France, Germany Criticize Iraq Resolution

[Japher]

no mobile weapons labs

I thought I heard different.

no weapons of mass destruction

we have found peices of them, and traces of them

I think they were there, and not to long ago... They are just not there any more, which says nothing about them not having been there. Who needs a smoking gun when you have victims? Who needs a smoking gun when you heard the shot and see the smoke?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie


You removed one big problem: Saddam

But you created at least 3 new big problems:
1) A damaged infrastructure, particularly water treatment, but plenty of other problems as well. And you lack the funds to fix it.
2) Anarchy, terrorism, and etnic conflicts, which you lack the manpower to keep at bay.
3) Massive unemployment, leading to poverty and more anarchy

a former "human shield" writing in the Washington Times

'I have been shocked at the difference between the Baghdad I found on my return and all the bad news from the city. Despite the recent bombings, Baghdad looks dramatically different. The stores are full of supplies. The streets are crowded with people and cars. The buses are working and police are on the streets, directing traffic. At night the streets are full of pedestrians, many families with children. I am at a loss to reconcile what we see on the ground with what is being reported.

The "regular people" are much better off than they were. Security has improved with Iraqi police everywhere, telephones are starting to work, electricity, while off and on, is relatively stable, the stores are full of food, and, little by little, people are getting jobs back. Pensions have been paid on time. The schools are working and people for the first time have hope and a future. When I was here before the war what was most awful for people was that they had no future — nothing to look forward to. For us who have never experienced that situation, it is difficult to understand, but it is akin to being in prison without the possibility of parole.

Those who naysay everything are very interesting. The people are very clear on who they are — they all were connected to Saddam. For the first time in their lives, they are going to have to work; no more handouts. The easy life is over. But the numbers are staggering. People estimate nearly 20 percent or more of the population was in some form on Saddam’s gravy train, some by choice, others by force. And nearly all of the population had been getting free food, tea and sugar. As for the crime, they emptied the prisons so nearly 50,000 hard-nosed criminals are on the streets. '

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler


There were people in the US admin who thought post war Iraq would be quick and easy. Or people who think they talk to Jesus. How is that relevant?

in response to this

"No need to state the obvious, that follows from the UN Charter."

[Defiant]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia


Wrong. Leaving them alone means they can no longer count on the support of the people because America is no longer messing with their affaires. Maybe you should try looking deeper then 9-11, which was brought about because of what we have done the last 40 years in the Gulf Region, which is have our fingers in every countries pie. You too would hate it if foreigners told you how to run your country and would manipulate elections, support dictators, and kills opponents.

NO, you are wrong, Saudis are manipulating their territory by supporting the terrorists against Israel, we support Israel, so unless we start firing missiles on Isreal they will always hate us. That is the plain facts, and if it is all out war they want we can give it to them.
Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, they don't have a particular problem with us, the rest fear freedom and we represent that. Only one country in the ME is a democracy and that is Israel. In the rest the state controls the money and the press, so of course we are the bad guys, but as you saw during the war with abbascoobbydoobby TV, they slant the version of the truth a weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee bit.

[HershOstropoler]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


in response to this

"No need to state the obvious, that follows from the UN Charter."

Yes, and? This is one of the few relatively clear rules of international law. Of course if you're a neocon or other extreme ideologue (not you, the admin), everything you don't like will go away if you just say it doesn't exist. For the rest of us, that doesn't work.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


The infrastructure was already damaged. Prewar Iraq did not have enough power to meet demand...

And how did that happen? Why did you bomb water and sanitation during the 1991 war? OK, I supported that war for many reasons at the time of it's occurance, but it's full consequences to civilians has not been widely reported outside the leftist rant media until now. As for progress in infrastructure rebuilding, the top news of the US DoD site a couple of days ago said that "it will cost millions to rebuild the water supply", meaning there is still a long way to go. I can't find that story now, but it was there earlier this week.

http://www.defenselink.mil/

ethnic conflict - ... Terrorism yes...

I would say your biggest problem here is lack of manpower. The force you sent were tough enough to kick out Saddams army, but they are too few and lack the appropriate type of training to keep law and order.

