get away with it so easily.

[Jack Mehoff]

There's a giant laundry list of reasons why the we invaded. WMD was just one in that long list. Does it really matter that one of those reasons in that long list didn't pan out? Is all intelligence accurate? I'm still not seeing how this affects the greater picture here. Is America only supposed to take actions that specifically go against benefitting us all of the time just make guys like you happy? I seriously doubt even that would be good enough. As if someone else wouldn't step into the void of countries who'd profit from our actions or inactions? Those that focus on one or 2 factors and don't see whole canoli have blinders on.

no WMDs means none of Americas goddamn business.

theres this thing called international law and state sovereignty, which means no matter how much you hate the way a country runs you can't interfere.

HR are not a pretext for invading a country, and even if it was,the UN uses that discretion, not the US.

The US is not the worlds sheriff. Iraq culd have soughted itsel out eventually, its not like the US waited 20 years to do anything about it...whats another 10 or 20?

The sole reason the US invaded Iraq was because of their huge, un-utilised oil supplies end of story and you guys are suckers for letting your gov get away with it so easily.

Really?? I have a solution for you, let's withdraw all U.S. troops out of South Korea, Japan, Middle East, Europe. I mean, we are not the policeman of the world after all, right?

[Mortimer]

NK poses an immediate threat to the region, unlike Iraq. and the US arn't the only ones in the NK region, japan, SK and Australia are all there as well.

Yes the US should pull out of the Middle East.

Europe....well all those bases are used for ME operations.....

[Jack Mehoff]

NK poses an immediate threat to the region, unlike Iraq. and the US arn't the only ones in the NK region, japan, SK and Australia are all there as well.

Yes the US should pull out of the Middle East.

Europe....well all those bases are used for ME operations.....

awww!! little boy changes his mind too often. You remind me one of those street punk claimed that they never need policeman, but the first thing they do when they get into trouble is dial 911.


theres this thing called international law and state sovereignty, which means no matter how much you hate the way a country runs you can't interfere.

HR are not a pretext for invading a country, and even if it was,the UN uses that discretion, not the US.

The US is not the worlds sheriff. Iraq culd have soughted itsel out eventually, its not like the US waited 20 years to do anything about it...whats another 10 or 20?

[Mortimer]

If a country poses a threat to your sovereinty then you have the right to interfere........thats just common sense.

i'm saying that Iraq didn't pose a threat, NK does at a much larger scale and they will put up a hell of a fight, hence the US moving for diplomatic resolutions. They didn't give Iraq this much time.

[hood]

theres this thing called international law and state sovereignty, which means no matter how much you hate the way a country runs you can't interfere.

crud.. we should tell all of those aid workers and red cross employees to get out of before they do any more violating.

By mentioning that the oil was the only reason for going in, it shows that you've got those blinders on that I was mentioning. It's one of many reasons that make it worth while. The UN isn't the single authority of the world. There's plenty of things that the UN was against that we or other countries did because it was the right thing to do, where we had little to gain.

The problem with the "the US isn't the world's sheriff" statement is that it doesn't hold water. We're slammed if we act as the policeman, and we're slammed if we sit back and do nothing when something bad happens and we don't do anything. Can't have it both ways. No matter what happens anywhere, SOMEONE gains. It's a harsh statement, but I'd rather it be us than some of the terrorists and evil dictators.

[hood]

The US is moving for diplomatic solutions to the NK crisis because the Clinton administration ****ing failed. If they had not chosen idiotic unilateral appeasement, we wouldn't be where we are now. The idea is to nip the problem in the bud before the guy has nukes. Clinton's people screwed up and now NK has nukes. There is no military solution to be had because it will always involve millions being killed which isn't an option. Diplomacy is the only choice. Iraq by contrast, was militarily solvable without millions more deaths.

[Fargin]

I didn't look at the footage, but it can hardly be any groundbreaking news value. I've never believed being a political prisoner in Iraq could be very entertaining or in US for that matter.

US got capital punishment too and losing ones virginity in a US prison dosn't sound too humane eihter.

I think as Rigor Mortimer said, the released foottage is to move polls and will have an effect, but only in US.

[Mortimer]

i don't agree with that logic

[Mortimer]

plus aid agencie are
NGO's

or NON GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS.......

[hood]

i don't agree with that logic

well now that i've put forth some effort, you have to tell me what part and why you disagree...

[Jack Mehoff]

plus aid agencie are
NGO's

or NON GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS.......

Is that why the terrorists blew up a Red Cross building last week in Iraq?

[Mortimer]

one more thing, in Feb leading up to the war i supported it.

I'm a soldier and the chances of me going to Iraq were small but it was talked about as the Australian gov hadn't decided what it was going to contribute in Feb.

However after a lot of reasoning and research i learnt a great deal about it and came to my own conclusion that it was morally and legally wrong.

Whatever relavence this has i don't know but i said it anyway.

[Jack Mehoff]

theres this thing called international law and state sovereignty, which means no matter how much you hate the way a country runs you can't interfere.


The problem with the "the US isn't the world's sheriff" statement is that it doesn't hold water. We're slammed if we act as the policeman, and we're slammed if we sit back and do nothing when something bad happens and we don't do anything. Can't have it both ways. No matter what happens anywhere, SOMEONE gains. It's a harsh statement, but I'd rather it be us than some of the terrorists and evil dictators.

Exactly!! if U.S. doesn't do something and they will bitch, but if we does something and they still bitch.

In conclusion, they are all bitches.

[Mortimer]

plus aid agencie are
NGO's

or NON GOVERNMENT ORGANISATIONS.......

Is that why the terrorists blew up a Red Cross building last week in Iraq?

what does that have to do with the fact that they are a NGO??....its a war zone of course there are risks of operating there.......

whats your point?

[Mortimer]

give me examples of the US being "slammed" for NOT acting???

[Mortimer]

look i'll help since its taking you so long

i went to google and searched "US criticized"

US criticized for arms buildup
US criticized by EU for death penalty
US Criticized for Rejecting Entry of Cuban Parliamentary Speaker
Resettling Iraqi POWs in US Criticized; Lawmakers Urge Clinton to ...
US Criticized for Abandoning ABM Treaty
casi] US Criticized for Arms Hypocrisy
Boston.com / News / World / Public diplomacy of US criticized
Kuwaitis' arrests by US criticized -DAWN - Top Stories; 31 July, ...
US Criticized Over Lack Of Support For CEDAW
[Imc-nyc-wbix] BTL Q&A: US Criticized for 1st-Strike Doctrine ...


nothing in there about not acting.......

[Mortimer]

lmao

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22US+criticized+for+not+acting%22&meta=

[Jack Mehoff]

rofl do your homework dumbass. Is beginning of WW2 ring a bell? Isolation didn't work very well after what happened in Pearl Harbor, does it?

Let's check my theory shall we? Let's withdraw all U.S. armed forces out of SK, Japan, Middle East, Europe and see how the world will react. I think we will get more than criticism if we actually do that.

[hood]

I should really just have a playbook to constantly pull from when these things come up 30 times a day. The number of times that I've had to research and then explain these things in the last 6 months is mind boggling. I'll write down this forum thread number and just refer everyone to my pre-written statement from now on.

I'll have to look around for specifics, but liberia was one of the recent ones, which we eventually caved in on.

[Mortimer]

rofl do your homework dumbass. Is beginning of WW2 ring a bell? Isolation didn't work very well after what happened in Pearl Harbor, does it?

Let's check my theory shall we? Let's withdraw all U.S. armed forces out of SK, Japan, Middle East, Europe and see how the world will react.

you really are just a muscle head arn't you jack?

IF A COUNTRY THREATENS YOUR SOVEREIGNTY THEN YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO RETALIATE. IRAQ WAS NOT A THREAT TO THE US of A.

NK IS A THREAT TO THE US AND THE ENTIRE REGION. not in ten years not in a month NOW. get it?




As for Liberia, yes the US could have done more....they still did very little.

however maybe they didn't need to because Liberia's neighbours helped.....so bad example Hood sir...sorry.

besides the fact that the circumstances are not even similar

[Jack Mehoff]

Mortimer,

Iraq is not a threat to anybody? Are you sure? Maybe you should spend more time in Kuwait and talk to the people over there.


As for this


Mortimer wrote:
give me examples of the US being "slammed" for NOT acting???


We withdraw all our forces out of SK. NK is going to invade SK. China invade Taiwan. United States sits on our butt and does NOTHING about it. I bet you probably will be the first hoe will come on this board and whine why America does not react.

[Vance]

Mortimer,

Iraq is not a threat to anybody? Are you sure? Maybe you should spend more time in Kuwait and talk to the people over there.
And Iran...

[Mortimer]

that was 10 years ago i am talking NOW............the US helped them under the UN banner....the measures were adequate.........

again....whats your fricken point?

[Mortimer]

Mortimer wrote:
give me examples of the US being "slammed" for NOT acting???


We withdraw all our forces out of SK. NK is going to invade SK. China invade Taiwan. United States sits on our butt and does NOTHING about it. I bet you probably will be the first hoe will come on this board and whine why America does not react.

I have no problem with the US assisting in the NK region......

A
G
A
I
N

you dumbass

NK IS A THREAT. IRAQ IS/WAS NOT


rofl rofl
lol you are the dumbest idiot ever i swear, can you even read?

[Jack Mehoff]

that was 10 years ago i am talking NOW............the US helped them under the UN banner....the measures were adequate.........

again....whats your fricken point?

My freaking point is as much as you don't like Americans and America. You still know that you NEED us more than we NEED you.

Can you imagine how ****ed up the world is going to be if United States decide to stay away from foreign policy and becomes a hermit?

[Jack Mehoff]

Mortimer wrote:
give me examples of the US being "slammed" for NOT acting???


We withdraw all our forces out of SK. NK is going to invade SK. China invade Taiwan. United States sits on our butt and does NOTHING about it. I bet you probably will be the first hoe will come on this board and whine why America does not react.

I have no problem with the US assisting in the NK region......

A
G
A
I
N

you dumbass

NK IS A THREAT. IRAQ IS/WAS NOT


rofl rofl
lol you are the dumbest idiot ever i swear, can you even read?

And yet rofl

First, you said that you don't need America to be the policeman. Now you say you do. rofl




Mortimer wrote:

theres this thing called international law and state sovereignty, which means no matter how much you hate the way a country runs you can't interfere.

HR are not a pretext for invading a country, and even if it was,the UN uses that discretion, not the US.

The US is not the worlds sheriff. Iraq culd have soughted itsel out eventually, its not like the US waited 20 years to do anything about it...whats another 10 or 20?

[Mortimer]

well if the US and Russia didn't **** the whole world over with the cold war we probably wouldn't need the US. they opposed communism, fought it and as a result countries like NK and china have become enemies....

the complexities are huge and we could debate forever about it all and you keep refering to the past.... i am refering to Iraq in 2003 and NK in 2003 and critizing the US on its foreign policy in 2003/04

[Mortimer]

Mortimer wrote:
give me examples of the US being "slammed" for NOT acting???


We withdraw all our forces out of SK. NK is going to invade SK. China invade Taiwan. United States sits on our butt and does NOTHING about it. I bet you probably will be the first hoe will come on this board and whine why America does not react.

I have no problem with the US assisting in the NK region......

