So from your perspective, Non- Americans, you seem like some reasonable people... what is the situation in Iraq? Who and how many "enemies" is the Bush Adminstration fighting? What is in the future? What and who is "al-Qaida"? What does the Bush administration really want? Who are the Sunni enemies? Who are the Sunni friends? Saudi Arabia, what do they gain? And the Shites? And Iran? And Afghanistan? And China and Russia? It all seems pretty fucked up, right from the start, a delusion of grandeur. The rats are jumping ship in the Bush Administration while the ship sails on the same course.
Dates
· UTC
Non- Americans out there... What is going on Iraq?
Archived38 replies · 814 views
This is an archived legacy thread. Replies are closed, but the discussion is preserved.
Me, Mr EdelBrock and Comrade Shitstirrer debated this into the ground about a year ago.
All that was achieved is that Edel can now spell 'Imams'
Well, you get different news viewpoint... who the heck is the USA fighting now? Just seems like a bad marriage with no way out but everybody keeps up the game because the other options are just as bad.
Too many questions there. Anyway, I'll answer some of your questions.
Who and how many "enemies" is the Bush Adminstration fighting? Basically, the Bush Administration wants to destroy al-Qaida, but even if they destroy them, lots of new groups will come out to fight and/or oppose the US. How many are the enemies? Millions. Not only in the Middle East and predominant Muslim countries, but in almost all parts of the world there are people who opposes the US foreign policies.
What does the Bush administration really want? Who are the Sunni enemies? (1) World Dominance. As the "last superpower" on this planet, they want to keep it that way forever. Throughout history, the world power has rotated starting back to the Roman Empire. A lot of people are saying that China is the next superpower, and the US knows it and is trying to prevent it. (2) Money. Oil is black gold. They only want to be involved with wars which they will gain profit from it. They never really cared about Africa. All the conflict there (i.e. Sudan, Rwanda), they never really give a damn. They would pretend they are concerned, bring the matter to the UN, but then, they would really never begin the initiative to move, unlike in Iraq, they used their veto power to invade the country. (3) Finish the war his father started. George Bush Sr. lead the Gulf War in 1991, but wasn't able to finish Saddam Hussein. Now that George Jr. is in power (where I believe he is a puppet of George Sr.), he was instructed by his father to finish Saddam. George Sr.'s plan was 'interrupted' when William Clinton came into power. But when the Republicans got the power again, they want to finish what they hadn't finish. I really hate to believe the conspiracy theory regarding the 911 incident, but then, come to think of it, if 911 didn't happen, I don't know what 'excuse' the Bush Administration will have to invade Iraq.
Saudi Arabia, what do they gain? Not only Saudi Arabia but all the other so-called 'US Allies in the Middle East.' UAE, Pakistan, etc., they all recieve massive amounts of "US AID" for US support for its operations. Although UAE and Saudi are wealthy countries, they know the consequenses of not supporting US' interests in the region, for they will lose a lot of business transactions and interest from The West.
What is in the future? I don't really know, but is scarry unless the US changes its policy. There is a hardbound book I saw last week that I'm planning to buy. As far as I remember, the title says something like 'How The US Will Be Loved Again' or 'Win Its Friends Back' (written by an American). I read some of it, and it is very interesting. As you know, the US used to be called 'Champions of Democracy.' They entered both World Wars late; 3 years late in WW1 and 2 years late in WW2. Maybe it could've been an intentional stategy (but I read the US congress would not approve the entry to the war). But then, the world look up at the US very differently during those times, unlike now.
That's all for now. I'll post more some other time.
Indeed*!*
pumped full of drugs wrote: So from your perspective, Non- Americans, you seem like some reasonable people... what is the situation in Iraq? Who and how many "enemies" is the Bush Adminstration fighting? What is in the future? What and who is "al-Qaida"? What does the Bush administration really want? Who are the Sunni enemies? Who are the Sunni friends? Saudi Arabia, what do they gain? And the Shites? And Iran? And Afghanistan? And China and Russia? It all seems pretty fucked up, right from the start, a delusion of grandeur. The rats are jumping ship in the Bush Administration while the ship sails on the same course.
Well from a Burt prospective. I'll try and keep it brief.
Iraq was still occupied up to 1947 by the UK, and has always been a pot pourri of ethnic and religious mix, be it Kurds in the North, Shia in the East etc. We pulled out because we couldnt afford to be there, and the biggest problem was keeping all these rival factions from killing each other. The first person to gas the Kurds on a mass scale was not Saddam, but Winston Churchill in 1921.
The only method of keeping this loose framework together was by force, which Saddam employed successfully. Take that force away, and without ever properly controlling borders pre- invasion, and the old wounds appear again, and surrounding countries want influence, be it Turkey with the Kurds, or Iran with the Shia population.
A distinct lack of tight borders allowed Jihadists to jump in and cause havoc (the term Al Quaeda is a Western 'umbrella' term, and not really in anyway a SPECTRE like organisation).
The future is bleak. No doubt oil was a major force in the decision to invade, as whoever has control in the last few years of supply will be very rich, something Russia are trying to exert with supplies of gas.
Bush seems to have a pro-Sunni policy going on, see Shia populations in Afghanistan, N Pakistan and Iran as the trouble-makers. Only last week he announced massive aid packages to Sunni countries; I think Saudi was to receive $20bn in aid for its co-operation, and increased future co-operation.
Where is it going? Who knows. It's a fuck-up of epic proportions, the cost of which is only offset by the amount of oil being pumped out of the country. If the next stop is Iran, i suspect Russia and China may become agitated enough to do something. It will certainly not be solved by a government belief that democratising every country will bring peace and a Halal Macdonalds to street corners.
i watch german news. gives me global perspective without a lot of fearmongering and sensationalism. american news is a giant fly-over zone. utterly worthless.
Sorry Burt for this minor correction but Iraq was declared independent by the UK in 1932 and entered the League of Nations on that year, although the British retained military bases and transit rights for their forces until 1947. They were a Kingdom upon independence, but there were numerous military coups until 1958, when the King was finally ousted in a coup and became a republic.
Indeed*!*
It is still an astonishing statistic that at the time of the invasion of Iraq over 50% of Americans believed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
Sub-Cultured*!* wrote: Sorry Burt for this minor correction but Iraq was declared independent by the UK in 1932 and entered the League of Nations on that year, although the British retained military bases and transit rights for their forces until 1947. They were a Kingdom upon independence, but there were numerous military coups until 1958, when the King was finally ousted in a coup and became a republic.
Indeed*!*
Thats the official line, but we chose their leaders up to the point of exit. In fact a couple of them went to to Eton.
Burt Reynolds wrote: It is still an astonishing statistic that at the time of the invasion of Iraq over 50% of Americans believed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
we call those people bush supporters, and they shouldn't be allowed to breed.
Burt Reynolds wrote: It is still an astonishing statistic that at the time of the invasion of Iraq over 50% of Americans believed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
In light of the fact that at least 50% of the world population, including Americans, are absolute idiots, that doesn't astonish me too much. Also, never underestimate the power of the American propoganda machine that managed to convince a similar majority that a Yale-educated cocaine addict from Maine was actually a Texan good ole boy with working class roots (referring, of course to the drunken monkey who is running things from Washington).
I also think that some of those polled may be in that bizarre camp that believes that the government knows more than them and must therefore be trusted. I mean, Iraq must have caused 9-11 right? Otherwise, we would have never attacked them because that would be ridiculous!
If we Americans continue our bull-in-the-China-shop approach to world affairs, I may lose hope that someday I'll be able to travel abroad without pretending to be Canadian.
Matt
I never believed in those govenment surveys. Their are always paid, and they're the ones selecting the area and sample size.
Indeed*!*
ERRRM, OIL thats whats goin on in iraq the rest is just a fuckin sideshow.
Bring our boys home NOW and leave the fuckin yanks to it,same goes with Afghanistan.
Bring our boys home NOW and leave the fuckin yanks to it,same goes with Afghanistan.
Well said Steve!
Sam the Stokie wrote:
Bring our boys home NOW and leave the fuckin yanks to it,same goes with Afghanistan.
Thirded!
