Iraq; a question of oil.

RE: US plans for Iraq.

“Your ancestors wouldn´t be happy about this comment. Where did you think your country got mostly everything from, darling?. At least a bit of respect for your roots would be advisable. And not mixing puntual discrepancies with an easy critizism of a whole continent.”

I no longer wish to acknowledge that Europe had anything whatsoever to do with the U.S. Its too painful for me to fathom that at one time Europe actually had a “pair”, but now is nothing more than a flock of castrated sheep.

RE: US plans for Iraq.

Cyrus.

“Kev, don’t you worry your precious little head about America and what we can and cannot handle at the moment. Of course, maybe if you Euros weren’t so afraid of the big-bad al-Queda/Taliban/Kosovar Albanians/Bosnian Serbs/et al you would send more than a few dozen (whoops, I mean few thousand) poorly equipped targets (whoops, there I go again, I mean soldiers) over to where they are needed to secure and rebuild those countries and at the same time not need American soldiers there to back you up…then our forces wouldn’t be stretched so thin to begin with!”

What do you mean? Britain constantly supports America. We are, in fact, your own personal aircraft carrier anchored just off the coast of Europe. Britsh troops served alongside Americans in all the countries you mentioned. You even requested British support in Afghanistan specifically for their specialist skills. Who patrols the no-fly zones in Iraq with America?

And as for those few thousand poorly equipped targets it seems more and more that that is exactly what they are becoming to America. How many British troops did you manage to kill in the Gulf War? How about your New Zealand and Canadian allies? Your own Government is now charging your own Air Force personnel with negligence. Is it the fault of the targets or those doing the targetting?

“Why don’t you state what you really want…a way out of having to sacrifice and make a difference in the world.”

Have a walk round any British town and read the names on the war memorials and see just how many were willing to sacrifice their lives to make a difference in the world.

“Just get out of our way if you cannot stomach what needs to be done.”

Where was America when Britain was fighting in Malaya, Borneo, Aden, Kenya? Don’t commend Britain in one post for her resilience in WWII and then accuse her of not playing her part elsewhere. All this boils down to the question of necessity. How necessary is it to oust Hussein? This dossier will doubtless pull public opinion towards military action. Whether it is conclusive enough we shall have to wait and see.

Regards,

kev35

RE: US plans for Iraq.

>[i]” You Euros make me so sick.

Your ancestors wouldn´t be happy about this comment. Where did you think your country got mostly everything from, darling?. At least a bit of respect for your roots would be advisable. And not mixing puntual discrepancies with an easy critizism of a whole continent.

>”Hey, can’t we all just get along? The UN will put a
>band-aid on it and it will all be better.” Just get out of
>our way if you cannot stomach what needs to be done. x(

In fact we are out of the way, but as soveign countries, we have our own views and oppinions. Being allies means, being able to disagree. Listening to friends is nice. I am having the impression that the role of henchmen, who always say yes, is what some members of the US administration want. We have supported the US many times in Afghanistan, most of the people in the Yugoslav war, in the Gulf war, but sometimes, as this time, we don´t whatever you like it or no. And the US has to get used to it. We are starting to walk alone, and as allies you should be pleased with our sincere advises and not with continuous submission. Friendship can´t be stablish upon this base.

RE: US plans for Iraq.

“I do find it worrying that America has turned it’s attention to Iraq without finishing off other matters first. al-Qaeda is still active and far from beaten, Afghanistan is on the brink of collapse and you still haven’t dealt with the people who spread anthrax on your own shores. Would it not be wise to finish one war before starting another?”

Kev, don’t you worry your precious little head about America and what we can and cannot handle at the moment. Of course, maybe if you Euros weren’t so afraid of the big-bad al-Queda/Taliban/Kosovar Albanians/Bosnian Serbs/et al you would send more than a few dozen (whoops, I mean few thousand) poorly equipped targets (whoops, there I go again, I mean soldiers) over to where they are needed to secure and rebuild those countries and at the same time not need American soldiers there to back you up…then our forces wouldn’t be stretched so thin to begin with!

Instead, you want “proof” that we should be doing what we are doing (or are going to do). Why don’t you state what you really want…a way out of having to sacrifice and make a difference in the world. You Euros make me so sick. “Hey, can’t we all just get along? The UN will put a band-aid on it and it will all be better.” Just get out of our way if you cannot stomach what needs to be done. x(

RE: US plans for Iraq.

DJ.

“Please don’t hurt us mister Saddam. We’ll stick our heads in the sand and ignore all the nasty stuff you are doing.”

If you bother to read anything written on this forum by a non- American you will find that quite a few of us share your concern but are unwilling to blindly follow our leaders (or yours) into a conflict likely to result in massive casualties without the evidence that a military operation is necessary. I’ve said before, get the evidence, get the proper mandate and then go in and do the job properly. I have no qualms about that and if enough evidence is found, and likely will be, gather the international community and oust him.

I do find it worrying that America has turned it’s attention to Iraq without finishing off other matters first. al-Qaeda is still active and far from beaten, Afghanistan is on the brink of collapse and you still haven’t dealt with the people who spread anthrax on your own shores. Would it not be wise to finish one war before starting another?

“Neville Chamberlain lives…”

He did what he believed to be right. His intentions were honourable and the year that elapsed after Munich gave the RAF the time to ensure they did not fight the Battle of Britain with biplanes.

Can we honestly say the same about Bush.

Regards,

kev35

RE: Yurpean whine…

Please don’t hurt us mister Saddam. We’ll stick our heads in the sand and ignore all the nasty stuff you are doing.

Neville Chamberlain lives…

UK assessment of Iraqi WMD development and delivery capability below.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/reports/international/iraqdossier.pdf

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

>Cyrus.
>
. There were thousands of French,
>Belgian and Dutch soldiers who had been in their graves for
>years before D-Day. They died not only in defence of their
>homelands but also in the struggle for liberation from
>occupation.
>
>

And let me add, thousands of civilians killed throughout Europe. So I suppose we have had just enough blood in our soil.

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

Cyrus.

“Hmmmm…perhaps you’re just not intelligent enough to understand what I was implying? Let me try again. If you Eurowhimps wouldn’t have appeased Hitler like you did in ’39 (actually, starting in ’36 as the first German troops crossed the Hohenzollern Bridge in Cologne and began reoccupation of Rhineland) then there wouldn’t have even
been a need for America to get involved in Europe.”

Hmmmm…perhaps if you’d been intelligent enough to read my profile you would have realised that this ‘Eurowimp’ was in fact British. You do, however, have a point about appeasement. But if America was so worldly-wise to coming events in Europe why did you not intervene then? Please remember, Europe is not only littered with the graves of American soldiers whose sacrifice is greatly appreciated by the people of Europe. There were thousands of French, Belgian and Dutch soldiers who had been in their graves for years before D-Day. They died not only in defence of their homelands but also in the struggle for liberation from occupation.

“You didn’t lift a finger to stop Hitler then and you refuse to lift a finger to stop Hussein now. You are a weak people…(excluding the Brits who have actually managed to maintain a backbone even after years of living so close to the rest of you)…and thus we must carry the load once again.”

Thank you for the obvious respect you have for the British involvement in the war, but again, remember, there were people from the Empire, the Dominions and also many European nations. Americans also fought and died with the Allies long before America as a nation joined the war. Europeans have fought the two largest conflicts in history on their own soil, both within the last one hundred years. With the greatest respect America has not.

America is a great and powerful nation with fine citizens and a proud military history. This is why I find it incredible that such a nation should go off half-assed on a mission to oust Saddam Hussein. Obtain the evidence you need against him, garner international support, provide a sensible plan for the country for when Saddam is removed and then, and only then, go and do it. This will not be like the Gulf War, I think any attacker will suffer numerous casualties. So please America, do it if it is necessary but put those brave members of your armed forces into harms way for the right reasons, not just on the whim of a man who seems to lust for war at any price.

