• 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.

iraq's mass graves

Who was in those mass graves anyway? War casualties from the Iran Iraq fight? Those dont count.

Sure Saddam did go around killing desenters, but when you toss out "mass graves" you imply that he had roaming bands of kill bots who wacked you just for looking funny.
 
Nie Trink Wasser said:
so mass graves are hilarious arent they ?
Click to expand...

No, they're not. But they're also not in question, from what I've seen around here. There's nothing to opine on, nothing to discuss or debate, and frankly I sort of wonder why you posted this.


Timmy:

You're a friggin' dope. Quit baiting people with the "well, are mass graves really all THAT bad?" BS. Too transparent, dude. Move on.
 
Well Ive had just about enough of the Saddam bashing! Really, whats a dictator to do. No mass graves, no killing dissenters, no iron fist ruling, no palaces. Geeez havent they ever read the dictator job description.?
 
He obviously didn't make it to the pics of the corpses lines up, liying face down with their arms bound behind their backs.
 
c0rbin said:
He obviously didn't make it to the pics of the corpses lines up, liying face down with their arms bound behind their backs.
Click to expand...

Sounds like hazing to me. Why theres piles of dead bodies behind frat row! No one complains about that.
 
Tmy said:


Sounds like hazing to me. Why theres piles of dead bodies behind frat row! No one complains about that.
Click to expand...
I beg to differ. My frat got placed on double-secret probation for this very reason thanks to some whiny complainers.
 
Nie Trink Wasser said:
just in case you're fooled by the "happy Iraq before American invasion" footage in michael moore's new flicker...

http://www.massgraves.info/
Click to expand...

Well, maybe if Bush and Co. would have justified the war on humanitarian reasons as opposed to garbage about WMDs, supporting terrorism, remotely operated planes, and so on, then he would have more support for it now.
 
Re: Re: iraq's mass graves

Crossbow said:


Well, maybe if Bush and Co. would have justified the war on humanitarian reasons as opposed to garbage about WMDs, supporting terrorism, remotely operated planes, and so on, then he would have more support for it now.
Click to expand...

Well, if Bush had said "we're going in to stop human rights abuses", would you have chanced your opinion and supported the war?
 
oh come on....he couldnt possibly side with the word "war"

the only way he'd side with it would be to call it something like "join a small uprising", "defending citizens against ethnic cleansing", "supporting anti-racist policies", "aggressive insurance", or "safety movements"

no way he could possibly identify with the word "war"

its too "hurtful" of a word
 
Re: Re: Re: iraq's mass graves

Segnosaur said:


Well, if Bush had said "we're going in to stop human rights abuses", would you have chanced your opinion and supported the war?
Click to expand...

Possibly.

If the war was really about building a democracy and it looked the USA was going to stay engaged for the several years that such an effort would take, then perhaps so. Also, I think that if there were such an effort, then there would be far more countries involved with the war and the post-war efforts.
 
Re: Re: Re: iraq's mass graves

Segnosaur said:


Well, if Bush had said "we're going in to stop human rights abuses", would you have chanced your opinion and supported the war?
Click to expand...

This line of thinking deeply troubles me. It seems to me are indicating that since Bush wouldn't have gotten support for the war by basing an invasion of Saddam's human rights violations, it's OK that he used deceptive means to justify going into Iraq.
Should such policies be followed in the future? Find out the most effective way to turn the public in your favour, truthful or not, and go with that. And just shrug your shoulders after the fact and say "Ah well, we got what we wanted."

It's been said again and again on this board, but the end doesn't always justify the means.
 
Well I for one think it is just horrible that Saddam killed all those people during church services, though I am surprised that there were so many Catholics in Iraq. But don't worry. God will punish him for killing all those people during Mass.

Has anybody investigated the link between Saddam and the Irish Republican Army?
 
It's like he built nice swimming pools for eveybody, but instead of using water he filled them with corpses.
 
Re: Re: Re: Re: iraq's mass graves

Crossbow said:


Possibly.

If the war was really about building a democracy and it looked the USA was going to stay engaged for the several years that such an effort would take, then perhaps so. Also, I think that if there were such an effort, then there would be far more countries involved with the war and the post-war efforts.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your honesty.

I don't necessarily think that basing the invasion would have gotten them much more support though... you'd still get people compaining that the invasion was for some other purpose ("its all about Oil"), others would raise the question "why Iraq and not <insert other dictatorship>", and yet others would try to justify Saddam's actions ("his abuses were done years ago and he's a good boy now").

In the end, it would still likely be a small coaltition that would end up getting involved.
 
With better/more responsible attention to intelligence and fact-checking, military conflict might not have been necessary in Iraq.

Unfortunately, out Administration went ahead with it based on the information and convictions they had.
 
c0rbin said:
With better/more responsible attention to intelligence and fact-checking, military conflict might not have been necessary in Iraq.

Unfortunately, out Administration went ahead with it based on the information and convictions they had.
Click to expand...


FORTUNATELY we removed dictator Hussein from power and people can actually have free lives there now.

FORTUNATELY letting the UN continue to accept bribes and make money off of that dictator (and his poor people) under the guise of "peaceful resolution" wasn't allowed to continue.
 
Nie Trink Wasser said:



FORTUNATELY we removed dictator Hussein from power and people can actually have free lives there now.

FORTUNATELY letting the UN continue to accept bribes and make money off of that dictator (and his poor people) under the guise of "peaceful resolution" wasn't allowed to continue.
Click to expand...

I keep hearing hawks claim that European countries like France, Germany, and Russia were "profiteering" from the Oil-for-Food days off Iraq and Saddam.

Where is the evidence for this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom