Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Come back, Saddam

  1. #1

    Come back, Saddam

    I've been suggesting this for a long time. The yanks have spent over $350 Billion on Iraq already.

    "The situation is desperate in Iraq and getting worse on a daily basis. Saddam Hussein was the easiest target; now we are fighting so many -- al-Qaida, suicide bombers, Shiite militias, Sunni groups, the Ansar al Sunna, the Islamic Army, the Mujahedeen army, the Iraq National Islamic Resistance, and so on."

    more on this:

    http://www.courierpostonline.com/app...610270322/1047

    and here:

    http://www.latimes.com/news/printedi...d-sectionfront

    It looks like the idea is gaining ground.
    Please note the absence of any personal attacks, jerkhoodness or other bannable offences in the above content.
    <a href="http://giftube.com/"><img src="http://91.121.71.200/gifs/4398.gif" alt=""></a><br/><a style="padding:3px;background: transparent;color:#00ADEF;font-family:tahoma;font-size:10px;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none;" href="http://giftube.com/" target="_blank">Gifs at Giftube.com </a>

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Whorewald
    Come back, Saddam
    I'm in total support of the US packing their bags and leaving Iraq ASAP. Its turned into a civil war and that's not the place for an external US led active military campaign. They've accomplished what they set out to do and remove Saddam, installed the first steps of a democratic government so get out.

    Afghanistan on the other hand continues to require a strong international force to continue to root out and eliminate the remaining terrorist strongholds.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Whorewald
    I've been suggesting this for a long time.

    It looks like the idea is gaining ground.
    LOL - Randy, if only they had listened to you sooner If only Perb's reach was greater!

    Quote Originally Posted by gravitas
    Its turned into a civil war

    They've installed the first steps of a democratic government so get out.
    at this contradiction, wouldn't you say

    Damn... did not know it was all about removing Hussein. Guess, that's what's left to grab on to... when everything else has been shown to be a pack of fabricated lies. First steps of a democratic government... you crack me up... everytime.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by OTBn
    LOL - Randy, if only they had listened to you sooner If only Perb's reach was greater!
    Yep. OTBN - ya read it here first. A lot of people would be waaaaaay better off if the had listened to me.
    Please note the absence of any personal attacks, jerkhoodness or other bannable offences in the above content.
    <a href="http://giftube.com/"><img src="http://91.121.71.200/gifs/4398.gif" alt=""></a><br/><a style="padding:3px;background: transparent;color:#00ADEF;font-family:tahoma;font-size:10px;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none;" href="http://giftube.com/" target="_blank">Gifs at Giftube.com </a>

  5. #5

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Whorewald
    I've been suggesting this for a long time. The yanks have spent over $350 Billion on Iraq already.

    ...

    It looks like the idea {of bringing Saddam Hussein back ** is gaining ground.
    After seeing Hussein on TV the only way I'd support that is if he got a full frontal lobotomy and was on guard 24 hours per day. That guy is just plain scary.

    The main problem with US military strategy in Iraq IMO is that they aren't taking into account the neighbouring countries that are supplying many of the troops. Furthermore, Rumsfeld putting the entire Iraqi army out of work was right up there with Schwartzkopf (sp?) letting them have attack helicopters in 1991. People complain about Bush being a moron. These guys aren't morons (at least Schwartzkopf has an IQ of 180) and they are making amazingly bad decisions.

    Eventually, without outside financial support, Iraq is going to have to sell the oil to somebody so what's the difference? At some point the "Iraquians" are going to have to cave in and get their shit together and get someone to fix the infrastructure to do that. Once they run out of money for ammunition I suspect the fighting is going to calm down a bit. So I say just get the f*ck out and let nature take its course. Any other course of action is only going to make things worse.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by john23
    Eventually, without outside financial support, Iraq is going to have to sell the oil to somebody so what's the difference? At some point the "Iraquians" are going to have to cave in and get their shit together and get someone to fix the infrastructure to do that. Once they run out of money for ammunition I suspect the fighting is going to calm down a bit. So I say just get the f*ck out and let nature take its course. Any other course of action is only going to make things worse.
    O'Contraire - the "insurgency" is and has been for some time... self-sustaining:

    NY Times - Nov 26: The insurgency in Iraq is now self-sustaining financially, raising tens of millions of dollars a year from oil smuggling, kidnapping, counterfeiting and connivance by corrupt Islamic charities that the Iraqi government and its American patrons have been largely unable to prevent, according to a US government report.