Regards,

kev35

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

>[>
>Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to
>repeat it.

Except some countries which don´t and repeat it on and on.

Iraq may have nukes…not just oil

Asia Times
Sept 24, 2002

You doubt it? Think again and consider this September 13 Pravda (yes, Pravda, the reformed former Soviet propaganda sheet) headline: “200 SOVIET NUKES LOST IN UKRAINE”. Who says so? None other than Petro Symonenko, the leader of the (opposition) Ukrainian Communist Party. According to Symonenko, speaking at a public meeting in Kharkiv (eastern Ukraine) on September 11, there were 2,400 nuclear warheads in Ukraine when the Soviet Union disintegrated, although the transfer to Russia (supposedly completed in 1997) of only 2,200 of them has been officially documented. “The fate of the remaining 200 warheads is unknown,” Symonenko said, claiming his information was based on the findings of a now-defunct parliamentary commission. Serhiy Sinchenko, head of the parliamentary investigation, admitted that some of the warheads had been “lost”.

This is, of course, not the first time that claims about missing nukes have been made. On September 7, 1997, former Russian national security adviser General Alexander Lebed (who died in a helicopter crash in Siberia in April of this year) told the US CBS News’ 60 Minutes program that the Russian military had lost track of over 100 suitcase-size one-kiloton nuclear bombs produced in the 1970s for the Soviet intelligence services (KGB, GRU).

There is also ample documentation of smuggling and theft of weapons-grade nuclear materials. The International Atomic Energy Agency has reported 175 nuclear smuggling incidents since 1993, 18 of which involved highly enriched uranium, the key ingredient in an atomic bomb. A new database by the Institute for International Studies at Stanford University terms the protection of nuclear and radioactive material “woefully inadequate” and records 643 cases of smuggling and theft. Russian authorities say that in the past three years alone, they have broken up hundreds of nuclear-material smuggling deals. They say their nuclear weapons are under “safe and reliable” protection, but admit that nuclear materials are less well-protected, including storage sites for an estimated 1,100 metric tons of highly enriched uranium and 160 metric tons of plutonium.

What’s most troubling about the Symonenko claims is the existence of a tape recording examined by US intelligence and said to confirm high-level Ukrainian involvement in selling high-tech weapons to Iraq. The tape, made by a bodyguard who has since fled Ukraine, records a conversation between Ukrainian President Leonid Kuchma and the head of the country’s military export service, Valeriy Malev. It is said to contain evidence of military sales to Iraq of Kalchuga radar equipment through shadowy Jordanian middle men. (Malev could not be questioned because he died in a mysterious road accident in March.) The fact that Kuchma has recently boasted of his warm links with Iraq adds credibility to US suspicions that Ukrainian nuclear materials (if not whole weapons) may have come into Iraqi possession.

rest of the article…
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/DI24Ak01.html

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

“Who was more barbaric than Hitler and the Nazis? Where was America in 1939, ’40 and ’41? It’s perhaps as well we didn’t just pack up in 1939 and wait for America to come and ‘save’the free world then.”

Hmmmm…perhaps you’re just not intelligent enough to understand what I was implying? Let me try again. If you Eurowhimps wouldn’t have appeased Hitler like you did in ’39 (actually, starting in ’36 as the first German troops crossed the Hohenzollern Bridge in Cologne and began reoccupation of Rhineland) then there wouldn’t have even been a need for America to get involved in Europe. You didn’t lift a finger to stop Hitler then and you refuse to lift a finger to stop Hussein now. You are a weak people…(excluding the Brits who have actually managed to maintain a backbone even after years of living so close to the rest of you)…and thus we must carry the load once again.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

[updated:LAST EDITED ON 23-09-02 AT 06:53 PM (GMT)]Hi, Vortex.

“My government have the responsibility to first take care of my well being than anybody else.”

Agreed, absolutely no argument.

“If they can help others, they should, but not jeapordize American lives unless its worth the noble cause. If every country think like this, then you won’t see the abuse of human rights all over the world…”

Very noble but you know that isn’t going to work. If you really believe that why do you consider the cause of the people of Iraq to be more noble than that of the Palestinians, or the people of Rwanda, or Somalia, or the Balkans, or Chechnya?

