You know Iraq is in trouble...

d0b33

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
17,462
911 el sicko!

Are you an @sshat for a living...
FFS why are you bringing up 911

I never opposed the war in Afghanistan (I agreed with the US going after Bin-laden), I oppose the Iraq invasion (which is an illegal invasion)
 

NewsFlash

Banned
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
584
Are you an @sshat for a living...
FFS why are you bringing up 911

I never opposed the war in Afghanistan (I agreed with the US going after Bin-laden), I oppose the Iraq invasion (which is an illegal invasion)

Illegal in who's eyes. Must USA wait for the nukes before they take action. Ag please man wake up. Stop bluffing yourself. USA had the same reasons for both invasions. Crimes to humanity. For Iraq they had just one additional reason, their will to want to nuke USA.
 

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
62,475
Are you an @sshat for a living...
FFS why are you bringing up 911

I never opposed the war in Afghanistan (I agreed with the US going after Bin-laden), I oppose the Iraq invasion (which is an illegal invasion)

I wonder if Kilo was for the war in Afghanistan.
 

supersunbird

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 1, 2005
Messages
60,142
Illegal in who's eyes. Must USA wait for the nukes before they take action. Ag please man wake up. Stop bluffing yourself. USA had the same reasons for both invasions. Crimes to humanity. For Iraq they had just one additional reason, their will to want to nuke USA.

Crimes against humanity? Hahaha! They dont take this gungho approach with Sudan or Zimbabwe.

More people have now died since the US invasion in Iraq than Saddam ever killed, so should we invade the US for these crimes against humanity?
 

NewsFlash

Banned
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
584
So alan85: in 100 words or less tell me your alternative. You would like the apartheid government to still be in power?

Or in fact take as many words as you want. I am still waiting for answers to any question ever asked you. You sir are a troll. You have no answers, no solutions and in fact nothing to say.
As I said before regards to Iraq, sometimes you need the minority with power and brains to keep the majority at bay if they cannot control themselves. The way we go at the moment in South Africa I wonder. What was really justifiable? You can only have one king in the country and it is normally the one with the biggest guns. Lesson from history.
 

d0b33

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
17,462
Illegal in who's eyes. Must USA wait for the nukes before they take action. Ag please man wake up. Stop bluffing yourself. USA had the same reasons for both invasions. Crimes to humanity. For Iraq they had just one additional reason, their will to want to nuke USA.

Not the same... let me make this simpler ok... ready

911 Hijackers attacked the US > Bin-laden responsible, US go after Bin-laden in Afghanistan

Iraq/Saddam not been hostile or a threat since the 90's > US makes up false premises to Invade Iraq, Invade without consent from UN and even while there's heavy global protesting

BIG difference
 

NewsFlash

Banned
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
584
Crimes against humanity? Hahaha! They dont take this gungho approach with Sudan or Zimbabwe.

More people have now died since the US invasion in Iraq than Saddam ever killed, so should we invade the US for these crimes against humanity?
Ag shame, another guesser, where is the source. The people dying in Iraq is due to internal hate, nothing to do with USA. But I think yo cannot count.
More people die in South Africa because of stupidity. Should we not impede Mbeki and his goons? About invading we cannot even invade a piss in a can-fruit bottle as they would jump positions to defraud the supplier.
 

d0b33

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
17,462
Ag shame, another guesser, where is the source. The people dying in Iraq is due to internal hate, nothing to do with USA. But I think yo cannot count.
More people die in South Africa because of stupidity. Should we not impede Mbeki and his goons? About invading we cannot even invade a piss in a can-fruit bottle as they would jump positions to defraud the supplier.

Source? LOL
I really don't feel like debating any more, I'll let google do the rest of the debating (with sources)
 

d0b33

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
17,462
Is there any proof that riverbend is an Iraqi lady?
It could just be an anti-war blogger with good resources
 

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
62,475
Crimes against humanity? Hahaha! They dont take this gungho approach with Sudan or Zimbabwe.

More people have now died since the US invasion in Iraq than Saddam ever killed, so should we invade the US for these crimes against humanity?

Self defense is more like it. Unfortunately for you the threats to the U.S are threats to you as well. Regarding Sudan, I don't think the U.S sees them as bigger problem than the Middle East at the moment and even less so for Zimbabwe. But where is the U.N?

Source please and how money of those were killed by Saddam loyalists?
 
Last edited:

Xarog

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
19,039
Ag shame, another guesser, where is the source. The people dying in Iraq is due to internal hate, nothing to do with USA. But I think yo cannot count.
More people die in South Africa because of stupidity. Should we not impede Mbeki and his goons? About invading we cannot even invade a piss in a can-fruit bottle as they would jump positions to defraud the supplier.

