Xerraire very true perhaps so, but we have alot of other stuff going on & in "our" schools but I guess that is besides the point the point is none of this had to happen if ppl seen a sick man in power at the first sign of it, they should have gotten/and or taken him out a long time ago, problem solved case over...
and on to the next when the next nut pops up? you don't wait for cancer to grow before you remove it.

The funny thing is we did see it coming:

"If Saddam Hussein fails to comply and we fail to act or we take some ambiguous third route, which gives him yet more opportunities to develop his program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of sanctions and ignore the commitments he's made? Well, he will conclude that the international community's lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on doing more to build an arsenal of devastating destruction. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow. The stakes could not be higher. Some way, someday, I guarantee you he'll use the arsenal."
-President Bill Clinton in 1998

Yet Clinton, being the pussy he is, did nothing. Thank God for puting Bush in control in such a time of need.

Xerraire.
Point 1. Where does the 'suicide vest' story specify that kids were to use these weapons?
No different to storing any other form of munitions in schools or other public buildings that would be off limits to the 'western' way of thinking. Just another media beat-up!
Point 2. Spying on the UK by the 'Russians'? Old news, everyone 'spies' on everyone. So what, more media hype.
Point 3. 'Media' reports are far from being reliable sources of information in times of peace, let alone 'War'.
If they can't get hold of a 'good' story some creative writing is the order of the day!
Point 4. One of the non-public sources I have access to has reported the destruction of 90% of the material on exhibition or in storage at the Baghdad Museum by 'looters'.
What could not be carried away has been destroyed ..... over 7000 years of history, nothing of note related to the Hussein period, but another resource that would have assisted the eventual recovery of Iraq and the people.
Destroyed by Iraqis certainly, but why no 'Policing' by the US Forces .... there are units 'protecting' the Iraqi oil resources, but it appears that hospitals or genuine cultural centres (for example) are not valued.
'Victory celebrations' by a liberated populace can rapidly turn into looting sprees which escalate from the dubious but understandable ransacking of 'Government' buildings to private business's (large and small!) to senseless destruction of vital support facilities for the people (genuine hospital and medical centres) on to the inevitable mob mentality of 'smash everything!'
Certainly the allied forces are spread thin, but the Royal Marines seem to have taken the task of maintaining a semblance of order in Basra and other of their operational areas, the Australians are out there doing what the SAS do best, while the US troops in the capital appear to be disinterested in doing anything regarding order.
Granted, no sane person would want Martial Law of the Hussein style invoked, but some brake must be placed on the growing conflict between the looters and the lootees .... the number of citizens of Baghdad asking 'where are the Americans' expecting (and rightly so) some order from the invading troops seems to be growing.
The time to start 'winning' the peace is right now ...... running around in ever decreasing circles attempting to turn up evidence to justify the so-called 'Police Action' is counter productive and will undermine any hard earned feelings of warmth the average Iraqi citizen is feeling toward the coalition troops.

I hear allot of evidence was lost possibly because of the looting.


I do not think the American military was ready for lawlessness. Not sure why though. I don't understand how many general were told to not do anything. I understand the first couple of days, but hospitals, musuems? I don't think the Iraqies would have been angry if they shot someone because they were ransacking places of value.

A few weeks ago I recall thinking that there was not enough toops, and I now feel stronger about that (and the fact that they waited for Turkey land rights... if you decided to go to war, then do it right.)


all of this is so sad, now the Iraqi people have lost more, and thier dignity as well. I hope the brain trust fully understands what they need to do. I might have come to the conclsion that there really wasn't much in the way of options, but that doesn't mean that they could not handle it better. I strongly believe it could have been handled better. Everything.

I just skipped through all this "Stuff", to say...Hello

They may have gotten into Baghdad proper and the gov't and the police disappeared faster than they expected. And perhaps not initially had enough troops to secure the place fully and underestimated the amount of looting and lawlessness. Still, one would think that when they saw what was happening steps should have been taken to protect important parts of the infrastructure like hospitals, buildings with gov't records and of course the museum and ensuring some public order. An article on the museum from the Wash. Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14331-2003Apr12.html

While the military may not have wanted to appear in force as an occupying army, neverthess it seems a lot of good will is being lost among those citizens who have been victimized by the lawlessness.

I think it can be regained if they get on there feet about it. There has to be community leaders about. Do potrols, warn looters once, most probaly will listen, other will be caught and held for a week. No charges but held, fed, and releases on thier own. This and other measures should quiet some of the storm. Other crime will arise and there will be a need for that infrastructure soon. It will have to be done by mostly Iraqies, but order will come mostly from the military.


@ China

Paxx, I've heard that Canada is next....

Of course, that came from an unofficial source....

Canada is a state. Like Puerto Rico and Mexico.

Except Puerto Rico does not pay Federal taxes (unlike Canada and Mexico)

wombat
other people have post links to news stories here without you jumping on them as you did me. I never suggested anything about the suicide vests except that I was pleased that as far as I know, we could be thankful that they didn't exist in our schools here to Doreen.

Anything on the Russia-France-China angle will continue to interest me, since they were opposed so hard to the war, and because I feel there are reasons for it. Namely the money trail they are finding now.

I can agree with you on the reliability of the media, but I can't go there and find out for myself, neither are you there, its all we have to get a start to be informed.

Xerraire, just a question.
If I agree with you that Russia/France/Germany were opposed to the war out of interest, under your very logic, should you not also be looking for what were the US/UK interests for WANTING this war?
I mean, lets be fair with all sides.
Yes, one could find suspicious the fact that these countries were so much opposed to the war. But then, logically, one must also find suspicious the fact that the US wanted this war so much. Fair is fair.

BTW, nobody yet has said anything about how weird it is that the US did not use Saudi Arabia in this war. The invading troops were based in Koweit and Qatar. Nothing in Saudi Arabia. Haven't anybody noticed how since 9/11, Saudi Arabia isn't so much a friend country with the US anymore?
Associate that with the fact that S.A. is the US #1 outside oil suplier, with the fact that Venezuela, who is the #2 outside oil supplier is living a great political oil crisis at the moment. The US import half their oil needs.
So, if indeed the US did not import much oil from Iraq in the past, doesn't mean that they won't start needing Iraq's oil real soon.
I'm not stating this as a fact, but as a definate possibility.

the US is still friend with the Saud family. they could not allow the US to use their country as a base, because that would have led to extreme trouble for their ultra-corrupt regime.

once again the US do NOT need Iraq´s oil. but they want to control the resources that other countries need. this is not a secret, these plans are open for everybody to read: http://www.newamericancentury.org/ you´ll find a few familiar names in their Statements Of Principles as Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Kagan etc.

paxx
I think I have already stated possible reasons for this war:
But I can repeat them to you, I don't mind.

» We were attacked by terrorist, and cells and threats of them have been found world-wide...and gathered intelligence from the UK and the US points the acts of terrorism to BinLaden and that Hussein was involved. They have found Al-queida fighters there in IRaq and terrorist training camps and such while there, so, that supports the intelligence.

» One of the sole responsibilities of any government is to protect its own people. I can rationalize that for a war to happen, there must be a great future threat. This is more than just payback or unfinished business from Gulf War #1. To which to hear the Kuwaiti's tell the tale, it was horrible when Iraq invaded them.

» When you add those two things up, and then combine it with he has slaugherted, torturted, maimed, killed, performed genocidal acts of terror on his own people, past , present and likely future, I suppose it wasnt that hard for people in the know of exact details to decide what to do.

And that, paxx, is my honest feeling of what has gone on here.

In the grand scheme of things, NO ONE really knows what goes on in the bowels of government, in its deepest core, or what motivates any of them. I too, can remain skeptical in many ways on many things.

Giving the benefit of any doubt for now, those are my beliefs on why the US and the UK decided to wage this war. It wasn't very popular a decision, I do believe they care about the human lives of their own people and those of innocent Irakis to do SOMETHING.

No Xerraire, I meant the real reasons.

I could also cite the official reasons Frane and Germany give, but they aren't anymore the real reasons either.

cite away

those I believe are the real reasons, paxx
So far nothing I have learned has suggested different to me.

Fun with Conspiracy Theories..... http://www.popmatters.com/features/021227-conspiracy.shtml ....I find #3 particularly funny.

Make me the President, I'll just nuke everybody and be done with it.... hehe....

wait, wait, wait... "People are paid NOT to work"????


/me steps up to the plate with resume in hand

Uh oh, I see a whole new line of arguing about to start here...... this thread might take over to vie for longest....

i'm back...

Everything that everyone does is 'in their own interest', or they wouldn't do it. Being responsible is deciding whose interest the action is *counter* to. If you pretend that oil is the point, the world is still bettered by removing Saddam Hussein. Those opposed to the war leave him in place and make him wealthier and stronger militarily... oh, and they get the oil, too. Why talk about it? That part is over.

**

I really wonder if people know what the word 'economy' means.

Gang-related crime has little to do with the economy. If it isn't crack it is untaxed alcohol and cigarettes, guns, gambling, or prostitution. If you don't like it blame the idiots that buy their products. If anything, prosperity in crime mirrors legitimate prosperity... they don't don't barter for their crack, do they?

My wife works in a hospital, so I have a healthy amount of skepticism about the 'dying in the waiting room' thing. You can't lay inept management at the feet of the economy. For every horror-show waiting room there is one across town that does a great job. If a half-dozen grey-haired dinosaurs are getting paid $200,000 a year to 'make administrative decisions' and they can't afford enough attending staff, the economy is not to blame.

I pay about $500 a month for health insurance. My wife is abused constantly by wealthy people who refuse to pay a $10 co-pay for an office visit, or because a patient's insurance doesn't cover Rogain. Insurance covers Viagra, for God's sake, you are surprised it is expensive? I'll say it again, when a poor person can't afford insurance, part of the high cost is PAYING FOR WHITEBREAD AMERICA'S VIAGRA. Sick? Yes. A limp economy? Hardly. I know several people that can't afford health insurance but wouldn't be caught *dead* in a used car...

Is that a problem with the 'economy'? People think that acts-of-God, malpractice or car accidents are lotteries; slip at McDonald's? PAYDAY! The economy's fault? Nah, blame the legal system. You have a medical degree so you are entitled to a BMW... is that a government mandate? No, so why blame them for it?

**

When you see construction companies going out of business, and when you see car dealerships shutting down, and when you can get a decent parking place at Best Buy, then worry. If the average person has the money to keep places like that in business, then they most certainly aren't going hungry.

Paxx, of course there are a number of reasons for the US' position. Geopolitical strategy and interests included which I suspect is more a part of it than the simple "it's just about oil" explanation. It would significantly increase US leverage in the area if there is a more US friendly gov't in Iraq. For example. Syria and Jordan had deals with Iraq for cheap oil in exchange for other favors. Iraq also provided a market for other nations' products, apparently Jordan for example has benefited from exports to Iraq. A change in regime in Iraq could significantly influence some of the political/economic factors to the US' advantage in terms of the other gov'ts in the region. At least, that's evidently what the US hopes for.

As for SA, I believe the US has been using the air base in SA during this for some air command and control operations. They are using the base, but I don't think they're flying planes out of there. SA wants their cooperation on a low profile, just as Jordan also doesn't want their support publicized although the US has been using an airbase in Jordan. SA and Jordan have their own radical elements to deal with (although in SA's case they had no problem exporting and supporting the movement as long as others were the target) and Jordan did have protests when people noticed US air operations at an airbase there. Also, again, with a more US friendly gov't in Iraq, the US could have some more leverage with SA and I think the Saudis are well aware of that.

hehe Baker (when you can find a decent parking place at Best Buy?)

well I dunno but you said:
"When you see construction companies going out of business, and when you see car dealerships shutting down, and when you can get a decent parking place at Best Buy, then worry. If the average person has the money to keep places like that in business, then they most certainly aren't going hungry"
by bakerstreet - 4/13/2003 1:46:12 PM

not always the case Baker, did you happen to see the gorgeous palace Saddam lived in? can you imagine his car he was cruising around in cuz according to you if ppl are driving around in fancy expensive cars then all is well in paradise right? well ppl were aparently going hungry...

cosmetic things thrown all around never show what is lurking underneath things... but I don't care for these kinds of discussions so I will let you guys carry on.
I just wanted to say hello to you guys

I still think if ppl would be more compasionate and real for each other the rest all falls into place, after all the ppl that hold the high chairs they are merely "ppl"