• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

52 more Iraqis "Liberated" this weekend

Thunder

Banned
T
Joined
Nov 18, 2006
Messages
34,918
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101101/ts_nm/us_iraq_violence

Thanks to the "liberation" of Iraq, and the lawlessness and anarchy that followed, hundreds of thousands of greatful Iraqi people have been "liberated", including 52 more this weekend.

Luckily, their "liberation" took place in a church, so they can go straight to heaven, following their newly achieved "freedom".

Funny, but soo fewer Iraqis were gaining "liberation" and "freedom" before the "liberation" of Iraq. How does this work again?
 
Care to explain how a screw up by the Iraqi security forces has anything to do with the "Liberation" of Iraq?
 
They weren't killed by the liberation of Iraq, they were killed by Al-Qaeda.
 
Virus said:
They weren't killed by the liberation of Iraq, they were killed by Al-Qaeda.
Click to expand...

such events did not occur, before Iraq was "liberated".

Now? Its a weekly occurrence. Life in Iraq has become a terrorist-infested hell on Earth.

"Liberation" truly is.......interesting.
 
Bill Thompson said:
Is it your belief that things are worse now than when Saddam was in control?
Click to expand...

I am simply pointing out the fact that Iraq has become the center of terrorist activity in the world, and this was not the situation pre-2003.

The "liberation" of Iraq has turned the nation into a hell hole of blood & tears.
 
Thunder said:
I am simply pointing out the fact that Iraq has become the center of terrorist activity in the world, and this was not the situation pre-2003.

The "liberation" of Iraq has turned the nation into a hell hole of blood & tears.
Click to expand...

It was a hell hole of blood and tears under Saddam.
 
I heard on the radio that the Iraq christian population has dropped from 1 million during Saddams rule to 200,000. Kind of ironic that a Christian based US goverment brought all this on.

Saddam with his firm rule was preventing the spread of fundamentalist islamic groups ( No, I`m not suggesting he was a good leader.)

Pro war stance keeps on changing. First reason was terrorism, WMD. After invasion was liberating Iraq. I don`t see the Iraqi people any more liberated and if anything has increased the chance of terrorism.
 
Thunder said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101101/ts_nm/us_iraq_violence

Thanks to the "liberation" of Iraq, and the lawlessness and anarchy that followed, hundreds of thousands of greatful Iraqi people have been "liberated", including 52 more this weekend.

Luckily, their "liberation" took place in a church, so they can go straight to heaven, following their newly achieved "freedom".

Funny, but soo fewer Iraqis were gaining "liberation" and "freedom" before the "liberation" of Iraq. How does this work again?
Click to expand...

Not "soo fewer". Probably a few hundred thousand. I'd rather endure lawlessness than live under Saddam, honestly.
 
Davo said:
I heard on the radio that the Iraq christian population has dropped from 1 million during Saddams rule to 200,000. Kind of ironic that a Christian based US goverment brought all this on.
Click to expand...

That's not irony and the US government isn't based on Christianity.

Davo said:
Saddam with his firm rule was preventing the spread of fundamentalist islamic groups ( No, I`m not suggesting he was a good leader.)
Click to expand...

Yeah and Stalin was "firm" too. The Baath regime was utterly totalitarian and mad and on a one-way trip down the crapper as well.

Davo said:
Pro war stance keeps on changing. First reason was terrorism, WMD. After invasion was liberating Iraq. I don`t see the Iraqi people any more liberated and if anything has increased the chance of terrorism.
Click to expand...

Saddam had to be replaced for a lot of reasons. Try Bush's address to the UN in 2002, his speech to the National Endowment for Democracy or the Iraqi Liberation Act signed into national policy under Clinton.
 
Davo said:
I don`t see the Iraqi people any more liberated and if anything has increased the chance of terrorism.
Click to expand...

Do they have to fear being reported on by a secret informant and tortured for saying something bad about their government? Do they have more freedom of assembly? Can the Shi'a perform their religious ceremonies? If yes, then I'd say they are "more liberated". That doesn't necessarily mean more safe.
 
Davo said:
I heard on the radio that the Iraq christian population has dropped from 1 million during Saddams rule to 200,000. Kind of ironic that a Christian based US goverment brought all this on.
... Snip...
Click to expand...

Yeah... about that...
 
Davo said:
I heard on the radio that the Iraq christian population has dropped from 1 million during Saddams rule to 200,000.
Click to expand...

That's because Iraq's "liberation" has unleashed a huge tide of love, tolerance, and freedom.
 
Puppycow said:
How many people in Iraq were killed by Saddam Hussein in 2010?
Click to expand...


Um....none. That's cause Saddam Hussein is dead.

However, Al-Qaeda existed in 2002. And yet, they appear to have killed no one in Iraq, in 2002.

Today? A whole lot.
 
Puppycow said:
Al Qaeda terrorists kill people, Thunder blames America. What a shock.

Remember Saddam Hussein and the Bathists?

Here's just a few of his more famous crimes. In addition perhaps 200,000 were made to "disappear" by his secret police. In total maybe a million Iraqis died because of his tyranny. And much, much more.
Click to expand...

And how many of those deaths occurred once the sanctions were put in place?

Half of the deaths attributed to Hussein, 500,000, come from the Iran-Iraq war. In that piece, which was beating the drums for war in 2003, which was what the NY Times did back then (Judith Miller?), they attribute about 200,000 deaths to his violence and repression.

That's horrifying. That's also about the number of that were killed in the two wars, and less than the number that were attributed to the sanctions (Albright's "collateral damage").

So my answer is, I don't know which was worse. Hussein was neutered and harmless by 2003, meaning that absent our occupation, there would have been far fewer deaths over the last 7 years. I do know that I wouldn't be particularly happy if a nation invaded the US, killed my family, then told me it was for my own good.

Watch this. Notice how absolute devoid from the debate voices like this are. We just don't give a rip what the Iraqis think, which is why it's so ironic that the last remaining justification for this horrific episode of American history is "it was for their own good."

http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/8998
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom