No one has to die! Right?

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: konichiwa
If my logic is escaping you, maybe you should read it again. We support Saddam and Iraq for years, supplying them with weapons and intelligence and turning our back when they commit war crimes.

We have for sure made mistakes in the past...

At the time, the Soviet Union and Iran were bigger threats, so we put up with thugs like Saddam. You're right, we shouldn't have then and we shouldn't now.

And we flaunt ourselves as the bastion of righteousness throughout the world, saving the disenfranchised from their evil dictator.

Yes, and if Bush would ignore the politically correct yahoos and just SAY that, we'd all be better off!

Where were we in Rowanda?

Clinton was in charge then, but even then I can't blame him for that. We have a history of only helping people when it serves our interests...

Where are we now in Chechnya?

Russia is fighting a bunch of terrorist thugs down there... Tough situation...

Where are we now in Israel?

Foolishly holding Israel back... The Palestinians didn't have a state in the West Bank and Gaza before 1967 when Israel won that land in a war. They weren't even there before then.

People don't bother to learn their history, not even the people making decisions. It is disgracfull. I have very little respect for most of those people.

Arafat has said many times over the past 30 years that destroying Israel is his goal. He doesn't want peace, he wants Israel gone. You don't talk to someone like that, you kill him.

/rolls eyes

If you look at the facts it's quite clear that "liberation of the Iraqi people" is FAR down on our list of reasons for attacking Saddam.

Yea, sadly I'd have to agree with you there...

Attacking Iraq serves our interests, as all wars do...

But at least the Iraqi people will indeed benefit from this, they will be far better off in the long run.

: ) Hopper

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: lowtech
100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Yep, exactly... Like I said, Saddam has killed over 1 million Iraqi civilians...

If we don't remove him, another million civilians will die over the next 12 years... The anti-war people never seem to talk about that point, do they?

: ) Hopper

 

[HappyPuppy]

Originally posted by: lowtech

Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
I understand the feelings of the anti-war people. They don't want civilians to die, they figure if we don't attack, no one has to die...

This is because they are thinking with their hearts, not their heads...

The truth is, civilians will die either way and they have been dying for some time. Over 1 million Iraqi civilians have died since 1991. We didn't kill them, Saddam did. He did it with tanks, troops, and by starving them.

He has also killed his own civilians in the past using chemical weapons.

Dead Iraqi civilians, killed via Iraq's own chemical weapons

So while it is true that if we don't attack, some Iraqi civilians may live that otherwise would have died, others that could live will die because we did nothing.

If you are against the war because you believe Saddam is actually not such a bad guy, that's one thing.

If you are against the war because you don't want Iraqi civilians to die, then you are not making that decision based on the facts. Your heart is gold, but your brain has been turned off, and you are wrong. Not just an opinion, the facts speak against you. If you're at all interested in actually being right, rather than just having "good feelings", then you'll have to start processing the facts.

: ) Hopper

100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Don't be ridiculous. The children aren't starving because of the embargo. Haven't you heard about the food/medicine for oil program? Saddam takes all the money and spends it on his military. He is responsible for the deaths of those children.

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
Don't be ridiculous. The children aren't starving because of the embargo. Haven't you heard about the food/medicine for oil program? Saddam takes all the money and spends it on his military. He is responsible for the deaths of those children.

HappyPuppy put it better than I did...

Saddam is responsible for those deaths... If he simply had complied with the UN resolutions after the Gulf War, the embargo would have been gone a long time ago and his people would be fine.

Also, as you say, the stuff from the oil for food program largely goes to his military anyway.

: ) Hopper

 

[etech]

100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Palestinians get Saddam funds

The party estimated that Iraq had paid out $35m to Palestinian families since the current uprising began in September 2000.

Palaces and Oil Smuggling

Since the end of the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein has directed and sustained a multi-billion dollar palace construction program while pleading that the UN sanctions keep him too poor to feed and provide health care for his people. While he keeps Iraq's hospital shelves bare and shows them to journalists, Saddam restricts access to the new and ornate palaces to himself and his chosen admirers of any given moment. Moreover, Saddam fits out these monuments with the finest foreign materials ? from golden plumbing to the finest European marble and crystal chandeliers ? smuggled in despite the embargo that Baghdad propaganda falsely claims blocks the import of food and medicine.....


Saddam killed those children, the sanctions didn't.

 

[konichiwa]

Originally posted by: etech

100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Palestinians get Saddam funds

The party estimated that Iraq had paid out $35m to Palestinian families since the current uprising began in September 2000.

So? Ariel Sharon has offered money to non-Israeli Jews to settle on illegally acquired Palestinian lands.

 

[tweakmm]

Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
But at least the Iraqi people will indeed benefit from this, they will be far better off in the long run.

I know! Just look at all the South American countries that we've helped to set up democracies for, I bet the Iraqi's are just peeing in their pants in anticipation.

 

[lowtech1]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy

Originally posted by: lowtech

Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
I understand the feelings of the anti-war people. They don't want civilians to die, they figure if we don't attack, no one has to die...

This is because they are thinking with their hearts, not their heads...

The truth is, civilians will die either way and they have been dying for some time. Over 1 million Iraqi civilians have died since 1991. We didn't kill them, Saddam did. He did it with tanks, troops, and by starving them.

He has also killed his own civilians in the past using chemical weapons.

Dead Iraqi civilians, killed via Iraq's own chemical weapons

So while it is true that if we don't attack, some Iraqi civilians may live that otherwise would have died, others that could live will die because we did nothing.

If you are against the war because you believe Saddam is actually not such a bad guy, that's one thing.

If you are against the war because you don't want Iraqi civilians to die, then you are not making that decision based on the facts. Your heart is gold, but your brain has been turned off, and you are wrong. Not just an opinion, the facts speak against you. If you're at all interested in actually being right, rather than just having "good feelings", then you'll have to start processing the facts.

: ) Hopper

100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Don't be ridiculous. The children aren't starving because of the embargo. Haven't you heard about the food/medicine for oil program? Saddam takes all the money and spends it on his military. He is responsible for the deaths of those children.

You must be on crack to believe that embago would hurt the rich or people in power. It just mean that the rich could pay the poor less money for their labor.

It doesn't matter who is in power in the middle east, because of fear that we has created (conflict between Iraq/Iran/Israel/Palestine/Jordan/Syria/Yemen/Afgahanistan) forces the people in power to purchase/develop arms.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: konichiwa

Originally posted by: etech

100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Palestinians get Saddam funds

The party estimated that Iraq had paid out $35m to Palestinian families since the current uprising began in September 2000.

So? Ariel Sharon has offered money to non-Israeli Jews to settle on illegally acquired Palestinian lands.

konichiwa

Try to stay up with the rest of the group please. lowtech posted the old lie that the UN sanctions on Iraq has killed millions of babies there. If Iraq is so damn broke that they can't afford food and medicine for there babies then how can the give $35 million to Palestinians to kill Israelis?
How can Saddam build twelve palaces that cover with their grounds over 12 square miles?

 

[lowtech1]

Originally posted by: etech

100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Palestinians get Saddam funds

The party estimated that Iraq had paid out $35m to Palestinian families since the current uprising began in September 2000.

Palaces and Oil Smuggling

Since the end of the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein has directed and sustained a multi-billion dollar palace construction program while pleading that the UN sanctions keep him too poor to feed and provide health care for his people. While he keeps Iraq's hospital shelves bare and shows them to journalists, Saddam restricts access to the new and ornate palaces to himself and his chosen admirers of any given moment. Moreover, Saddam fits out these monuments with the finest foreign materials ? from golden plumbing to the finest European marble and crystal chandeliers ? smuggled in despite the embargo that Baghdad propaganda falsely claims blocks the import of food and medicine.....


Saddam killed those children, the sanctions didn't.

Say that to the Cuban & Vietnamese to see what they has to say bout embargo.

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: konichiwa
So? Ariel Sharon has offered money to non-Israeli Jews to settle on illegally acquired Palestinian lands.

No, those lands were acqurred legally in the 1967 war...

The Palestinian people didn't own those lands before that war anyway, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan did...

No one complains that they didn't give them a state, why should Israel?

: ) Hopper

 

[lowtech1]

Originally posted by: tweakmm

Originally posted by: Grasshopper27
But at least the Iraqi people will indeed benefit from this, they will be far better off in the long run.

I know! Just look at all the South American countries that we've helped to set up democracies for, I bet the Iraqi's are just peeing in their pants in anticipation.

Why look so far?
Look at the mess that the Middle East is in now due to western influent (the past & present Briton/America, and the present France/Germany/Russia/China).

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: lowtech
Say that to the Cuban & Vietnamese to see what they has to say bout embargo.

The same thing is true there...

We are not responsible for the results of an embargo, the leaders who refuse to do the right thing are responsible.

: ) Hopper

 

[konichiwa]

Originally posted by: Grasshopper27

Originally posted by: konichiwa
So? Ariel Sharon has offered money to non-Israeli Jews to settle on illegally acquired Palestinian lands.

No, those lands were acqurred legally in the 1967 war...

The Palestinian people didn't own those lands before that war anyway, Egypt, Syria, and Jordan did...

No one complains that they didn't give them a state, why should Israel?

: ) Hopper

I'm not even going to begin to pick that apart. I'm sure there are others who will, but you clearly know nothing about the Israel-Palestine conflict. You just made a few of the most uneducated and obtuse statements regarding it that I have ever heard, and I don't have the time or the patience to argue with you.

