Selectivity

Pages: 1 2 3

2007-04-30 03:58:53

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|7003

The main excuse pro-Iraq war people come up with these days (now that the place is Vietnam II) is that going into Iraq was just and righteous, 'liberating' the people of Iraq from a brutal dictator. Well can I ask these people the following questions:

1. Why were the Iraqi people more 'deserving' of such a 'humanitarian' intervention than the people of Myanmar living under the brutal military junta regim of Than Shwe?

2. Why were the Iraqi people more 'deserving' of such a 'humanitarian' intervention than the starving people of North Korea living under the one and only Stalinist regime left standing on the planet?

3. Why were the Iraqi people more 'deserving' of such a 'humanitarian' intervention than the starving and oppressed Zimbabweans living under the megalomaniacal despot Robert Mugabe, who bulldozed thousands of homes belonging to opposition supporters and whose henchmen can brazenly and openly assault the opposition leader without reproach (goodness knows what happens to people less important)?

4. Why were the Iraqi people more 'deserving' of such a 'humanitarian' intervention than those Somalians trying to deal with what can only be described as a state of anarchy perpetuated by rival warlord factions and religious groups?

5. Why were the Iraqi people more 'deserving' of such a 'humanitarian' intervention than the Chechnyans whose legitimate desire for an independent state of Chechnya is being levelled with brute force and miserable cruelty?

6. Why were the Iraqi people more 'deserving' of such a 'humanitarian' intervention than the non-arab Sudanese who are being systematically burned out of their homes and chopped into small pieces?

7. Why were the Iraqi people more 'deserving' of such a 'humanitarian' intervention than the Palestinians who have made to 'wander the desert' for the past 59 years without a state and made to suffer one of the most brutal and oppressive military occupations witnessed in modern times?

Personally I'm not generally an advocate of intervention so don't give the pointless stock response 'Well why don't you do something about it!?', because I really couldn't care less.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2007-04-30 04:04:17)

2007-04-30 04:01:15

Cougar: Banned; +1,962|7213|Dallas

/agree

Ask an Iraqi how they feel about Liberation.

2007-04-30 04:13:01

RicardoBlanco: The English; +177|7016|Oxford

These can only be rhetorical questions Cam. You know liberation was never the issue.

2007-04-30 04:18:48

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|7029|SE London

RicardoBlanco wrote:
These can only be rhetorical questions Cam. You know liberation was never the issue.

But what was?

I can think of lots of things that weren't ever the issue and lots of things that were potential factors. But I really have very little idea why the Iraq war was fought.

2007-04-30 04:24:50

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|7003

The question that raises the most issues is the North Korean one:

a) They were thought to be developing WMD at the time and actually were (unlike Iraq). They are now thought to possess a nuclear weapon.

b) The kind of propaganda posters you see on North Korean billboards are of the following general type:

https://www.ki4u.com/north_korea_jan_2003.jpg

https://www.geocities.com/worstlogever/lil_nkorea.gif

https://international.ucla.edu/asia/nk/nk7.jpg

2007-04-30 04:33:53

RicardoBlanco: The English; +177|7016|Oxford

Bertster7 wrote:
RicardoBlanco wrote:
These can only be rhetorical questions Cam. You know liberation was never the issue.
But what was?

I can think of lots of things that weren't ever the issue and lots of things that were potential factors. But I really have very little idea why the Iraq war was fought.

Fuck knows...revenge, oil, WMD, I don't think anyone knows anymore.

2007-04-30 04:39:36

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|7029|SE London

RicardoBlanco wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
RicardoBlanco wrote:
These can only be rhetorical questions Cam. You know liberation was never the issue.
But what was?

I can think of lots of things that weren't ever the issue and lots of things that were potential factors. But I really have very little idea why the Iraq war was fought.
Fuck knows...revenge, oil, WMD, I don't think anyone knows anymore.

I don't think it was WMD, there are too many holes in the intelligence arguments. I don't think it was oil, although the fact it was there probably contributed, by way of covering the costs of the war by sticking loads of money back into the US economy through big contracts with US companies. Revenge is possible, but if it was that, then that's very scary.

I'm tempted to believe the whole thing was done for the profit of a very few select elitist US businessmen who happened to have ties to Bush. I wonder how much Cheney's made off Haliburton kickbacks?

2007-04-30 04:40:56

Varegg: Support fanatic :-); +2,206|7258|Nårvei

I can answer all questions at once: Domestic defence industry and Oil !

Wait behind the line ..............................................................

2007-04-30 04:48:47

TrollmeaT: Aspiring Objectivist; +492|7121|Colorado

Poor Foreign policy, were trying to bring the good life to waring tribes when the real threat is over their border.
If it was for the oil then why are my gas prices almost at $3.00 a gallon?

Last edited by TrollmeaT (2007-04-30 04:50:30)

2007-04-30 04:52:33

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|7155|67.222.138.85

Cougar wrote:
/agree

Ask an Iraqi how they feel about Liberation.

1:23

"Do you feel liberated? If I was liberated I would do and say what I want. I don't feel safe saying what I want"
(or something to that effect)

He just helped make that movie and didn't feel safe expressing his views? Right. Everyone one there was a male about 20-25, college student probably, typical liberal young adult, just like the people that age in the US saying we should pull out. Very bias.

The reason we went into Iraq had nothing to do with Hussein, WMDs, oil, or liberating the people. The reason we went to Iraq was to put a distinct American presence in the Middle East and show that we were not weak to prevent fundamentalist Islamic groups from continuing to gain support against us. We cannot fight a war against terrorists on the home front, it is impossible to keep every terrorist from getting in. The war must be fought on their homeland, if you truly want to prevent more attacks on U.S. soil as best as possible.

Now the effectiveness of this show of strength is/has failing/failed, but don't believe the necessary lies of the government. Of course he lied to the people, no one would have ever supported a war based on national image. I can't believe so many people are so naive to the fact that politicians lie a lot.

2007-04-30 05:14:40

crimson_grunt: Shitty Disposition (apparently); +214|7102|Teesside, UK

Varegg wrote:
I can answer all questions at once: Domestic defence industry and Oil !

Someone pointed out a while ago (turquoise i think) that Iraq switched to the euro for trading oil etc and it was switched back when saddam fell so I'd buy that. Iran started talking about switching to the Euro and bam! new target acquired.

2007-04-30 05:22:29

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6977|Global Command

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Cougar wrote:
/agree

Ask an Iraqi how they feel about Liberation.
1:23

"Do you feel liberated? If I was liberated I would do and say what I want. I don't feel safe saying what I want"
(or something to that effect)

He just helped make that movie and didn't feel safe expressing his views? Right. Everyone one there was a male about 20-25, college student probably, typical liberal young adult, just like the people that age in the US saying we should pull out. Very bias.

The reason we went into Iraq had nothing to do with Hussein, WMDs, oil, or liberating the people. The reason we went to Iraq was to put a distinct American presence in the Middle East and show that we were not weak to prevent fundamentalist Islamic groups from continuing to gain support against us. We cannot fight a war against terrorists on the home front, it is impossible to keep every terrorist from getting in. The war must be fought on their homeland, if you truly want to prevent more attacks on U.S. soil as best as possible.

Now the effectiveness of this show of strength is/has failing/failed, but don't believe the necessary lies of the government. Of course he lied to the people, no one would have ever supported a war based on national image. I can't believe so many people are so naive to the fact that politicians lie a lot.

Pretty much sums it up nicely. Thread over.

2007-04-30 05:24:27

sergeriver: Cowboy from Hell; +1,928|7205|Argentina

ATG wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Cougar wrote:
/agree

Ask an Iraqi how they feel about Liberation.
1:23

"Do you feel liberated? If I was liberated I would do and say what I want. I don't feel safe saying what I want"
(or something to that effect)

He just helped make that movie and didn't feel safe expressing his views? Right. Everyone one there was a male about 20-25, college student probably, typical liberal young adult, just like the people that age in the US saying we should pull out. Very bias.

The reason we went into Iraq had nothing to do with Hussein, WMDs, oil, or liberating the people. The reason we went to Iraq was to put a distinct American presence in the Middle East and show that we were not weak to prevent fundamentalist Islamic groups from continuing to gain support against us. We cannot fight a war against terrorists on the home front, it is impossible to keep every terrorist from getting in. The war must be fought on their homeland, if you truly want to prevent more attacks on U.S. soil as best as possible.

Now the effectiveness of this show of strength is/has failing/failed, but don't believe the necessary lies of the government. Of course he lied to the people, no one would have ever supported a war based on national image. I can't believe so many people are so naive to the fact that politicians lie a lot.
Pretty much sums it up nicely. Thread over.

