Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Another Mass Grave Found In Iraq  
User currently offlineB757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 23
Posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1350 times:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,92237,00.html

Tell me again why 16 words in the SOTU address are such a big deal? I guess the hundred of thousands murdered by Saddam are ok with some people since removing him was done by a Republican President.


"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1339 times:

Where there any "WMD" ???


Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
User currently offlineClipperhawaii From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2033 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1341 times:

People get mad over sixteen words that really would not have changed the outcome of us going in to destroy that tyrant.

Yet the world is silent on these mass graves.

Makes you wonder! But hey, there was Bosnia, Botswana, Cambodia, Poland, China. Millions of heads just turn away and pretend these things did not happen and that some were, and are being held accountable.

Lifes a bitch six feet under a tyrants boot.






"You Can't Beat The Experience"
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1332 times:

B753 and DC10Guy,

I highly recommend you both read this op-ed. It contains arguments that I think you both would find enlightening:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/16/opinion/16FRIE.html



User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1325 times:

That's good news, B757300, but that's NOT the reason we went to war, is it?

Where are the WMD's?

Where is this reconstituted nuclear program?

Where is the link between Al Qaeda and Saddam?

Those were the reasons given for the war, and none of the three has been show to be anything but false.

Do you work as a PR man for the GOP? Because that's all you sound like.


User currently offlineDc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1320 times:

Clipperhawaii, GW didn't say anything about mass graves being the reason we invaded Iraq before the war. We went there because of the threat Saddam was to us. Not because of the poor Iraqi people .... But now that we haven't found any "WMD" the poor Iraqi people is the reason why we invaded. Its clear to me we are there for control of Iraq's oil.


Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1305 times:

Alpha, don't tell me that you cannot comprehend a world where everything is not cut down and simplified to one single reason for every action. The world is a complex place.

WMDs were ONE reason to go to war. Saddam's being a brutal tyrant is another. To allow the lifting of economic sanctions on the innocent was another. And there are more. And yes, they were talked about before the war.

Don't let yourself get seduced by the sound-byte mentality of the modern news services who like to have everything in a nice clean simple package.

Charles


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1296 times:

Many of these mass graves date back to the early 80s, a time when a Republican President did open business with the Iraqi tyrant as well as doing business with hideous tyrants in all sorts of nasty places (Guatemala, El Salvador, Zaire, South Africa, the Phillipines, etc.) in full knowledge of the dirty realities.

Yet most of you who've suddenly developed a "concern" for Iraqi victims of torture, murder and political oppression were blissfully ignorant of these atrocities then. Incidentally, it was "liberal" organizations like Amnesty International that was fighting for the rights of these people while the US military-industrial complex was busy taking foreign dictators out for three star dinners at the Ritz. And lets not forget those champagne and caviar meals that Rumsfeld enjoyed with Saddam and the Hussein boys (Oh, my, little Qusay, how you've grown ! Can we send you a few Scud missile armed fighter jets as a graduation gift?)

So spare me the phony concern that right wing Conservatives have suddenly developed for slaughtered Iraqis. This has nothing to do with human rights of the oppressed and everything to do with resuscitating the dwindling political future of the lying charlatan in the White House.


User currently offlineDc10guy From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 2685 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1293 times:

Jaysit, Bravo that is an excellent point.


Next time try the old "dirty Sanchez" She'll love it !!!
User currently offlineBoeing4ever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1291 times:

Amazing. Thread after thread of Republican vs. Democrat. B757300, why did you even start this? Mass Graves aren't the reason Dubya wanted this war. Of course this SHOULD have been the reason. Dubya just wanted to finish off his father's fight. A petty feud. The man acts like a cowboy. He's not a god, so don't get so offended by the criticism. Every President takes criticism...none are perfect.

Jaysit, do you honestly expect me to believe that anyone of the Democrats or Liberals even cared? Liberal groups like Amnesty International cared. Conservative Groups like say Catholic Charities have done their fair share of caring in the world as well. So don't try to slip this "only liberals care about people...Conservatives are all heartless people" BS in here.

B4e-Forever New Frontiers


User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1272 times:

"Jaysit, do you honestly expect me to believe that anyone of the Democrats or Liberals even cared?"

Well, if you examine the Congressional record, you will see that liberal democrats like Pat Schroeder and Pat Moynihan among others were on full attack about US involvement in Central American despotic regimes, Southern AFrican despotic regimes AND Iraq. Liberal Dems were at the forefront of those calling for investigations into CIA involvement in El Salvador and Guatemala. The GOP and the blue dog dems were all fair and square behind Reagan and "the business as usual" dictum.

"Liberal" news magazines like The Nation were calling for investigations. As were liberal human rights organizations. As were liberal college campus organizations and academia. I don't know where you were in the 80s but I was in college and there was a whole political movement against US involvement in murderous dictatorial regimes worldwide. Unfortunately, this movement had virtually no participation by the American right.

Catholic Charities does a lot of good work (and they are quite definitely one of the best humanitarian religious organizations worldwide), but their focus has always been more palliative, rather than reactionary - unless it involves one of their own, as it did in El Salvador where 5 American nuns were brutally tortured and murdered.



User currently offlineAloges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8685 posts, RR: 43
Reply 11, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1261 times:

Could you please stop turning everything into a Republican vs. Democrat fight? It has become sort of boring and tedious.


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1256 times:

And some Republicans are at the leading edge of protecting human rights. The best example is Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas. For years, he has been trying to get the US to act against the slave trade that still goes on today in the Sudan. He is now pushing for the US to admit as many as 300,000 North Korean by eliminating red tape that currently blocks their arrival. Bob Dole was calling on the US to act in Balkans before we actually did.


In order for the US to act overseas there needs to be:

1. Self-interest
2. Moral justification

We cannot go in with just one of those.

I think those mass graves provide #2 for our action in Iraq. In one recently discovered grave alone, they found 10,000 corpses. Tony Blair made a point yesterday that at the very least, the US and UK eliminated an incredibly brutal dictator and that is a good thing. I agree with him.

As far as US actions in the 1980s, that was the Cold War. While we supported some pretty bad people, the Soviets were installing regimes usually much worse. We did not have the luxury to find people who believed in Jeffersonian ideals when trying to fight Soviet expansion.

[Edited 2003-07-18 15:07:17]

User currently offlineClipperhawaii From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 2033 posts, RR: 11
Reply 13, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1255 times:

As I said,"Yet the world is silent on these mass graves."
Last I looked, the world is not filled with republicans. Just holier than thou people who don't amount to a hill of beans in their obvious pleasure of "see I told you so attitude". They are right and the rest of you be damned.

Tyranny at it's finest.



"You Can't Beat The Experience"
User currently offlineLoneStarMike From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 3811 posts, RR: 34
Reply 14, posted (11 years 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1243 times:

Tell me again why 16 words in the SOTU address are such a big deal?

Because our current administration was told beforehand that the British information was highly suspect, but chose to present it anyway to the American public as a reason to go to war. Of course, 8 days later it wasn't strong enough or important enough to be presented to The U.N. as a reason to go to war.

Seems to me that when President Bush chose to utter those 16 words and deliberately mislead the public, that that would be in direct conflict with another 16 words... the last 16 words of the Gettysburg Address:

Government of the people by the people for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

LoneStarMike

User currently offlineSabena 690 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 1 week 3 hours ago) and read 1222 times:

Apparently in the blindness it is still not clear what the consequences can be of a war based on lies in the international world order...

Was Saddam horrible? Yes, but I wonder what the long term consequences of stupid bush will be.


User currently offlineKrushny From Spain, joined Dec 2000, 776 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (11 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1201 times:

Yet the world is silent on these mass graves

Wouldn´t it be better the world had acted while Saddam was digging? In Gulf W I, Bush father did not do anything while Saddam was busy filling mass graves with Shiites that had been convinced to uprise by the Allies...


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1192 times:

Krushny, as I've said a million times on here, this isn't the fault of George H.W. Bush in the '91 war. He has my respect for keeping his word on the goals of that war-liberating Kuwait. It was agreed ahead of time NOT to occupy Iraq, and he kept his word to keep his coalition together, and to keep Israel out of the war. Saddam wasn't targeted, but it was agreed then that if he died in that war, well, that would have been a bonus.

This is not the current President's father's fault-not is it the fault of Bill Clinton as some have predictibly tried to say. This current dilemma rests sqarely on our current President's shoulders.


User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (11 years 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 1191 times:

Bottom line - considering that American soldiers are STILL dying over in Iraq (courtesy of these newly liberated Iraqi's), even though this tyrant responsible for these mass graves is no longer in power, I'd say that finding the mass graves hardly justifies our men and women dying over there. Oh yeah, the humanitarian side sure gives you the warm fuzzies, but when you get down to the brass tacks, Saddams treatment of his own people posed ZERO threat to the US citizens or the US Constitution. So I guess that each of those 16 words is more important than many are giving them credit for. Then again, it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
262 Mass Graves Found In Iraq (1,000,000+ Victims) posted Wed Sep 8 2004 01:27:15 by B757300
Report: Hundreds Of WMDs Found In Iraq posted Thu Jun 22 2006 04:26:08 by Jetjack74
CIA’s Final Report: No WMD Found In Iraq posted Tue Apr 26 2005 22:14:18 by Tbar220
Biggest Marijuana Joint Ever! Found In Iraq posted Mon Nov 22 2004 00:06:03 by Techrep
CD Containing School Plans Found In Iraq posted Fri Oct 8 2004 07:53:35 by L-188
More Chemical Weapons Found In Iraq posted Fri Jul 2 2004 04:51:41 by B757300
Photos Of The MIG25 Found In Iraq posted Sat Jan 17 2004 20:15:33 by MidnightMike
'Chemical Weapons' Found In Iraq posted Sat Jan 10 2004 21:20:30 by VS340
No Banned Arms Found In Iraq posted Thu Sep 25 2003 16:25:19 by Qb001
Very Strong Evidence Of WMDs Found In Iraq posted Fri Apr 11 2003 20:30:57 by MD-90