|
|
Post by Srrh on Dec 19, 2002 9:01:09 GMT -5
Ok, check my twisted logic...
I think that, although not in the US best interest, the world should push Baby Bush to go after Saddam.
Given that;
1)Saddam is an asshole. He kills, tortures, imprison his neighbours and his own.
2)If the US goes after Saddam, the world community will be watching and Saddam's replacement's GOT to be a better man.
3)People of Irak will be better of.
The only flaw (I think) in my reasoning is collateral dammges. But if the US could take out Saddam with a bullet...
Some of us may shout fault as the US is obviously going after Irak's natural ressources...but so what? The average Irak peon never sees any of that money anyway...and it's not like if Saddam was reinvesting it in the countries education and infra-structure.
A US lead occupation force could not possibly steal more then the baas party...
Thus it's a good thing the US is sending its boys for a vist...
No? Too weird?
S.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Danny Boy on Dec 19, 2002 10:17:13 GMT -5
Srrh, you are not going to start believing the Sadam eats his young stories are you?
Compared to the likes of Sharon, the Saudi Ruling Family, The Kuwait Ruling Family and others from the area, he is a Nobel peace prize candidate.
You never saw, even when he was able to travel, Sadam losing $1,000,000 a night in a casino whilst his henchmen went out to get under age boys or girls for the late night entertainment.
As for Iraq as a country, Sadam plowed billions into Agriculture and irrigation projects on the basis that "Oil was a temporary gift from God, and should be used to build up the agricultural infrastructure of the country, which was the everlasting gift from God". Unlike Saudi, who's royal family pocket 60% of the countries oil revenue and give virtually nothing back.
There is so much shit happening out here at the moment, that I do not have the time or enthusiasm to really argue the pros and cons of Sadam/Iraq. Suffice to say, that whatever he did to the Kurds, was done with the full knowledge and assistance from the British, German, French and American military and Government.
|
|
|
|
Post by Srrh on Dec 19, 2002 10:32:49 GMT -5
1)You are not going to start believing the Sadam eats his young stories are you? 2)Compared to the likes of Sharon, the Saudi Ruling Family, The Kuwait Ruling Family and others from the area, he is a Nobel peace prize candidate. 3)As for Iraq as a country, Sadam plowed billions into Agriculture and irrigation projects on the basis that "Oil was a temporary gift from God, and should be used to build up the agricultural infrastructure of the country, which was the everlasting gift from God". 4))Suffice to say, that whatever he did to the Kurds, was done with the full knowledge and assistance from the British, German, French and American military and Government. 1)Of course not. But I don't think he a very "altruistic leader" either. I think a good UN buraucrat would do a better job. 2)Agreed. But the US won't go after those people now will they? 3)So are his palaces...lol 4)Again agreed. But the choice of going to the Hague with Chirac, Blair and Shroeder is not really there is it? Don't get me wrong Danny Boy, I think many people are more worthy of getting their ass kicked then Saddam. But it isn't in the agenda. I'll take what's on the table. But to be fair, Saddam's departure will not make me too sad. And If the US is ready to sacrifice it's kids for that, power to them. PS I realized this two days ago, while attacking Baby Bush's foreign policy...I ended up defending Mr.Hussein. And to be honest, although I don't like doubleyou, I can't say I prefer Saddam over him. If they could just kill each other, on the other hand, that would be just swell.... S... |
|
|
|
Post by Topcontender on Dec 19, 2002 10:37:23 GMT -5
Danny her are a few more winners and nominees
Saddam
Jesse jackson
Jimmy Carter
FREDRIK WILLEM DE KLERK
HENRY A. KISSINGER
LE DUC THO ,
|
|
|
|
Post by daSilva on Dec 19, 2002 12:07:51 GMT -5
DB,
Hitler had some great economic policies as well, doesn't take away from the fact he had no value for human life.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topcontender on Dec 19, 2002 12:51:07 GMT -5
Danny, we get your point, but ask yourself " would Iraq be better without Saddam and with a democracy?" Sharone is a bastard, but we know he will get the boot one day, Saddam will never get the boot, unless he gets a bullet or old age gets him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Srrh on Dec 19, 2002 13:36:00 GMT -5
No doubt.
Many are more worthy then Saddam for the boot.
The house of Saude is a great exemple. So is Kim of Korea etc..
But those are not on the agenda...for some "my father doesn't like you and i need political chips" reason, Baby Bush decided to go after Saddam. The reasoning stinks, but then again, so does Saddam really. I couldn't care less if he was replaced AS LONG as he is not replaced by someone worse (a la Poutin).
And with the world scrutenizing american actions, the replacement is bound to be better.
Thus the idea: "If Bush has human and financial resources to waiste for his political agenda, might as well be Saddam."
I'd rather spend my energy creatively with a guy like Brazil's lula or Chavez then defending Saddam rethorically.
NB: I think the philosphy of pre-emptive strike is VERY dangerous.
But I am not going to end up in Baby Bush's dicotomy: if you're against me, you're with the terrorist.