    The American study offers little hope that much can be done to choke off revenues to the armed groups battling the government in Iraq, the New York Times said.

    The report, obtained by the paper, estimates that groups responsible for many insurgent and terrorist attacks are raising 70 million to 200 million dollars a year from illegal activities.

    It says 25 million to 100 million dollars of that comes from oil smuggling and other criminal activity involving the state-owned oil industry, aided by "corrupt and complicit" Iraqi officials.

    As much as 36 million dollars a year comes from ransoms paid for hundreds of kidnap victims, the report says. It estimates that unnamed foreign governments previously identified by American officials as including France and Italy paid 30 million dollars in ransom last year.

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    vancouver
    Posts
    1,006
    There is no shortage of money to finance anything.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6129612.stm

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Randy Whorewald
    Come back Saddam. I've been suggesting this for a long time.
    Not only you, the idea has been floating since the early signs of chaos. Not to mention all those folks who said he should have never been removed at all. Evil, torturous and murderous as it was, Saddam's regime provided stability in his part of the Middle East, and there was no terrorist threat from Iraq. The US had no idea what it was doing when it invaded, had not thought out the so very logical consequences, and had grossly underestimated both extremist Muslims and also sectarian tribalism. No sane person can be a fan of Saddam, but many Iraqis (both Sunni and Shia) would welcome him back if the outcome was a stable and "peaceful" Iraq (excluding peace for his political foes of course).

    His return is not possible. Too much has escaped from Pandora's box; there is too much hatred and too many armed parties with their own political-power agendas. His faction would be just another one of the many spilling innocent Iraqi blood everywhere.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by gravitas
    I'm in total support of the US packing their bags and leaving Iraq ASAP. Its turned into a civil war and that's not the place for an external US led active military campaign. They've accomplished what they set out to do and remove Saddam, installed the first steps of a democratic government so get out.

    Afghanistan on the other hand continues to require a strong international force to continue to root out and eliminate the remaining terrorist strongholds.

    The strange thing is prior to 9/11 the terrorists in Afghanistan was the Northern Alliance and the Taliban was the government. After 9/11 the roles have reversed. Just who is the better of the two, if there is one?

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by sparkymacker
    I like the idea of partitioning the country into three separate entities; Kurds, Sunni & Shiite. The Saudi's can bankroll the Sunni's and the Iran can make the Shiite territory a province of greater Iran. The Kurds have demonstrated that they are the only ones capable of running their own affairs.

    Let me throw this into the mix, what territory constitutes Kurdistan? Is it just the geographical area in Iraq where the Kurds live or is it more than that? You see of the approximaitely 30 million Kurds in the world, just under half live in Turkey, with significant Kurdish populations in Syria and Iran as well. So if the Kurds to get their own country, then what would be its borders?

    Also keep in mind that we in the West find it amazingly easy to condemn Saddam Hussein for his crimes inflicted on the Kurds. However if we in the West truly want justice for the Kurds, then what do we do about other countries that have inflicted terrible bloodshed on the Kurds? One of these countries being Turkey which not all that long ago wiped out over 3,000 Kurdish settlements.

    Indeed the Kurds have been used as pawns in the Middle East a number of times, including twice by the US. Once in the 1970's who along with Iran inspired (for a lack of a better word) the Kurds in Iraq to rise up. This being part of a move to get Iraq to sign a treaty with Iran regarding their borders After Iraq signed the treaty the US and Iran did nothing to stop the Iraqis from retaliating against the Kurds.

    The second time is perhaps more well known, when President George HW Bush called on the different peoples in Iraq to rise up, but the US did next to nothing to come to their support when there was widespread bloodshed. There is a saying in the Middle East about the Kurds and it is that the Kurds have no friends.

    Lastly Iraq is one of many countries whose borders were arbitraly decided by European powers driven by self-interest than by the desires of the peoples these decisions affected.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •