Iraqi feelings.

Remove all ads!

Iran has nothing but a possible interest in perhaps starting a nuclear weapons program. They may one day initiate a proper progam even if I think it will be very hard as they lack expertise and ecquipment, not to mention that the world is watching and there is a great movement in the country working for democratisation, something the ayatollahs are hitting down on less and less.
As for North Korea I highly doubt that they have anything else than a sheitload of soldiers. I wonder how much of Kim's boasting is just that, boasting, and how much is real. He probably is doing his damnedest to get a hold of nukes but I doubt he has succeeded, and if he has managed to succeed it is even more unlikely that he has an effective delivery system. There is a difference between Iraq and N.Korea though, the populace and civilian infrastructures may be have been in tatters in both countries but North Korea has a whole military and scientific infrastructure. Iraq did not, every aspect of Saddam's military machine was destroyed after first the war against Iran and then the Gulf War followed by the massive sanctions and sporadic bombings and inspections. Whyt would the pressure ever be taken off? Saddam is/was old and I am sure the friendly support of internal enemies of Saddam would atleat give him enough to think about that he wouldnt have time or resources to pursue weapons no one would sell him, created by scientists he didnt have made out of goods he couldnt get a hold of.

I actually think that Saddam did comply with the resolutions but that he was stupid enough to show bravado and appear to defy some of them as to not lose face and appear weak to his own underlings and the rest of the arab world. He probably thought that he had made sure to get rid of any real reasons for the US or UN to lay the smackdown on him while still appearing to be a cool and tough cat to his underlings and fellow arabs. A risky and stupid gambit that didnt pay off. However I do not think that is reason enough for the US to wreck the international cooperation that slowly slowly has been built up since WW2, to alienate their most important and most powerful allies, to start a war where US and other foreign casualties are counted in the thousands and where Iraqi casualties are numbered in the tens of thousands.
Shatter the respect the world have had for the US and even further antagonize another generation of poor uneducated young arabs to hate the west led by the US so they are easy prey for lunatics like Bin Laden.
The WMD's were one of the scapegoats to start a war and a conquest which reasons are not hidden by the neocons but openly stated. You should read some of Ragusa's links sometime. The neocons in Washington arent ashamed of their plans, they do not hide them but still no one bothers to check up on it and when they do they tend to think it crazy talk by liberal sissies.

The war was about power, in the end most everything big enough to be noticed is about power.

 

A friend from Bosnia sent this link.
http://www.khayma.com/iraqihell/

Probably highly questionable. I didn't look at it too deeply.

 

The site proudly proclaims that it has "PICTURES YOU WON'T FIND ON CNN OR FOXNEWS OR ANY ZIONIST MEDIA". I think this says all that needs to be said about whether the site has any positive contribution to make.

 

@khazraj
The link is dead now.
@Chris
The fact that this site is advertising his resources like this, doesn't make them necessarilly lies. You can't judge by appearance only

 

BTA,
You bash my “concluding from internal wickedness” part. Allow me to elaborate my point:

Saddam was no madman, he always asked for allowance before he started a larger enterpirse. IMO it is hypochritical and naive to blame all the agressiveness on Saddam after the west had so actively encouraged and supported him to attack Iran. And referring to the old story about Saddam asking the US what they thought about the dispute between Iraq and Kuwait (an internal arab affair the US won’t mix in) that doesn’t look very unpredictable and mad to me too. Aggressive it was, sure, but he was basically a US tool and he fully understood that. Maybe notable, Saddam, with Israel, enjoyed the privilege of being allowed to kill US soldiers unpunished - remember the USS Stark?
In 2003 there wasn’t much left of Saddams once formidable army - after 10 years of continuous bombing and the embargo. His forces were obsolete and none of his direct neighbours even felt threatened anymore. Besides, Saddam was 65, how many years of despotic rule had he left?

I find it most amazing that in the US, a country of 400+ Million people, with the mightiest military in the world, people were genuinely afraid of Saddam. That phenomenon is unique. No other western country really shared that view. That isn’t because the rest of the world doesn’t understand a ****.

The hawks in the administration, and the mainstream media (not only FOX), painted Saddam and his arsenal as a threat to the US. I even read one article whose author stated that, while Saddam’s missiles and deadly drones couldn’t reach US Shores, Saddam could put them on a ship and fire them off the US coast ..... HAHA .... adding that he therefor sees the need to install a missile shield and demanded some additional 100 billion for defense spending. The threat Saddam could hand over WMD to terrorists is only a logical continuation of the less convincing potential threat "missiles from innocent looking disguised freighters".
Have a look at Laurie Mylroie’s writing – she’s perhaps the whackiest of the blame-Saddam fraction, blaming on him the Oklahoma city bombing and, of course, the anthrax mailings (and besides, she's at the AEI ; the tragic is that she believes what she writes) All that’s plain and simple fearmongering.

Fearmongering I feel will be an important part of the next US elections. Partly, because the current administration will try top justify their previous actions. To do so they can hardly contradict themselves by realistically acessing the world around them. That would mean dropping old habits too - the neocons have been at the B-team for no reason in the 1970s and the 1980s (and have been utterly far off with their doomsaying all the time). Listen to John Bolton: "Don’t forget: Syria and Iran are terrible threats too!" Maybe when you smoke dope too.

I found actually that the decisive part in "Bowling for Columbine", aside from all the lack of precision typical for Michael Moore as a polemist, was his trip to Canada and his reference to the non-culture of fear in the US.
The US is the country where the people are told that they are in danger all the time: Use the wrong toothpaste and you’ll loose all your friends. You have a soft belly? You won’t get laid until you get yourself a sixpack. If you don’t have a gun (or are for gun control), you’re a fool, because the baddies have one. You don’t have a triple lock at your door? Well, crimes high these days, better start to pray! You noticed the 9/11 attacks? Well, they evil arabiacs are sure to provide more of that, better buy a bunker to protect you and your beloved NOW before it is too late .....

Hypothetical threats are anywhere, anytime.

America went a long way since Roosevelt said that freedom of fear is what America is about.

 

I think Saddam was all about the show. Iraq has always been considered a power in the Middle East. Not a world power of course, but a Middle East power. I think they were very reluctant to allow weapon inspectors in not because they had something to hide from the inspectors, but that they had something to hide from their neighboring nations - the fact that they were no longer nearly as powerful as they once were. The toll paid by Iraq following the 1991 invasion of Kuwait was severe. The country never recovered economically to any great extent. Quite frankly, I don't think Iraq could afford any type of weapons program. By the same token, it was in their best interest to convince the rest of the world that they could. The regime could not appear weak to its own people or to the surrounding nations, and so fed into the idea that they were something they were not. I just think Saddam never thought that the U.S. would call his bluff.

 

Adelth i agree with you but your last words

arise some questions. First of all do you mean that the US intelligence agencies with all their capabilities (both in resources and in human staff) were for more than ten years been fooled by Shaddam and that the 24/7 electric eyes that watched Iraq could not even understand that simple fact? That Shaddam was boasting only?
I think you could help me on this by telling me if that is possible and then tell me why USA administration did not even considered the reations of the global community.
Or a worst case scenario that needs your answer. Can you explain me what are the real motives behind this invasion, if this feedback was known to them, but chose to conceal?

 

It's not as if history repeats itself, it's that human nature doesn't change. Bullying is a good tactic, it works. And it worked splendidly in the case of Iraq.

Anyone remembers: "If you don't like it, go to France" and "Either you're with us or you're with the terrorists" ?