 |
| |
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
quote:
Originally posted by DinoDoc
PS We didn't turn Iraq into a stone age country or kill a million of its citizens either. |
There's a million dead Iraqis and we bombed pretty much all of their modern infrastructre. |
They were able to get light bridges across the rivers within weeks. Heavier transport links are more limited, but that's solveable by logistics.
A million deaths (some 5% of the population) in a decade is sorta normal - virtually everyone who died in Iraq for any reason since the Gulf war is thrown into that figure, which is BS, just like the 100,000 KIA during the war. Most of the Iraqi pukes were smart enough to desert or stay dismounted from their IFVs. Only tank crews can be pretty conclusively fully manned. A lot of the estimates of 100,000 KIA in the war were based on the assumption that burned out IFV's were fully manned. (would YOU look to verify?  ) Later review of Iraqi documents showed most of the Iraqi divisions were substantially understrength, so the bodies weren't there to get killed.
The points the the whiners about poor picked on Iraq happily ignore are first: sanctions allow the Iraqis to trade oil for food, medicine and basic humanitarian supplies. Second, despite sanctions (which I've long opposed because of their token symbolism and lack of effectiveness), Saddam has managed to substantially rebuild his military, keep it's equipment running, keep it armed and fueled, all while building presidential palaces, monuments to himself, and staging this week's referendum.
The biggest point people ignore is the degree of state involvement and control over the Iraqi economy - Saddam wants to claim that a demolished facility for BW research was really a plant for diptheria vaccines, his government will assure a shortage of domestically produced vaccines.
The simple fact is that Saddam is a national "leader" opposed to the US, so all sorts of lefties want to make him out to be a hero, (without admitting it), so they whitewash his actions in contributing to the present situation in Iraq.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
He couldn't do anything about clean water, even if he spent all his resources on that alone. It requires chlorine, which he's not allowed to have, cause it can be turned into poison gas.
You'd think that perhaps the UN/US could build water chlorination plants that are overseen by the UN so that they can verify that none of the materials needed are diverted.
Yeah, we are the bad guys on this one. Madeline Albright said so. She said a half million dead Iraqi children was a good price. |
No, she didn't say that. She responded dismissively to a loaded question.
You do NOT need chlorine to produce domestic potable water of a quality considered acceptable in the US - even sterile water for hospital use. You sure as hell don't need it for typical semi-developed water quality.
When chlorine is used in the most of the western US, (I haven't done water agency work outside that area) it's typically drip fed at individual wells at the wellhead (we're talking typical water production utility), and the wellhead output goes direct to a distribution system without further treatment. If you're extracting from a river, or large enough lake or reservoir, you have treatment issues, but filtration, light UV illumination and permanganate work quite well - and there are other ways of treating water as well.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Nor did Iraq sneak attack Kuwait. It had warned Kuwait several times in 1990 that it would invade if they didn't stop the slant drilling and over production of oil whih was killing Iraq's economy. |
Two separate issues here - slant drilling and overproduction. The real economic issues were Iraq's fault - they started the war with Iran, and fought a static war in close proximity to the main oil field basin shared by Iraq, Iran and Kuwait. They effectively killed their own oil production. The Kuwaitis did relatively little slant drilling (had the Iraqis not started a war with Iran, they could have reciprocated and then worked out a deal on well proximity and density), but they did put a lot of new production wells into a disputed border area.
Saddam didn't need to invade all of Kuwait - even with a military option, all that would have been needed to be done was to go into the border area, secure it, have oil workers cap the wells, then take the well pumps back into Iraq and leave. Nice message sent to the Kuwaitis, nothing the rest of the world would have got too involved in, but hey, why do that when you can invade and make up some crap about the 19th province of Iraq. (Wonder if Saddam ever played golf and hung out at the 19th hole? ).
The other issue was overproduction, and that's not something that Kuwait did to Iraq, but an on-again off-again issue within OPEC on quotas. Since Saddam had cut his own throat on oil production, he wanted to see a sharp enough rise in price to make up the revenue shortfall, since the 40 billion he got from the US (~6 billion) and the other arabs (over 30 billion) weren't enough to prop him up through the war with Iran.
