What will be done with Saddam ?

[ledhed]

Led and Viper: Stop ignoring the substance of my posts and making inane acusations that hold merit only to the few retards around here that like to affrim each others non-thinking conformist drivel. I don't know if you are just stupid or mentally challenged; maybe you are on drugs or drink heavily but if you can't form an arguement, or at least some trace of an independant thought, say nothing instead.

well I can't speak for your retards whoever they may be , but if and when I find any substance in your post I will be shure to respond. as to the point I was trying to make in case you missed it. some of your more insane, innane or just outright kooky accusations and or findings you come up with seem to indicate a somewhat different and skewered view of the world and the events taking place , indicating to me some form of altered conscienceness on your part. It may just be from meditation or you could just be an alien life form. I wont say retarded because you seem to indicate some hostility towards retarded persons so I will not insult them by including you in there midst.
@ Famine " To the victor go the spoils " The firebombings of both Dresden and Tokyo are deserving of the term war crimes along with the whole war on the Russian front. A case can be made for war itself being a crime. but you see in most cases its the winner of the war who gets to decide who started it . The big debate after WW2 over the trials was a concern over precident
you can be shure that if the germans had won Bomber Harris's head would be on a pole. along with Eisenhower 's ,Montgomery's . The Japanese actully convicted the captured air men from the Doolittle raid of war crimes for bombing civillian area's and executed a few.

 

[87chevy]

good points ledhed, as usual. War has it's place, wether we like it or not. For now anyways. Yes, I will agree that the allied bombing of pure civilian targets was not right. But hindsight is always 20/20. None of us lived in those times. I'm not going to now, and will never, call the allied Generals, war criminals. But definately some things shouldn't have been done, and could have been done better. That was a crazy and desperate time, that hopefully will never be repeated.

So wellyrn you still need a plane ticket?

 

[wellyrn]

good points ledhed, as usual. War has it's place, wether we like it or not. For now anyways. Yes, I will agree that the allied bombing of pure civilian targets was not right. But hindsight is always 20/20. None of us lived in those times. I'm not going to now, and will never, call the allied Generals, war criminals. But definately some things shouldn't have been done, and could have been done better. That was a crazy and desperate time, that hopefully will never be repeated.

True enough, well, after the first sentance that is.

War does have a place and that should be the absolute worst and last option ever to be taken. I think most people feel the same as you do about the allies, them being war criminals is something i never even considered. WW2 is was hell, none of us could come close to imagining the horror of it. The situation then was extreme, defending europe from the blitz and trying to prevent the holocaust was a very good reason to go to war.

I think the problems with the current world situation is the USA being too greedy and afraid of change. They have tons of money and a great military, thats what they are known for. If there was a peaceful world community the US would have the least to gain and the most to loose. It's a classic dilemma. Obviously, i think that everyone would benefit from fairness and equality but the US will have to make some concessions that it won't want to make. Do you think it will or should happen? What other obsticles are there?

How do you think history will look back on our era? Foresight isn't as accurate as hindsight but it is more timely.

 

[Solid Fro]

I think history will give the nod to the US and all of the countries standing with the US against terrorism. The countries liberated from tyranny will thank the US and will finally experience freedom for the first time.

Do you ever get tired of hugging trees, wellyrn? I mean, doesn't the bark give you rashes?

 

[wellyrn]

I think history will give the nod to the US and all of the countries standing with the US against terrorism. The countries liberated from tyranny will thank the US and will finally experience freedom for the first time.

More brilliant insight from the coalition of the gullible. There isn't anything wrong with your opinion. However, the american usage "terrorism" and "freedom" should be acompanied by a (TM). I can only assume from an Iraqi standpoint "operation shock and awe" was pretty terrifying. Likewise if you live in Iraq and don't support the occupation you aren't really "free" are you?

To make it easy ill say 1/2 of people agreed with the war in each country. In April 47% of americans were in favor of the war and, not surprisingly, no one asks the Iraqis what they want. That means your views would have roughly 25% support. If you want to support this war fine but don't try to sell it as somehting it is not. Imposing your will on the other 75% is not freedom or liberation. Its more like tyranny.

In the bible there isn't an asterisk next to "thou shalt not kill".

 

[ledhed]

No Saddam and a country preparing for free elections. I'll take that form of tyranny if thats what you call it. poor Iraqi's having all that freedom imposed on them. We should be ashamed of ourselves. Maybe they'll give it back.

 

[Solid Fro]

An American solider giving boxes of crayons and other supplies to Iraqi school children. You call that tyranny, wellyrn?

Open your eyes.

 

[CDailey]

Someone on this site once said that he should be hung in the middle of Time Square and everyone gets to hit him one time with a baseball bat.

 

[wellyrn]

I think thats great. But how many crayons is a human life worth? They better hand out alot.

War is such a waste in every sense. It's even worse America started this one, your country could be doing so much better with its power that it frustrates me to no end. I'd say most of the western (rather than jihadist) "anti-americanism" is disapointment rather than hate. I don't "hate" you, you just really piss me off sometimes. My very first post on America was telling you to "grow up" and i still think the exact same thing. Take the criticism from the rest of the 1st world and, rather than protecting your collective "ego", learn to do better from it.

It's over now anyway. Can we agree that we should try to not let it happen again?

 

[the_cobbinator]

In case you hadn't noticed, people die in war. As terrible as that is, there's really nothing that can be done about it. So instead of being pessimistic about what we are doing in Iraq, try and be optimistic. As a kid, I spent hours on end drawing with crayons. What's going on over there isn't meant to compensate the dead, it's to help the living.

 

[ledhed]

Think of all the countries were the people decided that thier freedom was worth thier lives. Starting with the US. Then go to all the other former colonys from asia to south america you got to admit that most of the worlds people are in favor of freedom even at the cost of thier lives. For the most part freedom comes at the end of a gun. Thats just the way it is. When time passes and all the meglomaniac dictators and other crazys cease to exist then we can get all warm and fuzzy and put away the firepower. For now though I'm glad I live in the country with the big guns thats not afraid to use them to protect my freedom from being blown to pieces by terrorist/ fundementalist morons. Even if it means liberating a country or two.

 

[the_cobbinator]

I think a good quote for this general discussion would be "Freedom is not free". In order to have freedom, you must sacrifice something.

 

[wellyrn]

Ugh, my stomach turns when people talk like that. In north america we have no concept of what war is. Imagine Sept. 11 happening in America every day for 2 weeks or longer. Just try to put yourself in the shoes of someone living in a country where the war is actually being fought. Iraq makes the WTC look like a tea party. Thats not disrespect to the victims its just reality. You think the threat "terrorism" is frightening, imagine it actually happened on a daily basis, killing people you know, at any time a stray missile could hit your living room. That's fear. I have friends who have lived through wars and there is no way it can be dismissed so easily. An optimist would be trying to make sure it doesn't happen again.

And ledhed i missed what you said. It's un-american thinking but the "big guns" are what cause it all and they will never solve anything. You just made the next generation of Osama's by attacking Iraq is it a cycle you want to keep repeating?

 

[SS69]

saddam looks like gandolf with darker hair.

 

[ledhed]

I beg to differ a free democratic Iraq will serve to limit the influence of the Osamas in that part of the world. And generations of Americans have seen war, faught in wars and survived wars. You forget that the Civil war was one of the largest conflicts and was faught on our own soil amongst brothers. Just because we have been fortunate up untill 9/11 to keep the attacks from our shores that should not be mistaken for naivette about warfare. In fact I think because Americans have been in so many conflicts they are actually reluctant to go to war. it takes a very good cause to get the country moving into conflict and yes come to think of it Saddam looks a bit like gandalf after he faught the dragon and fell off the cliff.

 

[Solid Fro]

at any time a stray missile could hit your living room.

No. Missiles don't stray into your living room because the missile felt like it.

Over 80% (Source: CBS News) of the weapons used by the US are precision weapons. In other words, they don't miss. It is the terrorist's RPGs and improvised explosive devices that are blowing up living rooms.

 

[Solid Fro]

I think the Fabulous 5 from Queer Eye for the Straight Guy did a marvelous job on Saddam's hair and eyebrows. They really brought out the color and depth.

 

[ledhed]

Not to mention the mad bombers pissed off because they are not in power. by now the terrorist have killed far more Iraqi's than the US, as if anyone is keeping score. if the situation was even a quarter as bad as Welryn makes it seem 150,000 troops would be able to do squat in Iraq , every Iraqi that could fire a rifle would be out taking scalps and the US would be like the French at Diem bien phu. Did you ever take into account how small an amount of troops 150,000 is in a country the size of Iraq ? Its to there everlasting credit that they have accomplished so much with so little bloodshed and destruction of property. And it one of the reasons why there is no full scale revolt. remember the russians had over a million troops in afghanistan and got there buts kicked and run out of the country and Afghanistans what a quarter of the size of Iraq ?

 

[wellyrn]

You have some pretty crazy idea's yourself led. You need to put up your intellectual firewall because you are getting heavily infected. Just because I don't like the right wing doesn't mean i just believe every crazy left wing idea that comes at me. I hope you have to good sense to do the same in reverse because just because you think the left wingers are crazy doesn't mean you can just take the conservatives rhetoric as gospel.

The situation In Iraq...

You are right 150,000 isn't alot but of course warfare has changed, the american troops have the technological edge about 1,000,000 times over. It's AK47s and camels against cruise missiles and tanks. During the major combat more americans died in accidents than by hostile fire. Thats a major reason why i find the "heroism" of the US a little hard to swallow as most of the time they were killing soldiers who couldn't even see thier attackers let alone defend themselves. This is especially unsettling when you speak poorly of the Iraqi army, most of whom had no urge to fight execpt for the threat of thier superiors wrath. I consider the combatants on both sides eaqually unfortunate.

Iraq Body Count says around 10,000 civilians died during fighting. There is really no telling how many "combatant" Iraqis died but the only estimate i found was under 10,000 (IBC again).

I think you might be underestimating the revolts in Iraq. Entire cities were recaptured by Iraqis after the war. Fallujah is a city of 1/2 million that was entirely re-taken by the insurgency. Iraq public opinion was greatly overstated by the media. Of course no one asks them but its hard to imagine "most iraqis want the US there". Even harder to believe is that only a "small number of thugs" managed to fight the "coalition" country-wide for over a year.

Yes i do know of that war. It is the war where the CIA trained the mujadhideen bomb making and other insurgency tactics and gave them weapons and money to fight off the soviets.

Has meddling in Middle Eastern affairs ever worked before?

 

[ledhed]

Just for a start when was the last time you saw or heard of a cruise missle being fired in Iraq ? What do you know if anything about battle tactics ? if you think using a tank to protect unarmored troops is unfair or overkill then you are beyond help. and the camel crap that you keep digging up... are there actually any camels in Iraq ? When was the last time even the Arab media saw one of those outside of a zoo ? ask the British how hard it is to fight hidden bombs that do not discriminate against civilian or soldier . the main terrorist threat right now and for the last few months has been against IRAQIS in the hope of A. starting a civil war between the Sunnis and the Shiites B. intimadating anyone who would form a government not deemed acceptable by the insurgents. they are afraid and rightly so of challenging the American army directly because as in the past its just suicidal. I do not need a firewall and I do not even listen to the "right wing " idiots because they are just as screwed up as the left wing idiots. I just do not limit my intake of events to one sourse i'm lucky I own a computer I can look around. I'm also lucky to have family in the military both serving and retired. if you want to know how the fight is going or what we are fighting for WHO BETTER TO ASK.

 

[wellyrn]

1) During the main fighting. But does it really matter if it's a Tomahawk or a GBU-28 that just blew your legs off?

2) Enough to kick your ass at warcraft 3

3) Using tanks to protact soldiers is not what i have a problem with. I don't really know where you got that from. What i said was that the American technology is so superior that they were invincible to the hapless Iraqi defenders on the battlefield. Thats why i question them being labeled "heros" while the Iraqis are "cowardly" trying to stand up to such odds.

4) Yes they have camels.

Say a blind guy starts mouthing me off. He acts like a real asshole, then he even pushes me. Is it ok to hit him? Questionable. Does it make me a hero?

 

[ledhed]

So the Iraqi army was a bunch of blind guys ? With T72 and 80 tanks , modern artillery and weapons. Electronics , aircraft and support vehicles. hmmmm guess the L.A. swat squad should have went over and kicked thier butts. all the guys who got killed or wounded by this so called deaf dumb blind and backwards army must be really pissed....
Do you actually think about what you post ? when was the last time you talked to someone who was actually there getting shot at by these so call boobs of yours ?
did you ever wonder why we used cruise missles at over 1 million a pop ? I'll give you a hint ..You use cruse missles on high value well protected targets to minimize casualtys on your side and to limit collateral damage. See if you did not use a cruise missle you would have to send in sortes to supress the air defense , protect the fighter bombers , and refuel all of the above..good thing for the fighter/bomber pilots that are not dead or captured that we used them huh ?
And btw when warcraft can kill you for screwing up let me know..then maybe I'll be impressed.

 

[rjensen11]

your joking right?.....

well, i'll think they'll have a public execution as soon as they can arrange it. And i hope i can watch it. well, maybe not....

Dude, that's just wrong. I know that he's guilty as hell of doing horrendous things, but I'm still against the death penalty. Here are my 2 reasons:
1) I don't know who would want to sink down to his level
2) I don't know what gives anyone the authority to execute another person if they're not capable of doing something really, really, really bad....

 

[wellyrn]

Are you missing the point on purpose?

No not all iraqis are missing thier eyes and ears. It's called an analogy.

US tanks, like the m1a1 abrams fire twice as large ammunition much faster, much further and hit nearly 100% of the time (even while moving at full speed). The fearsome, Russian built, Iraq operated, T-70 tank you speak of, produced from 1942-1943 is armed with a Super Soaker and makes a whopping 140hp at the flywheel. The T-70 may have the bling you need for cruisin' the strip with ya crew, 12's thumpin' in the back, HOWEVER, it doesn't really match the Abrams for fighting capability. The US lost 3 Abrams, 1 broke down, 1 drove off a bridge and 1 was actually immobilized by enemy fire. It takes literally 100's of hits from the Iraqi's "modern weapons and artillery" to cause any damage to them.

