Why is the US/UK at war with Iraq?

[Smurf]

Adam, would you have celebrated the death of Hitler? Just curious.

Did you celebrate the bombs dropped on Japan?

The ratio of Iraqis actively helping the americans and Iraqis fighting them is close to 100:1. The ratio of Iraqis not fighting the Americans to Iraqis fighting the Americans is close to 10.000:1 . You can't defeat these numbers Adam.
Parts of Iraq are a mess, absolutely. But 90% of Iraq isnt. The parts of Iraq that are a mess have hundreds of thousands of Iraqis risking their lifes to help the Americans. There are different opinions of the US in these parts, and an overwhelming majority does NOT want the Americans to leave. You betray millions and gamble with the lifes of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis when argueing against the continuation of US presence in Iraq.
And i have suggested this before, try to discover the truth about what Iraqis want before you pretend to voice their opinion.

this just makes me sad

 

[Adam]

The ratio of Iraqis actively helping the americans and Iraqis fighting them is close to 100:1. The ratio of Iraqis not fighting the Americans to Iraqis fighting the Americans is close to 10.000:1 . You can't defeat these numbers Adam.

The ratio of red ants to black outside my kitchen door is 100:1. You can't defeat these numbers. But it's entirely irrelevent, isn't it? Think about it.

Parts of Iraq are a mess, absolutely. But 90% of Iraq isnt.

So what exactly are you basing these numbers on?

 

[Adam]

I'm guessing Ch 7 is owned by ol' Rupert (judging from Adam's pronouncement).

Everything here is owned either by Rupert Murdoch or Kerry Packer. Packer is mostly domestic though. He's also the one you wouldn't want to meet in a dark alley.

 

[Adam]

Saddam's oppression of the Shi'ites and their religious activities is well known and documented. Just do a Google search using "Saddam oppressed Shiite" and you will find page after page (some more credible than others).

1) Shi'a Muslims make up about 60-65% of Iraq's population.

2) Saddam was secular and fair; he oppressed them all equally.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein#Saddam_Hussein_as_a_secular_leader

 

[JohnDubYa]

Did you celebrate the bombs dropped on Japan?

No. But that was mainly because I was born in 1960.

 

[Adam]

Adam, would you have celebrated the death of Hitler? Just curious.

No. I celebrate no deaths.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Adam,

Shia Muslims were oppressed by Iraq's Baathist regime for more than 30 years and excluded from the highest ranks of power...


Under his rule, Shia opposition groups were fiercely oppressed and political and religious leaders murdered.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/2931903.stm

The notion that he oppressed all groups equally is absurd. Given that the Shia were a majority in the country, they should have been well-represented in higher government. They were not.

And ask the Kurds if Saddam treated them like he did his own Sunni Muslims.

Here is another article from Iraq.net

Hundreds of thousands of Shia Muslims are in the Iraqi town of Karbala to mark the festival of Ashura for the first time in more than 30 years.
The festival was severely restricted by Saddam Hussein.

Ashura is the climax of a 10-day period of mourning for Shias commemorating the martyrdom of Imam Hussain,
who was killed in Karbala in 680 AD.

His death is being marked by rhythmic chanting and ritual self-flagellation from devotees clad in black.

Over 2 million people are expected in Karbala in time for the festival's climax on Tuesday.

Many of the devotees this year have come illegally from neighbouring Iran, which, like Iraq, has a majority Shia population.

Years of suppression

Shias were repressed under Saddam Hussein's Sunni-dominated regime.

Observation of Ashura was hampered by a ban on the practice of ritually beating themselves and - among some Shia groups - of cutting wounds in their skin.


Pilgrims from Iran - a wartime enemy of Saddam Hussein's Iraq - were also not welcome at Karbala, one of Shia Islam's holiest sites.

The death of Hussein, the grandson of the Prophet Mohammad, cemented the split between Sunni and Shia Islam over who should inherit lead the faith.

The BBC's Barbara Plett says the Ashura processions were tightly controlled not only by Saddam Hussein but by the Sunni rulers of Baghdad who preceded him - all saw them as dangerous rallying points for resistance.

Security fears

"We have been waiting for this ceremony for 30 years. I can't begin to describe my feelings. This is total freedom," said Saad al-Masoudi, a Karbala resident.

But other mourners in the procession felt things had changed for the worse.

"Today is not a good day," said Mohammed Hussein Fadel. "I would have preferred Saddam over the American conquerors... At least Saddam was a Muslim." [nice display of religious bigotry]

The focus of the celebrations is the gold-domed shrine of Imam Hussein in the centre of Karbala.

This year's event coincides with the growing dominance of Shias in post-Saddam Iraq - leading to fears that disgruntled Sunni militants may target the celebrations.

To prevent this, Karbala has been ringed by security forces - with Polish soldiers policing the town's entry points and Shia militias guarding its streets and shrines.

 

[Adam]

Leaders of all sorts of religious and other groups were killed or disappeared throughout Saddam's reign. Like I said, they were oppressed equally.

 

[JohnDubYa]

If you are saying that the Sunni were oppressed to the same extent as the Shia, then you are dead wrong.

 

[Adam]

There are more Shi'a than Sunni.

 

[studentx]

The ratio of red ants to black outside my kitchen door is 100:1. You can't defeat these numbers. But it's entirely irrelevent, isn't it? Think about it.

Im not following you here. How is it irrelevant that there are 100 times more Iraqis helping the americans than fighting them? Please answer this one Adam.

 

[Adam]

The question is not "How is it irrelevent?" but "How is it relevent?" What was your purpose in bringing it up (and it was you who brought it up)?

 

[JohnDubYa]

There are more Shi'a than Sunni.

Yeah, so what? You keep bringing this point up. Why is it relevant to this argument?

 

[Adam]

Good grief. If someone likes squashing fruits, and is equally violent toward all fruits, and there are twice as many oranges as lemons, then the number of orangse squashes will be double the number of lemons squashed.

 

[JohnDubYa]

That may be one of the dumbest posts you have presented so far.

 

[studentx]

The question is not "How is it irrelevent?" but "How is it relevent?" What was your purpose in bringing it up (and it was you who brought it up)?

The question is not "What was your purpose in bringing it up" but "What was your purpose in not bringing it up?".
Yes Adam, we can all evade questions.

 

[Adam]

That may be one of the dumbest posts you have presented so far.

It's called an analogy. One day you might understand such things. Maybe.

 

[Adam]

The question is not "What was your purpose in bringing it up" but "What was your purpose in not bringing it up?".
Yes Adam, we can all evade questions.

You're amazing. And I'm sure you don't even know why.

Watch closely:

Your post dated 7:21 AM yesterday, #277:

The ratio of Iraqis actively helping the americans and Iraqis fighting them is close to 100:1. The ratio of Iraqis not fighting the Americans to Iraqis fighting the Americans is close to 10.000:1 . You can't defeat these numbers Adam.

My post dated 3:10 PM yesterday, #282:

The ratio of red ants to black outside my kitchen door is 100:1. You can't defeat these numbers. But it's entirely irrelevent, isn't it? Think about it.

Your post dated 10:25 PM yesterday, #291:

Im not following you here. How is it irrelevant that there are 100 times more Iraqis helping the americans than fighting them? Please answer this one Adam.

My post dated 12:59 AM today, #292:

The question is not "How is it irrelevent?" but "How is it relevent?" What was your purpose in bringing it up (and it was you who brought it up)?

And finally, your post dated 3:42 AM today, #296:

The question is not "What was your purpose in bringing it up" but "What was your purpose in not bringing it up?".
Yes Adam, we can all evade questions.

Now, as is quite clear from this debacle, this thread of conversation begins with some utter piffle you posted (#277). You brought it up. You brought up irrelevant garbage. Again. And I asked you what the relevence was. You have yet to answer.

 

[JohnDubYa]

Well, it was a BAD analogy.

The idea that Saddam treated Shias and Kurds equally to Sunnis is laughable and unsupportable. Saddam's blatant suppression of the Sunnis and their religious ceremonies is well-documented. Besides, your analogy falls apart with his treatment of Kurds.

 

[russ_watters]

Wait, no, I get it - if there are twice as many oranges than lemons but you only have two fists, squashing the same percentage of oranges as lemons takes twice as much effort!

Ugh, I feel dumber for understanding Adam's line of reasoning.

 

[klusener]

this article is from the USA today on the opinions of iraqis on US presence in Iraq...

Poll: Iraqis out of patience
USA TODAY
BAGHDAD — Only a third of the Iraqi people now believe that the American-led occupation of their country is doing more good than harm, and a solid majority support an immediate military pullout even though they fear that could put them in greater danger, according to a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Pol

 

[klusener]

wait i have found more info from the same article:

Asked whether they view the U.S.-led coalition as "liberators" or "occupiers," 71% of all respondents say "occupiers."

That figure reaches 81% if the separatist, pro-U.S. Kurdish minority in northern Iraq is not included. The negative characterization is just as high among the Shiite Muslims who were oppressed for decades by Saddam as it is among the Sunni Muslims who embraced him.

The growing negative attitude toward the Americans is also reflected in two related survey questions: 53% say they would feel less secure without the coalition in Iraq, but 57% say the foreign troops should leave anyway. Those answers were given before the current showdowns in Fallujah and Najaf between U.S. troops and guerrilla fighters.

"I would shoot at the Americans right now if I had the chance," says Abbas Kadhum Muia, 24, who owns a bicycle shop in Sadr City, a Shiite slum of 2 million people in Baghdad that was strongly anti-Saddam and once friendly to the Americans. "At the beginning ... there were no problems, but gradually they started to show disrespect (and) encroach on our rights, arresting people."

Sabah Yeldo, a Christian who owns a liquor store across town, says American failures have left the capital with higher crime and less-reliable services, including electricity. That is "making everybody look back and seriously consider having Saddam back again instead of the Americans."

In the multiethnic Baghdad area, where a Gallup Poll last summer of 1,178 residents permits a valid comparison, only 13% of the people now say the invasion of Iraq was morally justifiable. In the 2003 poll, more than twice that number saw it as the right thing to do.

