| Author |
Other bad news from Iraq. |
boto43
Joined: Nov 23, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Trnava-Nitra,Pardubice CSSR
PM |
All Czechs were released. Iraqis don't know anything about disintegration of Czechoslovakia but know we have no troops in Iraq. Czechs and Slovaks aren't an enemies for Iraqis. That's all for now. :-D
This message was posted from a T610 | |
|
BobaFett
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Kamino (wish it would be Lund)
PM, WWW
|
Interested what will happen to the siita cities tomorrow. The us army freed iraq from saddam. Officially. Now they fight against the freed siitas.
This message was posted from a R520 |
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
They're fighting a hardcore group who are determined to cause trouble no matter what.
Please remember that, since the end of the war, more Iraqis have been killed by fellow lraqis than by Coalition troops.
The Coalition is there trying to help rebuild Iraq, but these fanatics don't want that.
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC |
BobaFett
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Kamino (wish it would be Lund)
PM, WWW
|
Weird way of help. The siitas wont let it against the foreign troops.
This message was posted from a R520 |
boto43
Joined: Nov 23, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Trnava-Nitra,Pardubice CSSR
PM |
Scot , what r u speakin at , coalition = USA, no others need to be in the war with Iraq  |
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
Yes they do, if the US acts alone it is accused of unilateralism, a broad coalition ensures support for international rights, not just those of the US. Ignorant anti-US feeling often tries to portray the US as some form of demon out for itself, this is only partly true. The US has done more than most to preserve democracy and freedom in the past seventy years.
The problem comes from two fronts, those determined to criticise US policies no matter what and fanatics intent on oppossing the US no matter what (anyone notice a similarity?). The vast throngs of people who make such criticisims rarely have viable alternatives. Instead of constant criticism perhaps uniting to help the Iraqi people might be a good idea?
@bobafett
If you mean liberation from a doped up, psycopathic meglomaniac dictator, or giving food and medicines, or risking one's life for complete strangers or even fighting ruthless terrorists determined to cause as much sufferring as possible, then l agree, that is indeed 'some help'!
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC |
BobaFett
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Kamino (wish it would be Lund)
PM, WWW
|
The iraqi nation never asked the usa to free them of saddam. It reminds me as the russians freed us and stayed for 40 years.
This message was posted from a R520 |
boto43
Joined: Nov 23, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Trnava-Nitra,Pardubice CSSR
PM |
Invasion of SU to Czechoslovakia 30 years wasn't so dangerous 4 ppl. No killing of ppl,generally no shooting. I can remember to it I was 10 yrs old. That wasn't war as now in Iraq. I can't remember to Hungarian's events but I heard it was
much worse. Anyway I can say Russians weren't so aggressive as Americans do now.
This message was posted from a T610 |
BobaFett
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Kamino (wish it would be Lund)
PM, WWW
|
In 10-20 years the oil reserves of the usa are over.
This message was posted from a R520 |
boto43
Joined: Nov 23, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Trnava-Nitra,Pardubice CSSR
PM |
Hey boba,how do u know? Are u an expert 4 crude oil?
This message was posted from a T610 |
BobaFett
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Kamino (wish it would be Lund)
PM, WWW
|
no, i watch usually, if i have tha time for it, n-tv, the german news television. very interesting chanel, with great comments and reports made by real experts. my favourite is an older man, called mr. scholl-latour, he had already some very interesting news reports from the near east.
|
boto43
Joined: Nov 23, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: Trnava-Nitra,Pardubice CSSR
PM |
We don't have the tv channel in my country. Which part of Hungary do u live in?I live 50 km or less from Hungarian border.
This message was posted from a T610 |
BobaFett
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Kamino (wish it would be Lund)
PM, WWW
|
think we shouldnt go here off topic, hope u undersatnd it. i receive it via satelite. a kind of german cnn.
|
scotsboyuk
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM, WWW
|
@bobafett
I point you to this article:
http://www.findarticles.com/c[....]6_20/55926786/p1/article.jhtml
It makes two very important points; the first of which is that new finds are taking place thus extending oil reserves. This is in part because of the second point, improvements in technology. With more advanced technology we have been able to drill in deeper water for oil as well as accessing oil reserves in ever more difficult areas of the world for drilling.
Even if the entire world's oil reserves were to run out tomorrow the situation would still not be as dire as some might think. Synthetic oil has been produced since before the Second World War, indeed, Germany largely relied upon synthetic oil during WWII to satisfy both civilian and military needs. There is the capability to produce synthetic oil to meet our requirements, the reason we use natural oil is because it is cheaper, simple economics.
You seem to be of the view that the US invasion of Iraq was chiefly to do with oil, I can see why this would be an attractive viewpoint to hold, and I agree with it, in part. The first Gulf War was certainly motivated by concerns over oil, in this Kuwaiti oil, if Iraq was allowed to continue then it could very well have invaded Saudi Arabia and dominated Middle Eastern oil supplies, thus having a significant degree of control over the global economy.
The second Gulf War was for an entirely different reason, supposed weapons of mass destruction. There was no oil at stake in Iraq, hence no reason for invasion. Iraq was permitted to sell only a limited quantity of oil under UN sanctions and therefore had no great capacity to affect world oil prices or to seriously affect the global economy. I am not naive enough to think that the US will not capitalise on its control of Iraq to put its oil reserves to best use in aiding America, but certainly it seems an extremely unlikely motivation for America to launch a major war, in which there was the possibility of thousands of US troops dying, simply to control Iraq's oil reserves for a few years. America cannot keep control of Iraq indefinitely, not only because world opinion wouldn't let it, but also because of the fact that it would be prohibitively expensive, not just in terms of money, the disadvantages would far out way any benefit they would receive from Iraqi oil supplies. Hence we establish that the US cannot and will not maintain direct control over Iraq indefinitely.
Your analogy between Iraq and the Soviet Union is flawed for a number of reasons. At the end of WWII the Soviet Union had direct control over much of eastern Europe, to dislodge them from that control would have required British, Imperial & Commonwealth, U.S., French and other allied forces to commit many millions of men to another war, which in all probability would have lasted several years and cost millions more lives. There was a plan formulated in case the Soviets did attack the British and U.S. forces and try to push on into Western Europe, this plan was codenamed 'Operation Unthinkable'.
The US led invasion of Iraq freed the Iraqi people from a regime, which used torture, mutilation, execution and other barbarities to maintain its power. The fact that the Iraqi people did not ask to be freed from this oppressive system is not surprising, would you publicly call for a foreign power to invade your country and depose your government if doing so meant that you could be beheaded on a street corner or tortured to death?
The current insurgency is by a minority of the population and most polls show that the greater majority of Iraqis want the Coalition forces to stay in Iraq to provide security and help rebuild their country. Of course one could counter this with the argument that it was the Coalition who destroyed much of Iraq in the first place, if it weren't for the fact that there wasn't very much of Iraq to destroy. The regime had embezzled millions designed for aid, medical supplies and rebuilding programmes after the first Gulf War. Even before the first Gulf War the regime had allocated huge amounts of money to the military and weapons programmes. Of course the Western nations have themselves to blame, for making Saddam so powerful in the eighties, through financial and technological support in an effort to use Iraq as a bulwark against Iran.
I am extremely luck in that I live in a country, which has not been invaded in almost a millennia, a country that for almost two and a half centuries, hasn't lost a war and a country, which has never given into evil or allowed evil men and women to come to power; perhaps because your country has been under foreign control (I am presuming you are old enough to actually remember the Communists) your judgement is clouded? Perhaps you are of the view that all occupying powers are inherently bad for the country they occupy? I don't know the answers to these questions and I don't presume to tarnish you with a brush, however, I would like to know what your alternative would be when dealing with dictators such as Saddam. These men will not give up power of their own free will, to do so would be suicide, where would they go? Dictators maintain their power through fear and intimidation, not through popular support. Perhaps you think it acceptable for millions of Iraqis to live in fear whilst we try to negotiate with Saddam and persuade him to be nicer? A major flaw in the war to outs Saddam, from my perspective, is that it didn't take place earlier; he should have been deposed years ago, the same holds true for other oppressive regimes around the world.
Your arguments are flawed in the extreme, you take no account of what the Iraqi people actually want, peace, security, a good education for their children, medical facilities for when they are ill, freedom to go about their business and provide for their families, prospects for themselves and their children, freedom to practice their own religion (Saddam oppressed the Shiite majority) as well as the many other basic rights we take for granted here in the West.
It is one thing to sit here in Europe and drone on about how awful it is that the US has swaggered in again and bombed people, but please do remember that every day American and British soldiers, along with soldiers from other nations are fighting insurgents determined to cause as much damage to Iraq as possible and in the process killing innocent Iraqis and foreign civilians. Coalition soldiers don't want to be away from their families and loved ones, they don't want to be stuck in a country where there is a good chance that they will die and they most certainly don't want to be there any longer than they have to, yet they do their jobs, they protect Iraqi civilians, they guard buildings fundamental to Iraq's infrastructure, they willingly give of themselves to defend a people far from home. Perhaps the critics cans top for a moment and actually consider what it is they are railing against, because it increasingly becomes apparent to most sensible people that it is nothing more than anti-Americanism just for the sake of it.
"I may be drunk my dear woman, but in the morning I will be sober, and you will still be ugly." WSC |
BobaFett
Joined: Jan 06, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Kamino (wish it would be Lund)
PM, WWW
|
@scotsboyuk thx for the site, gonna check it in details later. your comment is well made, pity, i dont speak on that level english, thatswhy my short replies. u may pls agree it. thx. anyway, the usa took the oilfields away from europe, saddams dictatorius behavour has nothing to do with the whole situation. maybe in the point that he helped the palestinians with oil to buy for it weapons against the jews. the power jewish lobby in the usa is well known. saddam is a sunnita, he kept hard the siitas, now the siitas have an option to fight against sunnitas and the troops aswell. bin laden is from saudi arabia, this fact weakes and makes them in the eyes of the us government untrustable, so only arabian country is now kuweit which accept usa. its a great time for the al-kaida to come out from the caves and use the whole circus there for its own interest. thats all i can say to it now.
| |
|
Access the forum with a mobile phone via esato.mobi
|
Posted: 2004-04-16 19:45
