Well, kingdavid, since you asked...

Originally Posted by kingdavid... And that quoting thing you and Lorda have going there takes me back to some very interesting times I had a while back with you guys regarding Dubya (that's a name I picked up from one of Pony's threads).
We should look for another controversy and have another ball!! (After Bush, girl guitarists and the Beatles, I can't quite come up with something vroomy!!, if you know what I mean). I must however hasten to add that I don't start a thread just to argue, but if we end up with something engaging, I DON'T MIND!! :D

I would have posted this earlier, but it took me a while to track this column to the source. It appeared in the Calgary Sun last Sunday, but the author, Ann Coulter is not on staff. Check it out - I find it intensely interesting that the subject matter did not gain wider coverage.

As kingdavid said, "... I must however hasten to add that I don't start a thread just to argue, but if we end up with something engaging, I DON'T MIND!!... ". So lets discuss this, while keeping the flamethrowers tucked away. I think some very valid points have been made in the column, and they need to be examined.

Why can't we just all get along :( any why can't the US keep it's self out of everybody elses business.

I don't doubt one bit that it was known that something was about to happen and that preventative steps weren't taken, and that really bothers me.

Wow...Uhh, Lord, she's got a pretty solid argument there...

I wrote a lot of text in reply to this,then this board tells me I'm not logged in!@#$%^&*&** :mad: :mad:
So I'll have to write all that again.
That will have to be tomorrow,coz now I gotta go.
By the way,I bought a PC in January(a clone,but works just fine for me) and I might be getting some affordable internet into my crib(it's literally a crib,coz it's just one room).If I do,boy,will I be all over this board or what? :)

Originally Posted by: PRSplayaWhy can't we just all get along :( any why can't the US keep it's self out of everybody elses business.

I agree PRSplaya, Every time there is people starving to death we always end
up spending millions if not billions of dollars trying to keep just about every frickin country in the world from trouble, while here in our own country we
have poverty and hungary people, Granted the poverty percent is low here
compared to most countries but the government ought to make sure every
person here is taken care of first, millions of people here don't even have
medical insurance so if you dont have the money to buy your needed
prescription your doomed from the word go. Every time there is a flood,
earthquake, hurricane, or some type of catastrophic act of nature the
good ole US of A is right there to dole out physical help and financial help
to anyone that needs it every time. Did you see just even one country
offer us physical or financial help after the WTC catastrophy, which besides
losing about 3,500 lives in the blink of an eye, and trillions of dollars in cost
was as bad or worse than most we run to help out of their trouble.
I think I read the other day were spending two billion dollars a month over
in Iraq, figure that up for as long as we have been there so far, Screw Iraq
and the rest of them that don't have balls enough to stand up to a leader
that is suppose to be helping his people instead of murdering them and
treating them inhumanly, if they tried that here there would be a revolution
like you've never seen before in the history of time. We need to keep our people, and our money right here where they belong, and keep our fuc**n
noses out of other countries troubles and let them deal with their own
frickin problems. I gotta get off here before I end up writing a ten page
reply, but believe me I could fill up the space....................Mark ;)

you basically took all the words right out of my mouth!!!!!

I should have posted this much earlier,but it kinda went into the background and I almost forgot about it.
But after hearing about Abu Ghraib(boy,don't we anti-war heads know how to spread the bad **** about this war!),it's come to the foreground.
First I answer the article Lorda refers to.
Although I'm a Kenya living some 3000 miles from the US,I'd say I'm a "democrat."I lean towards them.So I get defensive when they're to blame for something,as this article illustrates.
Be that as it may,what is being exposed here is a failure by the clinton adminstration to deal with the real clear and present danger.That,however,has nothing to do with the reason the Bush adminstration gave to the world for waging war with Iraq.
That's my take on it.And although the people in america questioning Bush's actions may have played a part in allowing 9/11 to take place,it doesn't change anything with regard to the credibility of Bush's war with Iraq.
Now,about Abu Ghraib,I wonder what you guys feel about it.
Anyone?....

I think that there are some greedy peolpe here... :mad:
Is any one in here in the military or part of a military family??
About the Abu...**** happens...They were soilders that didnt have the proper training on keeping captives or what not...I would much rather be humiliated then be threatened to be burned alive (Im talking about the 3 Japanese people that were threatened to be burned alive if Japan didnt pull back)
Plus Sadam has previously done much worse tihngs than take pictures of people doin humiliating things yet nothing big was said about it.
I dont think what happened there was right and that all people involved in the activities should be court marshalled and maybe some prison time.

I thought those soldiers (I don't know how many but according to Amnesty this has been a tactic from USA/UK since the beginning of the war, to torture captured Iraqie soldiers) could show better moral than Saddams troops, but of course, there are allways a small group of idiots who ruin the big mass' reputation, just take Palestinian terrorists and the Israelian gouvernment. USA can throw away all kind of hope to get buddies with the Iraqian people for some decades now, and that's sad. I was totally against an American/Brittish invasion of Iraq. It's up to the UN to take such descisions. But I can't say I have ANY kind of trust to the UN either. Right now, in Sudan, over a million people are starving and fleeing a new African geniside and UN does nothing!!

Human nature has been displayed and I don't discredit the US for it. It's war, people get tortured. Happens everywhere and by everyone and it's not a big deal in my opinion.

Everything's lies. The release of those pictures had probably been planned for months before the US government (or whomever) finally publicized them, for what purpose I'm sure we'll find out in due time.

I say released by the US government to emphasize the point that we, as the general population, truly have no idea what's behind anything going on in the world. (Why would the US government bring this upon themselves, blah blah. I don't know, we'll find out in due time and learn to read.)

The 9/11 committee was 'supposed' to address the question of why the Bush administration didn't have better knowlege of the plans being made for the attacks. Now that it's becoming apparent that the intelligence community was crippled by policies laid down by the Clinton administration, the committee no longer serves to embarrass Bush, and will soon fade from media attention. i.e. How long has it been since the last headlines about their work?

As for Abu Gharib: The difference between the Americans now running that horrific dungeon, and the Saddamites who built it, is this: the Americans are being held accountable, and there will be public investigations, and punishment of those who deserve it. I sense that Secretary Rumsfield is genuinely shocked by events that occured under his watch. He will certainly do what he can to clear it up. And I think he may tender his resignation.

I picture the former keepers of this Hell-hole chuckling at the abuses that are being shown, and roaring with laughter to see the way that America is being pilloried for actions that pale in comparison with their own.

All societies have bad people in them. The worth of a society is shown by how those people are dealt with.

Inisfail....that is NOT a tactic to torture and humiliate people...You are only supposed to keep them captive feed them and thats all..If they attack, you are to subdue them and place them in cuffs or what not..You arent supposed to beat them.
Like basics said...torture and whole lot of other worse stuff happen all the time in the world...I dont see why the media is making such a big deal about it..If they were smart then they would have kept it to themselves..Its as if there trying to screw over the USA..
Did you guys hear about that American contractor that was decapitated on video by some of the Iraqis, Afer that they help up his severed head in front of the camera...Thats really sick.

If i were president, Iraq would have been a big crater by now (lots and lots of bombs) but that is exactly why im not and never will be president...lol

Weeeeeell.. It's a tactic if you want people to talk. Talk and confess, confess whatever you want, believe it or not.. I mean, I would rather confess that I was Jimi Hendrix than have acid all over me.

Anyway, I don't support torture, if that's what you mean!! I'm a kind guy who use to solve fights by buying the dangerous guy some beers.

Yeah, media should take a very close look at this, cause such acts can't be unseen. This shows that these people (those soldiers who posed and the other army idiots who are on the photos) have no more respect of human lifes than nazis who guarded Auswitch, Tre Blinka etc. They don't have compassion of others, they don't understand that behind the two eyes there are a human. Of course, what they did may have several reasons: Stress, aggression of being snipered all the time, mad because you've seen an army brother's head hold up in the air by Iraqie militia. But does that justify humiliate someone else? No.