Any way you try to spin it, reality comes back to Saddam's mismanagement and megalomania.
quote:
The Saudi's took him seriously and tried to pressure the Kuwaitis to back down, |
Nobody took Saddam seriously - the whole dispute had been submitted to the Arab league, but the Saudis traditionally are businessmen with money to burn, so they're smart enough to figure if you buy someone off to go away, in the long run, you make more money.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Comrade Tassadar
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
Liar. there was continuous civil war during the Taliban regime. Remember the Nothern alliance, and other organized resistance? |
Hmm...IIRC, the Taliban was firmly in control of what it was holding. Almost everywhere in Taliban-controlled territory was "safe" (well, not really....but you know what i mean). Now, IIRC, Kabul is the only 'safe' place and the rest of Afghanistan is a war zone. Completly and totally a war zone.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
IIRC Iraq invaded Kuwait because they didn't feel they should have to pay off loans that Kuwait made to help finance the Iraqi war effort in the Iraq - Iran war.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The Taliban held 90% of the country. In the areas they held, crime dropped considerably. I'm not saying it's a regime I'd want to live under, but after decades of constant fighting and terrorism the people of Afganistan welcomed the Taliban.
Even now, some folks are longing for the days of stability under the Taliban, which is really sad. |
Wasn't it you who some months ago posted a photo of a woman (a widowed mother of seven, IIRC) being executed by the Taleban in a football stadium for the "crime" of adultery? The photo had the ******* standing over her from behind with a Kalashnikov while she sat on the ground hands tied behind her, and it was taken as she was slumping forward after the Kalashnikov round went through the back of her head, exited her face, and impacted the ground, kicking up a nice little dust cloud?
Someone posted it, I thought it was you who did so. It sure as hell was the good ol' "stable" Taleban in action. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chris 62
"Destabilize the region"...
Favorite media buzz word that means nothing.
What exactly does Iraq control that is stable?  |
The media is a bunch of whiny chickenchokers, yank, we both know that. Tell me this, though - what kind of government do you think we should install after Hussein's ass is done?
How well would a real democracy go over with our other allies in the region, who are all monarchs with dictatorial control over government and an obscene degree of control over their national wealth and resources? (with few exceptions, those kings and emirs are largely despised by their own people)
If not a democracy, how well would a tokenly democratic (some down the road promise of elections) pro-US strongman go? Replace one dictator with another more friendly to the infidel invader? (whether that's actually the case, or the spin coming out of the mosques doesn't matter in the least)
Have you or anyone else heard any clear concept for what we intend to do in and with a post-Hussein Iraq? Everyone's already trying to wiggle out of the pseudo-commitments to aid and nationbuilding in Afghanistan, which probably needs something like 200 billion over two decades to transform it from a festering shithole to a semi-functional third world country.
Is the US (let alone the rest of the world) going to really follow through on long-term nation and government institution building, especially in "dune coon" and "camel jockey" countries? How well do you think that will play with US taxpayers in the long run, especially in a recession, and especially with the all too common prejudice in the US against middle easterners in general?
I'd agree with you if your point is that stability anywhere in the ME is pretty ephemeral and illusory, but the US has a hell of a lot more ways to screw up in Iraq after the war than it has ways of doing things right.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Chris 62
|
 |
But I'm feeling MUCH better now
Jan 2001
time: 00:23
|
|
BTW Mike, that woman was killed for video taping her kids, as I recall, but it was a while ago, I could be wrong.quote:
Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat The media is a bunch of whiny chickenchokers, yank, we both know that. Tell me this, though - what kind of government do you think we should install after Hussein's ass is done? |
I think it's REAL important to use IRAQI police as quickly as possible, US military SHOULD not be used to patrol Iraq population centers, only military bases, that's for a start.
Also, try to avoid ANY dudes with strong links to Saddam, it will only cause problems.
quote:
How well would a real democracy go over with our other allies in the region, who are all monarchs with dictatorial control over government and an obscene degree of control over their national wealth and resources? (with few exceptions, those kings and emirs are largely despised by their own people) |
We make it Crystal clear that they tow the anti-terror line, or they can join Saddam at the bottom of a hole, and that includes the Saudis.
quote:
If not a democracy, how well would a tokenly democratic (some down the road promise of elections) pro-US strongman go? Replace one dictator with another more friendly to the infidel invader? (whether that's actually the case, or the spin coming out of the mosques doesn't matter in the least) |
A military governer at first, followed by a selection of non-Saddam flunkies as possible politians, plus forcing a fair Constiution on Iraq, that would forbid by law anymore strongmen.
quote:
Have you or anyone else heard any clear concept for what we intend to do in and with a post-Hussein Iraq? Everyone's already trying to wiggle out of the pseudo-commitments to aid and nationbuilding in Afghanistan, which probably needs something like 200 billion over two decades to transform it from a festering shithole to a semi-functional third world country. |
What I said seems to be the idea, but it's important to remember Iraq isn't Afghanistan, it has an easy access to a vast source of funds, and won't require massive US aid the way Afghanistan does.
quote:
Is the US (let alone the rest of the world) going to really follow through on long-term nation and government institution building, especially in "dune coon" and "camel jockey" countries? How well do you think that will play with US taxpayers in the long run, especially in a recession, and especially with the all too common prejudice in the US against middle easterners in general? |
I think we are all sick and tired of being the world's scapegoat by every Leftist and moron with a grevence, this is a big chance to bury that nonsense once and for all.
