The Al-Zarkawi Thread (Merged)

Saddam had years to do whatever he wanted with the weapons, and unfortunately we will likely never know the location of those that were produced. We know he had such weapons because he had used them in smaller doses against the Kurds (i.e. some of his own people) on numerous occassions.

Funny that Turks were doing exactly the same with Kurds but instead of lining up for another invasion I can see your country supplying them with over 200 F-16.. :rolleyes:

Trying to tell me that the weapons weren’t there because we didn’t find huge stockpiles of them right away is not going to fly. Hussein had more than enough time to conceal or otherwise get rid (i.e. transport out of the country) of anything that would have been a violation of U.N. Resolutions.

Tadaaa. But your government were talking about huge stockpiles. I did not forget.

Hussein has time to conceal and get rid of the WMDs?.. Then there surely are proofs about that.. So, please, I am giving you space to present them.. 😉

So alternatively I guess Saddam remains in power and the Iraqi people continue to suffer and die by the thousands every year while pigs like Saddam and his sons continue to rule and do whatever they please to or with whomever they please. Sounds like a great future for Iraq to me….

Okay, I believe you are absolutely concerned about the future and prosperity of the Iraqi people.. So, what is the next step after Iraq is safe? Surely Sudan, Cuba or Northern Korea.. 😉

So all of a sudden we invaded Iraq to steal their oil and share some of that with Britain and then give a little to Poland? The Iraqi government has control of the oil and they can contract out to whomever they choose. America is not stealing the oil.

Why all of a sudden? It was being planned that since the very start.. Don’t you remember the dispute on this forum about that? You were among the toughest defenders of the idea that ONLY US and British companies should get all oil export and reconstruction contracts after France, Germany and other Europeans refused to participate. Whom are you trying to cheat here and why?

They are getting the Iraqi government on its feet so that it can use its natural resources to accelerate the process of rebuilding the country.

Sorry, that is only a cheap rhetoric. We are having elections in five days, I have heard quite a lot of that already.

Can you read? Go back and read earlier posts by Impi. I don’t know how to make it any clearer. If we wanted the oil all for ourselves I can guarantee you that it would now be in our hands with Exxon and Chevron already having new Mid-East HQ buildings and offices….

There is no point doing that openly. You don’t need Iraqi natural resources as long as you collect large share of the winnings from them.

Well in the United States left-winged means very liberal and liberals are generally a part of the Democratic party while right-wing means conservative and a part of the Republican party. Whever you live might be different, and I apologize for my ignorance in the matter, but in short you’d fit in well with the idiots we have in Hollywood as well as many of the members of the Democratic party.

We have pretty much the same system, only a bit more colorful. We have a group of three right-wing parties that stick together tight in coalition. They support very similar internal policy as your Reps, cut down taxes, support the richer and more successful part of the population. They are pro-reform, pro West, pro EU and also support Bush. The last thing I can swallow down somehow while otherway I have always been a great fan of their politics..

Then we have one social democratic party which are playing on the cheap rhetoric card, social welfare, high taxes and similar stuff. Then there goes one ultra-right-wing party and a party of former dictator (now politically utterly unimportant). These all are on my ignore list.

Flex I’ve made little mention of Europe in quite some time……you on the other hand are quite good at referring to all of the bad things America has done recently and in the past. My arguments are based on things I’ve read as well as my own assessment of the situation in Iraq. You, by contrast, seem like you’re on some crusade to discredit the United States whever you get the chance.

First, you got to distinguish between United States as whole and their foreign policy in the last 8 years. It is not my plan to discredit the former, just the latter. 2. I know you were not mentioning Europe directly. But the invasion to Iraq is a clear message to all Europeans. A message that sounds: pi$$ on you.. Me, as European cannot leave that unnoticed.

United Europe is currently a greater, larger and more powerful market than US. And I want you to accept us as full partners. Unless you do that, you won’t get my support. There are many things I find unacceptable: the way you treat Euros regarding JSF, Iraqi invasion, exclusivity for recon contracts, repeated sabotage of the euro-based oil stock exchange and many more. That will have to change. United Europe can be f*cked up with that easily as once with separate countries.

There’s the little devil again…he loves to play around doesn’t he? You haven’t responed to his well-made points with well-made points of your own. You simply spit out the same devil’s advocate point of view everytime you post. Then you claim he is naive because he doesn’t agree with your point of view. No one government is perfect and in fact just about all of them are corrupt in some way or another. It’s simply human nature. I’m no political expert nor am I an expert in world affairs, but I do have a mind of my own and I think quite clearly and because I support our current government it does not mean I’m a member of the “trickable” mass. Saddam’s actions before, during, and after the Gulf War of 1990/1991 and his continued defiance of the U.N. throughout the 1990’s regarding the WMD are more than enough to convince me the Iraq war is legal and was necessary. Clearly the planning could have been better, and everything certainly hasn’t gone as hoped for, but as they say war is hell, and things always tend to change.

Impi is otherwise a nice guy. But he takes everything from the perspective that people who are in charge in the US are moral and honest and so are their actions. That is what I call naiviety. It is nice, but also somehow childish.. Otherway, he has my sympathies..

I’m on active duty now in the USAF and though I’m in the States and will remain here for quite some time being, I have no problem in understanding and accepting that I will likely be deployed to that region of the world at some point in time. Do I want to go to war? No. Do I want to do my duty for my country? Yes. Do I support my President and his decisions? Yes.

Well.. Since you are a soldier you have to.. President is the highest commander of your armed forces, ergo your boss 😉 If you openly wrote anything negative about your president in this forum, you could be punished for that.. Unlike US civilians or citizens of other states.

If you ever should go to Iraq, take care of yourself. Still pretty hot out there.
Good luck and God bless you

Gollevainen a very nice point raised.

1. None of you seem to know how the oil infrastructure in Iraq is currently set up. Profits go right to the Iraqi government. US oil imports from Iraq are about where they were a few years ago; where’s this extra oil we were supposed to have absconded with?

2. It’s the UN that passed the resolutions imposing sanctions on Iraq, not the US. Nice try with that one, but it won’t wash. Why didn’t France veto? Or Russia or China? None of them had any serious love for the US back then (and Russia and France would have probably liked to sell more weapons and rebuild the Iraqi military), although we do get on better with Russia and China now.

oh yea? Last I checked, your president lied to you and the world regarding nukes

Who said anything about nukes?

oh…George W. Bush, President, of your Country. 🙂

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/22/politics/main564585.shtml

oh and the lies exposed in the same news item as well 🙂

WMD can mean any number of highly destructive chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. Perhaps you’ll remember that very long period of time where the U.N. was repeatedly denied access to inspect Iraq’s “special areas of interest”. The constant delays and the purposeful evasion of inspection by Saddam over the years……do you honestly believe there was no threat posed by him to at least the neighboring countries? He invaded another country in 1990 if you’ll remember. Who’s to say he wouldn’t have threatened someone else in the region….namely the Israelis? Remember Resolution 1441?

I think the Chief Inspector of UN has different opinion than your speculations…(which are quoted above and below)..
Read this:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0305-01.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-02-un-wmd_x.htm

Oh and they also mention some points which you have mentioned, why argue with the facts?

Yes he invaded in 1990, who is talking about the Gulf War of 1990, we have a dispute over this recent one, and America..could have gone and you know kicked Saddam that time, it caused a Shiite Uprising in South, where people hoped Americans will come to Rescue, No Abrams came, it was the the T series.

Rest is all your speculation and wishfull thinking to hide the evil of your government.

In short Saddam refused to comply, and he blatantly defied what was written in that resolution? The United States and England (as well as some other nations) decided that this will not be tolerated and Saddam will pay for that with the loss of his regime and a change of power in Iraq. This action had to be taken to ensure that Iraq wouldn’t have the chance to post a threat to the region any longer.

Saddam’s Army was in no state to pose a threat to anyone. Since you mentioned Defiance of UN Resolutions and Israel in the same thread, why double standards for Israel? Why are they allowed to defy all internation law?

Saddam had years to do whatever he wanted with the weapons, and unfortunately we will likely never know the location of those that were produced. We know he had such weapons because he had used them in smaller doses against the Kurds (i.e. some of his own people) on numerous occassions. Trying to tell me that the weapons weren’t there because we didn’t find huge stockpiles of them right away is not going to fly. Hussein had more than enough time to conceal or otherwise get rid (i.e. transport out of the country) of anything that would have been a violation of U.N. Resolutions. STOP DEFENDING WHAT HE DID in your attempts to make America look bad.

More speculation and assumptions…you cant fill the gaps and holes with your own fantasies. Offcourse the West knew he had chemcial weapons before, not becuase he used it on Kurds, but becuase western governments provided it to him and some other govts too.