“To be judgemental about it is to criticize the whole planet…which you know only a certain being up there have the power and the right to do so.”

I have to ask do you mean God or Bush? If you mean Bush, I appreciate the humour. If, however, you wish this to be a Religious as well as a political crusade I would like to point out that ‘God’ doesn’t appear to be showing an awful lot of interest or leadership.

Regards,

kev35

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

Hi, Cyrus.

“…the Euros are whining about GW only going after oil and that we should sit back and wait for Madman Hussein to “do something” before we actually take him out. Gee, when have I heard that rhetoric before??? Does 1939 ring a bell?!!!”

Yes, it rings loudly even now but not as loudly as it did in Europe in 1939, 1940 and 1941. Apparently the speed of sound was extremely slow back then as it took over two years to reach America, or was it just that America was suffering from selective deafness? Several thousand Americans heard the ringing of the bells and responded and paid the ultimate price long before the American Government decided to get involved.

“Second, the folks from “third world” countries on this board are nervous because they now fully understand that America is no longer just going to sit around and wait for a country to do something about the terrorists or psychopathic leaders among them…we’ll be glad to eradicate the problem ourselves if necessary.”

Good luck, and I hope you do a more convincing job than you have in Afghanistan, or dare I say in America? Of course, I forgot you’re still hunting the people who, literally, threw anthrax in your faces.

“Its best that everyone come to this realization now rather than later…America’s influence and power will be here for a long, long time to come. You can either follow us and help us fight to keep your democratic freedoms in tact or be overrun by the “barbarians” who’s only desire is the destruction of what you hold dear…the choice is yours.”

Now you’re injecting humour? you must be as that is really quite funny. Who was more barbaric than Hitler and the Nazis? Where was America in 1939, ’40 and ’41? It’s perhaps as well we didn’t just pack up in 1939 and wait for America to come and ‘save’the free world then.

Regards,

kev35

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

>People always talk
>about the American government value their own citizen’s
>lives more, and i say isn’t that obvious. My government
>have the responsibility to first take care of my well being
>than anybody else. If they can help others, they should,
>but not jeapordize American lives unless its worth the noble
>cause. If every country think like this, then you won’t see
>the abuse of human rights all over the world…instead you
>gotta blame the US.

Of course all countries tend to value the lifes of their citizens first. Inmoral but normal. I feel it´s pretty good defending our own citizens, and I don´t put any country as an example, probably the US comes out because it´s the most powerful country in the world, and it´s the one with more capacity to defend its citizens. I always feel upset when for example a plane crashes and the media usually say….”fortunately no Spaniards on board”…so no problem. This just drives me crazy. I suppose you´re right in thinking that defending your nationals for a noble cause could be worthy. But I suppose here comes the problem….What´s a noble cause?. I am sure, that any thug blowing civilians in Israel is convinced that his cause it´s worthy and it´s defending his citizens with a noble cause. It´s hard to decide, if defending our citizens upon the lifes of other serve to defend the human rights. I think a democracy with high values, being Europe, the US, Japan, should make a careful decision and balance everthing. If everything is global, human life consideration and appreciation should be global and universal. That´s the best way to defend human rights everywhere. Of course, dear Vortex, I don´t have an oppinion in that point, and my views are personal.:-) I still remember when we simply ignored the Tutsi-Hutus massacre some years ago. Just a few days on TV.