Also, the UN MUST be kept as FAR AWAY as possible from interfearing, all the ENTIRE process will fall to pieces.
quote:
I'd agree with you if your point is that stability anywhere in the ME is pretty ephemeral and illusory, but the US has a hell of a lot more ways to screw up in Iraq after the war than it has ways of doing things right. |
And the result would be ME's that hate us and commit terror?
We already have plenty.
Don't see a lot of downside Reb, in fact, it would mean and end to a decade of useless and hurtful sanctions, and a clear message that we are through playing games.
For too many years politics has become this endless game of lies, with complex rules that allow nations to behave horrobly yet accuse others of causing it, we see this all the time, 80% of the 3rd world blames the US for something.
Fine.
Now we will do something about it, if we have to kill every fundementalist medieval nut to do it, so be it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
NeOmega
|
 |
Play Pentagenesis Beta!
Feb 2002
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chris 62
I think it's REAL important to use IRAQI police as quickly as possible, US military SHOULD not be used to patrol Iraq population centers, only military bases, that's for a start....
|
>>>Is this realistic? Look at how the Palestinians are policing themselves. Do you think this will stop asymetrical attacks on U.S. troops. Do you really believe we could trust Iraqi policemen?
quote:
....but it's important to remember Iraq isn't Afghanistan, it has an easy access to a vast source of funds, and won't require massive US aid the way Afghanistan does.
|
>>>You mean it's oil?
quote:
I think we are all sick and tired of being the world's scapegoat by every Leftist and moron with a grevence, this is a big chance to bury that nonsense once and for all.
|
>>>how do you figure this'll shut em up? I think this'll make em howl louder. I know for one I will.
quote:
Also, the UN MUST be kept as FAR AWAY as possible from interfearing, all the ENTIRE process will fall to pieces.
|
>>>Is this a realistic "must". Do you really expect the UN to stay out. I think you kwno better, so by your own prediction, The ENTIRE process will fall to pieces.
quote:
Now we will do something about it, if we have to kill every fundementalist medieval nut to do it, so be it. |
>>>OOh ooh, can we try and kill every fundamentalist Christian nut too, like John Ashcroft and Jerry Falwell?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
NeOmega
|
|
Play Pentagenesis Beta!
Feb 2002
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chris 62
Is your answer realistic?
Is Palestine a country?
Is Iraq?
Ask me a legit question, or don't waste my time.
|
I asked you a legit question. I'll just assume you are dumb enough to trust Iraqi policemen to do the bidding of Americans.
quote:
No, Camel dung.
What do you think?
|
Adroit. But this has nothing to do with oil, right? Good god, you walked right into the trap like it was a cong bungee pit. I know your the same guy as the idiot over at CFC who power trips all the time, but geez, Chris 62 must be your stupid alter ego.
quote:
The UN can't do ANYTHING without a resolution.
Who controls a permanent Veto?
|
Russia and France, and they are dead set against this ivasion, yet, they somehow are beginning to warm up and compromise. But you don't think the U.S. would ever compromise do you?
quote:
You can do whatever you want, why should I care?
Yours might be the stupidest rebuttal post I ever saw on poly, and I bet you thought long and hard on it too!  |
Your whole plan for occupation of Iraq was about the stupidist thing I ever read. Those rebuttals took no time at all because they were so easy. Your re-occupation plan is full of obvious holes even to the most amateur of observers. Oh wait..... <- Look! now I am as funny as Chris 62.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
I think I have to agree with Chris on this one.
The US is blamed for everything!
So, perhaps it's about time the US took responsibility for it's "faulty foreign policy" and now started to clean up the mess that it is being blamed for.
A good place to start would be to turf out all the M.E. dictatcors and "kings" and replace the lot with constitutional republics - the US constitution is not entirely a bad model to start with and has much to be admired in it.
If that means going in with the Armed Forces, then so be it.
As proof that this strategy would work, you only have to look to the North Iraq no fly zones, where the Kurds are flourishing.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-10-2002 22:34
That or you dont Remember correctly 
That was cute... wish there was a news station anywhere in America that would show it or address the issues that it does.
Maybe you disagree with their laws, but a country with harsh laws is not the same as a lawless country.
|