• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

USA ten years in Iraq this week


commonman

Well-known member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
5,357
The USA are ten years there this week, can anyone tell me what the hell this war was all about, some say that between 150,000 and 1.2 million people have been direct or indirect casualties in this war, what the hell was it all about whos big idea was it to go to war in the first place.
 
Last edited:

borntorum

Well-known member
Joined
May 26, 2008
Messages
12,805
It was George Bush's idea and it was about non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
I think it was the likes of Cheney, Perle and Wolfowitz who originally wanted to use 9/11 to finish the job started by Dubya's dad in 1991, and who subsequently convinced the president
 

seabhcan

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
14,327
One way of looking at it is the NeoCons wanted to reduce the power of Saudi Arabia by taking the Iraqi oil fields and flooding the market.

The Saudis saw this a mile off, and funded anti-occupation terrorism and suicide attacks - these prevented development of the oil production for long enough for the Americans to lose interest.

Now the Saudis have an unchallengable position and control the whole region.
 

Aristodemus

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
3,741
You might not remember but there was an individual by the name of Saddam Hussein who used to run the place. he was an evil dictator who started 2 wars with his neighbours resulting in the deaths of over a million people. In addition he systematically went about a program of genocide against his own people which involved the use of weapons of mass destruction, ie chemical weapons. He also set about the destruction of an indigenous minority of people, the marsh Arabs by laying waste the area they inhabited. In addition he supported the use of suicide bombers in Israel and offered financial inducements to the families of so called "martyrs". He also ran a terror network that involved incarceration and torture of opponents and their families by methods which included, amongst others, industrial shredders, acid baths, amputation etc. A thoroughly nasty piece of work. When he failed to abide by UN resolutions with regard to inspections for weapons of mass destruction, which ironically he had disposed of, it was decided he had to be removed. He was.
 

Hitch 22

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2011
Messages
5,220
Saddam Hussein was a fascist tyrant who brutalized his own people for 30 years and committed mass genocide using poison gas, invaded or attacked his neighbors and supported terrorism. His sons were waiting in the wings to replace him. UN sanctions had merely resulted in a humanitarian disaster.

As bloody and as horrendous as the war was and is (it is still ongoing even though US and Coalition forces have withdrawn) Iraq today has a democratically elected government and has a chance at a future.

American and European opposition to the war is nowhere to be heard now because they primary motivation was Western boys and girls were dying.

Today there are no anti-war protests against Assad because quite frankly the bleeding hearts don't give a sh*t about the Syrians and they likewise didn't give a sh*t about the Iraqis and never did.
 

commonman

Well-known member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
5,357
Saddam Hussein was a fascist tyrant who brutalized his own people for 30 years and committed mass genocide using poison gas, invaded or attacked his neighbors and supported terrorism. His sons were waiting in the wings to replace him. UN sanctions had merely resulted in a humanitarian disaster.

As bloody and as horrendous as the war was and is (it is still ongoing even though US and Coalition forces have withdrawn) Iraq today has a democratically elected government and has a chance at a future.
Why did they just take out Hussein would not have been that big of a job, put who the want in to power the USA have done that before, save going to war.
 

seabhcan

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 3, 2007
Messages
14,327
Saddam Hussein was a fascist tyrant who brutalized his own people for 30 years
Why had the US nothing to say about the fascist tyrant who ruled Iran up to 1979. Or about the fascist tyrants who ruled across latin america for decades?

I don't believe you are stupid, so you must have another reason for not seeing the obvious.
 

Levellers

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2011
Messages
14,115
You might not remember but there was an individual by the name of Saddam Hussein who used to run the place. he was an evil dictator who started 2 wars with his neighbours resulting in the deaths of over a million people. In addition he systematically went about a program of genocide against his own people which involved the use of weapons of mass destruction, ie chemical weapons. He also set about the destruction of an indigenous minority of people, the marsh Arabs by laying waste the area they inhabited. In addition he supported the use of suicide bombers in Israel and offered financial inducements to the families of so called "martyrs". He also ran a terror network that involved incarceration and torture of opponents and their families by methods which included, amongst others, industrial shredders, acid baths, amputation etc. A thoroughly nasty piece of work. When he failed to abide by UN resolutions with regard to inspections for weapons of mass destruction, which ironically he had disposed of, it was decided he had to be removed. He was.
Is this the fellah you are on about - just about to take delivery of chemical weapons from the USA?

 

Dadaist

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
13,803
You might not remember but there was an individual by the name of Saddam Hussein who used to run the place. he was an evil dictator who started 2 wars with his neighbours resulting in the deaths of over a million people. In addition he systematically went about a program of genocide against his own people which involved the use of weapons of mass destruction, ie chemical weapons. He also set about the destruction of an indigenous minority of people, the marsh Arabs by laying waste the area they inhabited. In addition he supported the use of suicide bombers in Israel and offered financial inducements to the families of so called "martyrs". He also ran a terror network that involved incarceration and torture of opponents and their families by methods which included, amongst others, industrial shredders, acid baths, amputation etc. A thoroughly nasty piece of work. When he failed to abide by UN resolutions with regard to inspections for weapons of mass destruction, which ironically he had disposed of, it was decided he had to be removed. He was.
Are they the same Marsh Arabs that the US encouraged to rise up against Saddam's regime in 1991? And then did almost nothing to help the uprising.
 

james5001

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
11,503
It was George Bush's idea and it was about non-existent weapons of mass destruction.
It wasn't about that, as evidence has now shown.
 

james5001

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
11,503
You might not remember but there was an individual by the name of Saddam Hussein who used to run the place. he was an evil dictator who started 2 wars with his neighbours resulting in the deaths of over a million people. In addition he systematically went about a program of genocide against his own people which involved the use of weapons of mass destruction, ie chemical weapons. He also set about the destruction of an indigenous minority of people, the marsh Arabs by laying waste the area they inhabited. In addition he supported the use of suicide bombers in Israel and offered financial inducements to the families of so called "martyrs". He also ran a terror network that involved incarceration and torture of opponents and their families by methods which included, amongst others, industrial shredders, acid baths, amputation etc. A thoroughly nasty piece of work. When he failed to abide by UN resolutions with regard to inspections for weapons of mass destruction, which ironically he had disposed of, it was decided he had to be removed. He was.
That's not objective at all. If I introduce the idea that the us was supporting him when he was gassing the Kurds, that completely dismantles your post.
 

james5001

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
11,503
Saddam Hussein was a fascist tyrant who brutalized his own people for 30 years and committed mass genocide using poison gas, invaded or attacked his neighbors and supported terrorism. His sons were waiting in the wings to replace him. UN sanctions had merely resulted in a humanitarian disaster.

As bloody and as horrendous as the war was and is (it is still ongoing even though US and Coalition forces have withdrawn) Iraq today has a democratically elected government and has a chance at a future.

American and European opposition to the war is nowhere to be heard now because they primary motivation was Western boys and girls were dying.

Today there are no anti-war protests against Assad because quite frankly the bleeding hearts don't give a sh*t about the Syrians and they likewise didn't give a sh*t about the Iraqis and never did.
He was being supported by the us at the time.
 
Last edited:

Hitch 22

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2011
Messages
5,220
Why had the US nothing to say about the fascist tyrant who ruled Iran up to 1979. Or about the fascist tyrants who ruled across latin america for decades?
So should Saddam have been left in power then?

I don't believe you are stupid, so you must have another reason for not seeing the obvious.
Should Iraqis still be living under the boot heels of Saddam's henchmen?

Yes or no?

If the Iraq invasion had not been launched chances are the regime would still be in control of Iraq with his sons waiting in the wings to take power.
 
Top