A
G
A
I
N

you dumbass

NK IS A THREAT. IRAQ IS/WAS NOT


rofl rofl
lol you are the dumbest idiot ever i swear, can you even read?

And yet rofl

First, you said that you don't need America to be the policeman. Now you say you do. rofl




Mortimer wrote:

theres this thing called international law and state sovereignty, which means no matter how much you hate the way a country runs you can't interfere.

HR are not a pretext for invading a country, and even if it was,the UN uses that discretion, not the US.

The US is not the worlds sheriff. Iraq culd have soughted itsel out eventually, its not like the US waited 20 years to do anything about it...whats another 10 or 20?

Well maybe your right, i have contradicted myself a little.

however my reasoning for my support of the US in NK is this.

If NK nukes japan, imagine the affect on the US and indeed the world economy. Japan's economy is one of the biggest in the world, if it crashed then the implications would be enormous. therefore it would create recessions in many countries. this could be said to affect the sovereignty of the US (even if they didn't directly attackt he US).

Therefore a justifactions to attack/retaliate against NK

[Jack Mehoff]

Mortimer=punk ass who claimed that he doesn't need the police, but he WILL pick up the phone and dial 911 if he gets into trouble.

Mortimer=USA you sucks and blah blah blah. But this is his reaction when the world is **** on him "Can you please spare 50,000 American troops? The Chinese communist invading my country"

'Nuff say

[Mortimer]

no one cares that NK would invade SK
they care that NK would nuke Japan

[Mortimer]

Mortimer=punk ass who claimed that he doesn't need the police, but he WILL pick up the phone and dial 911 if he gets into trouble.

wrong

Australia isn't America :shock: i dial 000

plus that statement is wrong and just shows you can't read.



Mortimer=USA you sucks and blah blah blah. But this is his reaction when the world come to **** "Can you please spare 50,000 American troops? The Chinese communist invading my country"

'Nuff say

wrong again, i don't hate the US i hate the USG.
i was just highlighting the hypocracy of the USG's foreign policy.....again read what i am saying more carefully.


dood i think you better go to wal mart and get some more roids....your getting to smart.......

[Jack Mehoff]

no one cares that NK would invade SK
they care that NK would nuke Japan

And we care because...............???? I thought we are not the worlds sheriff. Let the people who whine about U.S foreign policy take care of that problem on their own :lol:

[Jack Mehoff]

Australia isn't America :shock: i dial 000

plus that statement is wrong and just shows you can't read.


Whatever!! I didn't know "To the left of you somewhere" is Australia. New nick name perhaps?

[hood]

yeah because SK is a total throwback economy wise, and they're hardly a technological hotspot that supplies a very large amount of the world electronics. *sigh*


the complexities are huge and we could debate forever about it all and you keep refering to the past.... i am refering to Iraq in 2003 and NK in 2003 and critizing the US on its foreign policy in 2003/04

This is the problem. If you decide that everything is always in the past, then why do you constantly bring up the US's past actions as the reasoning for your decisions about our current actions? It still boggles my mind as to why you think that our invading Iraq was so completely black and white. NOTHING in this world is so cut and dry.

[Mortimer]

where's HE219 or Tane.....this is boring.........

[Mortimer]

yeah because SK is a total throwback economy wise, and they're hardly a technological hotspot that supplies a very large amount of the world electronics. *sigh*

They don't care nealry as much as they care about Japan....SK is mostly important because of the troops.




the complexities are huge and we could debate forever about it all and you keep refering to the past.... i am refering to Iraq in 2003 and NK in 2003 and critizing the US on its foreign policy in 2003/04



This is the problem. If you decide that everything is always in the past, then why do you constantly bring up the US's past actions as the reasoning for your decisions about our current actions? It still boggles my mind as to why you think that our invading Iraq was so completely black and white. NOTHING in this world is so cut and dry.

I didn't raise it jack did, i was just responding.

and oohhh yes its not black and white. i agree with you there....but not in the same context however ;)

[hood]

I don't think you can write them off that quickly. Sure they're not as big as Japan, but they're as or more economically important than both Australia and Canada, and you wouldn't let them get invaded without doing something about it, right?

Gross domestic product in Billions of USD from oecd.org for 2002

Australia - 541
South Korea - 814
Canada - 940
France - 1644
Japan - 3441
US - 10383

[Jack Mehoff]

I'd say **** the world and let them take care of their own problems. Problem solved woot But then again, bitches like mortimer, doucebag18, spier probably come running in here and condemn why U.S.A. is such an irresponsible superpower because we only sit on our ass and do nothing while the world is in the process of annihilation one another, hypotheically speaking.

Can you imagine how much more money Australia and the rest of Asia have to spend on defense? IF U.S.A decide to withdraw our armed forces out of Japan, Phillipine, South Korea and we don't even give a flying rat ass about Asia.

As much as Mortimer hates to admit this but U.S.'s foreign policy is beneficial for everybody, or at least countries with some form of democratic government. Yes, that include Australia.

[Mortimer]

If it wasn't for the US we wouldn't have to spend money on defence. its only because countries once protected by Russia are now threatened by the US so they need to defend themselves and make themselves heard...simple as.

name one country that was once protected by Russia and isn't now on the "axis of evil"?

The cold war has created this and its largely the US's fault.

and btw its been like 6 hours and you still havn't given me an example of the US being slammed for NOT acting..........

[Herrmannek]

If it wasn't for the US we wouldn't have to spend money on defence. its only because countries once protected by Russia are now threatened by the US so they need to defend themselves and make themselves heard...simple as.

name one country that was once protected by Russia and isn't now on the "axis of evil"?

Poland :)


The cold war has created this and its largely the US's fault.

Don't forget about CCCP.


and btw its been like 6 hours and you still havn't given me an example of the US being slammed for NOT acting..........
recently Liberia.

[MSG Dman]

Hood should creat a "common dumbass questions" section so idiots like dicimus and muttimor can just refer to it before posting their idiotic comments and questions regarding US Policy.

This would save people on this board from having to continually post the same basic information about what the US has done in the past, and why they did it.

This once interesting web site is fast becoming too painful of an experience to waste ones time on.

Is it possible to create a "Jackass" forum that these idiots could use? This way every normal "non-troll" could have interesting discusions about the military without having to wade through their time wasting posts.

[Saranof]

Maybe I should remind you...

The saudi regime has the same torture record as the taliban. But the US support them with money nad weapons.
The US reinstalled the dictator of Kuwait after the 1st gulf war.

I can make a long list...
The point is, do you REALLY belive that the Bush admin gives a S**T about the iraqui people?!?!?
If you do, sorry, but go back to happyville where everyone is nice and do things without economic factors in the backround.

[Saranof]

This is the problem. If you decide that everything is always in the past, then why do you constantly bring up the US's past actions as the reasoning for your decisions about our current actions?


Because if you look to the past, the US has commited more atrocities against humanity than Nazi Germany. For what? Freedom? Oh, you mean supporting the likes of Pinochet?
Nothing is blacj or white, you are right.
But many people here seem to think that the US do things because they are nice.

[Herrmannek]

Men STFU, or move to and live for few years in a country folowing CCCP "humanitarian" standards, and then if you would still think the same as today I will call you Idiots.

USA worst than commies rofl

[Fargin]

What would you guys do without eachothers. Admitt it you guys love this, it helps form you oppinions and prejudices.

[Vance]

Because if you look to the past, the US has commited more atrocities against humanity than Nazi Germany.
Even if that were true, that's not a valid argument, since Nazy Germany was barely 10 years old.

Oh yeah, we sure love to kill off entire races of people. :roll:

[Ichhabe]

Because if you look to the past, the US has commited more atrocities against humanity than Nazi Germany.

Saranof; please say that you said that because you had a little bit to much of Absolute Vodka...

[Jack Mehoff]

If it wasn't for the US we wouldn't have to spend money on defence. its only because countries once protected by Russia are now threatened by the US so they need to defend themselves and make themselves heard...simple as.

name one country that was once protected by Russia and isn't now on the "axis of evil"?

The cold war has created this and its largely the US's fault.

and btw its been like 6 hours and you still havn't given me an example of the US being slammed for NOT acting..........


Here, look below. Do you think U.S.A. should test my theory?



Jack Mehoff wrote:
We withdraw all our forces out of SK. NK is going to invade SK. China invade Taiwan. United States sits on our butt and does NOTHING about it. I bet you probably will be the first hoe will come on this board and SLAM America because we does not react.

Also, remember what happened at the begining of WW2 and Pearl Harbor. Isolation didn't work very,does it?

[Jack Mehoff]

This is the problem. If you decide that everything is always in the past, then why do you constantly bring up the US's past actions as the reasoning for your decisions about our current actions?


Because if you look to the past, the US has commited more atrocities against humanity than Nazi Germany. For what? Freedom? Oh, you mean supporting the likes of Pinochet?
Nothing is blacj or white, you are right.
But many people here seem to think that the US do things because they are nice.

Yes, that's why George Bush is going to commit genocide against Mexican, blacks and asian people living in America. We want America to be a pure White Anglo-Saxon Protestant :roll:

Just STFU if you don't know what the hell are you talking about? Have you ever live under a communist country? because i know I have and i've seen it all. You will enjoy their "humanitarian" standard.

Also, buy a plane ticket and fly to Vietnam and live there for a year like I had. After a year come back here and i'll listen to your opinion. Until you have not done so, just STFU

[hood]

and btw its been like 6 hours and you still havn't given me an example of the US being slammed for NOT acting..........


It's called sleeping... give it a try sometime.

[Mortimer]

still nothing?

[hood]

*sigh* I noticed that I posted facts about other stuff and you completely ignored it. I also noticed that after you demanded proof in other threads, and people finally provided it, you ignored it there too. What's the point of me spending time on this if you ultimately don't care about any facts other than what's already in your head? Not worth my or your time.

[SFontaine]

Let us take a look at a day. A day not too long ago that changed the way the United States Government looks at other countries and potential threats. That day was September 11th, 2001.
Before that day Americans thought "Hey sure some countries/organizations maybe talkin smack bout us and threatining us but what can they do?". We all saw what they can do.
Now don't get me wrong, Morty. I'm not sayin Iraq had anything to do with 9/11 but if you have a country like Iraq that has a history of violence and aggression towards the United States and other countries in the Middle East you look at that country very hard. That's what the US Government did.
They found evidence that said Saddam was building Weapons of Mass Destruction. They acted on it. They didn't want to wake up one morning to another Sept 11. They wanted to keep their country safe. Better safe than sorry. It appears now that they may have been wrong, but it's better than not acting and something actually happening that leaves a couple thousand Americans dead on American soil while at work, again.

Oh and PS


still havn't given me an example of the US being slammed for NOT acting..........
Liberia. The United States didn't wanna get involved but yet people at the UN kept bitching and moaning for the US to go in. Eventually they had to go in, despite their already stretched numbers.

[Jack Mehoff]

Liberia. The United States didn't wanna get involved but yet people at the UN kept bitching and moaning for the US to go in. Eventually they had to go in, despite their already stretched numbers.

Or U.S.A can withdraw our troops from SK, Japan, Middle East, Europe and SAVE American tax payer a **** load of money in the process. I want to see the world whine and moan because they know they will have to spend more of their OWN money for their defense.

[Tiger]

:roll:

US troops in Europe are not there to defend Europeans. Europeans are not small third world countries who can't defend themselves, moron... :bash:

Europe can defend itself WITHOUT the help of USA, you know...We don't need you anymore...In the 50-60s, during the Cold War, yes, but NOT now...

US bases in Europe are just used for Middle East or African operations, not for the defence of Europe...

[Splinter26]

:roll:

US troops in Europe are not there to defend Europeans. Europeans are not small third world countries who can't defend themselves, moron... :bash:

Europe can defend itself WITHOUT the help of USA, you know...We don't need you anymore...In the 50-60s, during the Cold War, yes, but NOT now...

US bases in Europe are just used for Middle East or African operations, not for the defence of Europe...


Isn't it funny how quick they change their minds about US once the **** hits the fan? lol

[Sabre]

Thread's kinda gotten of track.

As to some earlier comments about 'this is why we really went into Iraq', I have this to say:


We went into Iraq 12 years ago.


Did we know then that Saddam's men tortured his people? Yes.


Did we kick him out then? No.



Don't go around thinking you're the only ones trying to help people around the world, or that this action was in response to Sadddam being a baddun. If that were the case, you'd have got rid of him 30 years ago.

If you fail to see my logic, you have your logic switch set to 'American'.


PS: The UK government was no better, we did not act during the 70's and 80's, in fact, just like the US, the UK government continued to support him.

Our government was just as quick to settle for the easy victory in 1991, especially after the 'Road to Basra' incident. It was then that Daddy Bush and Major let the iraqi's and our troops down by not letting them finish him off. I believe that someone already mentioned the tortures after the Basra uprising. Something that only happened because Bush promised help and then turned his back on them.

The reason for going in? Well I would like it to be..."We f***ed this country right up, so here's a better-late-than-never solution"

In reality? George W. Bush involved in a domestic ****-measuring contest with himself. Plus the crazy american need to enforce random ideals with bloody consequences. (ie: gun laws, 'better dead than red')
It's sort of like George W. turning round and saying "Look Paw, I dun s**t myself, but know I half cleaned it up someways...ain't I good paw?"

[rokus2595]

Ahhhha. As Wolfovitz said "WMD was just convenient reason to begin this war".

Ok. North Korea has WMD and ready to use it. And regime also tortures and kills people. Why you didn't begin from Korea?

Answer: Korea doesn't have oil and do not threat Israel directly. And it is REALLY ready to use WMD on any enemy troops invaded.
Yeah, real f*** smart. Let's invade NK and get SK blown to kingdom come, and fight a guerilla war that will last years with more than 5 times the troops Saddam had. :roll:

Yeah, instead we went after Iraq since we know they have no WMD, their army posses no challenge to ours, and besides, they are sitting over the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world......come on people, we didn't go over iraq over WMD, or to go after Saddam Hussein...the real reason was oil, but of course cannnot say that out loud (after all, we are all about democracy and freedoms, and no country that holds those values could commit such a thing as steal someone elses natural resources... :roll: ...so what do we do instead? we keep inventing reasons for the war....and now we say we are doing it to liberate iraq...sure tell that to the guerrillas now attacking us with the support of the great majority of the Iraqis.....They want us out of their land, and the question then becomes how long before we here in the USA realize this.

[Vance]

Ahhhha. As Wolfovitz said "WMD was just convenient reason to begin this war".

Ok. North Korea has WMD and ready to use it. And regime also tortures and kills people. Why you didn't begin from Korea?

Answer: Korea doesn't have oil and do not threat Israel directly. And it is REALLY ready to use WMD on any enemy troops invaded.
Yeah, real f*** smart. Let's invade NK and get SK blown to kingdom come, and fight a guerilla war that will last years with more than 5 times the troops Saddam had. :roll:

Yeah, instead we went after Iraq since we know they have no WMD, their army posses no challenge to ours, and besides, they are sitting over the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world......come on people, we didn't go over iraq over WMD, or to go after Saddam Hussein...the real reason was oil, but of course cannnot say that out loud (after all, we are all about democracy and freedoms, and no country that holds those values could commit such a thing as steal someone elses natural resources... :roll: ...so what do we do instead? we keep inventing reasons for the war....and now we say we are doing it to liberate iraq...sure tell that to the guerrillas now attacking us with the support of the great majority of the Iraqis.....They want us out of their land, and the question then becomes how long before we here in the USA realize this.
rofl


I take the 'oil' bid as a complete joke now.

Are we stealing their oil right now? Or have we already done it? Why are gas prices still rising?
:roll:

[rokus2595]

Ahhhha. As Wolfovitz said "WMD was just convenient reason to begin this war".

Ok. North Korea has WMD and ready to use it. And regime also tortures and kills people. Why you didn't begin from Korea?

Answer: Korea doesn't have oil and do not threat Israel directly. And it is REALLY ready to use WMD on any enemy troops invaded.
Yeah, real f*** smart. Let's invade NK and get SK blown to kingdom come, and fight a guerilla war that will last years with more than 5 times the troops Saddam had. :roll:

Yeah, instead we went after Iraq since we know they have no WMD, their army posses no challenge to ours, and besides, they are sitting over the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world......come on people, we didn't go over iraq over WMD, or to go after Saddam Hussein...the real reason was oil, but of course cannnot say that out loud (after all, we are all about democracy and freedoms, and no country that holds those values could commit such a thing as steal someone elses natural resources... :roll: ...so what do we do instead? we keep inventing reasons for the war....and now we say we are doing it to liberate iraq...sure tell that to the guerrillas now attacking us with the support of the great majority of the Iraqis.....They want us out of their land, and the question then becomes how long before we here in the USA realize this.
rofl


I take the 'oil' bid as a complete joke now.