Just read this. Particularly:

<< In the 1967 war, Israel occupied the remaining territory of Palestine, until then under Jordanian and Egyptian control (the West Bank and Gaza Strip). This included the remaining part of Jerusalem, which was subsequently annexed by Israel. The war brought about a second exodus of Palestinians, estimated at half a million. Security Council resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 called on Israel to withdraw from territories it had occupied in the 1967 conflict. >>

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: konichiwa
I'm not even going to begin to pick that apart. I'm sure there are others who will, but you clearly know nothing about the Israel-Palestine conflict. You just made a few of the most uneducated and obtuse statements regarding it that I have ever heard, and I don't have the time or the patience to argue with you.

Sure, run away when you lose an arguement...

Tell me, who owned the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan Heights before the 1967 war?

Hmm??? Go ahead, you can do it, Google is your friend...

Tell me, when did the Palestinians have a state? When exactly did Israel take it away from them?

: ) Hopper

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: konichiwa
Just read this. Particularly:

<< In the 1967 war, Israel occupied the remaining territory of Palestine, until then under Jordanian and Egyptian control (the West Bank and Gaza Strip). This included the remaining part of Jerusalem, which was subsequently annexed by Israel. The war brought about a second exodus of Palestinians, estimated at half a million. Security Council resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 called on Israel to withdraw from territories it had occupied in the 1967 conflict. >>

Thank you, you prove my point...

The Palestinians were under Egyptian and Jordanian control prior to the 1967 war... They never had a state of their own.

If Israel is forced to leave, that land should be returned to Egypt and Jordon, the last owners of that land.

As for what the UN said about it, Israel is free to ignore the UN if they wish. Israel is a soverign state and is not bound to obey the UN.

But wait you said, isn't Iraq a soverign state? Why can't they ignore the UN? They can, nothing says they have to obey the UN.

The only reason they have to obey the UN at all is the threat of force if they do not comply. Those 250,000 soldiers in the Kuwait desert for example, is a very good reason why Iraq should obey and comply.

If there were 250,000 soldiers outside the borders of Israel, demanding they leave the West Bank, Israel might well comply with the UN too.

: ) Hopper

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: lowtech

Originally posted by: etech

100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Palestinians get Saddam funds

The party estimated that Iraq had paid out $35m to Palestinian families since the current uprising began in September 2000.

Palaces and Oil Smuggling

Since the end of the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein has directed and sustained a multi-billion dollar palace construction program while pleading that the UN sanctions keep him too poor to feed and provide health care for his people. While he keeps Iraq's hospital shelves bare and shows them to journalists, Saddam restricts access to the new and ornate palaces to himself and his chosen admirers of any given moment. Moreover, Saddam fits out these monuments with the finest foreign materials ? from golden plumbing to the finest European marble and crystal chandeliers ? smuggled in despite the embargo that Baghdad propaganda falsely claims blocks the import of food and medicine.....


Saddam killed those children, the sanctions didn't.

Say that to the Cuban & Vietnamese to see what they has to say bout embargo.

Iraqi babies are dying in Cuba and VietNam?

Stick to the subject or start a new thread. Your contention was that the UN sanctions killed millions of Iraqi babies. I don't think that you can prove that bit of Iraqi propaganda.

That is all.

 

[lowtech1]

Originally posted by: Grasshopper27

Originally posted by: lowtech
Say that to the Cuban & Vietnamese to see what they has to say bout embargo.

The same thing is true there...

We are not responsible for the results of an embargo, the leaders who refuse to do the right thing are responsible.

: ) Hopper

You are really on crack on this subject. What the Vietnamese could do to America for 19.5 years during the embargo?
The only thing that the Vietnamese could have done wrong is defeated the foreign invaders that supported the muderous South Vietnamese dictators.
It is not that the North are peace loving army, but at least that they were fighting for their country.

 

[lowtech1]

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: lowtech

Originally posted by: etech

100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Palestinians get Saddam funds

The party estimated that Iraq had paid out $35m to Palestinian families since the current uprising began in September 2000.

Palaces and Oil Smuggling

Since the end of the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein has directed and sustained a multi-billion dollar palace construction program while pleading that the UN sanctions keep him too poor to feed and provide health care for his people. While he keeps Iraq's hospital shelves bare and shows them to journalists, Saddam restricts access to the new and ornate palaces to himself and his chosen admirers of any given moment. Moreover, Saddam fits out these monuments with the finest foreign materials ? from golden plumbing to the finest European marble and crystal chandeliers ? smuggled in despite the embargo that Baghdad propaganda falsely claims blocks the import of food and medicine.....


Saddam killed those children, the sanctions didn't.

Say that to the Cuban & Vietnamese to see what they has to say bout embargo.

Iraqi babies are dying in Cuba and VietNam?

