Just dont pay attention to what these lying Kurds have to say

http://wbt.com/news/detail_ap.cfm;jsessionid=96304997d8c467144153TR?ap_id=D8JLGI300

Quote :

""The villagers were blinded and they were vomiting - only God knows what it was like that night," said Najiba Khider Ahmed, a 41-year-old woman from Sheik Wasan. She described being held in a detention camp for nine days, where her brother and niece disappeared. "During those nine days, it was like the apocalypse. Even Hitler didn't do this," she said, breaking down into tears repeatedly. "Saddam Hussein used to shout about 'the Iraqi People.' If we were his people, why did he bomb us with all sorts of weapons?" She said she had two pregnancies after the attack - the baby in the first was born with skin peeling off, and the second miscarried, born with malformed limbs, which she blamed on the gas attacks. Another survivor, Ali Mostafa Hama, said the chemical bombs let off "greenish smoke. It was if there was a rotten apple or garlic smell minutes later. People were vomiting ... we were blind and screaming. There was no one to rescue us. Just God." Hama, wearing a traditional Kurdish headdress, said he saw a newborn die during the bombardment. "The infant was trying to smell life, but he breathed in the chemicals and died," he said, speaking in Kurdish with an Arabic translator. "

8/22/2006 10:56:09 AM

Lock.

Terminate.

8/22/2006 11:02:27 AM

I mean, I agree that Saddam was a dick and all, but why is it the US's responsibility to save them from him? I think our government's responsibility is to Americans, and only Americans. My tax dollars don't belong over there unless there is a legitimate threat to our nation.

[Edited on August 22, 2006 at 11:04 AM. Reason : ag]

8/22/2006 11:03:42 AM

I don't think you can judge the status of an entire nation based on this testimony alone....so I think the title is a little misleading. Maybe their lives are better, but what about the nation as a whole?

...im not trying to dispute or agree with the idea...I just think its silly to make such a broad statement based on a few people's testimony.

[Edited on August 22, 2006 at 11:08 AM. Reason : df]

8/22/2006 11:07:40 AM

yeah, we should have left Hitler to rule europe too

just this time we stopped it years before it started

8/22/2006 11:09:18 AM

but lets be honest here, we didnt get involved in that war until the axis brought it to us.

8/22/2006 11:10:10 AM

correct, but what if we could have just invaded germany 10 years before

france and most of the world would hate us, but they would be better off

8/22/2006 11:11:47 AM

so when Kuwait requested our help in 1991 we just shouldve told them 'no' ?

8/22/2006 11:11:53 AM

Quote :

"correct, but what if we could have just invaded germany 10 years before france and most of the world would hate us, but they would be better off "

maybe, but maybe not. hindsight is 20/20. my belief in our foreign policy is that we shouldnt be a police to the world. if we are asked to help, then we should take it on a case by case basis, but we shouldnt impose our will on other nations. of course things are different if a war is brought to us. i realize this is strictly my opinion, and neither right or wrong, but thats how i will vote if a decision comes down to that issue.

[Edited on August 22, 2006 at 11:24 AM. Reason : df]

8/22/2006 11:21:50 AM

good thing we didnt try to police bin laden when we had him captured

8/22/2006 11:23:34 AM

Quote :

"My tax dollars don't belong over there unless there is a legitimate threat to our nation."

there are several reasons why we cared about the well being of the Iraqis more than we did the Rwandans.

8/22/2006 11:24:51 AM

yes, we attacked a weak country with a leader that wanted world power, the same thing that Germany was

could Saddam have risen to a global threat, maybe, maybe not

although on that logic, why havent we attacked N Korea or Iran, if only they had humiliated the first Pres. Bush too

8/22/2006 11:25:26 AM

humiliated = attempted to assassinate?

8/22/2006 11:26:21 AM

Quote :

"there are several reasons why we cared about the well being of the Iraqis more than we did the Rwandans. "

none of which i would consider a "legitimate threat to our nation"

[Edited on August 22, 2006 at 11:32 AM. Reason : d]

8/22/2006 11:31:54 AM

so we should've just let them continuously break UN sanctions with no consequences?

8/22/2006 11:38:07 AM

I would think that's for the UN to deal with.

8/22/2006 11:39:13 AM

what is the UN supposed to do, say "hey Iraq...I know you've been doing whatever you wanted and not paying attention to our sanctions which were voted on by numerous countries...so we will ask you again...please abide by our sanctions"

8/22/2006 11:40:20 AM

But that still does not explain why it's our job to enforce UN sanctions. Did the UN ask us to invade?

8/22/2006 11:44:31 AM

we're there so that we can eventually cut our dependance on Saudi Arabia

8/22/2006 11:44:37 AM

Quote :

"I don't think you can judge the status of an entire nation based on this testimony alone....so I think the title is a little misleading. Maybe their lives are better, but what about the nation as a whole? ...im not trying to dispute or agree with the idea...I just think its silly to make such a broad statement based on a few people's testimony."

EXACTLY.

TreeTwista is an idiot.

What's so good about Iraq right now?

Oh I know, here is something that's getting better:

May: 2,500 dead
June: 3,000 dead
July: 3,500 dead (1500 in Baghdad)
Aug: 4,000 dead???

Men, women, children and the elderly are being blown up when they are shopping in vegetable markets, or when they are praying in mosques.

Bodies are being found of abducted laborers with single gunshout wounds to the back of the head.

People lining up to join the police force are being sprayed upon with bullets.

Yeah, that's so much better than what Saddam gave to his people.

Hey, at least Saddam was onlu killing certain races, or people in certain regions.

But now, the whole country is a killing field with nearly all races and groups killing each other.

[Edited on August 22, 2006 at 11:47 AM. Reason : ]

8/22/2006 11:45:33 AM

those people should really stop killing each other

8/22/2006 11:50:06 AM

Quote :

"Hey, at least Saddam was onlu killing certain races, or people in certain regions"

8/22/2006 11:51:57 AM

for some reason, it's so easy to be Hitler these days

8/22/2006 11:54:22 AM

Yes, they should stop killing each other.

There is this thread in the lounge "Have you thanked a soldier lately".

Some starry eyed stupid chick said this in the thread:

Quote :

""But he also said that Iraq is a fantastic country that will be 1st world in the some-what near future, as soon as they get out all the bottled up rage from being in an oppressive regime." "

And, my response:

Quote :

"Wow, just wow. 14,000 people who should be alive right now are dead (Jan-July). Out of those, 5,600 died in May and June. Car/suicide bombings of markets and people waiting in line to enlist in the police/army are killing 20-30 like every other day. These people hate each other completely, more than they hate the Americans for invading their country. Saddam was evil but he was needed, at least for the near-future, until those people can stop hating each other. I have talked to several Iraqis, and though they all hate Saddam, they say he was a necessary evil, because he prevented the Shiites and Sunnis from decimating each other. I think the vast majority of the world's population would pick the Saddam option rather than the civil war right now, if living in Iraq. At least under Saddam, your life and limb were secure, unless you spoke up against him. But now, women and children are being massacred while buying vegetables EVERY FUCKING SINGLE DAY. FIRST-WORLD, HERE IRAQ COMES. FUCKING LOONEY TUNE APPLE PIE IGNORAMUS. Saddam was evil but he was needed, at least for the near-future, until those people can stop hating each other. That's THE FUCKING CONCEPT some Americans can't fathom even in the slightest. These cheery nubile idiots think democracy is the way to go in every country. BUT IT IS NOT, not at this instant. In some countries (READ: Arab countries), you NEED the King/Sultan/Military ruler to keep people from killing each other, until people themselves warm to the idea of democracy and in the next 50-100 years, THEMSELVES stand up and bring democracy. Until then, Saddam et al are necessary evils. Oh, and on a side--but completely relevant--note, it is great how the Palestinian's right to choose a leader was rewarded by the US. America tells the Palestinians to have elections for decades, and when they do, and choose someone, America says no, cuts off all funds, and pretty much gives Israel the green light to destroy the newly elected leaders and their infrastructure."

8/22/2006 11:54:59 AM

OEP11 sees a few fastballs in the 3rd inning and thinks he has the whole game figured out

ps: capitalizing words like fuck dont strengthen your argument

8/22/2006 11:55:39 AM

Quote :

"I mean, I agree that Saddam was a dick and all, but why is it the US's responsibility to save them from him? I think our government's responsibility is to Americans, and only Americans. My tax dollars don't belong over there unless there is a legitimate threat to our nation. "

I agree 100000000%.

8/22/2006 12:04:16 PM

at least i got most posts in before the SB trolls got here

8/22/2006 12:04:49 PM

i'm glad we have intelligence agencies and covert agents to determine whats a legitimate threat to our nation instead of some liberal college kids

or conservative college kids...bottomline is they know whats a legitimate threat a fuck load better than you do

8/22/2006 12:05:22 PM

Quote :

"bottomline is they know whats a legitimate threat a fuck load better than you do"

Also said by a college kid

8/22/2006 12:15:41 PM

college grad

but even so, they know a lot more than you and me

are you happy now?

cause they still know better than any of us

i can say "i dont think they are a legitimate threat" but what do i know about it? have i been to iraq? have i infiltrated iraqi communications lines over the past 20 years? no but they have

another thread won by me yet i'm sure many will debate that...liberals with their main argument of "in my opinion, i dont think this war is justified"...yet you dont decide things like that because of lack of knowledge

8/22/2006 12:18:23 PM

I, too, am a college grad.

You can say "they still know better than any of us" but how do you know that they know better? How do you know that they don't have an agenda of their own? Have you been in US intelligence? Have you infiltrated their ranks?

It's basically just a "yes it is" "no it's not" argument from this point (which, by the way, you can't really win).

You say US Intelleigence's word is reliable when it comes to national security. I say that isn't necessarily true.

We're at an impass.

8/22/2006 12:26:38 PM

what leads you to such a mistrust of the US government??

8/22/2006 12:27:48 PM

Well, I have no real reason to trust them.

8/22/2006 12:29:30 PM

Quote :

"You can say "they still know better than any of us" but how do you know that they know better? How do you know that they don't have an agenda of their own? Have you been in US intelligence? Have you infiltrated their ranks?"

no of course i've never been in US intelligence and I'm sure they do have their agendas...but its pretty much undeniable that they know better than us...regardless of what they tell the public, they know better than us...I don't know how you can even argue that...you can argue that they have alterior motives and that they dont tell us the whole story...but you and me (i'm guessing) get our news from tv stations, news papers, websites...they get their news from wiretaps, hidden microphones, intercepting communications, etc...i think they know more than us.

8/22/2006 12:35:00 PM

Quote :

"what leads you to such a mistrust of the US government??"

theyve been wrong before. they are people, and people make mistakes. to say that they are always correct is simply being naive. i hope they are right most of the time, but there is really no gaurantee.

while there is no argueing that they have the best information, there is plenty up for debate as far as did they make the right decisions based on that information. there is no one "right path" in a lot of these situations...and only time will tell if they chose an acceptable one.

8/22/2006 12:37:45 PM

if ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry christmas.

8/22/2006 12:38:39 PM

LOCK

8/22/2006 12:39:22 PM

Quote :

"correct, but what if we could have just invaded germany 10 years before"

you mean before Germany did anything deserving invasion?

Quote :

"what leads you to such a mistrust of the US government?"

8/22/2006 12:42:23 PM

^^ you know, I get so sick of people saying "lock" without giving a reason... I mean, if you have a reason, that's fine, just share it with the rest of us... otherwise you look like a turrets syndrome-ridden retard.

[Edited on August 22, 2006 at 12:42 PM. Reason : carrots]

8/22/2006 12:42:26 PM

Because the entire premise of the argument is a strawman. Not to mention it's anecdotal.

8/22/2006 12:47:40 PM

LOCK

8/22/2006 12:49:02 PM

Quote :

"I mean, I agree that Saddam was a dick and all, but why is it the US's responsibility to save them from him? "

1) they have oil
2) he tried to kill Bush's father

8/22/2006 12:49:47 PM

1) That doesn't make it a "responsibility"
2) Then that would be Bush's problem, not necessarily the US's

8/22/2006 12:52:04 PM

^^^^^^.....exactly...

so many of you guys only "distrust" the government right now because there is a repub in power...if bill clinton was doing this stuff you would be like "leader of the free world baby!!!"..."freedom is on the march!!"....

thanks for proving my point

[Edited on August 22, 2006 at 12:54 PM. Reason : asdf]

8/22/2006 12:53:36 PM

i take your hypothetical....and

i raise you my invisible hard drive

8/22/2006 12:54:29 PM

so if i said that i didnt agree with the way Clinton and Bush did foreign policy, WOULD I BLOW YOUR MIND!?!

[Edited on August 22, 2006 at 12:56 PM. Reason : df]

8/22/2006 12:55:47 PM

^^ If it helps at all, I don't trust any of them.

8/22/2006 12:56:31 PM

Quote :

"only time will tell if they chose an acceptable one"

i agree sober...unfortunately it seems most people on here dont realize that time will tell and only think about right now...they see the tree in front of them but cant conceptualize the forest

^^^^yeah boonedocks probably also thinks that if it was Clinton or Gore or Kerry, the muslim world wouldnt look at the US the same way

^^^oh look big fag came to fag it up

8/22/2006 12:56:59 PM