Go here: http://web.amnesty.org/pages/ttt4-article_7-eng

“”British firms sold thousands of kilos of the basic ingredients of nerve and mustard gas to Iraq and Iran last year, the Department of Trade confirmed yesterday… the Department’s figures show that 2,000 kilograms of methyl phosphonyl difluoride has been exported to Iraq. This is the basic ingredient of the nerve gas Sarin… British firms also sold 38,000 kilograms of dimethyl methylphosphonate and other Sarin ingredients to Iraq.”
Andrew Beitch, The Guardian, 6 April 1984

And stop pointing at me and trying to emhpasize to others that im trying to defend the actions of Saddam, keep your tricks to yourself…Two wrongs wont make it right… Why should I defend Saddam when I hate him as much as you do…only difference is that I dont like your president either …and so what..majority of Americans dont like him too, go figure..and for the THIRD TIME…you are just seeings things in BLACK AND WHITE..This is not Star wars…either Sith lord or Jedi Knight, come out of hollywood and you’ll see the grey.

I just dont like the idea f how it is being done.

So alternatively I guess Saddam remains in power and the Iraqi people continue to suffer and die by the thousands every year while pigs like Saddam and his sons continue to rule and do whatever they please to or with whomever they please. Sounds like a great future for Iraq to me……….

Well, you missed the point when Saddam was armed by your government ;)…you in USAF must know more about it than me ;). Good idea is not to create strong dictators so in the end you have to get rid of them in a bloody way. That was my point.

No one is discrediting American Government, there isnt any credit left anyway…so nothing to worry about.

[B]

So alternatively I guess Saddam remains in power and the Iraqi people continue to suffer and die by the thousands every year while pigs like Saddam and his sons continue to rule and do whatever they please to or with whomever they please. Sounds like a great future for Iraq to me……….

Iraqi people Suffered and died because of United State of Americas sanctions m8!
And Saddam was better leader than what we nowadays see in iraq.

Have you ever been in Iraq!? I think no.

Have you ever seen someone die by bullet wound in front of you? I think no!

Have you seen someone die because he/she can’t get enough Food or medicine in front of you? I think no!

baby you speak like this sitting on Kingdom chair! Come down to see real life.

The reason i was asking those question is that you don’t know much about iraq but those what you hear in Fully censored midea which has only one goal to brain wash people like you.

ps. That was my Idea.

oh yea? Last I checked, your president lied to you and the world regarding nukes

Who said anything about nukes? WMD can mean any number of highly destructive chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons. Perhaps you’ll remember that very long period of time where the U.N. was repeatedly denied access to inspect Iraq’s “special areas of interest”. The constant delays and the purposeful evasion of inspection by Saddam over the years……do you honestly believe there was no threat posed by him to at least the neighboring countries? He invaded another country in 1990 if you’ll remember. Who’s to say he wouldn’t have threatened someone else in the region….namely the Israelis? Remember Resolution 1441?

If you don’t then please read this link….http://www.un.int/usa/sres-iraq.htm

In short Saddam refused to comply, and he blatantly defied what was written in that resolution? The United States and England (as well as some other nations) decided that this will not be tolerated and Saddam will pay for that with the loss of his regime and a change of power in Iraq. This action had to be taken to ensure that Iraq wouldn’t have the chance to post a threat to the region any longer.

Saddam had years to do whatever he wanted with the weapons, and unfortunately we will likely never know the location of those that were produced. We know he had such weapons because he had used them in smaller doses against the Kurds (i.e. some of his own people) on numerous occassions. Trying to tell me that the weapons weren’t there because we didn’t find huge stockpiles of them right away is not going to fly. Hussein had more than enough time to conceal or otherwise get rid (i.e. transport out of the country) of anything that would have been a violation of U.N. Resolutions. STOP DEFENDING WHAT HE DID in your attempts to make America look bad.

I just dont like the idea f how it is being done.

So alternatively I guess Saddam remains in power and the Iraqi people continue to suffer and die by the thousands every year while pigs like Saddam and his sons continue to rule and do whatever they please to or with whomever they please. Sounds like a great future for Iraq to me……….

From the very start Americans have publicly put great emphasis on the fact that only Americans and British companies get the reconstruction and oil export contracts. Later, some Polish companies were invited, as well.. The rest of the world was absolutely excluded. What more proof would I need?

So all of a sudden we invaded Iraq to steal their oil and share some of that with Britain and then give a little to Poland? The Iraqi government has control of the oil and they can contract out to whomever they choose. America is not stealing the oil. They are getting the Iraqi government on its feet so that it can use its natural resources to accelerate the process of rebuilding the country.

Unfortunately, there are no arguments that would make me quit assuming America is in Iraq for the oil. Got any?

Can you read? Go back and read earlier posts by Impi. I don’t know how to make it any clearer. If we wanted the oil all for ourselves I can guarantee you that it would now be in our hands with Exxon and Chevron already having new Mid-East HQ buildings and offices….

???????
How in the world did you come to assumption that I am left-winged? Left-winged are social democrats and communists, I have no soft heart for those. I have always voted one single right-wing party and that won’t change anytime soon..

Well in the United States left-winged means very liberal and liberals are generally a part of the Democratic party while right-wing means conservative and a part of the Republican party. Whever you live might be different, and I apologize for my ignorance in the matter, but in short you’d fit in well with the idiots we have in Hollywood as well as many of the members of the Democratic party.

Just as you are using “Europe is evil” arguments.

Flex I’ve made little mention of Europe in quite some time……you on the other hand are quite good at referring to all of the bad things America has done recently and in the past. My arguments are based on things I’ve read as well as my own assessment of the situation in Iraq. You, by contrast, seem like you’re on some crusade to discredit the United States whever you get the chance.

Impi is as naieve as one could be. That is the best material for any government – eager to believe everything that is officially written and to reject anything else.. Under all circumstances willing to brainlessly salute to the flag. Of such members deformable trickable masses are formed. Just perfect.. If I were a politician, I would love to have such voters..

There’s the little devil again…he loves to play around doesn’t he? You haven’t responed to his well-made points with well-made points of your own. You simply spit out the same devil’s advocate point of view everytime you post. Then you claim he is naive because he doesn’t agree with your point of view. No one government is perfect and in fact just about all of them are corrupt in some way or another. It’s simply human nature. I’m no political expert nor am I an expert in world affairs, but I do have a mind of my own and I think quite clearly and because I support our current government it does not mean I’m a member of the “trickable” mass. Saddam’s actions before, during, and after the Gulf War of 1990/1991 and his continued defiance of the U.N. throughout the 1990’s regarding the WMD are more than enough to convince me the Iraq war is legal and was necessary. Clearly the planning could have been better, and everything certainly hasn’t gone as hoped for, but as they say war is hell, and things always tend to change.

I’m on active duty now in the USAF and though I’m in the States and will remain here for quite some time being, I have no problem in understanding and accepting that I will likely be deployed to that region of the world at some point in time. Do I want to go to war? No. Do I want to do my duty for my country? Yes. Do I support my President and his decisions? Yes.

Come on Flex…stop it with the constant devil’s advocate stance that you love to take. If things in that government were really as rigged as you seem to think they are, something would have come out of it all by now implicating the United States in stealing Iraq’s oil. As many have pointed out, not everyone supports the American mission over there. Those in particular, are the ones who will make sure that everything is legally done and transferred, which up to this point it all has been. Furthermore, you seem to think that because there are those in the current Iraqi government who are happy about Saddam’s departure that they all automatically are power hungry and corrupt. You think those in Saddam’s government were any better? The people over there are happy for the chance to reform their government and get the country on a path to righting itself.

Why do you people always come with Saddam? The topic is entirley different.

From the very start Americans have publicly put great emphasis on the fact that only Americans and British companies get the reconstruction and oil export contracts. Later, some Polish companies were invited, as well.. The rest of the world was absolutely excluded. What more proof would I need?

Did I read that correctly? Are you implying that many of the terrorist attacks are in truth committed to American or Colition forces? So nobody will spill the beans on “what is really going on in Iraq according to Flex”…..? Yet again you love that devil’s advocate position don’t you?

I am not. It is you who has said that.. I have implied that among dozens of existing bomb attacks one more made in CIA will definitely be left unnoticed.

Do you know what makes absolutely no sense? To spend xx billion on invasion to a rich oil country, to seize all oil reserves and then to pass them over for free to a government elected by people of which many have strong anti-American feelings and which could followingly use it at will.. That is the above-cardinal-stupidity, it hurts me to see how childishly naieve you are, kid.