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

maybe it’s not necessarily that dirty today, but i don’t want to be hipocritical and denounce whats done before since like i said the standards of morality is different and its only fair to strive for better for now and the future, but not to be hypocritical of the past because nobody was there to feel the pressure and the circumstances. People always say we don’t know if we didn’t do this the outcome would be worse, but equally true is the contrary. I hope you understand my point. I believe the important thing was to honestly make the “right” decision at the time and go with it. In the context of 1945, if Truman really felt that it was necessary to save more lives, especially American lives given that we were attacked unprovoked and undeclared first and he is the President of the United States, not Japan (their leader should’ve have surrendered, there’s nothing honorable about secretly attacking somebody, like shooting from behind somebody’s back unprovoked). People always talk about the American government value their own citizen’s lives more, and i say isn’t that obvious. My government have the responsibility to first take care of my well being than anybody else. If they can help others, they should, but not jeapordize American lives unless its worth the noble cause. If every country think like this, then you won’t see the abuse of human rights all over the world…instead you gotta blame the US. Where’s their responsibility? On the other hand, you have to keep in mind what kind of world only 50 years ago…it wasn’t that moral in today’s standard. To be judgemental about it is to criticize the whole planet…which you know only a certain being up there have the power and the right to do so. Maybe it was on the verge of another flood? :7 but i guess a promise is a promise.

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

Wow…I leave for a weekend and this thread takes off without me here to keep everybody honest. 😉

First, after reading thru these posts I read exactly what I’ve come to expect…the Euros are whining about GW only going after oil and that we should sit back and wait for Madman Hussein to “do something” before we actually take him out. Gee, when have I heard that rhetoric before??? Does 1939 ring a bell?!!!

Second, the folks from “third world” countries on this board are nervous because they now fully understand that America is no longer just going to sit around and wait for a country to do something about the terrorists or psychopathic leaders among them…we’ll be glad to eradicate the problem ourselves if necessary.

Third, the Chinese just hate the fact that America is powerful enough to do what they can only dream of at the moment…so they denounce everything we do just to make themselves feel better.

Its best that everyone come to this realization now rather than later…America’s influence and power will be here for a long, long time to come. You can either follow us and help us fight to keep your democratic freedoms in tact or be overrun by the “barbarians” who’s only desire is the destruction of what you hold dear…the choice is yours.

A great man once said…

There are three kinds of people in this world:

1. Those who MAKE it happen,
2. Those who WATCH it happen,
3. Those who WONDER WHAT HAPPENED

Pick a number.

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

Well Vortex, I prefer to think that I democracies like Europe, the US and other participating in conflicts with ditators are in higher moral ground and can´t responde in the same way. So in war I don´t think everything is valid. We don´t know, because we don´t have any magic ball what it would be if the nukes weren´t dropped. If the Japs and Hitler commited atrocities, we can´t commit them. If Hitler bombed civilian cities, we can´t find justification in bombing Dresdem for instance knowing that there were only civilians. Wars are terrible, but no necessary that dirty.

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

I agree, no nukes on civilians. If it were left to me, i wouldn’t use it on those cities. But i take it at good faith that scientists really didn’t know too much about radiation….so it was the explosive power that they know intimately about. But, we can’t be 100% critical without admitting that the world was very different. Take this for example, one of the major reason that Japan didn’t immediately surrender after Hiroshima was because the people in control firmly believed that it wasn’t the work of one bomb, it’s a price they’re willing to pay for, and the most ridiculous of all, there’s no way the US has another one just like it. In fact after the second one, it was the Emperor that suddenly went against the military and openly declared unconditional surrender on radio (IIRC). Japanese leaders sometimes are very hard headed and honor means everybody else should die like them. Should also note that firebombings of other cities in Japan and Germany caused even more deaths in a single raid…so, the concept isn’t about nukes, but about the kind of targets. Some said the US should just blockage them, but knowing the Japanese they won’t surrender until the last one dies, which would’ve been the Emperor. You see, there’s no way the Emperor would know about slow deaths, but single large events like the atomic bombing he did find out.

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

I mean, that Israel and Iraq should fullfill UN resolutions. Glad we agree on that.

RE: Iraq; a question of oil.

I’m not sure about Israel, but in comparison they’re child’s play when it comes to violating UNSC resolutions. IIRC, there’s 2 outstanding UNSC resolutions for Israel, and since it’s a UNSC the US has agreed on those so i don’t know what you mean about vetoing. If you’re talking about some could’ve been resolutions, that would’ve been true for Iraq too.