And someone should remind them that we'll still be there for them if they actually have a real enemy to fight.....payback for WWII I suppose, though WE wont ride in in the last five minutes and act like we won it.
Andrès wrote: Bush won`t never attack Al-qaida, cause Bin Laden is his business associate
You cant attack something that only exists in the media. And it was his dead brother who traded with him.
Burt Reynolds wrote:
Andrès wrote: Bush won`t never attack Al-qaida, cause Bin Laden is his business associate
You cant attack something that only exists in the media. And it was his dead brother who traded with him.
Precisely, anyone who believes that Al-Q is a real thing should watch "the power of nightmares: the rise of the politics of fear" an excellent BBC doco from a few years ago, widely available on bittorrent (legally in the UK, as any UK license holder has a right to own a BBC show taped from air)
Doctor? wrote:
Burt Reynolds wrote:
Andrès wrote: Bush won`t never attack Al-qaida, cause Bin Laden is his business associate
You cant attack something that only exists in the media. And it was his dead brother who traded with him.
Precisely, anyone who believes that Al-Q is a real thing should watch "the power of nightmares: the rise of the politics of fear" an excellent BBC doco from a few years ago, widely available on bittorrent (legally in the UK, as any UK license holder has a right to own a BBC show taped from air)
said documentary can be watched by anyone here
i find it quite scary that someone from "the land of the free" has to ask freinds from other countries what is happening in the world, yank media machine is so insular that i'm supprised y'all know that there is "other countries" out there, some of them are actualy freinds!!
Burt Reynolds wrote: Me, Mr EdelBrock and Comrade Shitstirrer debated this into the ground about a year ago.
All that was achieved is that Edel can now spell 'Imams'
Naw, still can't spell emums for the life of me....how do you spell it anyways? 
What I do find hilarious is no matter who is asked about the war in Iraq (which remember is not officially a war), each person (in general, not singling out any NOOLers) talks like an expert on the matter...but they mainly only spew information fed to them by the media, unable to expand any new thought into conversation...and European news isn't much better than US news. But I think the most hilarious thing is that people can't seem to remember why we went to War with Saddam in the first place...I mean they LIVED through that time period, so they should remember...but instead people remember the most recent propoganda fed to them.
EdelBrock wrote: the most hilarious thing is that people can't seem to remember why we went to War with Saddam in the first place...
It was cos he crashed the planes into them towers, dummy
Burt Reynolds wrote:
EdelBrock wrote: the most hilarious thing is that people can't seem to remember why we went to War with Saddam in the first place...
It was cos he crashed the planes into them towers, dummy
Why did we go to war than? Non-existant WMD's? For the towers they didn't bring down? This could take a long time.
old lead foot wrote: i find it quite scary that someone from "the land of the free" has to ask freinds from other countries what is happening in the world, yank media machine is so insular that i'm supprised y'all know that there is "other countries" out there, some of them are actualy freinds!!
Well put Kehoe and USA used to demonise those 'Commie Bastards'(sic) for the likes of Pravda etc. What's the difference with that and the Bush administration/media now?
Cheers!
Burt Reynolds wrote: It is still an astonishing statistic that at the time of the invasion of Iraq over 50% of Americans believed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
From a book on popularising popular science I read once.....
68% of them think Astrology is a science! 60% of their teens think Chernobyl is Cher's real name and over 50% think Galeleo and Aristotle were soccer players.
Burt Reynolds wrote:
EdelBrock wrote: the most hilarious thing is that people can't seem to remember why we went to War with Saddam in the first place...
It was cos he crashed the planes into them towers, dummy
Rumsfeld was ordering the CIA NSA and fuck knows who else to give him evidence that allowed an attack on Iraq from about Lunchtime on Sept 11th 01....a matter of public record I may add. As is the fact that each time the spooks came to him and said "no link, no evidence, it's a crock sir" he said that wasn't good enough and would they please fuck off and not come back til they had what he needed. In the end he told them to make it up (not as bas as Tony and his....45 min weapons that aint went off, or been found yet.)
Why did we end up there?
Easy....american engineering is infantile, in order to produce the same power as a 1l citreon saxo, an american car must use a 5l V8. Also American's are tight fisted bastards, why pay for oil when you can steal it.