How about the 1 million Iraqi children who died from preventable diseases because of barbaric trade embargoes that denied them vital medicines?

How is that not a crime against humanity?
 

Alan

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
62,475
How about the 1 million Iraqi children who died from preventable diseases because of barbaric trade embargoes that denied them vital medicines?

How is that not a crime against humanity?

Sanctions were wrong. They should have gone in after Gulf War 1 and removed Saddam but of course certain people were already huffy over Desert Storm :rolleyes:

But sanctions involded Clinton and the U.N:sick: . Also wasn't Kofie's son investigated for receiving money from a key contractor in the oil-for-food program.
 

kilo39

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,425
Sanctions were wrong. They should have gone in after Gulf War 1 and removed Saddam but of course certain people were already huffy over Desert Storm :rolleyes:

I wonder if this is really true? Perhaps an equally valid position would be "they didn't want to unseat their buddy, just kick him out of Kuwait."

But sanctions involded Clinton and the U.N:sick: . Also wasn't Kofie's son investigated for receiving money from a key contractor in the oil-for-food program.
I've said it a dozen times. What is it with the bush trolls: do they randomly make stuff up or do they just dream it to themselves? Anything to justify their sordid reality?

On August 6, 1990 the U.N. Security Council adopted Resolution 661 which imposed stringent economic sanctions on Iraq, providing for a full trade embargo, excluding medical supplies, food and other items of humanitarian necessity, these to be determined by the Security Council sanctions committee. After the end of the 1991 Gulf War, Iraqi sanctions were linked to removal of Weapons of mass destruction by Resolution 687.[1].

The United Nations economic sanctions were imposed at the urging of the U.S. to remove Saddam Hussein from power. President George H. W. Bush stated: "By making life uncomfortable for the Iraqi people, [sanctions] would eventually encourage them to remove President Saddam Hussein from power"

Iraq sanctions

Self defense is more like it. Unfortunately for you the threats to the U.S are threats to you as well.
Self defense? Against what? Oh ya, the wmd that didn't exist that they were going to deliver by ICBM. Please. Where do you get this stuff from? Ya, the terrorists of 911 were Iraqi! Duh. But then again maybe they were actually Saudi? But lets not spoil a pretend reality.

I wonder if Kilo was for the war in Afghanistan.
America went into Afghanistan on the basis of 911. If we accept 911 then it was legit. But then again 911 could possibly be the biggest hoax of all (but then you guys like hoaxes.)

and others:

Is there any proof that riverbend is an Iraqi lady?
It could just be an anti-war blogger with good resources
Where's any proof that she isn't. Anti-war blogger with good resources? Another dream world. The difference: trolls can't tell truth from lies even though both are easily verifiable. (In fact they prefer to make it up as they go along, much easier that way, they don't have to do any work; just lap it up.)

Illegal in who's eyes. Must USA wait for the nukes before they take action. Ag please man wake up. Stop bluffing yourself. USA had the same reasons for both invasions. Crimes to humanity. For Iraq they had just one additional reason, their will to want to nuke USA.
Um, what nukes would that be? Oooh ya, the Iranian nukes. Right. Must be in that big nuke factory they built outside Tehran. Ja, they are also going to fire an ICBM just like Iraq. :rolleyes:

and for OT:

Well to save us going way of topic for now I'll say just this. You didn't have to vote ANC. They were going to win anyway and you were just increasing their majority hence their power. But no you fell hook,line and sinker.

Here we go with this old troll story just because I differ in opinion to you:rolleyes: .

*sigh*
You have no idea of my circumstances therefore don't draw erroneous conclusions based on your assumptions. (Seems you do that a lot.)
 

NewsFlash

Banned
Joined
Dec 8, 2006
Messages
584
America went into Afghanistan on the basis of 911. If we accept 911 then it was legit. But then again 911 could possibly be the biggest hoax of all (but then you guys like hoaxes.)

Um, what nukes would that be? Oooh ya, the Iranian nukes. Right. Must be in that big nuke factory they built outside Tehran. Ja, they are also going to fire an ICBM just like Iraq. :rolleyes:

Just wake up. The stupidity of some guys on this forum is beyond comprehension. I said they want or wish to nuke them. I did not state they have nukes. But if they had they would have used it. It would have come some time in the future as Iran is striving for now.

What an @ss, 911 a hoax. Maybe the towers was never there it was a mirage image produced by the USA. C'mon get real.
 

kilo39

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,425
Since this appears to be the crux of your argument, I'll address this section.

Let's assume for a moment that the US invasion was illegal. The American people were duped, Bush is a big fat liar, etc. So what? So does that mean the US should give up and go home? What would that accomplish? To paraphrase your post, if you look at the situation TODAY it remains imperative to US foreign policy (for reasons I have stated above) that they ride it out in Iraq as long as possible.
You guys just don't get it do you?

Civil war? Thanks to whom? I already addressed this, but I think I demonstrated clearly that the US did NOT cause the Sunni-Shia conflict in Iraq. Nothing in the facts suggest this. And why would they? 40 bodies a day--killed by whom? Shias and Sunnis. Excluding tragic incidents like Haditha, American troops are only shooting in self-defense or at insurgents.
Exactly. Now let's think very hard: if america hadn't removed Saddam would this situation be true. No. And we all conveniently forget Iraq was a democracy, twisted that it was. Did the Iraq's ask america to invade? No. No doubt Saddam was a scourge but that scourge was installed by america and his barbarity could have been defeated in other ways besides full scale war and the illegal invasion of a country. As to right now: america's presence gives these forces a reason to come out of the woodwork and gives global forces a very direct easy target. America should leave now. Can the country be in any worse state than it is now? Perhaps it would fall into total civil war but there are other avenues available (nato or un troops) under mandate: of course we will just ignore these avenues and wring our hands about "what choice do we have," while ignoring any feasible alternate. And don't tell me multinational forces are in Iraq. Point is: they have no authority.

I will say however that at this point, I believe the idealistic American vision of an Iraqi democracy is not possible. Perhaps, however, under the guidance of a US-backed benevolent dictator democracy can be introduced.
Ja, dictators are always good. :rolleyes:
 

Nanfeishen

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
8,936
Politics , wars, Iraq, the U.S. , games of state, that the pawns are forced to play and suffer for. Terrorism,has been around for years, its not the global threat its made out to be simple and straight foreward.
The following links may be for an anti-war lobby , but they make some rather good points:
On the legality of the situation
http://www.antiwar.com/roberts/?articleid=10258
For the poor sods who dont have a choice:
http://www.antiwar.com/glantz/?articleid=10262
On the creation of "the Man" read the footnotes
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20070102_robert_scheer_a_monster_of_our_creation/

Just my two cents worth , and beyond that , not particularly bothered or concerned by the "war on terror", because there will always be a cause or a "threat" to western democracy, always some "enemy" to throw at the gullible masses to garner support for some or other political or economic lie, it is all just a sick game, and unfortunately not enough people ignore it.
This conflict will go on and on, the opportunity for leaving has come and gone, all i will say is i pity the boys and girls, who will have to endure the consequences of blindly following their orders, on both sides, who will ultimately be the biggest loosers, and the innocents who have no choice but to bear the brunt of being pawns in these games of state.
 

kilo39

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,425
Just wake up. The stupidity of some guys on this forum is beyond comprehension. I said they want or wish to nuke them. I did not state they have nukes. But if they had they would have used it. It would have come some time in the future as Iran is striving for now.

First: they didn't. And they don't. And even if they did they don't/didn't/haven't the technology to deliver an ICBM against america. So america invaded because the nukes they never had they would have used if they had them: (at some future time.) Can you see how flawed your logic is? Never mind that the country was on its knees, it was verified over and over again they didn't and the Iraqi's swore they never had them (or had any future intention to get them, not that they had the ability in the first place, ever, well certainly after the Israelis kicked their butt way back in ?? 1981.) A bit like Iran. But let's sort them out as well 'cause they could just get nukes that they would use at some future time perhaps (even though all evidence is contrary to this assumption?) World diplomacy in action according to the trolls.

:D

What an @ss, 911 a hoax. Maybe the towers was never there it was a mirage image produced by the USA. C'mon get real.
Coulda, woulda, shoulda. Dumb and dumber. Which part of my posts are invisible to you? The bit about Condeliza saying No, not true. Or the bit about Iraq having nothing to do with 911? Or the bit about LIED to the world and the UN? Who's the blind one here that lives by mirages? (Let's not even mention the stupid word.) :D (or comprehension) :D

:sick:
 

d0b33

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 16, 2004
Messages
17,462
Just wake up. The stupidity of some guys on this forum is beyond comprehension. I said they want or wish to nuke them. I did not state they have nukes. But if they had they would have used it. It would have come some time in the future as Iran is striving for now.

What an @ss, 911 a hoax. Maybe the towers was never there it was a mirage image produced by the USA. C'mon get real.

Militias hijacked Saddam's execution, claims government official
http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=15732007

So the militia men(the people who are considered the enemy by the US and the world) hung Saddam, so all along you're supporting the terrorists
LOL

FFS show some respect to your elders, Kilo's been here long before you showed up
 
Top