Several times, especielly when I see the pictures on the new, I would like to blow USA away with some nukes. But when I think so I say to myself: "Just because of some idiots you can't hate everyone from the same country."

Isn't that right? The Iraqie people aren't responsible for what happened with the american soldiers, nor where they responsible that Saddam ruled the country (Some says it was because of France, UK and USA). People are kinda the same all over the world when you get to know them..

I just don't understand this bull****.

An Iraqi mob killed our people, dragged their multilated bodies through the streets, and hung them from a bridge (the American contractors that were there trying to rebuild their country), and nobody says a thing. No outrage. Nada. Then a few pictures of some Iraqis supposedly being tortured comes out, and I'm supposed to feel bad? Sorry, but I don't. I'm sure that whatever was done to them was nowhere near as bad as what they would and have done to our people when they capture(d) them . . . or as bad as the stuff that Saddam did in that prison.

I agree Christoph, they did some horrible things to those 4 contractors..Lots of more hoibblie and atrocious things happen all around the world yet everyone else has the need to make a big deal out oif whar america does...Big ****in deal yheir just pictures of naked iraqis getting humilitated and tortured and there "torture" as the media calls isnt as bad as awhat sadam would have done to them. Like in Africa...There are those tribes that constantly fight and burn each other alive..does that get any coverage??No but a couple of ****in idiots take pictures of humiliated iraqis and its like its the end of the world..

Originally Posted by: guitarmanxxxx

I agree PRSplaya, Every time there is people starving to death we always end
up spending millions if not billions of dollars trying to keep just about every frickin country in the world from trouble,
Did you see just even one country
offer us physical or financial help after the WTC catastrophy

i did! England for one, sent over fire service with special equipment, other european countries also moved in to help bringing in speciaist equipment designed for use in earthquakes etc. the reason you didnt get financial help is because the USA does not need it in any shape or form. however yes, when 9/11 happened countries within Europe did come to the aid of USA.
And believe me USA does not help every country in the world, far from it. Aid agencies from america may help but the government only intervenes when there is a huge problem.

As to the reason as to the pictures were such a "big Deal" is because american troops had gone into Iraq to remove a torturing ba*tard of a dictator. unfortunatly when the pictures came out of the american abuse of iraqis it removed the notion that america was improving the country for the people living there. i know what did happen to the iraqi prisoners is not any where near the same level as what saddam was at, but it still casts a bad light over what the American forces are trying to do over there, which is to bring peace and remove oppression, torture etc.
As to whoever said that the pictures shoud have been kept underwraps they should realise that that would impinge on the freedom of the press to report on the war this would mean that the america government would be censoring what the press released therefore going against what the war in iraq is about i.e. freedom from oppression.

If you're going to be drawing parallels between the things saddams people did to americans as compared to what bush's people are doing to iraqis,then what was the point of this whole war?Saddam was ananimal,and that's why it was necessary to remove him.Because the acts he commited were vile.But for you to feel cheated that people didn't complain about iraqis torturing people but they complain when americans torture people,you're shocking me.So now that the international community didn't much for rwanda in 94,that means we should allow the **** that's going down in Sudan to go on,since,after all,we didn't intervene in rwanda,why intervene here?
There's a question of standards here,which is why while in america a cop arresting you will read you your rights(I'm assuming the movies depict what happens on the ground),in kenya a cop will beat the **** out you before bundling you into the patrol car's boot,not the backseat.Reason?Standards.

I also don't suppose torture is allowed for in any rules of engagement governing wars or treties or what have you.

And if american soldiers will be able to commit acts that are not part of their military mandate,what's to make me not think that the "civil" adinstrators won't commit acts that aren't part of their civil mandate.In other words,how can the rest of the world trust that america will do things right in iraq,regarding anything,not just military stuff.

And i thought in america you're innocent until proven guilty,not the other way round,and when you go ahead and torture someone,that mantra isn't in application.

I gotta get back to work now.

I'll pick up from there.

The whole point of the war like Jimi said was to pull the dictator out of power but those idiots who thought it would be "funny" have basically made some people think that this war is about somthing else. Kingdavid..Ignore what I said earlier...I was pissed and drunk and shouldnt have posted anything.
Different presidents might find it best to intervene in somethings and not others while another president might want to intervene in somthnig that the other didnt. So saying why didnt we intervene then but want to intervene now..well we had a different president then and now.
What cops do in the movies isnt always what our cops do in real life..There supposed to read you your rights then cuff you and put you in the car and what not but sometimes you will have a bad cop who might do other things.. who knows
In America, civilians are innocent till proven guitly (its the mainly the jury that decides whether you are guilty or innocent)..If your in the Military, your basically guilty until proven innocent..thats how it works
I dont think you know very much on how our laws work so its best not to make assumptions of what is applicable and what isnt..Do remember there are exceptions to certain things

At the end of the day,let's just say that like Lordatherings said(and these sentiments are being expressed by commentators in our local press),since this is America,people will be held accountable.Heads will roll.I gather that Janice Karpinski woman(she was in charge of the prisons in Iraq) has akready been dismissed.It's such a shame,she evoked feelings of admiration inme when I saw her photo in a US Army fatigue,with the name Karpinski on her right breast.The fact that she's probably descended from immigrants(Karpinski sounds Polish or Eastern European to me),she's a woman,and then she's ranking that highly in the US Army.Then this.Quite a waste.

Anyhow,I think the reason the world reacts as it does to such incidenta regarding Iraq is because it(the world) by and large didn't support the war in the first place,and to add insult to injury,the WMD's,which were a major,major reason for the war,haven't been found,and as you've all heard by now,the threat was exaggerated,blah blah blah.

Back to the topic Lordatherings had in mind when starting this thread,I guess attempts to embarass Bush will at the end of the day hark back to the question of whether the war in Iraq was legitimate to start with,and whether it was worth it.I suppose a tortured Iraq(tortured by Saddam) cannot put their freedom in monetary terms,but hey,American lives have been lost too,it's not like Iraqis are more valuable than Americans.

How do you guys fancy Bush's chances in November,bearing all this in mind?I gather Kerry is not terribly impressive.

Well, my opinion may not be interresting, cause I'm not living in America, but maybe this will maybe catch your attention:

I don't like Bush so therefor I would choose Kerry. But Kerry has supported some bad deciscions from the republicans concerning the Israel-Palestinian conflict. But, somehow (cause the news don't tell as much about Kerry as I would like) he feels like an opposition to Bush, cause it's the other big political party in the US. It's kinda fun though that in the US he's almost on the left side of the political line. In Sweden he would be on the right..

I guess that those photos (I think there came some new recently) will be a big weapon for Kerry in november, not only the pohotos, maybe the whole war.

But as allways the domestic conditions will be the most important. If there will be a boom, I think Bush will be able to sit on the throne for some four new years. But will the financiall conditions become worse for the regular citizen then maybe Kerry will the next president.

Considering Iraq I just wanted to add one thing: If the American president would ask UN for help, which I promiss that he will during the summer, I don't know what the UN-members will say. I don't know either:

Is this a problem that America and it's allied has to solve themself? Or should the UN help, not for the sake of America and their friends, but for the Iraqie people? If the UN desciedes to help, perhaps that will give a signal to the US/UK that they can continue occupate countries and once they get problem UN will help them? Thats not a world I wanna live in..

By the way, why are you so angry at the Iraqie people? You attacked them, right? Should they be happy cause you got rid of Saddam? They were some days after the capturing (not all, cause some of the people, the Baath members and a lot of the shiamuslims, lost power and they are not happy), but since nothing have become better, why should they be happy?

Belive me, many people in Iraq think like this, wheter you want it or not: They got rid of Saddam, and he was evil. He tortured prisoners, he killed civilans and he was very unpredictable. But as far as I've seen, the americans do exactly the same thing.