Home | Community | Message Board

Magic-Mushrooms-Shop.com
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: US Propoganda [Re: oO_wombat_Oo]
    #1445392 - 04/10/03 12:14 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

wombat writes:

First: obviously, it's an unarguable fact that some Iraqis do, in fact revere Saddam.

And it is an unarguable fact that most detest him. Virtually all the Shi'ites do, for example, and the Shi'ites comprise a majority of Iraq's population. Throw in the Kurds and the relatives of political prisoners who have vanished into his dungeons over the years, and there is a clear majority.

Yet you claim that the Iraqis rejoicing his overthrow are "a few pockets of pro-US iraqis" who are not "represntative of the Iraqi civilian population".

Second: Not wanting to be free of Saddam, and not wanting to get bombed to buggary and back are two different things.

And how would Egypt or the Sudan or France have deposed Hussein without bombs?

Further, they didn't get bombed "to buggary and back". Even if we accept the inflated figures of the famous oh-so-obviously-in-touch-with-reality Iraqi information minister at face value, the civilian casualties from bombs total less than a thousand.

It's a rather predictable failing of the gung-ho American psyche that you seem unable to tell the difference.

I'm not an American.

Liberation does not equal getting bombed nightly. Not the same thing. One can happen without the other.

Yes, I've heard that from countless people in this forum. No one has yet been able to explain how this is to happen, however. The only answer ever given is "somehow".

This is the biggest failing of the American psyche. Try and understand this, although I'm sure you'll... blah blah blah

You didn't answer the question. First you claim that the Iraqis want to be liberated -- they just don't want to be liberated by Americans, and they don't want the liberation to involve any bombing. I then asked whom they would prefer as their liberators, and by what method those liberators were to liberate them. I am still waiting for your answer.

Well, that's just pure ignorance on your behalf. It was the biggest bombing campaign since World War II.

Incorrect. That title goes to the war in Southeast Asia. And the civilian bomb casualties in this war are pretty low.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineoO_wombat_Oo
Stranger
Male User Gallery
Registered: 06/04/01
Posts: 812
Loc: NSW, Australia.
Last seen: 3 years, 27 days
Re: US Propoganda [Re: Phred]
    #1445436 - 04/10/03 12:29 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

"Virtually all the Shi'ites do, for example, and the Shi'ites comprise a majority of Iraq's population."

The Shi'ite Muslims are a group that - with the promise of US backing - rose against Saddam's regime in '91. They were slaughtered as the US (and others) sat idiley on the border and watched.

As a result, there is no way they are going to support the US now. America is now considered an enemy and traitor of the Shi'ite population.

Yes, I agree, they do not want Saddam. But once again, you're seeing things in two dimensional FOX-network logic. They certainly don't want Americans in Iraq either.


And how would Egypt or the Sudan or France have deposed Hussein without bombs?

It's none of their business. They probably wouldn't have even tried. How is Sweden going to depose Castro (why would they want to?)? Or how is Malaysia going to depose Robert Mugabe? Do you get my point?

There are much greater injustices in the world other than Saddam's regime. But most people realise it's none of their business. And that's the line even the US tote - until one of those regimes has loads of oil, that is.

Unlike those other regimes, Iraq and her people were rich and prosperous until the UN sanctions. Admitedly, Saddam was far from an ideal leader, but he makes some other look like saints.

I do, however, believe that Saddam is an evil man that should not be in charge of a rich country (or any country) like Iraq.


I then asked whom they would prefer as their liberators, and by what method those liberators were to liberate them. I am still waiting for your answer.

My answer is: I don't know. It's none of my business. They could have given the UN weapons inspectors a chance to start with.

Do you seriously think the rest of the world is wrong? Do you seriously think that George W Bush has out-thought every other prominent world leader? Seriously?

Because that's what your argument implies.






Edited by oO_wombat_Oo (04/10/03 12:35 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: US Propoganda [Re: oO_wombat_Oo]
    #1445527 - 04/10/03 01:21 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

wombat writes:

The Shi'ite Muslims are a group that - with the promise of US backing - rose against Saddam's regime in '91. They were slaughtered as the US (and others) sat idiley on the border and watched.

Since you apparently don't bother to read my posts, let me paste my comments from earlier in the thread:

It wasn't merely the US forces that sat and watched, it was the entire world. The US was part of the UN coalition that had signed the conditional ceasefire agreement -- the same agreement whose conditions Iraq has refused to fulfill for a dozen years. By the terms of that agreement, the UN coalition forces withdrew from Iraq, and could not re-enter in order just to interfere in a mere "in-house" dispute.

Why don't you check some international law, or even the UN Charter? You will see that providing assistance to insurgents trying to overthrow an internationally recognized government is a no-no. Clearly Hussein's regime was a recognized one in the eyes of the UN, or the cease-fire agreement would have been meaningless.

I don't say I personally agree with this absurd convention, I merely point out that it exists.

As a result, there is no way they are going to support the US now. America is now considered an enemy and traitor of the Shi'ite population.

Not to the Shi'ites we are seeing on the news.

Yes, I agree, they do not want Saddam. But once again, you're seeing things in two dimensional FOX-network logic. They certainly don't want Americans in Iraq either.

My, but you're a pompous little marsupial, aren't you? I have never seen a Fox news broadcast on TV, since I haven't had a TV for fifteen years. And whether you agree with my position or not, it is hardly two-dimensional. As for logic, I leave it to the readers to decide who is displaying the most logic in this thread.

It's none of their business. They probably wouldn't have even tried. How is Sweden going to depose Castro (why would they want to?)? Or how is Malaysia going to depose Robert Mugabe? Do you get my point?

There are much greater injustices in the world other than Saddam's regime. But most people realise it's none of their business.


Look, you said earlier in the thread -- "First, of course Iraqis want to be liberated."

Now you are saying that even though they want to be liberated, they are shit out of luck because:

a) They have been unable to liberate themselves without outside assistance

b) No outside nation should assist them, since "it's none of their business"

I do, however, believe that Saddam is an evil man that should not be in charge of a rich country (or any country) like Iraq.

The majority of Iraqis share your opinion. I guess that is why they are happy he is no longer in charge.

My answer is: I don't know.

No need to feel ashamed of that answer -- it has been the answer of everyone asked the same question.

It's none of my business.

If it's none of your business, why do you find it necessary to rant and rave? Chill, dude.

They could have given the UN weapons inspectors a chance to start with.

UN weapons inspectors are incapable of liberating Iraq.

Do you seriously think the rest of the world is wrong?

The number of adherents of a given proposition is irrelevant to its truth.

Do you seriously think that George W Bush has out-thought every other prominent world leader? Seriously? Because that's what your argument implies.

My argument implies no such thing. You claim that Iraqis are unhappy that Saddam has been deposed, that the "pockets" of delighted Iraqis we are seeing are "not representative" of the majority of Iraqis. You provide no proof of that assertion, you merely present it as axiomatic. I then pointed out (correctly) that the majority of Iraqis are in fact happy that Saddam is gone. What on earth has any of that got to do with the thinking processes of George Bush?

Saddam is gone. If I were an Iraqi, I wouldn't give a damn if he had been removed by the UK and the US and Australia acting in concert or France and Germany and Spain acting in concert.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineoO_wombat_Oo
Stranger
Male User Gallery
Registered: 06/04/01
Posts: 812
Loc: NSW, Australia.
Last seen: 3 years, 27 days
Re: US Propoganda [Re: Phred]
    #1445717 - 04/10/03 04:06 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

"Why don't you check some international law, or even the UN Charter? You will see that providing assistance to insurgents trying to overthrow an internationally recognized government is a no-no."

That argument is pathetic and stinks of typical US hypocrisy.

Dropping atmoic weapons on civilian cities is illegal too, but that didn't stop you in WWII. Not that any American will ever stand trial for that - one of the greatest war crimes in the history of humanity. Fucking hypocrits.

Even the US detaining of POW's (a status recently given to them by the US) in Cuba without trial is illegal. That doesn't stop you either.

But there's no use larking on those things, they'll never change. And nor will your attidude. You're too blinded by red, white and blue. Stars and stripes in front of your eyes.

The Iraqis are obviously pleased to see Saddam go, but the ends does not justify the means.

War is evil. Especially an unjustified one such as this. There can be no excuses for it. The US, UK and Australia acted as aggressors against a country that was obviously no threat to them. This was done for western economic interests. This will destabilise the Mid East for years to come. This resulted in the mass slaughter and maiming of innocent civilians.