Well perhaps if you would quit assuming America is in Iraq for the oil then perhaps the idea of taking out a horrible regime and attempting to rebuild the country with democratic reform wouldn’t be so hard to understand.

Definitely. Unfortunately, there are no arguments that would make me quit assuming America is in Iraq for the oil. Got any?

And yes I’m the first to admit there are those in Iraq who don’t like Americans being in there, but what about those that do. That’s what kills me with all you left-wing people…..you claim to have the interests of the Iraqi people at heart and yet you completely ignore the fact that there are millions in Iraq who are glad Saddam is gone, and even happier about the fact that their country now has a future that wasn’t possible with Saddam.

???????
How in the world did you come to assumption that I am left-winged? Left-winged are social democrats and communists, I have no soft heart for those. I have always voted one single right-wing party and that won’t change anytime soon..

Why don’t their opinions matter? Perhaps because the idea that America is actually trying to help Iraq out is just too counter-productive to your “America is evil” arguments?

Just as you are using “Europe is evil” arguments.

Impi’s arguments are actually quite well thought out, and I wish I had the level of knowledge he does about the situation. It actually disgusts me to see how your disdain for the current American government causes you to spit out the things you do. Impi is far from naive….he’s quite well-informed and much more so than you (or me for that matter).

I have always been a fan of the United States. It is the idiotic policy of your current administration that has changed my mind. Wrat is wrong is that Bush will leave soon, but the pepole behind him pulling the strings will remain and set up another puppet.

Impi is as naieve as one could be. That is the best material for any government – eager to believe everything that is officially written and to reject anything else.. Under all circumstances willing to brainlessly salute to the flag. Of such members deformable trickable masses are formed. Just perfect.. If I were a politician, I would love to have such voters..

If we had gone into Iraq to steal the oil, then we’d be in complete control of Iraq’s oil reserves, and there wouldn’t likely be any form of government.

Now Iraq has the government finally, becuase Americans didnt like any previous candidate, they finally found the yes-man, hence the government.

[quote]
The points that Impi made about the deaths of Iraqi civilians are also quite true. Saddam’s regime was murderous and the people of Iraq were never truly safe because if, on a whim, Saddam had decreed that someone was going to die, then that person (or family) was executed….it’s a simple as that. Additionally, the goal of the invasion was not to kill Iraqi civilians. Collateral damage is a part of war and unintentional deaths have occured, but it is important to remember that the insurgency is responsible for the largest portion of civilian casualties by far. The people in the insurgency supported Saddam and they don’t care who they harm in trying to get Coalition troops out of the country. Unfortunately, this means that many thousands of civilians have died.
[quote]

Since when did America started caring about the civilians of other countries? Wasnt Saddam was once given millitary aid [That included Chemcial and Biologicial Weapon know-how from Britain] How many dictators are their supported by America? What about the civilians of those countries? Dont tell me Afghanistan, they didnt gave a damn until they realised Made in America Osama has gone totally rogue.

The goal of the invasion was to get Saddam out of power and setup a stable democratic government so that the people of Iraq can have a future and despite the struggles in the country now, they are closer to having a good future than they ever were under Saddam, and as Impi said, under Saddam, they would never have any chance to succeed.

oh yea? Last I checked, your president lied to you and the world regarding nukes and I dont know some martian weapons Saddam would use to threaten its neighbours and blow up whitehouse. Saddam wasnt the issue, just a face-saver for Bush to tell after his initial lies were exposed…first thing Americans did when the baghded fell….go rush to Oil ministry…not care about those treasures of human history that was being looted openly…so much for ‘caring’.
Obviously the people have no chance to succeed under Saddam, being sanctioned by the west and a War monger whose passion for violence was feuled by the west, all long term planning 😉

You can say all day that we are in Iraq for the oil, but at the end of the day that’s simply not the truth. Playing the devil’s advocate is one thing, but saying that oil is what we were after is a lie. If we were there for oil I can promise you, it would all be flowing straight back to the United States right now. That’s not the case.

So America spent 100s of billions of dollars just to topple Saddam? Whats there for America, you tell me…if it was democracy, there are far more worse leaders than Saddam ruling today…I dont see the logic for democracy and ‘caring about people’…..when people like Mugabe have just made the lifesof locals miserable, who jail up opposition leaders under the cry of ‘treason’ but luckily for Mugabe, he doesnt have much oil :-/

Whats there for America is Oil, which is money. Thats a good logic for war for a Captialist regime. Was just reading ‘Death of a Salesman’…

Most you don’t like the United States and I’ve got no problem with that, but that shouldn’t lead you to make false conclusions about the war in Iraq and why we invaded.

