• 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.

Iraqis stage mass anti-US rally

Bush did the biggest mistake by moving the biggest enemy of Iran Saddam Hussein. Ahmadinejad probaly wants to invade Iraq and Lebanon. Hezbollah group are also the puppets of Iran and Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad is playing games.
 
moon1969 said:
Sadr wants Iran to invade Iraq. Sadr is the puppet of Ahmadinejad. Ahmadinejad is a smart guy. Ahmadinejad maybe a holocaust denier but he is not a stupid man like George W. Bush is.
Click to expand...

Sadr is no ones puppet. Oh there is a relationship with Iran but it is one of convience only. The Badr Organization worked for Iran at one point but they work for us now. Sadr probably wants to rule Iraq and either he or someone in his organisation is smart enough to realise that building up street level support is the way to do it.

They also realise that there is no future in fighting the US (or at least the results are no better than waiting for them to leave) which is why when the violence caused by the Badr Organization Iraqi goverment trying to shut him down died out once the US got involved.
 
Matteo Martini said:
Evidence?
Click to expand...

Look at what happened during the low level civil war a while back. Without the US there it gets a lot worse fast. And that is a problem not just because there would be a bunch of sunni, shia and shia trying to kill each other but because the kurds would have to act to secure themselves from the fighting. Problem is that that is likely to result in pissing off turkey so we get a turkish invasion of northern Iraq. Not the most peaceful of outcomes.
 
geni said:
Look at what happened during the low level civil war a while back. Without the US there it gets a lot worse fast. And that is a problem not just because there would be a bunch of sunni, shia and shia trying to kill each other but because the kurds would have to act to secure themselves from the fighting. Problem is that that is likely to result in pissing off turkey so we get a turkish invasion of northern Iraq. Not the most peaceful of outcomes.
Click to expand...

What a nice strategical analysis.
How easy is to make analyses on the skin of other people.
The point is that there was not such a mess in Iraq before the US invasions, and all the analyses made by the US Government (war will be quick and easy, no clash between Sunni and Shia, ..) proved wrong.
 
Matteo Martini said:
What a nice strategical analysis.
How easy is to make analyses on the skin of other people.
The point is that there was not such a mess in Iraq before the US invasions
Click to expand...

Well no because sadam killed off anyone likely to cause them. Al-Sadr's father for example. I'm sure the US could apoint a strong man dictator that would also be able to prevent such messes (well not completely obvious sadam went in for large scale killing from time to time but hey you don't think that = mess). This solution appears to be unacceptable to rather a lot of people though.
 
geni said:
Well no because sadam killed off anyone likely to cause them. Al-Sadr's father for example. I'm sure the US could apoint a strong man dictator that would also be able to prevent such messes (well not completely obvious sadam went in for large scale killing from time to time but hey you don't think that = mess). This solution appears to be unacceptable to rather a lot of people though.
Click to expand...

Evidence that taking off Saddam was the only possible solution to the problem?
When Saddam was in power, were in Iraq thousands of deaths each month?
Could Saddam`s crimes against Kurds be prevented without invading Iraq?
 
It's pretty much a lose lose pick. Either you fear for your life from soldiers, suicide bombers, etc. or you fear for your life from a brutal dictator who makes people who say the wrong things disappear.
 
Policenaut said:
It's pretty much a lose lose pick. Either you fear for your life from soldiers, suicide bombers, etc. or you fear for your life from a brutal dictator who makes people who say the wrong things disappear.
Click to expand...

This world is not perfect
There will always be lose picks.
The point is if this hundreds of thousands of deaths in Iraq could have been avoided had the US troop stayed home.
 
Matteo Martini said:
Evidence that taking off Saddam was the only possible solution to the problem?
Click to expand...

Which of the many problems with Iraq are you talking about?

When Saddam was in power, were in Iraq thousands of deaths each month?
Click to expand...

On average probably.

Could Saddam`s crimes against Kurds be prevented without invading Iraq?
Click to expand...

Technicaly no because we don't have a time machine. The no fly zone appeared to be doing a reasonable job of protecting the kurds but that wasn't a long term viable situation
 
Matteo Martini said:
This world is not perfect
There will always be lose picks.
The point is if this hundreds of thousands of deaths in Iraq could have been avoided had the US troop stayed home.
Click to expand...

It's a catch-22 Matteo. Going in saved thousands of lives from Saddam's abuses, while it also caused thousands of deaths from the invasion and subsequent occupation.

But you're right; you can't always have the best of all possible worlds. Sometimes you're stuck with bad and worse.
 
IchabodPlain said:
It's a catch-22 Matteo. Going in saved thousands of lives from Saddam's abuses, while it also caused thousands of deaths from the invasion and subsequent occupation.

But you're right; you can't always have the best of all possible worlds. Sometimes you're stuck with bad and worse.
Click to expand...

The other point is that, while ultimately, it was Saddam responsible for the abuses he and his gang committed when he was in power, when the US Government decided to take the situation in their hands, they too ultimately became co-responsible for the mess and the killings that happened afterwards.

edit:
I personally would not like to be held co-responsible for the death of one person, let alone hundreds of thousands
 
Last edited:
geni said:
Sadr is no ones puppet. Oh there is a relationship with Iran but it is one of convience only. The Badr Organization worked for Iran at one point but they work for us now. Sadr probably wants to rule Iraq
Click to expand...

Ah, this kind of outlook always reminds me of Gaddafi at one of the Arab League's meetings where he said 'We hate each other' and boy is he right and we lucky! :D
Well, somewhat lucky anyway. ;)
 
Policenaut said:
It's pretty much a lose lose pick. Either you fear for your life from soldiers, suicide bombers, etc. or you fear for your life from a brutal dictator who makes people who say the wrong things disappear.
Click to expand...

Saddam was a bad hombre yes. But in the western propaganda machine, he was made out to be a bigger threat to the Western world since Hitler.
We all know the real reason for invading Iraq was oil, not the welfare of the Iraqis or Kurds. You think the Bush administration gave a **** about the population of Iraq? If you do, then the American people are much more gullible than what I thought they were.
 
mrbaracuda said:
Ah, this kind of outlook always reminds me of Gaddafi at one of the Arab League's meetings where he said 'We hate each other' and boy is he right and we lucky! :D
Well, somewhat lucky anyway. ;)
Click to expand...

Luck has nothing to do with it. Iraq was designed to have various groups that hated each other in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom