View Single Post
  #891  
Old April 11th, 2003, 05:41 AM

Askan Nightbringer Askan Nightbringer is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Sydney, Australia (the 3rd island!)
Posts: 198
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Askan Nightbringer is on a distinguished road
Default Re: [OT] Another heated discussion about the Iraq siutation, war and politics.

Disclaimer - Saddam is a murderous tyrant. Not up their with Hitler and Stalin but maybe the equal of Suharto, and more brutal than Pinochet and co.

Now that I've got that out of the way I can get to my point.

Why did a "supposedly" 400,00 strong military capitulate so quicky? If Saddam wasn't willing or capable to use WMDs to defend his own capital, then how could he have possibly been a threat to the US, or even my country? Maybe the threat Iraq posed was overstated?

Its not about oil, not about liberation, not about security threats, not about UN resolutions, its all about POWER.

And I have a little secret that I'm willing to share with everyone - "People cheat, lie and spread half-truths in order to maintain and gain power."

There was an agenda to invade Iraq long before UN resolution 1441. America never intended to let the UN dictate the actions to take against Saddam. The UN was irrelevant if it didn't support the US's plan (and irrelevant if it did, a sort of a lose-lose situation). It was all done for show. Someone or some group in the US administration decided invading Iraq was a way to gain power and all that was needed was to build the case. A string of evidence was produced, most of it turned out to be a load of crap. Evidence turned out to me plagiarised, forged and just plain wrong but that didn't stop it coming. Saddam was linked to S11, Al-queda, Maradona's "Hand of God" effort and just about everything else that might get someone behind the invasion. It didn't matter about counter-evidence, if we made up enough excuses then everyone will ended up believing at least one.
Iraq was just a "Target of opportunity"

So does everybody believe everything their leaders are saying to them? I seriously doubt it, so why would you believe anything they say without evidence? Do you believe the media? The "alleged" champions of truth and democracy than survive based on what type of products their targeted audiences consume, with owners who are always looking to get some media ownership law overturned so they can buy something else. Hardly a recipe for impartiality if you ask me. Do you believe the so called "think tanks"? How are they funded? What agendas do they run?
The only words worth reading are by people who having nothing to gain by telling them. Thats what makes the forum a bit more interesting than my local newspaper.

Askan
(Who can't spell)

[ April 11, 2003, 04:46: Message edited by: Askan Nightbringer ]
__________________
It should never be forgotten that the people must have priority -- Ho Chi Minh
Reply With Quote