I’m sorry to say thats its again, just your assumption that I dont like USA, again you speak in black and white…like extremists…disagreeing with a war and doesnt makes me hate your governemnt..

And to say it matter of factly, majority of your own countrymen arent happy with your president, dont you worry about me.

Yes, I dont like your government, and that also certain people in it, so what? that doesnt make me hate your country man, thats just extreme bull. USA is among the countries whose people I respect due to certain qualities. Not what you are saying.

That country will have a future once things settle down. There are Iraqi citizens that are glad Saddam is gone, and they want the chance to live in a civil, free, democratic society. If you don’t want them to be able to have that, then there is something very wrong with you.

Whatever happened to your this statement back in 80s. Yes I wish the people can live a better life. They have already seen more violence on the streets in 1-2 years then they have witnessed in all Saddam era combined and multiplied by 2. And I hope they have a future now, they certainly do with American liked government there now. I just dont like the idea f how it is being done.

Oh and you dont have to promise me anything 🙂 You keep on promising to everyone 😉

And when I say Americans, I mean the Government.

It is true the the US has caused a lot of problems by backing dictators against the Soviet Union, but I support the war. We see the results of terrorist bombings in Iraq all the time, but many forget are just not aware of the huge numbers of Kurds and other Iraqis killed by Saddam Hussain, and the MILLIONS killed by the wars that he started. Under Saddam, people may not have lived in fear of bombs going off next to them as much as they feared someone coming in the night to take them away. Death was a familiar thing under Saddam. It may be bad there, but its better than it was.

Thats statement looses pretty much credibility if we take consider the fact how in the US belowed ally, Turkey Kurds live under milk and noney flown from Turkeys goverment.

Can you answer how it is that in country that have no oil and stable US supporting goverment, an ethnical minoritys liberation movment (Kurdistan workers party in this instance) is decleared terrorist organistion, but in the neighbouring oil rich and allowedly anti-US country theyr couse is somehow supportable????

The new ‘democratically elected govt’ consists of people who would otherwise be crawling in copper mines under Saddam. Of course they are thankful for the invasion, just alone by grabbing power they have made a great deal of profit out of it. They will sign ANYTHING the US pass them over and be sure as hell they are gonna not trumpet out the contents and details of oil contracts to the press.

Come on Flex…stop it with the constant devil’s advocate stance that you love to take. If things in that government were really as rigged as you seem to think they are, something would have come out of it all by now implicating the United States in stealing Iraq’s oil. As many have pointed out, not everyone supports the American mission over there. Those in particular, are the ones who will make sure that everything is legally done and transferred, which up to this point it all has been. Furthermore, you seem to think that because there are those in the current Iraqi government who are happy about Saddam’s departure that they all automatically are power hungry and corrupt. You think those in Saddam’s government were any better? The people over there are happy for the chance to reform their government and get the country on a path to righting itself.

If someone even tried to do that, the very next day he would be found dead in another ‘bomb attack made by terrorist insurgents’.

Did I read that correctly? Are you implying that many of the terrorist attacks are in truth committed to American or Colition forces? So nobody will spill the beans on “what is really going on in Iraq according to Flex”…..? Yet again you love that devil’s advocate position don’t you?

Do you know what makes absolutely no sense? To spend xx billion on invasion to a rich oil country, to seize all oil reserves and then to pass them over for free to a government elected by people of which many have strong anti-American feelings and which could followingly use it at will.. That is the above-cardinal-stupidity, it hurts me to see how childishly naieve you are, kid.

Well perhaps if you would quit assuming America is in Iraq for the oil then perhaps the idea of taking out a horrible regime and attempting to rebuild the country with democratic reform wouldn’t be so hard to understand. And yes I’m the first to admit there are those in Iraq who don’t like Americans being in there, but what about those that do. That’s what kills me with all you left-wing people…..you claim to have the interests of the Iraqi people at heart and yet you completely ignore the fact that there are millions in Iraq who are glad Saddam is gone, and even happier about the fact that their country now has a future that wasn’t possible with Saddam. Why don’t their opinions matter? Perhaps because the idea that America is actually trying to help Iraq out is just too counter-productive to your “America is evil” arguments? Impi’s arguments are actually quite well thought out, and I wish I had the level of knowledge he does about the situation. It actually disgusts me to see how your disdain for the current American government causes you to spit out the things you do. Impi is far from naive….he’s quite well-informed and much more so than you (or me for that matter).