Stick to the subject or start a new thread. Your contention was that the UN sanctions killed millions of Iraqi babies. I don't think that you can prove that bit of Iraqi propaganda.

That is all.

Yes, it could be propaganda, but who to say that you are not eating up every word of propaganda that your administration is feeding to you?

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: lowtech
You are really on crack on this subject. What the Vietnamese could do to America for 19.5 years during the embargo?

Nothing, but that has nothing to do with it...

They do things we don't like, so we toss an embargo on them...

If their people starve, it is because their government is evil and doesn't get food to the people.

Even today, we send food to North Korea for free to help feed those people. Why? Because we have no interest in seeing people starve. The evil leaders of those countries divert that food to the military.

: ) Hopper

 

[konichiwa]

Originally posted by: Grasshopper27

Originally posted by: konichiwa
Just read this. Particularly:

<< In the 1967 war, Israel occupied the remaining territory of Palestine, until then under Jordanian and Egyptian control (the West Bank and Gaza Strip). This included the remaining part of Jerusalem, which was subsequently annexed by Israel. The war brought about a second exodus of Palestinians, estimated at half a million. Security Council resolution 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 called on Israel to withdraw from territories it had occupied in the 1967 conflict. >>

Thank you, you prove my point...

The Palestinians were under Egyptian and Jordanian control prior to the 1967 war... They never had a state of their own.

If Israel is forced to leave, that land should be returned to Egypt and Jordon, the last owners of that land.

As for what the UN said about it, Israel is free to ignore the UN if they wish. Israel is a soverign state and is not bound to obey the UN.

But wait you said, isn't Iraq a soverign state? Why can't they ignore the UN? They can, nothing says they have to obey the UN.

The only reason they have to obey the UN at all is the threat of force if they do not comply. Those 250,000 soldiers in the Kuwait desert for example, is a very good reason why Iraq should obey and comply.

If there were 250,000 soldiers outside the borders of Israel, demanding they leave the West Bank, Israel might well comply with the UN too.

: ) Hopper

So the Palestinian Arabs who were displaced from their homes, farms and livelihoods deserve nothing simply because there wasn't a Palestinian State? The UN provided a perfectly viable solution for this decades ago, when they suggested two sovereign states, a Palestinian and a Jewish state. But that didn't happen, and now here we are today.

And your point that Israel does not have to obey the UN is exactly right, and it is exactly the problem. Why do we find it necessary to threaten to invade Iraq if they do not comply with the UN, but Israel is our foremost ally? World cop doesn't work when you only help certain people.

 

[lowtech1]

Originally posted by: etech

Originally posted by: konichiwa

Originally posted by: etech

100 000 Iraq childrens died per year from starving due to the embargo.

Soaring death rates among Iraqi children -- UK & US study.

Palestinians get Saddam funds

The party estimated that Iraq had paid out $35m to Palestinian families since the current uprising began in September 2000.

So? Ariel Sharon has offered money to non-Israeli Jews to settle on illegally acquired Palestinian lands.

konichiwa

Try to stay up with the rest of the group please. lowtech posted the old lie that the UN sanctions on Iraq has killed millions of babies there. If Iraq is so damn broke that they can't afford food and medicine for there babies then how can the give $35 million to Palestinians to kill Israelis?
How can Saddam build twelve palaces that cover with their grounds over 12 square miles?

Same ole crap that you can say about America. We can't balance our bugget, but we have money to wage war in Iraq.

 

[Grasshopper27]

Originally posted by: lowtech
Yes, it could be propaganda, but who to say that you are not eating up every word of propaganda that your administration is feeding to you?

The difference is, I *know* my government spews propaganda at me. Most of the people in those countries have no clue that the only information source they have is completely corroupt.

In Iraq, it is a capital crime to watch a foreign news service.

Thanks to the Internet, I can check out the news anywhere in the world, including French, German, and Russian news services and get all sides to the story.

: ) Hopper

 

[etech]

lowtech

Yes, it could be propaganda, but who to say that you are not eating up every word of propaganda that your administration is feeding to you?

Oh I don't know, perhaps the fact that Iraq was found to be staging the funerals of babys for the press.

How Saddam 'staged' fake baby funerals

The Iraqi dictator says his country's children are dying in their thousands because of the West's embargoes. John Sweeney, in a TV documentary to be shown tonight, says the figures are bogus. Here he reports from Iraq on his findings
...
There is only one problem. Because there are not enough dead babies around, the regime prevents parents from burying infants immediately, in the Muslim tradition, to create more powerful propaganda.
...
_____

Do you want more or is that enough?

 

[tweakmm]

Originally posted by: Grasshopper27

Originally posted by: lowtech
Yes, it could be propaganda, but who to say that you are not eating up every word of propaganda that your administration is feeding to you?

The difference is, I *know* my government spews propaganda at me.

and yet you eat up every word?
incredible:Q