Are we stealing their oil right now? Or have we already done it? Why are gas prices still rising?
:roll:

and you are just as clueless as the american soldiers in Iraq now.....sad....

[Vance]

And of course, since YOU can't answer MY question, you call me clueless. :roll:

[rokus2595]

hmmm, i guess you really don't know then.
Ok this is how i see it

Are we stealing their oil right now?
We are in the process, but please don't call it stealing, instead what we do is we give our companies complete control over the oil contracts....iraqis dont' get to decided what companies should bid, they have no control over how a natural resource that BELONGS to them, gets administered...but we do..so call it spoils of war if you want.



Why are gas prices still rising?
What does that have to do with the fact that we now control Iraq's oil?? at the end of the day it is you and I paying for it...let the market decide what the price of oil should be, as long as it is us who have access and control over those oil fields

[hood]

Other than haliburton which is in charge of rebuilding the facilities and getting them in working order, please provide proof that Iraqi oil is under contract to US oil companies.

[rokus2595]

Other than haliburton which is in charge of rebuilding the facilities and getting them in working order, please provide proof that Iraqi oil is under contract to US oil companies.




Iraqi Oil: Funding Reconstruction

The U.S. has just recently lined up long-term oil deals with 12 companies around the world in a hastened effort to gain revenue to pay for reconstruction. According to its senior American advisor, Philip Carroll, a former executive of oil giant Royal Dutch Shell, Iraq’s State Oil Marketing Organization, plans to supply an average of 725,000 to 750,000 barrels of oil a day to U.S. firms like ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco, ConocoPhilipps, Marathon and Valero Energy; as well as European giants like Shell, BP, Total, Repsol YPF; the Chinese firm Sinochem; Switzerland-based oil dealer Vitol and Japan's Mitsubishi. (23) The choices of oil contractors seem to be entirely political, with Carroll’s former company on the list, along with National Se curity Advisor Condoleeza Rice’s former firm, Chevron. The contract with BP is may be a partial payback for the United Kingdom’s commitment of combat troops to the U.S.-led war against Hussein’s regime; and the Japanese deal has been discussed as "bait" to lure the Japanese government into supplying personnel for security and policing functions in occupied Iraq. And, of course, while Washington’s man from Royal Dutch Shell exercises veto power over the decisions of the new Iraqi oil ministry, the money for rebuilding Iraq’s devastated oil producing infrastructure goes to **** Cheney’s former company, Halliburton, on a cost-plus basis. (1)


1)"Iraq Lines Up Long-Term Oil Deals," by Chip Cummins, Wall Street Journal, July 29, 2003, company identification provided by Agence France Presse, July 31, 2003. (http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=631)


And keep in mind as you read this that it is the whole process we have under control, from how the contracts are worded, what companies enter this process, and finally, to what companies the contracts go to.

[Macs.]

You are blaming the U.S. for stealing oil ?

Rather the USA has that oil then the iraqis.
BTW why do you blame the U.S. for stealing the oil, it's a re-pay. The USA has to pay for all the military + rebuilding processes.

[spier]

You are blaming the U.S. for stealing oil ?

Rather the USA has that oil then the iraqis.
BTW why do you blame the U.S. for stealing the oil, it's a re-pay. The USA has to pay for all the military + rebuilding processes.AHHAA! And who was it that destroyed the country in the first place? rofl

[hood]

Well, I see 2 things from reading that. First, the although many countries are contributing large amounts of money to Iraq's reconstruction, the US being the largest contributor, a lot of the money still needs to come from somewhere. The oil will help pay for that, and isn't only going to US firms as is stated above. Secondly, all of these Iraq based agencies will be turned over to the Iraqis once they have a government in place and the idea that we have total control over such things will fade significantly. 5 years from now, when Iraq is firmly on its own 2 feet, and elections have been held, this will become a non-issue.

[Vance]

You are blaming the U.S. for stealing oil ?

Rather the USA has that oil then the iraqis.
BTW why do you blame the U.S. for stealing the oil, it's a re-pay. The USA has to pay for all the military + rebuilding processes.AHHAA! And who was it that destroyed the country in the first place? rofl
Saddam?

[One?]

You are blaming the U.S. for stealing oil ?

Rather the USA has that oil then the iraqis.
BTW why do you blame the U.S. for stealing the oil, it's a re-pay. The USA has to pay for all the military + rebuilding processes.AHHAA! And who was it that destroyed the country in the first place? rofl
Saddam?

Saddam did not drop MOABs on Iraq or Cluster bombs all over the place. He killed the people without destryong the surroundings.

[Ratamacue]

There really wasn't all that much to be destroyed by us.

[One?]

There really wasn't all that much to be destroyed by us.


The constant misslies and bombs that were dropped on baghdad by the thousands isnt much eh?

[Ratamacue]

There's a reason why they're called precision munitions.

[Haiw]

There's a reason why they're called precision munitions.
because whatever you do, they always hit the ground? ;)

[Vance]

You are blaming the U.S. for stealing oil ?

Rather the USA has that oil then the iraqis.
BTW why do you blame the U.S. for stealing the oil, it's a re-pay. The USA has to pay for all the military + rebuilding processes.AHHAA! And who was it that destroyed the country in the first place? rofl
Saddam?

Saddam did not drop MOABs on Iraq or Cluster bombs all over the place. He killed the people without destryong the surroundings.
Heads up, MOABs weren't us during the war.

[spier]

You are blaming the U.S. for stealing oil ?