My opion as well. But for some morrons, the fact that some of his victims were American, made his crimes acceptable…The mentioned morrons did not even consider that most of his victims were, in fact, Iraqis…

Good to see that you can out your first sentence with your own arguments. :rolleyes:

BTW, I have scrolled this thread over once more, post by post. There is no single poster here who has claimed Zarqawi’s act as noble or or acceptable.. Care to quote someone for proof?

That makes absolutely no sense. The legally elected government of Iraq was not “set up”, it was properly elected through a process created and overseen by the United Nations and independent electoral advisors, and NOT the USA. In fact, I have met one of the United Nations electoral advisors involved in that, and he was just about as anti-American as you are. It would be disingenuous to claim that the current Iraqi government was somehow “set up” by the United States. We’re not talking about the provisional government here.

Your comment about “long-term oil contracts” is also laughable. The United States specifically structured the rules around the interim governments to make sure that they were not allowed to enter into any long-term oil export contracts until a democratically elected government was in place. Therefore, the new, democratically elected government, has complete control over all oil export contracts and is NOT bound by anything signed before it came into office with regards to oil.

In fact, the first long-term oil export contracts are only expected by the end of this year, when Iraq’s Parliament passes a comprehensive oil law to regulate the industry.

So let’s summarise: The United States invades an oil-rich country, yet declines to take direct control of the oil, preferring instead to hand over authority to two increasingly independent interim governments, while at the same time banning all foreign ownership and control of Iraqi oil until such time as an independent government can make its own choice. In the process, it also spends billions of dollars of its own money to try stablize the country, while not taking a single cent of Iraqi oil revenues in return. Finally, it supports a democratic Iraqi election, allowing others (not necessarily supportive of the US’s goals) to both oversee and assist the election to ensure it would be as free and fair as possible. The result is a democratic government that has absolutely no legal obligations to the United States and can sell its oil to whoever it wants.

Great way to steal the oil, eh?

The new ‘democratically elected govt’ consists of people who would otherwise be crawling in copper mines under Saddam. Of course they are thankful for the invasion, just alone by grabbing power they have made a great deal of profit out of it. They will sign ANYTHING the US pass them over and be sure as hell they are gonna not trumpet out the contents and details of oil contracts to the press. If someone even tried to do that, the very next day he would be found dead in another ‘bomb attack made by terrorist insurgents’. Nobody would even blink an eye about him..

Do you know what makes absolutely no sense? To spend xx billion on invasion to a rich oil country, to seize all oil reserves and then to pass them over for free to a government elected by people of which many have strong anti-American feelings and which could followingly use it at will.. That is the above-cardinal-stupidity, it hurts me to see how childishly naieve you are, kid.

I think voter’s rights should be only issued upon passing some kind of anti-idiocy and anti-childish-naiviety tests. BTW, your sit-com has already begun, don’t miss it.

the zarkman died as he lived………..a bloated fat pig.

its a pity his death wasnt video taped and shown worldwide like those beheadings he carried out.

My opion as well. But for some morrons, the fact that some of his victims were American, made his crimes acceptable…The mentioned morrons did not even consider that most of his victims were, in fact, Iraqis…

Of course you can set up any legally elected government after you have secured profits from oil export for yourself by long-term contracts. Now you can do a small cheap ceremonmy to the world press about ‘how you place all oil production and export in Iraqi hands’.

This must be the cheapest trick on Earth and I find extremely surprising how easily can masses be cheated. If you cared to read about the background of recent revolution in Bolivia (Morales) then you would see what does it mean ‘placed all gas production and export in Bolivian hands’ but I guess people with Sit-Com culture won’t be going as far as to try to see thing from broader perspective.

That makes absolutely no sense. The legally elected government of Iraq was not “set up”, it was properly elected through a process created and overseen by the United Nations and independent electoral advisors, and NOT the USA. In fact, I have met one of the United Nations electoral advisors involved in that, and he was just about as anti-American as you are. It would be disingenuous to claim that the current Iraqi government was somehow “set up” by the United States. We’re not talking about the provisional government here.

