14 Jan 05
I'll tell you what i find even more depressing. I had BBC24 (news channel) on rolling news for 6.5 hours last night (it's on in the background while i work, err, play chess) and the coverage of this event went something like this....
"Further news, President Bush declared the search for WMD over today. The search didn't find anything"
That was it! No comment, no questions, no "errr, hold on a minute, maybe this should be our lead story", no "hold on a minute, isn't this why we went to war." Im Shocked. What happened to the news? No wonder TV stopped appealing to me a couple of years ago. Celebrity Big Brother is more important than war.
14 Jan 05
Originally posted by flyUnityThis is very interesting. Thank you for the link.
I decided to look this up, although this isnt the same one I saw before, it shows that 57% say they are better off now, then before the War
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/GoodMorningAmerica/Iraq_anniversary_poll_040314.html
I think it's very interesting, though certainly not surprising, to see the disparities between Arab respondents and Kurdish respondents. It makes a lot of sense given that the Kurds endured a great deal of Saddam's persecution and very little of the US bombing.
Perhaps it is not reasonable in our discussion to continue to refer to "the Iraqi people" as if they were a fairly homogenous body. Not only are they a very mixed people (Most of us knew this before.), but the effects of the war have been drastically different these different segments.
Also, I'd be interested to see how attitudes have changed. I'd like to see the same survey conducted again this March after the elections.
I recommend anyone reading to check out the link, but more importantly to check out the two pdf files at the bottom on the questionarre and the methodology.
14 Jan 05
1 edit
Originally posted by flyUnityProblem is, those free and fair elections won't be in some areas, nother problem is that a lot of Saddams old security forces had to be brought back in to help maintain power.
I think were better off though, one question for everybody, Is it better to have Saddom in power or not? he killed hundreds of thousands of ppl,
Iraq Is happy,
US Liberals are not,
I think that is a good trade 😛
At least we know ...[text shortened]... o WMD,
If we been hit by a WMD liberals would still be whining,
Also, what happens if free and fair elections did happen, andf the Shia cleric who is elected tells the US to fob off and Iraq and Iran become good buddies?
"The US set a dangerous precedent? I think the UN did by not enforcing their laws, now any nation knows that if it dosnt obey security resaloutions, it has nothing to fear, The UN wont do anything. " - Sorry to bring up and old argument, but as you don't seem to know it, let me broaden your hoirizons.
Go to www.un.org, check out the security resolutions, get a list of countries that are in violation of sanctions. $10 says that the most of the top ones are US allies, Israel had over 70 outstanding resolutions against it last time I checked.
14 Jan 05
1 edit
Originally posted by flyUnityIraq polls? Do you really believe someone wanders around Iraq with a clipboard asking if they like being liberated?
No offence, but have you been watching CBS too much?
Look at the Iraq polls, Most of em are happy that they were liberated
And btw, Demacrats voted for the war too (when public opionion was for it), They just bailed out when public ...[text shortened]... s them
Oh, You never did answer my question in my previous post
Are these poll results appearing in the speeches of Bush, Blair, and Powell?
14 Jan 05
Originally posted by steerpikeSeriously, someone did.
Iraq polls? Do you really believe someone wanders around Iraq with a clipboard asking if they like being liberated?
Are these poll results appearing in the speeches of Bush, Blair, and Powell?
However I wonder how impartial the voting was, if I saw a journo being escorted by guys with big guns, pretty sure I would try agree with him on whatever he says.
If Iraq is so safe, how come in Bagdad, the green zone is the only area safe to foreigners?
14 Jan 05
Originally posted by builderEven the so called green zone doesn't sound to safe to me..
If Iraq is so safe, how come in Bagdad, the green zone is the only area safe to foreigners?
I got this yesterday from the mailing list of Dahr Jamail, a freelance american journalist in Baghdad.
A Restless Calm…
I’m typing as mortars are blasting away in the nearby “Green Zone.”
Mortars are easy to tell-the higher pitched ‘thunk’ of their launch,
then a pause, then a loud boom that echoes through the still night.
Blaring sirens wail in the distance, along with the random cracking of
gunfire. Nightfall always seems to bring action in this area of central
Baghdad-just last night there were many sporadic gun battles out my window.
14 Jan 05
Originally posted by AThousandYoungThat is spot on. We need to be sure that the reason we go to war is a sound one a priori. If all that was required to justify a war was that something good must come out of it sometime in the indefinite future, then nearly any war in history could be justified by any side.
Thanks for posting the poll. It's very interesting.
I still think that invading other countries to improve their lives without checking to see if the people are ok with it is highly questionable.
15 Jan 05
2 edits
Originally posted by steerpikeActually.
It is official. The Duelfer report concluded that Iraq had no stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons and its nuclear program had decayed before last year's U.S.-led invasion.
Powell lied. ¨Powell reiterated U.S. and British cl ...[text shortened]... of you believed them then. And some of you still believe them now.
Powell was wrong.
He has admitted it.
Here is a big shock for you. He and Bush knew it was a lie.
They just needed to put pressure on the biggest "state" sponsor of terror, ie, Saudi Arabia.
So they used a pretext and a lie and invaded Iraq. To pressure the Saudies.
Worked too. The Islamofacists are now attacking the Saudi's.
good. I love it when a plan comes together.
<edit> Don't come cryin' to me because Bush and Powell are smarter than us. They are. And they saw the real problem and did something about it. Good on em. What's a few hundred thousand dead people compared to the makings of another world war. Or do you dare think of that?
15 Jan 05
Originally posted by nikitaproninOk. Sorry. I'm off to piss on my own leg for the fool that I am.
BUSH WON THE ELECTION YOU COMMUNIST IDIOTS!!! WHY HE HAD A PLAN,WAS NOT A IDIOT,THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CHOSE HIM,NOT STUPID PEOPLE FROM MENTAL HOSPITALS.KERRY FANS NEED TO GET A LIFE. AND STOP WASTING POST SPACE IDIOTICLY.
BOW TO MY MIGHTY MIND YOU IGNORANT FOOLS
15 Jan 05
1 edit
Originally posted by TinorangatiratangaBush now has a few problems:
Now that Bush succesfully hoodwinked most Americans into illegally attacking Iraq, patriotism is a sure vote catcher! how will he now detract Americans (again!) from the ballsup of the Iraq invasion?
whatever it is will have to be some show!
American Intelligence has been shown to be either politically driven or incompetent.
The Secretary of State has lied to the United Nations General Assembly, Bush has lied to the world, and future statements on dangers from dictators will be distrusted.
He has shown American forces can be driven into a long and bloody street war where superior weapons is not an overwhelming advantage
Volunteers did not expect two years in a hostile country where even a mess hall is the front line.
So unless he turns things around in four years, he will be labelled as the President who lost the war- plus Bin Laden is still out there laughing at him.
16 Jan 05
It was all about free elections huh?
http://cnn.netscape.cnn.com/news/story.jsp?
idq=/ff/story/0002/20050116/0807442623.
htm&PhotoID=20050116BAG02D&floc=NW_1-T
Bush is not a puppet of the neoconservatives?
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050116/ts_nm/
iran_usa_newyorker_dc