• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

'655,000 Iraqis killed since invasion'

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #21
    Originally posted by Masher
    It appears that Saddam treated Iraqis the way they need to be treated and that kept a lid on all this. Maybe he should be nominated for a Nobel peace prize.
    Interesting point.

    I remember seeing the Berlin wall come down and thinking "Oh God! Now we'll have some tulipe going down".

    The Soviet Union, like Saddam, kept a lid on all kinds of simmering racial, territorial and religious hatered.

    'Freedom' to these nutjobs just means they are free to go on a killing spree and massacre their neighbours.

    You've come right out the other side of the forest of irony and ended up in the desert of wrong.

    Comment


      #22
      Originally posted by Masher
      It appears that Saddam treated Iraqis the way they need to be treated and that kept a lid on all this.
      Quite. And that isn't hindsight. We knew that before we invaded.

      Similarly, I read yesterday that South Korea SUPPORT the North Korean regime, because they don't want all those starving and commie Pyong-Yangers pouring over their border.

      Comment


        #23
        Surely you're not suggesting that all we've done is destabilise these regions...

        Churchill - In "Tongue firmly in cheek" mode!

        Comment


          #24
          Originally posted by hyperD
          John Snow was interviewing the USA Secretary of State (?) about Korea on C4 news and asked as we invaded Iraq because we believed they had WMD, now that we know that Korea has definitely got them, will the US invade shortly?

          He smoothly replied that this was different as Korea was using this as a means of posturing within the global arena and has a history of it.

          Er, OK then.
          The hypocriscy of the Bush administration is astounding.

          Comment


            #25
            Originally posted by wendigo100
            Similarly, I read yesterday that South Korea SUPPORT the North Korean regime, because they don't want all those starving and commie Pyong-Yangers pouring over their border.
            Quite so.

            Vaguely heared on the radio this morning that some Whitehouse official was asked by a journo when the US would be invading NK as they clearly DID have Weapons of Mass Destruction, no question about it!

            The Whitehouse bod said it was a somewhat different situation (i.e. NK can punch back and doesn't have oil).

            I expect the the Iranians are paying attention. The US is a bully and a coward.

            You've come right out the other side of the forest of irony and ended up in the desert of wrong.

            Comment


              #26
              Terrain there does not favour tanks - bombing from air won't help much as NKns were digging deep tunnels in mountains for the last few decades.

              Comment


                #27
                Originally posted by zeitghost
                Exactamundo...

                The important point is "doesn't have oil"...
                Even if they were floating on a sea of the stuff, the US wouldn't dare because:

                1) The NK military are a formidable and highly motivated force. They hate the US even more than the mad Mullahs do (believing through indoctrination that the US started the Korean war by invading).

                2) They have already kicked Uncle Sam's arse once and the shame of another kicking would be unthinkable.

                3) They can't effectively fight in two arenas at once. The Iranians would probably take the opportunity to start kicking off.

                4) China would take a pretty dim view - and there is no way the US is going to feck around with China.

                You've come right out the other side of the forest of irony and ended up in the desert of wrong.

                Comment


                  #28
                  Originally posted by zeitghost
                  Exactamundo...

                  The important point is "doesn't have oil"...
                  Neither did Kosovo or Somalia

                  Oh and if Iraq was all about oil then why havent the prices come down since we supposedly control all them lovely oil fields now!

                  Mailman

                  ps. Sorry for being late

                  Comment


                    #29
                    Originally posted by Mailman
                    Neither did Kosovo or Somalia

                    Oh and if Iraq was all about oil then why havent the prices come down since we supposedly control all them lovely oil fields now!

                    Mailman

                    ps. Sorry for being late
                    It's ok to be late. Just be sorry for being a twat.

                    And it's not about oil per-se. It's about regional control and influence, and getting some bunce for the huge 'reconstruction projects' that ensue to the good ole' boys at Haliburton etc.

                    Even the US realises that oil is rapidly becoming yesterday's agenda, so they'd better make the most of it while they are the world's only oil-based superpower (a bit like saving up for your retirement).

                    The USA's 'pension' is going to anything they can grab, and hold onto now.

                    You've come right out the other side of the forest of irony and ended up in the desert of wrong.

                    Comment


                      #30
                      Originally posted by bogeyman
                      there is no way the US is going to feck around with China
                      I'd go further - they'd rather China did something about NK rather than have to do it themselves.

                      They are up against a formidable opponent in Kim Jong Il - he is a renaissance man who has flown fighter aircraft, written operas and enjoys golf, having shot multiple holes-in-one during his first try at the game on PyongYang's par-72 international golf course. He reportedly aced five holes and finished 38 under par after his first round. He routinely shoots three or four holes-in-one per round.

                      Luckily for Tiger Woods and the rest, he's more interested in starving his people and behaving like a twat than joining the US PGA.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X