The war on Iraq was an atrocity

[JTD]

It's time to stand up for what I believe in. Why?

I watched a documentary today: Deadline Iraq/Untold stories of the war in Iraq on newsworld international on satelite. It was very powerful. Most moving about it was the women of Baghdad, who slept with their children at night when the bombs were falling so they'd die together. Some liberation, huh? It also showed U.S tanks deliberately targeting a hotel where journalists were housed. I remember the attack on the Palestine hotel at the time it happened. The media was DELIBERATELY targeted, I think. I remember CNN's Christiane Amanpour being very angry in her reports on the incident at the time it happened. It also showed U.S soldiers killing Iraqis and going up to them and saying "it's better you dead than me." Then, of course, we have the case of Ali Ishmael Abass, the 12-year-old boy who lost his two arms, mother, father, sister after a stray bomb hit his home. His life is ruined. He talked about how he hates the Americans now.

Bush should fight actual global terrorists, not some tin-pot dictator who is lying to the world about having some great stash of WMD in an attempt to bully his neighbours.

This is not the way to fight terrorism. I think the war with Iraq greatly undermined the war on terror, took valuable millitary resources away from Afghanistan and allowed Al Qaeda to thrive. Senator Bob Graham echoed this on CNN's late edition today. The transcript is available at cnn.com.

I supported the war at the time, but it is now clear to me that this war was outrageously wrong. There were no WMD's, there was no "imminent" threat to the U.S. Senator Kennedy was right when he said this war was "cooked up in Texas by Karl Rove (Bush's chief political adviser) and it was decided this war would be good for them politically". Fortunately, it hasn't been. But that's the only reason this war was fought. Bush wanted to gain more popularity and get re-elected.

I was so impressed with Secretary Powell's Feb. 5 briefing to the U.N. But it was all lies. He was told to say that. He knew the true situation, that's why he fought so hard for diplomacy. Powell's opposition makes sense now.

BTW, it's despicable how the republicans and George W. Bush have turned 9/11 to their own political advantage. The political climate in the U.S now is: You either support Bush or you support the terrorists. Sad... and scary...

Also, I hope this thread stirs up some great debate. I will reply ASAP to any concerns you raise about my post and maybe we can clear things up for each other.

[coriolis]

1. True, no WMD's have been found (yet). But why was the UN performing all those inspections prior to the US intervention? If I remember correctly, France and Germany accepted that the WMD's existed but wanted diplomacy to "have a chance." Even if SH was a tinpot dictator and was lying to his neighbors about having them, then he needed to be dealt with. And don't forget that SH did in fact use poison gas against the Kurds.

2. What about the atrocities committed by Saddam and his people? Mass graves and torture chambers have been found.

3. With the terror he imposed on the Iraquis, no internal opposition had a chance. I read a story about his rise to power through murder, fear and terror.

4. In that incident where the Palestine Hotel was targeted, were shots fired, and were journalists killed? Can you find another source for that story, because I watched the coverage pretty closely, and I don't remember it.

5. Same question on the report that soldiers "executed" Iraquis. And were these Iraquis combatents or noncombatents?

6. Newsworld International was started by the Canadian Broadcasting Network, and is now run by a French media company. Al Gore is working towards buying this service to set up a left-leaning rival to FOX.
http://www.nydailynews.com/business/sto ... 9917c.html

[stormchazer]

Below is a list of crimes attributed to Saddam Hussien. It amazes me that people label us as terrorist when we act. If you want left-wing hyperbole, by all means watch the Clinton New Network. This the same organiztaion whose exec admitted it turned a blind eye to Saddam atrocities so as to protect its offices in Iraq.

http://cgi.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0305/28/asb.00.html

The Army admitted they mad a mistake when the Palestine Hotel thing happened. Gee...soldiers in a war-zone being shot at never make mistakes. I am sorry that the Iraqi woman had to crouch in basements. Innocents always suffer. Ask the families of those buried in Saddam's mass graves.

Repression of the Iraqi People
Summary
Saddam Hussein's repression of the Iraqi people has not stopped.