Rather the USA has that oil then the iraqis.
BTW why do you blame the U.S. for stealing the oil, it's a re-pay. The USA has to pay for all the military + rebuilding processes.AHHAA! And who was it that destroyed the country in the first place? rofl
Saddam? :roll:
If you check out pre-war(GW1) then Iraq was doing pretty nicely under Saddam. Then the constant bombing for 12 years and the sanctions kinda brought the country back to the stone age.

[Vance]

You are blaming the U.S. for stealing oil ?

Rather the USA has that oil then the iraqis.
BTW why do you blame the U.S. for stealing the oil, it's a re-pay. The USA has to pay for all the military + rebuilding processes.AHHAA! And who was it that destroyed the country in the first place? rofl
Saddam? :roll:
If you check out pre-war(GW1) then Iraq was doing pretty nicely under Saddam. Then the constant bombing for 12 years and the sanctions kinda brought the country back to the stone age.
Oh yeah, there was a little thing where he INVADED KUWAIT....maybe if the monumental **** wouldn't of done that, we wouldn't of bombed his country. Have a good one, and just some thoughts....

[One?]

No one knows for sure if the MOAB was used or not. 2 Republican Guard brigades were wiped out of existance during the airport seige (the were coming down from the north and no one knows what happened to them).


Regardless the US used depleted Uranium and Cluster bombs. Depleted Uranium alone is still killing children from the 91 war do they realy need more radiation in Iraq?

[Ratamacue]

I don't believe there is any hard proof that depleted uranium is causing all those deaths in Iraq.

[Vance]

No one knows for sure if the MOAB was used or not. 2 Republican Guard brigades were wiped out of existance during the airport seige (the were coming down from the north and no one knows what happened to them).

Wasn't that just a rumor? That there were extra RG brigades coming down from the north? Or so I heard.

[spier]

I don't believe there is any hard proof that depleted uranium is causing all those deaths in Iraq.No proof that is officially accepted by the US government that is. However, the fact that US equipment that fell victim to friendly DU fire was taken off the battlefield by men in full NBC gear, that shipped the equipment off to special decontamination facilities in the US might be a subtle hint towards DU not exactly being harmless. Oh, and the 150% percent increase in leukemia and other raditation related dieseases in areas where DU weapons were used in the first gulf war might also be a hint..

Oh yeah, there was a little thing where he INVADED KUWAIT....maybe if the monumental **** wouldn't of done that, we wouldn't of bombed his country. Have a good one, and just some thoughts....Kuwait was violating Iraqi territory and the American embassy practically gave him the green light to do what he wanted. You can look it up if you want.

[Argyll]

I have a doubt ,a serious doubt about so called combat efectivness,the buzz word used by CENTCOM,during the ground war.
The reports about the complete destruction of never mind RG Brigades but regular Brigades would out the death toll to well over 20-30 thousand enemy KIA,and did we see the mass of bodies littering the battlefields,in their thousands.....not a peep,by my recogning no bodies ........no proof!

Have you all forgotten that NATO and the US categorically stated that they destroyed the Yugoslav Army in Kosovo,and that it no longer posed a threat in the TAO,only to see hundreds of Tanks and APC'c pull put of there after the negotiated surrender,and that the subsequent follow up investigation revealed that the bombing accuracy was absoloute crap!!
The RAF came in for some severe criticism over this!!
How many times has it been said that the "media" are seldom right,and not to believe the vast majority of their reports.
Can the same not be said about CENTCOM and the Pentagon?
In essence here are we truly to believe that these Brigades were "vapourised" into thin air,or did they do like the rest of the Iraqi Army and drop their kit,and regroup and fight a guerilla war against the invaders?.See this worries me,as I felt that the ground war was just way too easy,the euphoria that was seen ,was understandably high,but now is the time to be even more wary and vigilant,250,000 RG and Iraqi Special Forces don't just give up the ghost!!

[hood]

If you check out pre-war(GW1) then Iraq was doing pretty nicely under Saddam.

A crap-load of people who managed to escape Iraq would beg to differ, along with all the people in the mass graves, the countless women that his son Qusay raped... the list goes on. As usual, truthout.org reading people are only interested in half the truth.

[Argyll]

True Hood,but there are a good few countries where HR borders on the insane!
Iraq was just one of many,look how long it took to act against Serbia,where ethnic cleansing took place for years,Rapes and mutilations were reported for years and we all,the Wet turned a blind eye to it,and I'm ashamed of that!
For 40 years Saddams has carried out this reign of terror,and it's taken the best part of these 40 years to say enough is enough!!.....come on why did it take so long,why did his neighbours not feel the need to do something?
We the Coalition asked them to rise up and rebel in 91,then we hung the poor bas*ards out to dry,that's totally shamefull Hood,and we wonder why the Sunni's are fighting so hard against occupation?

[Fargin]

Actually you should read up on Iraq pre-the wars and sanctions.

[One?]

The sudden disappearance of the RG brigades is still a mystery. And supposdly the Iraqi Command announced that there will be a huge battle that night to regain the airport.


From reports that came after the war the Arab/Muslim fighters were sent to the airport to fight along with the fadeyan and there were 2 brigades coming down from the North to support them.

Some claimed to have entered the airport and more than one person said that they have killed americans. I dont know wether to believe that but the documantry showed more than one iraqi from all over iraq that supposdly fought the battle of the airport. And they all claimed to have killed american soldeirs (in a not so human way).

And the US said that they will use "tactical weapons" or I think they were "tactical nukes" (can't remember the exact term). And suddenly the 2 brigades disappeared and no one knows what happened to the commanders, or the soldeirs, or the equipment.


If they did indeed drop a MOAB on that brigade then you will not be able to find any remains to those soldiers.

[Vance]

If they did drop the MOAB there would be a huge hole in the ground.

[Jack Mehoff]

You are blaming the U.S. for stealing oil ?