Poverty - we're making slow but real progress - there was certainly plenty of poverty under Saddam - But now there are plenty of unemployed ex-soldiers, etc

This is an area where I am not that well-informed, so I will not go into furter discussion on this. I just used it as another example.

But I know that while most people in Iraq didn'd want to keep Saddam, they don't want to be governed by Americans either.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

NO, you are wrong, Saudis are manipulating their territory by supporting the terrorists against Israel, we support Israel, so unless we start firing missiles on Isreal they will always hate us. That is the plain facts, and if it is all out war they want we can give it to them.
Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, they don't have a particular problem with us, the rest fear freedom and we represent that. Only one country in the ME is a democracy and that is Israel. In the rest the state controls the money and the press, so of course we are the bad guys, but as you saw during the war with abbascoobbydoobby TV, they slant the version of the truth a weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee bit.

If we stop supporting Israel (ie stop giving them billions in aid) and stop meddling in their affaires, they will leave us alone. We cannot win the war, so why start it.
And who cares if only one country is a democracy. Thats not my problem. Democracy can only come about if there is a consensus. There are too many factions fighting in those countries to bring it about. Democracy doesnt work if it is forced. instead of shoving your arrogant morally superior ideals on everyone, let them figure it out themselves. Forcing anybody doesnt solve anything.

The reason for the kings is western of course. The Brits installed them all.

I thought I heard different.

Well you heard wrong.

we have found peices of them, and traces of them

I think they were there, and not to long ago... They are just not there any more, which says nothing about them not having been there. Who needs a smoking gun when you have victims? Who needs a smoking gun when you heard the shot and see the smoke?

No we havnt. We have victims all over the world. Cry me a river.

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by Defiant


That is right, "convential ollie", but Iraq was the best tactical choice for an invasion for a presence in the ME, we couldn't attack Saudi(who I am believing needs it desperately) but because of Mecca and we would start a massive war with the Muslims. What Bush did was take the best target, Iraq(because of Saddam and his history) to gain a presence in the ME, now we are in the back door of Saudi, Syria, Iran. The worst thing we could do now is envite the UN to help, keep those bastards out, let this remain a US and British operation.
If we are attacked and money or direct links can be established to Saudi, you just might see another war, much larger with global consequences.

[Troll mode] Nuke the Kaba! [/Troll mode]

And for "conventional" I am everything but that, I can assure you!

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Japher


Really? Ooops! Oh, well, I guess what's done is done...

Still, if he did destroy them, were's the evidence? Were's the proof that he destroyed them? Burried in the sand? Or in the Russian documents that say that they hid the weapons for the b-strd?

Apparently most of the "missing" stuff was destroyed in the early 90s but without documentating it. Silly Iraqis forgot the West might want proof.

[Japher]

Well you heard wrong.

Trailor

I am not going to dig through months of news on Iraq, but I heard what I heard, and you just saying I am wrong doesn't cut it buck-o. Perhaps they were discredited, but I didn't read anything on that... I also have seen them use missles and retreive shells of what could be used for such WoMD...

[SlowwHand]

Yes, it was more than silly.
Since that was what was agreed to by Hussein to get the cease-fire.
Well. I don't know that I would call it silly.
I'd call it scheming, but that's just me.

I'm known to not be as trusting as you.

[Japher]

Well, anyone could just make-up some documents!
Sadam should of done that, and everyone would of been happier...
Until some psycho bombed Isreal

[SlowwHand]

Iraq has sent scud missles. What do ya want?

[Chemical Ollie]

Sloww, I like your new avatar! Indeed, I like Eric Clapton, but the humour of that image is better!

Is it your dog?

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia


If we stop supporting Israel (ie stop giving them billions in aid) and stop meddling in their affaires, they will leave us alone. We cannot win the war, so why start it.
And who cares if only one country is a democracy. Thats not my problem. Democracy can only come about if there is a consensus. There are too many factions fighting in those countries to bring it about. Democracy doesnt work if it is forced. instead of shoving your arrogant morally superior ideals on everyone, let them figure it out themselves. Forcing anybody doesnt solve anything.

The reason for the kings is western of course. The Brits installed them all.

Bull****. Hitler used the same victimization argument to gain concessions from the Allies and his appetite only grew larger with each one. Do you honestly believe that OBL and all those Taliban freaks are any better?