He is draining the southern marshes, causing grave environmental damage and forcible relocation of civilians in an attempt to eliminate opposition to the regime.

He is murdering Shi'a clerics.

He is destroying villages and forcibly relocating people in both the north and the south and destroying villages in the south.

International human rights groups and others are gathering evidence and working to establish an international criminal court to try Saddam and his senior aides for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

He has used chemical weapons against his own people.



UNSC Resolution 688

In Resolution 688 (1991), the UN Security Council condemned the Government of Iraq's repression of the Iraqi civilian population, which it concluded threatened international peace and security in the region.

The Council demanded that Iraq immediately end this repression and allow immediate access by international humanitarian organizations to all those in need of assistance in all parts of Iraq.

Iraq has neither ended the repression of its civilian population nor allowed outside organizations access to help those in need. The government of Iraq uses military force to repress civilian populations throughout the country, resulting in the deaths of thousands and the destruction of entire villages.

• Iraq has refused to allow the UN's Special Rapporteur for Human Rights to return to Iraq since his first visit in 1992. The government of Iraq has refused to allow the stationing of human rights monitors as required by the resolutions of the UN General Assembly and the UN Commission on Human Rights. The regime expelled UN personnel and NGOs who, until 1992, ensured the delivery of humanitarian relief services throughout the country.

• Iraqi authorities routinely practice extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions throughout those parts of the country still under regime control. The total number of prisoners believed to have been executed since autumn 1997 exceeds 2,500. This includes hundreds of arbitrary executions in the last months of 1998 at Abu Ghraib and Radwaniyah prisons near Baghdad.


Photo 3 & 4: click here or on image for enlargement and caption
• In the 1970s and 1980s, the Iraqi regime destroyed over 3,000 Kurdish villages. The destruction of Kurdish and Turkomen homes is still going on in Iraqi-controlled areas of northern Iraq, as evidenced the destruction by Iraqi forces of civilian homes in the citadel of Kirkuk (see Photo 3 & 4).

• In northern Iraq, the government is continuing its campaign of forcibly deporting Kurdish and Turkomen families to southern governorates. As a result of these forced deportations, approximately 900,000 citizens are internally displaced throughout Iraq. Local officials in the south have ordered the arrest of any official or citizen who provides employment, food or shelter to newly arriving Kurds.


Photo 5: click here or on image for enlargement and caption
• Iraq's 1988-89 Anfal campaign subjected the Kurdish people in northern Iraq to the most widespread attack of chemical weapons ever used against a civilian population. The Iraqi military attacked a number of towns and villages in northern Iraq with chemical weapons. In the town of Halabja alone, an estimated 5,000 civilians were killed and more than 10,000 were injured (see photo 5).


Photo 8: click here or on image for enlargement and caption
• The scale and severity of Iraqi attacks on Shi'a civilians in the south of Iraq have been increasing steadily. The Human Rights Organization in Iraq (HROI) reports that 1,093 persons were arrested in June 1999 in Basrah alone. Tanks from the Hammourabi Republican Guards Division attacked the towns of Rumaitha and Khudur on June 26, after residents protested the systematic maldistribution of food and medicine to the detriment of the Shi'a. Iraqi troops killed fourteen villagers, arrested more than a hundred more, and destroyed forty homes. On June 29, the Supreme Council for the Islamic Resistance in Iraq reported that 160 homes in the Abul Khaseeb district near Basra were destroyed (see photo 8).

• In March 1999, the regime gunned down Grand Ayatollah al Sayyid Mohammad Sadiq al Sadr, the most senior Shi'a religious leader in Iraq. Since 1991, dozens of senior Shi'a clerics and hundreds of their followers have either been murdered or arrested by the authorities,and their whereabouts remain unknown.


Photo 6 & 7: click here or on image for enlargement and caption
• In the southern marshes, government forces have burned houses and fields, demolished houses with bulldozers, and undertaken a deliberate campaign to drain and poison the marshes. Villages belonging to the al Juwaibiri, al Shumaish, al Musa and al Rahma tribes were entirely destroyed and the inhabitants forcibly expelled. Government troops expelled the population of other areas at gunpoint and also forced them to relocate by cutting off their water supply (see photo 6 & 7).

War Crimes

The nature and magnitude of the crimes committed by Saddam Hussein and his regime since 1980 demand that all efforts be made to hold those individuals accountable for their crimes. We believe that Saddam Hussein and key members of his regime should be brought to justice for their past and current crimes.

[opera ghost]

I'm simply at a loss as to why the US is the world police force. Yeah Sadamn is a bad guy. I think almost anyone you ask is going to agree with that.

My question is: What gives the US the right to wander in, drop bombs, destroy a soveriegn nation (regardless of how bad or good the sovern is), and force democracy on them? And why is it done at the expense of the american people (in money for the war and the rebuilding- and in lives of american soilders lost)? Why can't we take care of Americans first? Oh- right. Because Sadamn's cronies blew up the twin towers. I'd rather that we spent every penny we've spent on Iraq to track down and turn Osama into a fine white dust.... but no- we went to war with a seperate soveriegn country- and then had to rebuild it.

Why not rebuild America? Or bomb out Iraq and Afghanistan until thier people can't complain anymore and purchase (or claim) the land for the US? Why are we spending billions and billions of dollars to blow up a country that we're going to turn right back and rebuild with NO benifit to the US at all.

I'll give you one thing- Sadamn is a bad guy. He shouldn't be in power. Then again I'm not a big fan of Castro either. We have appointed ourselves as the police force of the world- liberating the opressed and downtrodden- removing the dictators and the extreamist regimes... oh wait- we're only doing that in Iraq- not with any of the other countries that might need our help. Sounds fishy. Sounds REALLY expensive.

First Iraq and then where? Are we going to wipe out every country that has terrorist ties? Are we going to continue to go to war without gain until the american people are bled dry? No- we're going to make an example of Iraq... and in another 4 years when someone new is up for reelection we'll look for a new country to destroy.

:-?

[chadtm80]

I'm simply at a loss as to why the US is the world police force. Yeah Sadamn is a bad guy. I think almost anyone you ask is going to agree with that.

My question is: What gives the US the right to wander in, drop bombs, destroy a soveriegn nation (regardless of how bad or good the sovern is), and force democracy on them? And why is it done at the expense of the american people (in money for the war and the rebuilding- and in lives of american soilders lost)? Why can't we take care of Americans first? Oh- right. Because Sadamn's cronies blew up the twin towers. I'd rather that we spent every penny we've spent on Iraq to track down and turn Osama into a fine white dust.... but no- we went to war with a seperate soveriegn country- and then had to rebuild it.

Why not rebuild America? Or bomb out Iraq and Afghanistan until thier people can't complain anymore and purchase (or claim) the land for the US? Why are we spending billions and billions of dollars to blow up a country that we're going to turn right back and rebuild with NO benifit to the US at all.

I'll give you one thing- Sadamn is a bad guy. He shouldn't be in power. Then again I'm not a big fan of Castro either. We have appointed ourselves as the police force of the world- liberating the opressed and downtrodden- removing the dictators and the extreamist regimes... oh wait- we're only doing that in Iraq- not with any of the other countries that might need our help. Sounds fishy. Sounds REALLY expensive.

First Iraq and then where? Are we going to wipe out every country that has terrorist ties? Are we going to continue to go to war without gain until the american people are bled dry? No- we're going to make an example of Iraq... and in another 4 years when someone new is up for reelection we'll look for a new country to destroy.

Hmmm.. Think I might have my first opertunity to use the new "Ignore" feature.. lol j/k

Operaghost.. One question for you.. If we lived in a Nation like that, would you not want some one to come save you? All I can say for the iraquis is at least Bush is running things and not you

back and rebuild with NO benifit to the US at all.

You can HONESTLY say there is NO benifit???????

[chadtm80]

I supported the war at the time, but it is now clear to me that this war was outrageously wrong. There were no WMD's, there was no "imminent" threat to the U.S. Senator Kennedy was right when he said this war was "cooked up in Texas by Karl Rove (Bush's chief political adviser) and it was decided this war would be good for them politically". Fortunately, it hasn't been. But that's the only reason this war was fought. Bush wanted to gain more popularity and get re-elected.

I was so impressed with Secretary Powell's Feb. 5 briefing to the U.N. But it was all lies. He was told to say that. He knew the true situation, that's why he fought so hard for diplomacy. Powell's opposition makes sense now.

BTW, it's despicable how the republicans and George W. Bush have turned 9/11 to their own political advantage. The political climate in the U.S now is: You either support Bush or you support the terrorists. Sad... and scary...

GIve me a Break.. Oh ya.. You right Jason Bush and his advisors woke up one morning and said hmmmmmm Lets seee.. How can I get re-elected.. I know we can start a war with iraq.. We will lose some American soldiers in the meantime, but ah well, I will get re-elected.. GIVE ME A FREAKING BREAK!!!

BTW.. Whats despicable to me is how you backed the war, but now that you see its not "smooth sailing" and people are dying, its oh no.. Run for cover.. People are not suppose to die in war.. Come on.. Its WAR.. Is 9/11 being used for motivation on all this? Hell ya it is.. Have you forgoten that day? Whats sad is it will take another day like 9/11 to get some of "you" to support action again.. The thing is here, is Bush and his aids dont need a Reminder.. They will NEVER forget

[Guest]

Couldn't agree more with you Chad. Yeah I have had second thoughts about this war - who doesn't but you know its the reason we are over there fighting to be a police force to ensure world peace.

I don't discuss politics that much and I usually middle of the road - but I firmly support our president in making this decison to go to war. And no I'm not a republican either.

[chadtm80]

Jason.. Its also funny how you, and the whole CNN click Focus on the "bad stuff".. Yes.. A 12 year old boy lost his limbs.. I feel just Terable about that, as im sure the entire nation does.. But you do realize this is war right? You do realize that his nasty regime hid with in the innocent peoples homes, schools, and churches.. Innocent people died, and some more still will.. Its a part of war.. Not saying its ok, just saying its part of war..

A mother had to sleep with her kids while the attacks were going on.. and? That means it wasnt a liberation effort on are part?

[chadtm80]

And no I'm not a republican either.

Congrats Ticka.. You have taken the first step to recovery.. Admiting the problem lol j/k

[looks like rain]

arm chair politics are always 20-20- when has war ever been pleasant? to the victor goes the spoils-why do we always give "ours" away?

[streetsoldier]

About that "intentional attack on the Palestine Hotel"...maybe YOU didn't see this, but I did, and paid very close attention.

On the top of that hotel was an Al-Arabiya camera crew; suddenly, as they were shooting scenes of our tanks, some "blurs" showed up on screen, THEN the camera was knocked to the ground! Remember?

Those "blurs" were SPENT CARTRIDGES being ejected from Iraqi AKs firing at the Americans just to the left of them (obviously not wishing to be caught on-screen by the world, they knocked the camera down...Iraq was claiming that the tank fire was "unprovoked", and here we have CLEAR evidence that there WAS "provocation"). Any ex-soldier would have seen it for what it was.

Can y'all gimme a "DUH"?

[mf_dolphin]

If you don't think that Saddam possessed WMD then you'd better take your arguement to the UN. They not only believed it they had it documented and Saddam admitted it. The only thing in question is where did it go. We have uncovered weapon systems that were in clear violation of the UN mandates including systems designed to deliver chemical and biological weapons. Wake up and smell the roses. Because of the UN's unwillingness to force the issue and our own prior administration's ineptness and inactivity, Saddam had plenty of time (12 years!) to hide anything he wanted. Where is the outrage over the thousands of people being found in mass graves where they were machine gunned to death? Isolationism was one of the contributing factors to Hitler's rise to power. I guess we should have just let Saddam continue to murder his own people, invade other countries and finance and train terrorists.

Our President enforced the UN resolutions that followed the Kuwait war and I am proud that he had the guts to do it! It was in the best interests of the US as is the rebuilding of a free Iraq!