Rather the USA has that oil then the iraqis.
BTW why do you blame the U.S. for stealing the oil, it's a re-pay. The USA has to pay for all the military + rebuilding processes.AHHAA! And who was it that destroyed the country in the first place? rofl
Saddam?

Saddam did not drop MOABs on Iraq or Cluster bombs all over the place. He killed the people without destryong the surroundings.

rofl

rofl chemical weapon doesn't destroy your surrounding? Sure, it's only make women give birth to two headed children and some other complication, it ****ed up the water supply, it cost a **** load of money just to disinfected it the area, people get all kind of nasty cancer. At least you can rebuild buildings when blow up with conventional weapon. Chemical weapons? good ****ing luck


I'm from northern Utah and i live like 60 miles from U.S. Army Desertet Chemical Depot and Dugway Proving Ground. I think i've seen enough southern Utahns got cancer from all that chemical **** they tested out in DCD and Dugway Proving Ground.

Honestly, i think you bitch too much. We used our smart bombs to take out military targets and Saddam used his chemical weapon just to kill as many Kurds. If we want to level Baghdad to the stone age with conventional bombs, no problemo but we didn't.

[Fioraon]

Good call rokus2595, you're so right. This war was all about "Oil" because without oil life in Iraq would end as we know it. Iraq needs that oil to provide for its people as any country should. Without it, there would be nothing. Iraqi's dont farm, dont mine, dont make silicon chips, **** they dont even make WMD's anymore. They drill.

Of course anyone with a brain would use this as a tool. A tool for Iraq, a tool for the world.

So what, we fought a war that had a large deal of oil about it. But explain to me how the **** that justifies not going to war with Saddam please. Everyone wins cept for that thug of a Saddam (And of course nations that oppossed a better society for Iraqi's and at home, Its a power thing.)

Cheers

[hahaha]

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...............
Honestly who gives a **** - as if any of you can ever truly understand what goes on over there or anywhere else in the world.

[[AFSOC]]

Dude shut the hell up.....

There human beings too, show some God damn respect......

[Kingpin]

The sudden disappearance of the RG brigades is still a mystery. And supposdly the Iraqi Command announced that there will be a huge battle that night to regain the airport.

From reports that came after the war the Arab/Muslim fighters were sent to the airport to fight along with the fadeyan and there were 2 brigades coming down from the North to support them.

Some claimed to have entered the airport and more than one person said that they have killed americans. I dont know wether to believe that but the documantry showed more than one iraqi from all over iraq that supposdly fought the battle of the airport. And they all claimed to have killed american soldeirs (in a not so human way).


From Russian source (published 6 April 2003 20:00 Moscow time):

A hard situation has formed near the international airport. The day before yesterday the Iraqi minister of propaganda claimed that the coalition forces in this region would have been eliminated by this morning, and the Iraqi command ordered to storm the airport. At 10am it was attacked by 3 Republican Guards battalions enforced with militia troops.

Americans requested artillery and aviation support. The battle lasted for almost 6 hours. After several unsuccessful attacks Iraqis managed to drive Americans back from the second runway to the airport building. Currently the coalition forces control the building itself and the new runway bordering to it. During the day the foes had to increase their strengths and deploy reinforcements. By the evening up to 2 regular Iraqi brigades and 2 thousand militiamen were fighting for the airport. Americans had to use all available forces of the 3rd Mechanized Division and 101st Airborne Division to repulse the attacks. Only assault aircraft and battle helicopters made more than 300 operation flights to this region.

During the fight Iraqis lost up to 20 tanks, 10 APC, about 200 men killed and up to 300 wounded. The American losses were up to 30 men killed, about 50 wounded, at least 4 tanks, 4 ARC and 1 helicopter. But it is impossible to obtain the exact data yet. By this hour there have been more than 20 flights for evacuation of killed and wounded coalition soldiers and the command have requested ambulance aviation again.

[Royal]

Iraqi's dont farm, dont mine, dont make silicon chips, **** they dont even make WMD's anymore. They drill.

They don't farm? You've never been to Iraq then? :cantbeli:

[hood]

Iraqi's dont farm, dont mine, dont make silicon chips, **** they dont even make WMD's anymore. They drill.

They don't farm? You've never been to Iraq then? :cantbeli:

:) Half the country is lush greenery as can be seen in photos like this one:



http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/gulf_war_2_iraqi_freedom_army_special_forces/ussf19.jpg

[Argyll]

Wow look at the size of these Mushrooms!!
Nice pic Hood!!

[Seoulstriker]

Iraq is in the heart of the Tigris-Euphrates river valley. It's been lusciously green and agriculturally based for 3000 years. ;)

[Russian Texan]

Wasn't this post about Saddam's Men torturing Iraqis? Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't torture part of the justice system in most muslim countries? I remember reading somewhere that Iraq (before the invasion) had one of the lowest crime rates in the world due to the fear of punishment, i.e. if you steal they chop off you hand. Granted that torture was applied for political reasons to but...
Now look at US: overcrowded prisons, overbloated beaurocratic judicial system and so on. Do any of you know how much money gov spends on putting a person in jail? Do any of you know how much money it costs to upkeep one inmate a year? Look up the number, you'd be surprised - a lot of americans don't make that much, in fact most americans don't make that much. I'm not saying that choping off hands is the way to go, but...just some food for thought ;)

[ST4]

Gess, some threads, such as this one, go off on tangents to disrepecting other people and calling them stupid or gay. Why do some people on this site hate one another...

No wonder why there are so many problems in the world... no one can get along with another.

The video is probably nothing compared to the real horrific treatment of the Iraqi people.

Man's inhumanity to man :(

[hood]

I'm not saying that choping off hands is the way to go, but...

Actually by making that post, you are.