What about the people in the countries mentioned by CameronPoe? Are those less important?

2007-04-30 05:29:01

Cougar: Banned; +1,962|7213|Dallas

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Cougar wrote:
/agree

Ask an Iraqi how they feel about Liberation.
1:23

"Do you feel liberated? If I was liberated I would do and say what I want. I don't feel safe saying what I want"
(or something to that effect)

He just helped make that movie and didn't feel safe expressing his views? Right. Everyone one there was a male about 20-25, college student probably, typical liberal young adult, just like the people that age in the US saying we should pull out. Very bias.

Also notice how he's in his house with most of the lights off. Click on the video, go to the user channel and watch the other video's. It's not like they are running around all happy and free, filming everything. In one episode one of the guys cut a hole in a back pack and stuck a camera in his bag. He wanted to show the carnage on his street but he was afraid that if an American saw him with something in his hand he would be shot, and if an insurgent saw him they would take him for a traitor and kill him. Real biased, liberal, and typical huh? Or watch the episode where the guys grandma's house got raided, ramsacked and shot up full of holes because an American convoy saw someone sitting in a lawn chair on the porch.

Flaming Maniac wrote:
The reason we went into Iraq had nothing to do with Hussein, WMDs, oil, or liberating the people. The reason we went to Iraq was to put a distinct American presence in the Middle East and show that we were not weak to prevent fundamentalist Islamic groups from continuing to gain support against us. We cannot fight a war against terrorists on the home front, it is impossible to keep every terrorist from getting in. The war must be fought on their homeland, if you truly want to prevent more attacks on U.S. soil as best as possible.

After N. Korea admits to building nukes, openly hates the west and vows to destroy it and the causing of humanitarian crisis year after year by it's own government, that still doesn't justify us going to war with PRNK. So how does some faulty evidence about aluminum tubes, birthday cake and mobile chem labs in railcars qualify as "making America safer"? I feel much more threatened from N.Korea than I ever did from Iraq or Afghanistan.

2007-04-30 05:40:43

JahManRed: wank; +646|7076|IRELAND

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Cougar wrote:
/agree

Ask an Iraqi how they feel about Liberation.
1:23

"Do you feel liberated? If I was liberated I would do and say what I want. I don't feel safe saying what I want"
(or something to that effect)

He just helped make that movie and didn't feel safe expressing his views? Right. Everyone one there was a male about 20-25, college student probably, typical liberal young adult, just like the people that age in the US saying we should pull out. Very bias.

The reason we went into Iraq had nothing to do with Hussein, WMDs, oil, or liberating the people. The reason we went to Iraq was to put a distinct American presence in the Middle East and show that we were not weak to prevent fundamentalist Islamic groups from continuing to gain support against us. We cannot fight a war against terrorists on the home front, it is impossible to keep every terrorist from getting in. The war must be fought on their homeland, if you truly want to prevent more attacks on U.S. soil as best as possible.

Now the effectiveness of this show of strength is/has failing/failed, but don't believe the necessary lies of the government. Of course he lied to the people, no one would have ever supported a war based on national image. I can't believe so many people are so naive to the fact that politicians lie a lot.

So going into Iraqi is a way to counter terrorism and show the terrorists who's boss? If that's the plan then it was a total failure. You have created the perfect training and recruiting ground for a whole new generation of fighters, just as the Taliban were born out of the US & USSR proxy war.

2007-04-30 05:52:54

ATG: Banned; +5,233|6977|Global Command

sergeriver wrote:
ATG wrote:
Flaming_Maniac wrote:

1:23

"Do you feel liberated? If I was liberated I would do and say what I want. I don't feel safe saying what I want"
(or something to that effect)

He just helped make that movie and didn't feel safe expressing his views? Right. Everyone one there was a male about 20-25, college student probably, typical liberal young adult, just like the people that age in the US saying we should pull out. Very bias.

The reason we went into Iraq had nothing to do with Hussein, WMDs, oil, or liberating the people. The reason we went to Iraq was to put a distinct American presence in the Middle East and show that we were not weak to prevent fundamentalist Islamic groups from continuing to gain support against us. We cannot fight a war against terrorists on the home front, it is impossible to keep every terrorist from getting in. The war must be fought on their homeland, if you truly want to prevent more attacks on U.S. soil as best as possible.

Now the effectiveness of this show of strength is/has failing/failed, but don't believe the necessary lies of the government. Of course he lied to the people, no one would have ever supported a war based on national image. I can't believe so many people are so naive to the fact that politicians lie a lot.
Pretty much sums it up nicely. Thread over.
What about the people in the countries mentioned by CameronPoe? Are those less important?

You can't be everything to everybody.

2007-04-30 05:58:58

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|7155|67.222.138.85

Those other countries would not satisfy U.S. interests to "liberate".

If it was a true Stalinistic regime that video never would have gotten out, and the makers would have been shot.

Fundamentalist Islam is far more dangerous than North Korea. NK doesn't have a delivery system for nukes, and if Islam is ever united the U.S. is pretty much done for unless we can change how they view us now.

Yes it is, and as I said it is failing. The generals saying we needed many more people than we actually sent over were not listened to, and therefore the whole operation is a mess.

I love D&ST

2007-04-30 06:04:17

klassekock: Proud Born Loser; +68|7034|Sweden

I agree with Jahmanred above. When are USA going to realize that the more terrorists you try to neutralize and kill, the more you create. You CANNOT put fear or submission into a people with that strong religious belief. I am afraid that your war on terrorism will backfire on America and create more problems than you had from the beginning.

Get your hand out of the wasps nest!!!!!

Last edited by klassekock (2007-04-30 06:07:22)

2007-04-30 06:08:24

EVieira: Member; +105|6926|Lutenblaag, Molvania

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Now the effectiveness of this show of strength is/has failing/failed, but don't believe the necessary lies of the government. Of course he lied to the people, no one would have ever supported a war based on national image. I can't believe so many people are so naive to the fact that politicians lie a lot.

Necessary lies, heh. And who is to judge which lies are necessary? So you are OK with all the lies fed to you? Whats the point of voting then?

"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)

2007-04-30 06:10:53

EVieira: Member; +105|6926|Lutenblaag, Molvania

ATG wrote:
sergeriver wrote:
What about the people in the countries mentioned by CameronPoe? Are those less important?
You can't be everything to everybody.

Ok, point conceded. But now we go back to the original topic: Why Iraq? Why then?

"All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them."
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)

2007-04-30 06:14:07

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|7029|SE London

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
Those other countries would not satisfy U.S. interests to "liberate".

If it was a true Stalinistic regime that video never would have gotten out, and the makers would have been shot.

Fundamentalist Islam is far more dangerous than North Korea. NK doesn't have a delivery system for nukes, and if Islam is ever united the U.S. is pretty much done for unless we can change how they view us now.

Yes it is, and as I said it is failing. The generals saying we needed many more people than we actually sent over were not listened to, and therefore the whole operation is a mess.

I love D&ST

North Korea are the ones supplying ballistic missile systems to the Islamic countries. Iran buys missile systems off NK. Taepodong-2 is a very successfull ballistic missile (with a max range of 10000km), perfectly capable of carrying a nuclear payload. Libya and Syria use NK manufactured missiles. Iran and Pakistan both use missile systems based on NK designs (from the Rodong-1).

I'd say NK have the best delivery systems of all of them.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-04-30 06:14:44)

2007-04-30 06:53:11

Scorpion0x17: can detect anyone's visible post count...; +691|7214|Cambridge (UK)

agree with OP.

end of.

2007-04-30 07:02:12

IG-Calibre: comhalta; +226|7190|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann

can't believe you didn't include Burma in that list CP an actual democracy over thrown by a military junta and the Democratic leader imprisoned - what is the west doing about it? fuck all that I can see..

2007-04-30 07:14:26

CameronPoe: Member; +2,925|7003

Myanmar IS Burma IG.

2007-04-30 07:44:17

IG-Calibre: comhalta; +226|7190|Tír Eoghan, Tuaisceart Éireann

where's me big conical hat with the D on it? D'oh!

Last edited by IG-Calibre (2007-04-30 07:45:15)

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Selectivity

RicardoBlanco wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

RicardoBlanco wrote:

RicardoBlanco wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

RicardoBlanco wrote:

Cougar wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Cougar wrote:

ATG wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Cougar wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Cougar wrote:

Flaming Maniac wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Cougar wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

ATG wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

ATG wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Board footer