[Guest]

And no I'm not a republican either.

Congrats Ticka.. You have taken the first step to recovery.. Admiting the problem lol j/k

LOL Chad - do you think there is hope for me......

[chadtm80]

One step at a a time ticka.. One step at a time.. LOL

[coriolis]

When Gore completes his purchase of Newsworld International we can call it Al-Goriqua.

[ameriwx2003]

Where to start lol... Ok.... here goes.. When Bush made the choice to invade Iraq I wondered if at the time it was the logical next step in the war on terror. It was a step thaT I felt sooner or later had to be taken though. so the choice to invade I supported and still do. In fact , pre 9/11 I was wondering why the hell we let this guy hang around.. besides the atrocities Jara has pointed out. Saddam violated the UN resolutions imposed on him after he invaded Kuwait and was pushed out( not before plundering and looting that country). his multiple violations of the resolutions was itself ample reason to finish Saddam off. Bush made a choice of a preemptive strike against Iraq and he had ample reason too... the choice to invade Iraq could be debated for years and probably will be. If in 1936 France and Britain had done something about the German re-occupation of the Rhineland which was a direct violation of the Treaty of Versailles I am sure there would be pacifists saying the allies where warmongers for attacking the poor Germans for wanting to get back their territory:):).. As for the attack on the Hotel.. that was a mistake and the U.S. admitted as much.. I mean it was war and mistakes much worse then that have happened in the Fog of war. As for the civilian casualties; thats a part of war, always has been and always will be.. The U.S. takes great pain to minimize civilian casualties( sometimes I feel at the risk of putting our troops in extra danger) and the rate of civilian casualties is a drop in the bucket compared to the Second World War when tens of thousands of civilians lost their life when the allies firebombed axis cities ..

[mf_dolphin]

Well said Mike!

[chadtm80]

Where to start lol... Ok.... here goes.. When Bush made the choice to invade Iraq I wondered if at the time it was the logical next step in the war on terror. It was a step thaT I felt sooner or later had to be taken though. so the choice to invade I supported and still do. In fact , pre 9/11 I was wondering why the hell we let this guy hang around.. besides the atrocities Jara has pointed out. Saddam violated the UN resolutions imposed on him after he invaded Kuwait and was pushed out( not before plundering and looting that country). his multiple violations of the resolutions was itself ample reason to finish Saddam off. Bush made a choice of a preemptive strike against Iraq and he had ample reason too... the choice to invade Iraq could be debated for years and probably will be. If in 1936 France and Britain had done something about the German re-occupation of the Rhineland which was a direct violation of the Treaty of Versailles I am sure there would be pacifists saying the allies where warmongers for attacking the poor Germans for wanting to get back their territory:).. As for the attack on the Hotel.. that was a mistake and the U.S. admitted as much.. I mean it was war and mistakes much worse then that have happened in the Fog of war. As for the civilian casualties; thats a part of war, always has been and always will be.. The U.S. takes great pain to minimize civilian casualties( sometimes I feel at the risk of putting our troops in extra danger) and the rate of civilian casualties is a drop in the bucket compared to the Second World War when tens of thousands of civilians lost their life when the allies firebombed axis cities ..

Exactly

[opera ghost]

Operaghost.. One question for you.. If we lived in a Nation like that, would you not want some one to come save you? All I can say for the iraquis is at least Bush is running things and not you

back and rebuild with NO benifit to the US at all.

You can HONESTLY say there is NO benifit???????

You're entitled to your own opinions. I'm not a bush fan- you are. All's fair in religion and politics. But do you really think it's best to turn off opinions you don't want to hear just because they dont' agree with yours? Seems a bit narrow minded- especially from a moderator.

Oh and Yeah. I can honestly say that I feel there is no benifit to the American people. *shrugs* You believe differently. That's cool. I didn't set out to change your mind- just to express my opinion

[mf_dolphin]

OG I don't see where anyone is turning off anyone's opinions. You have every right to post your opinions and those of us who disagree have the same rights.