Alot of Iraqis are going to die, because of Bush's unjust war.
Over 5000 Iraqis were dying each month because Saddam Hussein was diverting food and medical aid from the oil-for-food program to buy weapons and luxuries for his loyalists. His army had murdered 40,000-70,000 Kurds and Shiites in the aftermath of the first gulf war. They only stopped when the no-fly zones were established. It is readily aparent that they would continue to murder the Kurds and Shiites if allowed to. In this case, as in Kossovo a few years back, war results in less death than peace. Those who want peace now just like to delude themselves that the deaths would not be a result of their inaction.
Therefore, pres.Bush is just as bad as Saadam Hussien.
By that logic, FDR was just as bad as Hitler and Hirohito.
I would say: Worse !
Saddam Hussein killed only people in Iraq, Bush kills people all over the world !
Saddam has killed thousands of Iranians with chemical weapons. Don't be foolish STAii.
STAii, are you aware of some world war that Bush is waging that nobody knows about?
edit: I can't believe this got by me, but...
What is the point of noting that Saddam "only" killed people in Iraq?! Even if true (which it is not), it is still terrible.
I would just point out though that the no-fly zone was established twelve years ago, and that prior to the no-fly zone, the Iraqis were in a middle of a war in which the Kurds supported the iranians.
Of course this in no way justifies it. But just put it into context. The conclusion that Saddam is continuing to do this and will in the future is not that clear.
The point is that Bush has the power to start killing people at any point in the world, Bush controls the life of all people on the globe.
On the other hand Saddam can only kill those who are under his threat (maybe i was wrong by saying only the people of Iraq).
In other words, Bush can threaten the life of Saddam, Bush can threaten the life of Iraqis, Saddam can not threaten the life of Bush, or the life of USAmericans (other than the soldiers).
this original topic is about the Iraqi people...
let's just hope, that regardless of what opinions fly, actions will be taken, and we can only hope that as little lives will be lost as possible...
let's hope that the people of Iraq can look to a better life without pain and suffering...
Of course he does, but you said that Bush is killing people all over the world. When you put it like that ^^, it's totally different.
Tom, i was refering to Afganistan + Iraq (And still the other countries in the region).
Anyways, last word.
I want to say that the people living in Iraq back in the old days were happy (before 1991).
Iraq was a very great civilized place to live, it was almost a heaven !
I know this because almost all of my family lived in Iraq for some time (and my parents lived therefore for a long ammount of time).
But as soon as US wanted to defend Kuwait (wow, aren't they brave ? they knew how to defend Kuwait but didn't know how to defend Vietnam, did they ??), Iraq turned into hell.
All the weapons (that gave the power) were gone, most money taken, all countries against it, the seige ... etc.
Maybe if Iraq was left alone back then, now it would be a real threat to US.
It seems US knew this, and wanted to end it from the begining, and this is what it did (till now).
I am not saying that Saddam is some kind of Angel, he is a bad guy, but there are many ways to get rid of someone bad, and killing a whole country to do that is not one of the 'good' ways.
(a good way: simply assasin him !)
EDIT: I forgot to write what i wanted to write for Greg.
So, Saddam killed thousands of people with chemical weapons ?
How about US when it killed about 500 thousand people with a two bombs ? people are still suffering from it till now !
And ... you don't consider US a terrorist country ?
There's no doubting that Bush is a 'better' man than Saddam. We only have to imagine the horrors that a Saddam Hussein could inflict upon the world if he was given the power of Mr. Bush, to know that George is a fundamentally-decent man. He's not perfect... but he isn't 'evil'.
What bothers me here, is that I see evidence (from the posters) for George's comparable goodness as a justification of his actions.
But that's not good enough really. "I'm better than you: therefore, my actions are all justified.", does not follow. That's why it's a meaningless argument (with Staii) to discuss the merits of each leader. It doesn't prove anything anyway.
So a long and bloody war with your closest neighbor is the stuff "heaven" is made of? Yikes.
And apparently that scares you. Does Saddam's power scare you? Is Saddam more or less inclined to use force? You do realize you are seeming to support the regime of a criminal dictator that the world is nearly unanamous in condemning, right? And this over the the US which despite our breathtaking power hasn't exercised the full force we are capable of in 55 years. I don't understand why you fear the US and not Iraq. Maybe its erroneous beliefs like this:
Um... Kuait? Israel? Saudia Arabia? IRAN!!!!?!?? In fact, Saddam kills people in any country he can reach. We've just been able (so far) to keep his reach reasonably short. But it has taken a active opposition to do that.
As The News Says , US AirFighters killed 2 Civilians and wonded more than 50 Civilians ...
But on the other hand , Iraqis Didn't kill any US Civilian .
This Topic Is About Poeple , Right ? So I'll talk about poeple.
US government says that Iraqi poeple wants to get free of the dictator leader , and they hate him , so the brave ( duhh! ) US And English army are here to free the poeple from this bad leader ...
If that's their reason , then I have something to suggest .
Why don't China invade USA to help it's poeple to get rid of their bad leader G.W. Bosh ... since most of the poeple hate him , then China should do the same with The US ...
I'm Sure Now You See That I'm talking nonsense , but that's the sense US told the Iraqies about
Another thing , Remember What DEMOCRACY Means ... And see Who chose who is the leader ...
That's Not Legal ... USA Respects Law .. Duhh ! I'm Lying !
Obviously there is some denial going on here.
Alot of people like Bush, I am one, and most people can atleast tolerate him. Bush works in a democracy which doesn't allow him to throw people into meat grinders and bomb thousands with chemical weapons.
You have a point.
Originally it is meaningless to discuss such a thing.
But it seems that the people on the forum see that this war should happen because Saddam is a bad person, and we should get rid from him.
What i was pointing is that Bush is bad too, so why don't we get rid of him too (by making a war on US ?).
(so mainly, it is not me that has the idea of the comparison of leaders, this came up because people are justifying this war by the badness of Saddam)
What i was trying to justify is that this war is not because Saddam is a bad person, or because US really cares about Iraqis and want to make a better life for them, and not because Iraq has mass destruction weapons (which is something that didn't show till now, if they had any, wouldn't they use them ?), it is only because US and UK need economy, money, market, and oil !
How many Iraqi civilians die on a daily basis due to the oppression of Saddam? The net effect of this conflict will SAVE civilian lives.
I covered this in another thread, but the answer is so simple people don't see it. The US simply doesn't have the means to launch an invasion of China, so we don't. We fight battles we can win. If we lose, we don't help anyone.
"Denial" is one word that fits. I have a stronger word in mind that also starts with the letter "d"...
Did you ever live in Iraq ?
Did u ever even met an Iraqi ?
You (those who never had real contact with the situation) only watch it on TV, and say it is bad.
Iraq is the only country in the region that respects science and scientists (before it was ruined in 1991).
Iraq is the first place to have an electronic microscope in the middle east.
And there are other facts.
I am not saying that he did not kill anyone, he killed lot of people.
But he made some kind of rules, if you don't go against those, you are living in a real heaven.
And before 1991 there was no hungry Iraqi, and no poor Iraqi too !
So, back to my point.
I think this democracy was in the US constitution since it started, so how come US simply called all those Japaneese in WW II.
Doesn't give you this an idea that US does not respect any thing ?
It throughs people in grinders, bombs MILLIONS of people, not thousands !
So far, as I heard it on the news, 25 civilians are dead
You didn't see the picture of the 2 years old kid .... His head was widly open ... all his family were killed .
ALSO YOU DIDN'T HEAR OF THE 4 JORDANIAN STUDENTS THAT WERE KILLED IN IRAQ BY US MISSILE ... THEY WERE STUDENTS NOT SOLDIRES !
I find it interesting nobody mentions the fact that no civilian lives would be in danger if Iraq hadn't put prime military targets in civilian areas... or if he had advised his people to evacuate instead of trying to convince them the US posed no threat.
^^^ That's just not true... it's a war, people get killed. If you happen to live next door to a power plant, or a bomb goes off target, or (this happened to a Jordanian refugee) you happen to be at the only gas station on the road to Amman when it's bombed, that's it. I do think that the US military has kept civilian casualties exceptionally low considering the gains and attacks so far.
Bah, I meant that they'd be in less danger, not no danger!
Saddam does however mix civilians with the miltiary as much as possible. Everyone likes to say how in the first Gulf war we bombed schools and hospitals. This is completely true. What they don't mention is the fact that these civilian installations are purposely built on top of command bunkers, weapons plants, and other military installations.
Separate names with a comma.