I'd guess because they have a 1,000+ km range but i guess you know your military.

 

[ledhed]

The fearsome, Russian built, Iraq operated, T-70 tank you speak of, produced from 1942-1943

t72's are built in 1972..t56's in 1956 t80's in 1980.. So the US builds better tanks than the Russians..now ain't that something..guess that makes it unfair somehow. Must be what you learned playing warcraft. BTW the amuntion is saboted thats what gives it its penetrating power and range, in this case the bore sizes are similar but the US tank uses better ammo and a much better gun platform..so the twice the size crap ain't working.
You do know that LIVING through a battle is a good thing right ? Or I guess you would rather the US army uses Shermans to level the playing field...or maybe we should only fight using inferior tactics to make the battle a bit more sporting..unlike warcraft though you can't just reload a save after you get blown to atoms...

 

[wellyrn]

ok, well i don't think thats how it works because a platform like the T-80 was used for many years, mid-70's and on for that one... and here is where i got the specs for the T-70 you mentioned...

http://www.nemo.nu/ibisportal/5pansar/5sidor/t70.htm

that's the only t-70 i found and it wasn't made in 1970... 1942 in fact... just like i said.

congratulations, you have now completely lost me...

so... err.... yeah... i like to play computer games... 💡👍

 

[Solid Fro]

The Iraqi military used the T-72 tank, which entered service in 1971.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/t72tank.htm

I'm not sure why wellyrn wants the American military to fail. We have superior weapons and tactics. Total superiority wins wars.

 

[Talentless]

http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm

I know you are trying to point out hypocrisy, and perhaps you have succeeded in that end. And I am sure you are aware, as I do not believe you to be ignorant of such possibilities, and I even empathise with you to an extent I have not determined, that the length and depth of those charges are probably quite difficult to verify; they would consume an amount of time the majority of us cannot commit to, or so I perhaps wrongly presume.



I understand America is imperfect, and that you want so much for it to use its power in the "right" way, but you appear to want to challenge America's present course and the notion (simplified) that it's might makes right with some counter philosophical concept of unity and cooperation through a world body. Supposing America was brought down to be more "equal" to other nations by an international court, public opinion, sanctions, etc.; some will be elated; some "may finally see justice;" but some "may take advantage" of the world's situation with the super power nuetered. Surely, if you can espouse the concept of non violent cooperation, whose longevity, even moral superiority, can be questioned, no matter how successful it is claimed to be in Europe, I can mention the possibility that a rogue nation will be emboldened by the supposed balance (a balance I doubt will ever exist even if the US ceased to). Because that rogue may be far more powerful then known, and nothing guarantees force cooperation. Nations may hesitate; and the appeal of a super power becomes evident.



Perhaps non of these will happen; the rogue; non military cooperation against said rogue; and even poor pre emptive planning and implementation to thwart the rogue. But perhaps the US, judging your philosophy sound, will come to dislike its power and inevitably weaken itself. Equality does not equal security; does not preclude the possibility of war. But it does ensure dependence, which is not always healthy for the dependee. Hypotheticals are fascinating, but the existing capabilities of a super power can thwart some of the negative ones, at least on some level, and that presumption seems to me to have less contingencies.



I do not believe you hate America, and I do not believe you want us gutless, but there is an air of utopianism in what you do appear to wish for, and each step towards leveling the field should be met with the question: "Is this really in your best interest?"



I am not psychic, so we may see someday.

 

[the_cobbinator]

👍 Well said Talentless.

 

[wellyrn]

👍 indeed!

I think a 3rd attempt at a world governing council is better than letting 1 country run the whole show. The US showing it is more powerful and influential than the entire UN is devastating. The world government is a dictatorship right now and it needs to be changed for the sake of democracy.

I think if the face of the world is democratic then the individual governments would weaken with no real threat against them. When the choice comes down to crazy cowboy bush and crazy emperor saddam it is much harder for the people in those countries to see democracy for what it should be. As we saw with the Iraqis, when the first taste of democracy is the American ass kicking machine knocking down doors and blowing **** up, the reaction is mixed to say the least.

Canada is very similar to the US but we have absolutely jack **** for military power. I feel a hell of a lot safer here than i would in the US. I think having your military and even worse using it just makes you enemies. We fought the Axis in WW2 as well, the difference is we didn't try to keep using our army to play around with the world and try to change everything we don't agree with.

You do serve an essential role right now but we should be moving in the 'utopian' direction rather than the 'kill 'em all' direction.