If you can't see the facts for yourself, me stating them is not going to help.

But mark my words right now: This will come back to bite the US and her allies in the butt. That's a certainty.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: US Propoganda [Re: oO_wombat_Oo]
    #1445720 - 04/10/03 04:09 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

That's a certainty.



Thanks for letting us know the future.



psssttttt.... just between us... since you know what the future will bring how about PMing me with Saturday nights Powerball numbers?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Edited by luvdemshrooms (04/10/03 04:09 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineoO_wombat_Oo
Stranger
Male User Gallery
Registered: 06/04/01
Posts: 812
Loc: NSW, Australia.
Last seen: 3 years, 27 days
Re: US Propoganda [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1445725 - 04/10/03 04:16 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Yeah, haha.

If you can't figure that out for yourself your either George W Bush or an eggplant.

I said nothing enlightening or mind-blowing. The whole world already knows it, even US officials.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US Propoganda [Re: Phred]
    #1446155 - 04/10/03 10:13 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

And of course neither Bush nor Reagan "armed Saddam to the teeth".

Keep telling yourself that. It still won't make it true.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US Propoganda [Re: Phred]
    #1446181 - 04/10/03 10:25 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

It wasn't merely the US forces that sat and watched, it was the entire world

The US had the vast majority of the armaments over there. If they had wanted to do it, it would have been done.

Why don't you check some international law, or even the UN Charter?

All they had to do was enforce the no-fly zones they'd already set up with UN approval. They refused to do this and allowed Saddam to send in the helicopter gunships.

And talking as tho the US is frightened of the UN in the light of recent events is a little bizarre to say the least.

The majority of Iraqis share your opinion

Trouble is they shared it 20 years ago when Bush and Reagan were so close to Saddam it was dubbed "the love affair".

UN weapons inspectors are incapable of liberating Iraq.

Could you explain again why the troops were sent into Iraq. It seems to change every week. First it was Saddams links to Bin-laden, the next week it was WMD, now it's "liberating the people" is it? When do you think young Bush got the fire of liberation in his heart? Was it while his dad was arming and propping up Saddam? Do you think he had big arguments saying "I want to free the downtrodden Iraqi people dad, stop arming him please.."

If I were an Iraqi, I wouldn't give a damn

Ask that question of the little Iraqi lad who lost his entire family and had his spinal cord severed by red hot shrapnel.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: US Propoganda [Re: oO_wombat_Oo]
    #1446189 - 04/10/03 10:29 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

wombat writes:

Dropping atmoic weapons on civilian cities is illegal too, but that didn't stop you in WWII.

Once again, I am not American. However, note that at the time the bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there were no laws regarding atomics one way or the other.

But there's no use larking on those things, they'll never change. And nor will your attidude.

What attitude? Look, all I pointed out was that the Iraqis celebrating Hussein's fall from power are real. They are not being paid to celebrate, they are genuinely happy that he is gone.

The Iraqis are obviously pleased to see Saddam go, but the ends does not justify the means.

Then what means would you have suggested be used?

The US, UK and Australia acted as aggressors against a country that was obviously no threat to them.

No they didn't. They attacked a regime, not a country.

This was done for western economic interests.

I have seen that claim posted here perhaps six hundred times. No one ever provides proof of the claim, since no proof can be provided. None of us can know which motives were foremost in the minds of Bush, Blair, and Howard. All one can do is guess, then try to outshout one's opponent who guesses differently.

This will destabilise the Mid East for years to come.

Perhaps. On the other hand it may make it more stable. At this stage in the game, you have no way of knowing.

This resulted in the mass slaughter and maiming of innocent civilians.

An inflated estimate of under a thousand civilian casualties from the notoriously reliable minister of information is hardly "mass slaughter".

If you can't see the facts for yourself, me stating them is not going to help.

The problem here is that you are not stating facts. You are asserting arbitrary opinions with no supporting evidence and mis-stating facts (such as your claim that this was the biggest bombing campaign since WWII).

Look, I have been discussing this with anti-war people here on this forum for months. I disagree with most of them, but most of them provide far higher caliber discussion than you have so far. Why not spend a bit of time reading some of their posts? You maight learn something.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: US Propoganda [Re: Xlea321]
    #1446192 - 04/10/03 10:31 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Alex123 writes:

Keep telling yourself that. It still won't make it true.

So sorry, Alex, but it is true, you know it is true, and anyone who clinks on that link and backchecks it for themselves also knows it's true.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/18/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 9 years, 17 days
Re: US Propoganda [Re: Xlea321]
    #1446218 - 04/10/03 10:44 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

Alex123 writes:

If they had wanted to do it, it would have been done.

But if they had done so, you and others of your ilk would have been screaming in apoplexy that they had violated the cease-fire agreement and flouted international law.

All they had to do was enforce the no-fly zones they'd already set up with UN approval. They refused to do this and allowed Saddam to send in the helicopter gunships.

And the British fighters in the no-fly zone also ignored the helicopter gunships because....?

And talking as tho the US is frightened of the UN in the light of recent events is a little bizarre to say the least.

Again you exhibit your congenital inability to distinguish between past and present. At the time the Shi'ite rebellion was taking place, the ink was barely dry on the conditional ceasefire agreement. We are now talking about twelve freaking years later -- twelve years during which Iraq failed to fulfill even a single one of the terms of that conditional agreement; twelve years of sanctions and resolution after resolution filed against Iraq. The two situations are not even remotely similar.

And I find it curious that you are claiming the US should have immediately broken a ceasefire agreement and used military force against Hussein then in order to liberate Iraqis, but that to enter now is blasphemy. Can we say "hypocrisy"?

Trouble is they shared it 20 years ago when Bush and Reagan were so close to Saddam it was dubbed "the love affair".

Non sequitur. Once again your obssession with the past is used as an excuse for inaction during the present.

Ask that question of the little Iraqi lad who lost his entire family and had his spinal cord severed by red hot shrapnel.

Ask that question of the thousands of Iraqis who had their entire families imprisoned, raped, tortured, and killed. The Iraqis seen searching for some scrap of paper in a police torture house in the hopes they might finally know the fate of their relatives.

Ask that question of the parents of the children freed from Hussein's prisons.

pinky


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: US Propoganda [Re: Phred]
    #1446241 - 04/10/03 10:53 AM (20 years, 9 months ago)

But if they had done so, you and others of your ilk would have been screaming in apoplexy that they had violated the cease-fire agreement and flouted international law.

No, enforcing the no-fly zone was already approved by the UN.

And the British fighters in the no-fly zone also ignored the helicopter gunships because....?

The american generals told the british to do so...?

We are now talking about twelve freaking years later

12 years is nothing. Israel has been flouting scores of UN resolutions for 30 years with full US backing.

And I find it curious that you are claiming the US should have immediately broken a ceasefire agreement and used military force against Hussein then in order to liberate Iraqis

If they had no intention of supporting an uprising why did Bush encourage the people to do so? Just propaganda?

Once again your obssession with the past is used as an excuse for inaction during the present.

Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.

Ask that question of the thousands of Iraqis

In other words the little kid with his spinal cord severed wouldn't give you the answer you'd like.

Well, Saddam was at his height of oppression back in the 80's when the love affair with Bush was strong. I think it's a little rich trying to take the credit for "Liberating" anyone when you've propped up the dictator for decades.

Remember, those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Confessions of an Anti-Sanctions Activist wingnutx 1,067 2 01/29/14 04:52 AM
by theindianrepublic
* 500,000 iraqi children dead because of US sanctions. Albright: "The Price Is Worth It"...
( 1 2 3 4 all )
exclusive58 9,299 79 11/09/05 05:42 AM
by GazzBut
* Sanctions and War on Iraq: In 300 words deranger 744 5 01/22/08 04:26 PM
by afoaf
* Jihad Propaganda -- the Enemy speaks his mind Asante 1,072 11 04/12/06 08:06 PM
by Fospher
* American Propaganda
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
atomikfunksoldier 7,107 117 04/30/03 10:53 AM
by Rono
* Propoganda... MokshaMan 1,227 13 11/02/01 06:33 PM
by ElPrimo
* Do you think sanctions work? SirTripAlot 1,736 11 01/12/07 11:38 PM
by astralplaynes
* U.S. Announces Sanctions Against Iran Too Vanilla 526 1 10/25/07 02:44 PM
by Too Vanilla

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
1,622 topic views. 0 members, 5 guests and 5 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.024 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 14 queries.