Americans regard their men and women in uniform as liberators who are trying to help Iraq. But the Iraqis now see them as a threat and focus their anger on them.

"When they pass by on the street, we are curious, so we go out to look and they immediately point their gun at you," says Muia, the bicycle shop owner.

Except for the Kurds, such feelings are widely held. For example:

Two-thirds say soldiers in the U.S.-led coalition make no attempt to keep ordinary Iraqis from being killed or wounded during exchanges of gunfire.

58% say the soldiers conduct themselves badly or very badly.

60% say the troops show disrespect for Iraqi people in searches of their homes, and 42% say U.S. forces have shown disrespect toward mosques.

46% say the soldiers show a lack of respect for Iraqi women.

Only 11% of Iraqis say coalition forces are trying hard to restore basic services such as electricity and clean drinking water.

 

[JohnDubYa]

That is "making everybody look back and seriously consider having Saddam back again instead of the Americans."

Josef Stalin, murderer of over 20 million people, was widely mourned across the Soviet Union when he died. There are still people who moan about his absence. "The trains ran on time" is a common theme expressed by those that weren't personally persecuted.

 

[Adam]

Well, it was a BAD analogy.

The idea that Saddam treated Shias and Kurds equally to Sunnis is laughable and unsupportable. Saddam's blatant suppression of the Sunnis and their religious ceremonies is well-documented. Besides, your analogy falls apart with his treatment of Kurds.

Actually the Kurds in northern Iraq were troubled far more by the Turkish. Saddam was a secondary concern for them.

 

[Adam]

Wait, no, I get it - if there are twice as many oranges than lemons but you only have two fists, squashing the same percentage of oranges as lemons takes twice as much effort!

Ugh, I feel dumber for understanding Adam's line of reasoning.

Wow. A misrepresentation and an ad hominem, all in one little post. Well done russ_watters.

 

[JohnDubYa]

I doubt anyone could describe Saddam as a mere "secondary concern" to the Kurds. He slaughtered them by the thousands. Do you have any references to back up your claim that he carried out such progroms against the Sunnis?

 

[Gokul43201]

Klusener, it is natural for the citizens of any country to be distrustful and incipiently opposed to any occupying force. If a marine sees someone poking his head out his window, sure he'll point his gun at the head. Wouldn't you, if you were there ? But that's a good example of how little it takes for the occupier the make the native feel oppressed.

On the other hand, this does make Bush's words a lie every time he says : "The people of Iraq are better off now". Not if a majority of them don't feel that way.

As a counter-argument to this last point, what an Iraqi says to a western journalist may not be really what (s)he feels and may be deliberately (or at least subconsciously) biased.

To summarize : "The Iraqi people don't really know what's good for them. The President of the United States does."

Go ahead, call me a flip-flopper...

 

[Adam]

Yay for Manifest Destiny...

 

[JohnDubYa]

Klusener, it is natural for the citizens of any country to be distrustful and incipiently opposed to any occupying force. If a marine sees someone poking his head out his window, sure he'll point his gun at the head. Wouldn't you, if you were there ? But that's a good example of how little it takes for the occupier the make the native feel oppressed.

I would have to live under Saddam's rule for 25 years in order to answer that question.

On the other hand, this does make Bush's words a lie every time he says : "The people of Iraq are better off now". Not if a majority of them don't feel that way.

You assume that being better off is merely a matter of opinion, and that everyone can accurately gauge how much better off the people as a whole are in any situation.

Applying your reasoning, the economy would never be a campaign issue. Even if the unemployment rate hits 10%, 90% of the people would have few complaints. Instead, people vote based on how OTHERS are doing, not just themselves. What you are seeing from Iraqis is tunnel-vision --- since Saddam didn't torture and kill the majority of the population, this majority feels that living under Saddam was better.

Ending the sanctions alone will improve the lives of Iraqis. But those Iraqis who, themselves, were unaffected by the sanctions apparently couldn't care less about those that died from starvation and disease.

Those that wish the US had never invaded are just selfish. They couldn't care less about those that Saddam tortured. They couldn't care less about those that died from the sanctions. All they care about are their own personal living conditions.

I think these attitudes are based largely on religious bigotry. If the US had invaded with an army of Muslims, I am sure the opinion polls would have been different.

As a counter-argument to this last point, what an Iraqi says to a western journalist may not be really what (s)he feels and may be deliberately (or at least subconsciously) biased.

To summarize : "The Iraqi people don't really know what's good for them. The President of the United States does.

Do you really think Saddam Hussein was good for the Iraqi people? Were the sanctions imposed by the United Nations good for the Iraqi people? Or are the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people just a matter of opinion?

 

[Ethanol]

Who provided Saddam those gases he killed Kurds with? i never actually found out. He was ****** he killed all those people but those who were not against him fared well. He was the man who never listened to the opposition. Instead he killed them. i don't know how some of them survived but they were lucky.

i do want to know who gave saddam those gases or the technology to prepare them?

 

[pelastration]

i do want to know who gave saddam those gases or the technology to prepare them?

ICI. Rotterdam. Special containers.

(corrected ICC to ICI)