Loads of good news from Iraq that the cynical left would rather not hear...

[Theben]

Originally posted by Lincoln


France (and probably Germany) would never allow an invasion of Iraq, and France said as much before the UN. If the US and Britain had aquiesed to that threat of veto the people of Iraq would still be without hope. But you are right in that it is better to do what is necessary without making enemies if possible. France is as much to blame as Bush is if he was too hasty. France left no out so Blair and Bush ignored her. History will prove who was right.

A lot of what France & Germany said came after Bush made it clear that he was going to war with Iraq regardless of what anyone thought. Bad diplomacy on Bush's part, led to bad results with Europe.

I quote I heard by a news reporter sums it up nicely: "This is a man[Bush] who lost a PR contest with Saddam Hussein [emphasis in original], and it's the European's fault?"

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Tiberius
So the iraqi people were freed. Great!

Now, tell me Lincoln, do you honestly believe that Saddam was the only dictator on Earth? No? Then, in the name of the opressed people of this world, I'm asking you: who's next?

So if we cannot free some we should not free any? Do you object that some are not being tortured now because there are others some place in the world who are still under oppression? Why don't you start a campaign to free someone instead of criticising the work of those who already have brought some hope? Is it because your ideology is more important than actually helping people?

There are quite a few liberals along with conservatives in Iraq now actually trying to help people they claim to care about. Too bad that you are too cynical to see any good news. Maybe Iraq will return to a dictatorship and oppresseion. Then you can gloat with the rest of the cynical left. Sorry for the good news. I didn't mean to spoil your day.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Theben


A lot of what France & Germany said came after Bush made it clear that he was going to war with Iraq regardless of what anyone thought. Bad diplomacy on Bush's part, led to bad results with Europe.

I quote I heard by a news reporter sums it up nicely: "This is a man[Bush] who lost a PR contest with Saddam Hussein [emphasis in original], and it's the European's fault?"

I followed the news prior to the war and I don't agree that Bush was any more stubborn than France was. In any case if France had their way people would still be without hope in Iraq to this day. France did nothing but obstruct. Blame who you want but the job was done inspite of France. And you are correct that many were rooting for Saddam. Too bad for them.

[problem_child]

What always annoys me when people brag about how the US and UK have 'liberated' Iraq, is how they conveniently forget the US/UK failure to support the Iraqi peoples own efforts to rid themselves of the dictator twelve years ago after GW1. Then it was not to USUKs liking for the Iraqi people to liberate themselves, so after encouraging an uprising, the USUK stood by and let thousands of Shi'ites and others get slaughtered by Saddams forces... the US and UK were so complicit in this one could easily say they helped Saddam put down the uprising. So Lincoln please don't waste our time by bragging about how now the Iraqi's are finally rid of the dictator, as it was US and British policy that forced him on them and kept him on them for so long in the first place.

You watch, my prediction is that in ten years time Iraq will still be a human rights nightmare presided over by a thruoughly undemocratic (probably Ba'athist) regime.

Did you know that there are no US planse to de-Ba'athize Iraq? (such as the deNazifiction of Germany) that's because ultimately the US did not want regime change in Iraq, it just wanted a new less uppety dictator.

[FrustratedPoet]

So if we cannot free some we should not free any? Do you object that some are not being tortured now because there are others some place in the world who are still under oppression? Why don't you start a campaign to free someone instead of criticising the work of those who already have brought some hope? Is it because your ideology is more important than actually helping people?

There are quite a few liberals along with conservatives in Iraq now actually trying to help people they claim to care about. Too bad that you are too cynical to see any good news. Maybe Iraq will return to a dictatorship and oppresseion. Then you can gloat with the rest of the cynical left. Sorry for the good news. I didn't mean to spoil your day.

Why didn't you even attempt to answer the question he asked?

[dannubis]

Originally posted by Lincoln


I followed the news prior to the war and I don't agree that Bush was any more stubborn than France was. In any case if France had their way people would still be without hope in Iraq to this day. France did nothing but obstruct. Blame who you want but the job was done inspite of France. And you are correct that many were rooting for Saddam. Too bad for them.

And what hope do the people of iraq have now ... Oil is running through the pipelines but fresh water and power supply still aren't restored properly ?!?

I bet the local population has got the message ...

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by Lincoln

Why don't you start a campaign to free someone instead of criticising the work of those who already have brought some hope?

Because helping the iraqi people wasn't for a milisecond the goal of this war. Are just so naive, that you can't make the difference between a reason and an excuse?

Why did you "free" Iraq and not some other country that is not in the middle east? Tell me.

Is it because your ideology is more important than actually helping people?

Hahaha! What do you know about my ideology? I suppose I'm a communist now, right? Hahaha.

You still didn't answer me. Who's next? I'd really like to know that, because if suddenly the US finds my country as being opressed, I'd like to begin to pack.

[Lincoln]

I guess you didn't read the first posts. Woud you rather have uniterrupted electricity or be free from torture?

[FrustratedPoet]

Woud you rather have uniterrupted electricity or be free from torture?

I didn't realise it was an either/or situation.

[problem_child]

The US hit-list goes like this

Iraq
Iran
[a non Saudi] Arabia
Egypt.

[Lincoln]

Originally posted by Tiberius


Because helping the iraqi people wasn't for a milisecond the goal of this war. Are just so naive, that you can't make the difference between a reason and an excuse?

Why did you "free" Iraq and not some other country that is not in the middle east? Tell me.



Hahaha! What do you know about my ideology? I suppose I'm a communist now, right? Hahaha.

You are obviously a cynic. Really, some people in Iraq are happy. What ever your ideology is you can keep it because it is void of compassion. Did you even read the ccomments of people in the first post? Can you even see real people who are happy to be free? Or do you only see evil in the motives of people you hate?

[problem_child]

Lincoln dude, you really are a propaganda-monkey, you just lap it aaaaall up and beleive it from the very bottom of your heart. In a way I kind of admire your rosey innosence, and your faith in the good-will of the statesmen who appear on your teevee in the evening to tell you what's happening, why it's happening, and how brave and noble and good your country is. I bet you still beleive in Santa Claus as well

[General Ludd]

Did anyone actually read through all that "good news"? I skimmed througha bit of it and it was mostly silly nonsense like a mayor complaining about not having sportsclubs and hotels, or just newsblips about US actions. Not to mention the immensely corny things like a 'youth soccer player' saying "we're playing with freedom now"

[Lincoln]

Yeah, common people who are free to do the simple things we take for granted. And you judge them sitting in a free society.

[General Ludd]

You're good with the melodrama. I should take some notes.