I've been duped...EDIT: It would appear that I wasn't duped

[Random Variable]

I truly (and foolishly) believed that the Iraqi people wanted to be freed from the terror and brutality of Saddam's regime. But after listening to exiled Iraqis in Jordan, it would appear that the Iraqi people would rather suffer under Saddam's murderous rule than be liberated by a non-Muslim country.

EDIT: I'm so confused.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Vespasian
I truly (and foolishly) believed that the Iraqi people wanted to be freed from the terror and brutality of Saddam's regime. But after listening to exiled Iraqis in Jordan, it would appear that the Iraqi people would rather suffer under Saddam's murderous rule than be liberated by a country that supports "the Zionist entity."

Good, that means we can stop worrying about the Civilians and go about winning this war!

 

[fhetw]

ive seem similar instances of this as english speaking iraqis say they would rather be under hussein's rule since at least then they had some form of government to restore order and they had a chance to get food and fresh water. hopefully humanitarian aid will get their soon relieving their situation and preventing a humanitarian disaster.
as to the exiled iraqis in jordan, hell every1 over there hates each other and have contrasting beliefs.

 

[Red Dawn]

All throughout history the people in that region have spent more effort buggering or stabbing each other in the back than trying to live in peace. They only respect power, ruthlessness and sacrifice.

 

[ReiAyanami]

the civilians have been brainwashed by decades of saddamite rule, plus arabic countries are not fond of us in general. but is there any doubt in your mind that afghanistan is better today than under the taliban rule of 5 years ago? you bet

 

[Pliablemoose]

Saddam must have been doing something right to get 100% of the vote when he was re-elected.

Hell, even France wouldn't re-elect him with 100%, maybe 99% or so...

 

[Moonbeam]

I would venture that Israel might be periferal to this matter.

 

[Random Variable]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Vespasian
I truly (and foolishly) believed that the Iraqi people wanted to be freed from the terror and brutality of Saddam's regime. But after listening to exiled Iraqis in Jordan, it would appear that the Iraqi people would rather suffer under Saddam's murderous rule than be liberated by a country that supports "the Zionist entity."

Good, that means we can stop worrying about the Civilians and go about winning this war!

The lesson of this war will most likely be that war should first and foremost be about defeating the enemy militarily.

 

[Jmman]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Saddam must have been doing something right to get 100% of the vote when he was re-elected.

Hell, even France wouldn't re-elect him with 100%, maybe 99% or so...

Yeah, it is amazing that he got 100% of the vote. I doubt the AK47 pointed at their head had anything to do with it........

 

[JellyBaby]

It's a moot point. The die is cast. Soon Saddum will no longer rule and the challenge for the Iraqis will be to ask themselves how much effort they want to put into never becoming subjigates of tyrannical influence again.

 

[Stark]

You have to remember, Israel and Babylon haven't had the best relationship over the centuries. Aside from King Cyrus, the Hebrews haven't had anything nice to say about a ruler from between the Tigris and Euphrates.

 

[wnied]

Do you guys honestly believe those morons who reported this story?
Take a minute and think about who would gain from a story run on international press, about Iraqis benefitting in anyway under the current regime enough to fight for it...

...Truth is, the footnote to the story run, was that Saddams Son was paying their way back to Iraq to help fight the American force. I think these bozos were plants made to hang around the borders and stir up trouble.
~wnied~

 

[BarneyFife]

Look. Iraq is a mess. Saddam provides (or provided) stability to the country. He held the Kurds, Iranians, Turks, and all those Muslim groups in check. The US media insists that the Arab people are happy that Saddam is going to go away and after the war, everyone is going to be running through fields of green grass, drinking lemonade, waving American flags, eating apple pie, and singing "Sunshine on my shoulders". What a bunch of crap. Iraq will be split into 20 different parts each run by a warlord or designated leader, civil wars will begin, Iran and Turkey will jump in for a land grab and all hell will break loose. This war will be all a waste and we'll all be wishing Saddam was there to keep Iraq in peace. History has proven my argument and just look at Afghanistan, its actually worse now then before the Taliban were there. The Taliban bitch slapped all the war lords and kept everyone in check.

 

[Phuz]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
Look. Iraq is a mess. Saddam provides (or provided) stability to the country. He held the Kurds, Iranians, Turks, and all those Muslim groups in check. The US media insists that the Arab people are happy that Saddam is going to go away and after the war, everyone is going to be running through fields of green grass, drinking lemonade, waving American flags, eating apple pie, and singing "Sunshine on my shoulders". What a bunch of crap. Iraq will be split into 20 different parts each run by a warlord or designated leader, civil wars will begin, Iran and Turkey will jump in for a land grab and all hell will break loose. This war will be all a waste and we'll all be wishing Saddam was there to keep Iraq in peace. History has proven my argument and just look at Afghanistan, its actually worse now then before the Taliban were there. The Taliban bitch slapped all the war lords and kept everyone in check.

:Q

I agree... things just don't work the same way. The people just don't have the same views, values and norms... Completely different cultures, how can we expect some form of democracy to work. It won't.

 

[Siddhartha]

pro?pa?gan?da \'pra-pe-"gan-de, 'pro-\ noun [NL, fr. Congregatio de propaganda fide Congregation for propagating the faith, organization established by Pope Gregory XV ?1623] (1718)
1 cap : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect
pro?pa?gan?dist \-dist\ noun or adjective
pro?pa?gan?dis?tic \-'gan-"dis-tik\ adjective
pro?pa?gan?dis?ti?cal?ly \-ti-k(e-)le\ adverb

(C)1996 Zane Publishing, Inc. and Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. All rights reserved.