Your comment about “long-term oil contracts” is also laughable. The United States specifically structured the rules around the interim governments to make sure that they were not allowed to enter into any long-term oil export contracts until a democratically elected government was in place. Therefore, the new, democratically elected government, has complete control over all oil export contracts and is NOT bound by anything signed before it came into office with regards to oil.

In fact, the first long-term oil export contracts are only expected by the end of this year, when Iraq’s Parliament passes a comprehensive oil law to regulate the industry.

So let’s summarise: The United States invades an oil-rich country, yet declines to take direct control of the oil, preferring instead to hand over authority to two increasingly independent interim governments, while at the same time banning all foreign ownership and control of Iraqi oil until such time as an independent government can make its own choice. In the process, it also spends billions of dollars of its own money to try stablize the country, while not taking a single cent of Iraqi oil revenues in return. Finally, it supports a democratic Iraqi election, allowing others (not necessarily supportive of the US’s goals) to both oversee and assist the election to ensure it would be as free and fair as possible. The result is a democratic government that has absolutely no legal obligations to the United States and can sell its oil to whoever it wants.

Great way to steal the oil, eh?

the zarkman died as he lived………..a bloated fat pig.

its a pity his death wasnt video taped and shown worldwide like those beheadings he carried out.

Why? These people reagard death as being quite different to what those in the west with Judao-christian origins believe. As far as they are concerned this act will grant tham accesss to paradise and at the same time people like you will jump up and say oh my god they must have been desperate all americans are evil, therefore just giving them what they want.

Thats BS. Comitting suicide in Islam means exactly as much as in Christianity. A cardinal sin resulting in no redemption after death.
This whole theory of yours is based on misinformation.. As usual….

I think Phrozenflame summed it up quite well, you might also want to take note of all the SUICIDE bombers we see coming from the muslim world.

Islam makes a big difference between hanging your self off the roof and being killed in suicidal attack where your take several enemies with you. I think you know that very well but since it does not suit your propaganda you ignore it.

Oh yeah, and the whole “war for oil” thing is so idiotic I don’t even know where to start. Sure, maybe before the war you could have claimed that was the case, but now that America has done what it promised and not only handed over power to a legitimate Iraqi government but placed all oil production and export in its hands, it only makes you look silly to claim that America went in to steal Iraq’s oil.

Of course you can set up any legally elected government after you have secured profits from oil export for yourself by long-term contracts. Now you can do a small cheap ceremonmy to the world press about ‘how you place all oil production and export in Iraqi hands’.

This must be the cheapest trick on Earth and I find extremely surprising how easily can masses be cheated. If you cared to read about the background of recent revolution in Bolivia (Morales) then you would see what does it mean ‘placed all gas production and export in Bolivian hands’ but I guess people with Sit-Com culture won’t be going as far as to try to see thing from broader perspective.

Looks to me like the Sunday Times and Observer are guilty of being taken in, hook line and sinker, by an enemy psy-ops operation.

Who is the enemy in this case? Are you suggesting Al-Qaeda directed by OBL is getting the message across using Newpapers based in UK?? I guess this suspession alone is enough to book someone for link with Al-Qaeda charges i wonder y not when done by one of own?

Sorry for my bad english that was printed in a local newspaper so I can not translate fully but below is what I was aböle to translate.

Zarqawi was a game

It was game we call Honey and Bee. Organised by US secret services.
Zarqawi the Honey and Insurgents the Bee.

So they put the Honey ( Zarqawi ) and made it larger and larger using midea.

There come more bees around it then after they got what they need they took the Honey out ( killed Zarqawi ) and Hunted lot of Bees who were around the honey.

I hate to have to break it to you, but people who call known terrorists who enjoy cutting the heads of innocent civilians courageous are nothing but terrorist scum themselves,

If you say so then it surely is true.. 😎 BTW, was it before or after you were kidnapped by those blueish-illuminating flying pancakes you mentioned?

we all know you hate democracy and freedom but please get a grip.

That is truly a very interesting insight. 🙂 Care to explain what exactly does it mean *to hate freedom*? So, what do I love instead? (I might learn something interetsing about myself tonight..)

I find it very interesting that when i give a reply attempting to explain the situation you simply ignore it- typical terrorist just ignore the facts that mess with your il-informed world view.

That has a rather simple explanation. After reading your hysteric single-line outscreams I simply completely ignored your full reply.. It might have well contained some interesting opinions of you, but I simply did not care anymore.

It is your own fault. Don’t be surprised that if you cannot control yourself and keep it civilized then nobody cares about whatcha say..