War in Iraq?, version 4.0 (Official Iraq thread)

Never been to Birmingham before, might plan a trip to show my appreciation of the mosque.

 

I was wondering what a "west-midlander" was.



Interesting fact though.

The name of a mosque should not inspire any hatred towards it though.

 

Maybe they will now change the name to the "General Jay Garner" mosque. I'm sure he'll feel honored.

 

Note the article was written by a Swiss. Switzerland is a wonderful country. If only the US would learn from the Swiss and mind its own business.

You can always move there B_S , I wont shed a single tear I promise you.

 

Never been to Birmingham before, might plan a trip to show my appreciation of the mosque.

I would advise against it. It's in an area of the city where I wouldn't feel remotely safe walking along the street.

 

Did you hear North Korea recently caved on the multilateral talk issue?

Bloody cowards. The US should have invaded them instead of Iraq. NK deserves an international kick in the groin more than Saddam has for 12 years.

 

jabbadabbado--

i read your posts. i agree with much of what you stated. previously, i was under the impression that you were insinuating that it was MY opinion that i thought the war was JUST about oil and that you were being sarcastic and putting words into my mouth to the effect that i thought stealing oil was perfectly acceptable. i see that your intent was not sarcasm now, if offense was taken, please accept my apologies. i think the difficulty in explaining what someone is saying as "my opinion" as opposed to just stating what one might consider just a factual statement presents an unfortunate opportunity for misunderstanding. i'll even go so far as to say that SOME of the pretenses of SOME motivations for the U.S.'s decision to engage iraq are frustrating to me as well.


i certainly hope i "get it" at this point, but tell me if this isn't an accurate (if not nearly as comprehensive as your post) synopsis of your "gist":

there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the fact that iraq is an enormous source of a product which the world depends on (again the only addendum for me is my opinion that alternative energy sources should be more vigorously pursued by all nations). how exactly that resource is distributed in terms of benefits to iraq and it's people is crucial. oil WAS a factor in the motivation for war.

fair enough?

anyway, just wanted to say sorry for the defensiveness and misunderstanding.


gonk--

i am much more interested in seeing a successful resolution to north korea's leader returning to a look that doesn't make me view him as the pacific rim's version of a morrissey fan gone horribly, horribly wrong. the pompadour must be stopped at all costs.

 

Let's hope there's a resolution of some form with relevant effect. I'm pro-war on North Korea, anti-war in the Middle East in general.

 

Jedi Xen, I'd be afraid that if I moved to Switzerland, the US might try to "liberate" it too.

 

Think of all those anonymous bank deposits that are yearning to be free.

 

Hey, get a load of some of the stories on the BBC website. Apparently there's been some cases in Mosul of the Americans firing on a crowd of rock-trowing protesters (killing between 7 and 12) and a mass gathering to welcome a Shia cleric back into the city of Kut. He boycotted the recent talks on reforming Iraq.

Not exactly what the US might have had in mind at this point. Let's hope something hobbles together to please the majority.

 

Gonk:

Yes, but the U.S. does have an out since it was merely a witness ot the Oslo Accords and the 1995 treaty.

If not, they can always charge Abu Abbas with masterminding piracy on the high seas - since that is jus genitum, there won't be too many folks who would be willing to complain about that.

 

Apparently there's been some cases in Mosul of the Americans firing on a crowd of rock-trowing protesters (killing between 7 and 12)

Whats wrong with these people? They have been liberated and should be happy.

 

Yes, but the U.S. does have an out since it was merely a witness ot the Oslo Accords and the 1995 treaty.

Legally? Yes. But since the US was the primary sponsor of those very accords, it's going to look very bad in the Middle East. It's possible the US could hand him over to Italy, since it had no involvement with those accords whatsoever. But it would look bad if the US were to prosocute him themselves.

 

Not if he continued to help and support terrorist activities.

 

Jedi Xen, I'd be afraid that if I moved to Switzerland, the US might try to "liberate" it too.

YOu know better than that.....wait a minute I just realized who I was talking to. Go read a book.

Whats wrong with these people? They have been liberated and should be happy.

Oh yes we should take the actions of some and make believe the whole country is that way. Lets go dig up Saddam and put him back in power shall we? There are people happy to be rid of Saddam Hussein, there are people who arent, can't please everyone, you know that too. That was one of America's blunders in this war is by putting Garner in charge of the interim government instead of an Iraqi exile, that is salt on an open wound.

 

Not if he continued to help and support terrorist activities.

No, but considering he's publically apologized for everything he's done, it's going to make that sort of case that much harder. As opposed to, you know, Bin Laden, who probably intends to apaologize some dozen centuries after he's dead.

 

"the pompadour must be stopped at all costs."

ROTFLMAO!!!



You forgot "high-heeled" pompadour.

Morissey?

The best thing The Smiths ever did was break up. Never a big fan, except for that one song, can't remember the name, with the guitar sounding like a train whistle.

 

"So when is now" was the song.

And I agree.

 

"Oh yes we should take the actions of some and make believe the whole country is that way"

I don't think this forum should condone such irony.

 

I don't think this forum should condone such irony.

Agreed. It is very, very ironic.

Think of all those anonymous bank deposits that are yearning to be free.

 

Gonk:

So, Abu Abbas has a nasty accident, then.

I do not think the U.S. should let a known terrorist who masterminded a cruise ship hijacking that involved the death of a wheelchair-bound American slide.

If it means Mr. Abbas has a nasty accident or is shot while trying to escape custody, so be it.

 

DarthKarde,

Whats wrong with these people? They have been liberated and should be happy.

Stop with the rhetoric.

If you stop to looks at the situation it is easily understandable why these folks turn to violence. It's all they have known for the last several decades.

First and foremost you have the economic despair levied upon them by Saddam and the Baathists which is currently aggravated by the results of war. Couple that with the ethnic infighting that has permeated Mosul and the mistrust created among the city dwellers and you have a really touchy situation.

Not to mention that the people were upset that the governor-general, Jebouri (a tribal leader) has ties to Hussein's regime. Anyone with a shred of common sense can see why these people were upset and why they turn to violence time and time again to get their point across.

It would seem that you are far too busy looking for sounding points to rip into the United States and the campaign in Iraq to look at the facts of the situation and make a logical determination. I hope that the information above will help you to do so. If not, there are countless other resources available to you that provide insight into the precarious situations that exist all across the country of Iraq.

 

Stop with the rhetoric.

If you stop to looks at the situation it is easily understandable why these folks turn to violence. It's all they have known for the last several decades.

Actually this is wrong. Iraq as a country was quite prosperous in many areas under Saddam while he was allied with the US in the 80's. It was not a decent life if you were a Kurd, but anyone else was capable of getting a decent education and a middle-class life as long as you had no political aspirations.

These are not 'poor barbarians' who have known nothing better in the past years. They are people who likely were not greatly enamoured with Hussein, but like the US less.

 

Stop with the rhetoric.

If you stop to looks at the situation it is easily understandable why these folks turn to violence. It's all they have known for the last several decades.

Actually this is wrong. Iraq as a country was quite prosperous in many areas under Saddam while he was allied with the US in the 80's. It was not a decent life if you were a Kurd, but anyone else was capable of getting a decent education and a middle-class life as long as you had no political aspirations.

These are not 'poor barbarians' who have known nothing better in the past years. They are people who likely were not greatly enamoured with Hussein, but like the US less.