 

[Auric]

The British and French Empires collaborated to create these countries in the first place to maintain some order in the region after the final defeat and collapse of the Ottoman Empire. The policy has always been relative stability without true independence nor unity. Puppet dictators have thus been useful in this regard and arming them all against one another further helps the balance of trade. The last I heard, Israel alone was receiving $3.5 billion per year in "foreign aid" from the USA (75% of which must be spent on US military gear), while the remaining economic portion is primarliy used to pay off past military debts. So, the American tax payer in effect heavily subsidizes the military industrial complex beyond even the wildly excessive amounts officially budgeted for "defense". It is hard to say what the American people get in return other than unproductive economic output... and oh yes, a willing strong man in the Middle East to help ensure the oil keeps flowing. But I digess. The decision not to topple the Iraqi government twelve years ago was deliberately made upon consideration of the resulting instability from the opposed factions. The very last thing the USA wanted was another fundamentalist and USA-independent Islamic nation like Iran -even worse one that would control perhaps the largest oil reserves on the planet (horror of horrors!). Back-tracking a bit, Saddam Hussein and only became a close pal as defender against said Islamic fudamentalism and only invaded Kuwait after a diplomatic misunderstanding when upon enquiring was told that America had no interest in Kuwait. Oopsy! That gaff sure has a long echo.

 

[etech]

only invaded Kuwait after a diplomatic misunderstanding when upon enquiring was told that America had no interest in Kuwait. Oopsy! That gaff sure has a long echo.

It's also wrong and did not happen the way it has been portrayed.

Frontline Aziz interview


edit/

I get the strong impression that some people in this thread are saying that the Iraqis are too stupid to form a stable democratic country after the war.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: etech

only invaded Kuwait after a diplomatic misunderstanding when upon enquiring was told that America had no interest in Kuwait. Oopsy! That gaff sure has a long echo.

It's also wrong and did not happen the way it has been portrayed.

Frontline Aziz interview


edit/

I get the strong impression that some people in this thread are saying that the Iraqis are too stupid to form a stable democratic country after the war.

It's not stupidity, more like ignorance.

 

[joohang]

I get the strong impression that some people in this thread are saying that the Iraqis are too stupid to form a stable democratic country after the war.

Not sure about others, but imo, Iraq's road to democratization will be very bumpy, and hopefully without too much bloodshed. Just about every nation I studied so far went through the same process. If North Korea does ever get liberated and attempts to democratize the people, it will go through the most painful process never before seen in history.

It is not that I think that the Iraqis are too stupid, but people do not easily realize what democracy is about and it will likely require one or two generations for them to establish some form of "civil society" in Iraqi.

 

[mastertech01]

Maybe they should interview the families of those young boys who were forced from thier homes under threat of execution yesterday and today to fight for Iraq which THEY prefer.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Vespasian
I truly (and foolishly) believed that the Iraqi people wanted to be freed from the terror and brutality of Saddam's regime. But after listening to exiled Iraqis in Jordan, it would appear that the Iraqi people would rather suffer under Saddam's murderous rule than be liberated by a country that supports "the Zionist entity."

Woot! Now we can stop providing humanitarian aid to all countries other than Israel, our deficit will be wiped clean within 5 years.

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Saddam must have been doing something right to get 100% of the vote when he was re-elected.

Hell, even France wouldn't re-elect him with 100%, maybe 99% or so...

yeh its helps when all who oppose saddam in the elections are killed and their families raped and murdered. See, he was at least doing that right.

 

[Auric]

Aziz's comments are clearly not unbiased. He seems to explain events with hindsight in terms that justify current affairs rather than conceding that there are always unknown factors and things have a tendency to get out of control. He claims the USA conspired to destabilize Iraq by supporting Kuwait's increased production knowing that it would bankrupt Iraq. I find that difficult to believe. If Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were compliant enough as far as production and thus cost of oil to the USA and Iraq was acting as a defense against Islamic fundamentalism, then what was to be gained? He also claims it was only Iran that was responsible for the uprisings at the end of the war. Anyone that watches Frontline has seen plenty of evidence of US involvement. I certainly understand his point of view and can sympathize with the Arab position but even a casual observer can see it is a bit twisted. That interview did not actually cover the diplomatic incident regarding the US not having an interest in Kuwait which I recall was also detailed in a Frontline documentary.

 

[etech]

Auric

And at the end of it all there is still no justification for the statement that the US somehow gave Iraq the green light to invade Kuwait.

 

[Auric]

Oh yes, and let us not assume that democracy is some end-all and highest evolutionary form of government. Our democracatic ideals and individual freedom came from independent Greek states. They still depended on an underclass as we do today so liberty was by no means universal. Remember, other humans were considered chattel upon the founding of the USA while today we tend to outsource our chattel overseas (or over the southern border). But I digress again. In any case, this nouveau democracy stuff can still be considered experimental as we only threw off the yolk of tyranical monarchs within the last few centuries. The natural order supports dictators and it is foolish to think we can suddenly impose our system on other peoples without the bloodshed and unrest we went through (we being European and Western), and especially when their tribal bonds have not been weakened like ours and double plus especially when we try to use them as pawns in a game. It would take a generation of occupation to begin to turn a country. Seven years or so is the period bandied about by the US. Good luck!