In this case I am both against him and Saddam.
My personal dislikes toward doubleyou are not going to make me defend Saddam.
Somehow, That would mean Bush won.
In short, fuck them both, but fuck Saddam more ;D
S.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Danny Boy on Dec 19, 2002 22:25:32 GMT -5
I just have a real problem with America, or to put it bluntly, a handful of Jews, dictating and controlling world policy.
The price you pay for living in a free world, is that there will be leaders you don’t like, Sadam IS NOT a threat to anyone at the moment, it is all about oil and israel’s need to have puppet governments in place in the Middle East.
And TC wot was wrong with the peanut man???
|
|
|
|
Post by Srrh on Dec 20, 2002 8:43:18 GMT -5
1) Sadam IS NOT a threat to anyone at the moment 2)And TC wot was wrong with the peanut man??? 1)He is to some of his own people...and his neighbours. I personally don't really care about the crooks in place in Kuweit, but he also tried it on Iran. Not to mention on his Kurds...(although it seems to be fashionable to do so, Turkey is no better). And he is no good for the health of his familly either...lol Over all, he is not someone I like, so pfft. Gone with him. After that maybe the US wil go after Silvio Berlusconi. I'll take that too. And Kim, and Sharon, and Kabila, and Poutin, (and Arafat, by the way)....Bush can take himself out at the end. It's x-mas, I'll take what I can: beggers can't be choosers. Now, between removing Saddam and Sharon: the answer would be Sharon. Immediate, as I think he is a much greater threat to world peace. Fucking butcher... 2)TC WTF's wrong with the peanut guy? I like him too. He is MUCH better as an ex then as a pres. S.... |
|
|
|
Post by Topcontender on Dec 20, 2002 11:15:57 GMT -5
Peanut guy? You talking about Carter? I swear this man will go anywhere if he thinks it s will stop a war. He has good intentions, but he is very mistaken
|
|
|
|
Post by daSilva on Dec 20, 2002 12:19:06 GMT -5
DB,
Just curious, how did you become an anti-semite?
|
|
|
|
Post by Srrh on Dec 20, 2002 13:23:39 GMT -5
da sliva: touché !! lol
Actually as long as it's "some jews", I couldn't care less...but the day it will be "the jews" (aka all jews) it will be...hrmm, very uncomfortable for me too.
One day DB will have to explain this global conspiracy thingy to me though...I am affraid I don't always follow...every body knows it the free massons, or was it the illuminatis (hey, TC?)
Rael says it's the aliens....sound even cooler....
TC: Carter is the nobel peace prize. And that means a lot. You know who alfred nobel was? the guy who invented TNT.
;D
Freaky world....
S....
|
|
|
|
Post by Wycco on Dec 20, 2002 17:07:23 GMT -5
Who will be better off if Saddam is replaced?
Not the US, not the UK, not Australia, nor anyone else who is pro-attacking Iraq...
The people who will benefit are the Iraqi's, the Kurds and... well Israel.
Saddam IS a bad man- but Iraq is hardly a threat to the US. Certainly less so than say North Korea is- I think even in the US itself- there are various wacko militia spread throughout the US that pose much more of a danger to the US than Saddam himself does!
Should Saddam be ousted? Perhaps- although I agree with Srrh- a military planend assassination of Saddam and his eldest son (responsible for worse attrocities than his father) would be a better route.
BUT WAIT- thats conviction with death penalty without a trial???
Well... yes it is- but far better than potentially hundreds of thousands of deaths that would occur if an invasion of Iraq caused them to fire biological and chemical weapons at a) US troops and b) Israel.
Bush being the war-lover that he is would no doubt retaliate with a nuke on a minor Iraqi city or two.
Overall- I think Iraq is only a trivial threat to the US- but yes, the middle East will be better off without Saddam. I just hate to see thousands of people die over replacing him. I vote for an assassination!
|
|
|
|
Post by Danny Boy on Dec 20, 2002 22:19:43 GMT -5
Da-silva;
If you think I’m anti-semitic you should read a Fairy Story called “The New Testament” the hero of the book constantly warns people of the danger of the Pharisee’s to the exclusion of practically any other enemy/nemesis.
If you read what I say, or have said, I do not have a problem with the jewish race, I don’t like any dogmatic religion be it, Catholic, Muslim, Judaism or many others, I certainly do not believe any laws should be based on religion. The fact remains that the big movers and the people who pull the strings in the US are Jews and I see them as the biggest threat to world peace. This does not mean that I’m anti American either, I just do not like their political leaders.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danny Boy on Dec 20, 2002 22:35:02 GMT -5
Srrh,
You are still missing the/my point, We do not have the right to interfere in another countries political destiny. The very meaning of freedom, is choice, if the Americans only want governments that they like or approve of, then we are in big trouble.
As for a conspiracy, where do I start?! However, when I see Jerry Springer ridiculing a jewish person or hear Dr. Laura taking call from “A Jew troubled by what is happening in their name” I will start to believe that I am mistaken.
|
|
