Don't agree with war on Iraq? Then read this

Remove all ads!

The non-assassination was signed by Ford in 1976 iirc.

I did hear some rumbelings about it being withdrawn by W though after 9/11. I take it that didn't happen?

 

Did you know that the iraqi soldiers are actually killing their own people who are trying to escape the city to find food and water, and then trying to blame us?

 

1) Dictatorships are not democracies.

2) Democracies are not dictatorships.

3) You can make a dictatorship SEEM like a democracy, if you keep a group of 10 or 12 people, and tell them to vote for your decisions or they will be executed and replaced.

4) You can make a democracy seem like a dictatorship if you join the Army/Navy/Coast Guard/Marines/Air Force, and refuse to follow an order; jailbirds are cool.

If I was in Iraq, and I was going to either die at the hands of my countrymen, or die at the hands of some kind of foreign invaders...I would seriously have to wonder what kind of a country I live in where my own people put me in a position like that.

The average Iraqi is not nearly as well-informed as the rest of us are. You have your little city that you live in, and unless you send out a telegram by way of Camel Jockey Express, you have no idea what's going on in the next city. This is how you maintain order in a dictatorship; also, this is how you put down an attempted unionization in your factory. Works wonders when you keep your people divided.

1) Start.
2) Divide.
3) Conquer.
4) Goto 2.
5) End.

Right now, the United States and Britain and Poland and Australia and some other countries that I forget, are sacrificing their troops for Iraqi civilians. It's a swap-out. You lost 10 men, but managed to kill 25 paramilitaries. Attrition.

At some point, one way or another, large numbers of "civilians" are going to be killed. It's going to come to mustard gas and claymores. Or it's going to come to bombing powerplants and hospitals and telephone lines. You can blame it on the United States; we have a couple of other notches on our gun-belts. Or you can blame the Baath party; they've been planning on fighting and sacrificing their "civilians" since 1992. You can blame it on Vietnam for teaching the rest of the world how to fight a guerilla war; they made it popular.

You can blame it on Jane Fonda for not having any kind of a clue what kind of world SHE would be in, if she didn't have the kind of freedom a democracy allows for.

I think it's time to start the serious bombing. Take out the powerplants, roads, telephones. Send in EA-6B's to shut off satellite phones before you hit targets in cities. Get with the dividing and conquering.

Really get a hard beat down. And pump an enormous amount of cash into the place to get it working again, afterwards. This is stuff that should have been done 12 years ago; and it's our fault for letting it get this bad. Get it over and done with, so you can start rebuilding.

Look at where Japan is today. And Germany. We bombed the Holy Living Jesus H. Khrist out of them, and now they are in a position to cuss us for doing it. Rebuilt.

I'd call Germany a democracy, long before I'd call Iraq one. Turkey is in kind of a buffer zone; not exactly a democracy, but definately not a monarchy/dictatorship.

 

No one really wants to pump in the amount of money needed to rebuild Iraq like that ejsmith. You can just look at Afganistan, the US talked wide and broadly about how they would build the country up so it could sustain a real democracy. IIRC congress refused the first grant of money for that. It is easy to say that you are going to build things up it is a completely different thing to do it.

After WW2 Germany and Japan were pretty much able to build themselves up with help from the US. While Iraq and Afganistan are unable to do anything as they are not really unified nations with not even a proper broken infrastructure. The paralels that so many people make to WW2 and today do not really work, it is so totally different situations.

 

I'd like to add something here. It may be that some leaders of European Countries, like Spain, Italy, Poland, Denmark and others, "said" they support the war. But their "support" is nearly nothing else but words (for which they anticipate some hard-cash in return). Wheras more substantial support comes from a country like Germany, which is bound by treaties to do so, even if it's Goverment is strict against the war.

Like somewhere else in this fourm already stated, the 3 danish ships aren't a hell of a lot and in Spain they got heated debates over issuses like "Are american and british aeroplanes allowed to get refueld in our air-space ?"

 

Viking. I never said "to think that assassination of Saddam would solve it all bloodlessly". I don't think that assassination is the answer. I find it "ironic" that the coallition claims to be doing the war for the "freedom" of the Iraqis. It's hypocricy. The 1980s and the first Gulf War prove that. Knowing that someone is a dangerous dictator that kills innocents and then supplying war technology to him is beyond criminal. Perhaps if the coalltion did not use such thinly veiled lies to wage its war then more people would support it.

 

I'm sure our boats will be very useful