Analysis: More signs that the US and Iran will soon be at war. - Page 5 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #41 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-10-2006, 05:24 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Gregs300CD's Avatar
 
Date registered: May 2005
Vehicle: 1982 300CD
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 5,044
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
I think I misread that. Sorry, I thought you were discounting American lives rather than valuing Iraqis.

And no, I didn't mean the administration should get a pass on killing Iraqis either. Just that if somebody needs to die for Iraqi freedom, it should be Iraqis.

I think we're on the same side of this here.

Last edited by Gregs300CD; 05-10-2006 at 05:30 PM.
Gregs300CD is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #42 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-10-2006, 05:45 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar
To me, the suggestion that the administration should be held accountable for American lives lost, but not those of Iraqis is despicable. The implication is that non-Americans are sub-human, so it's OK to exterminate them as long as we do so without endangering Americans.
All life is precious. It's the reason going into war should be a last resort, with a solid moral foundation that justifies the loss of life. This war has been absent that from day one. There simply has never been a justifiable moral reason for murdering Iraqi children in their beds. There has never been one good reason for an American soldier to give his life. The war has been an obvious fraud to millions of people since it's beginning. The conservatives in this country have devalued the Iraqis to subhuman status since the day this war began, no better than SS guards in a concentration camp loading Jews iout of the trains. These people were murdered, and our soldiers were murdered, and they continue to be murdered.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #43 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-10-2006, 10:24 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
elau's Avatar
 
Date registered: Oct 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,392
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvining
If the lid ever comes off this stinking pile of dogshit a lot of people are going to go to jail.
KV,
Have to disagree with you on this one. I don't ever want to see them going to jail. I want to send them to Iraq or Afghan, have them finish what they started. Until then, there is no justice.

'95 R129
'04 G35.5 BS
'10 X204
elau is offline  
post #44 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-11-2006, 01:46 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Tahloube's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2005
Vehicle: 1990 500 SEL, 2003 Range Rover HSE
Location: Abu Dhabi, UAE
Posts: 2,073
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvining
All life is precious. It's the reason going into war should be a last resort, with a solid moral foundation that justifies the loss of life. This war has been absent that from day one. There simply has never been a justifiable moral reason for murdering Iraqi children in their beds. There has never been one good reason for an American soldier to give his life. The war has been an obvious fraud to millions of people since it's beginning. The conservatives in this country have devalued the Iraqis to subhuman status since the day this war began, no better than SS guards in a concentration camp loading Jews iout of the trains. These people were murdered, and our soldiers were murdered, and they continue to be murdered.

This should be written in gold.
Tahloube is offline  
post #45 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-11-2006, 05:46 AM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Apr 2006
Vehicle: 1985 500SEC
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think I better have all my vitals checked, I actually find myself in agreement with kvining when it comes to Iran. The nuclear option will never happen, too much risk of contamination. I have travelled all over Iran and lived there before, during and for almost three years after the revolution for a total of ten years. When the Iraqi's dropped bombs at night, we had a complete blackout and a 10 pm martial law curfew. Meaning anything that moved after that hour would be shot at. I remember one New Year where the tracers from anti aircraft guns were our fire works. Visitors to out Tehran house would have to stay the night, and I had many all night discussions with three friends who worked for the German shortwave service, the BBC and Agence France Press respectively. These guys had been through a multitude of uprisings, revolutions and wars all over the World, and really opened my eyes to political realism. Jimmy Carter, no doubt a very nice and moral man, was a total disaster when it came to U.S. foreign policy and especially when it came to Iran. By withdrawing support from Iran he toppled the first domino of many. With any other U.S. president it is doubtful Iran would have happened the way it did, Afghanistan may have never happened, or at least different from the way it did. I think the Russians were already building the road and tunnels through the mountains as a free gift to Afghanistan. The same road they used later to invade! Iraq would have been unlikely to start a war with Iran, and therefore later would never have invaded Kuwait. The Iranian revolution was for a large part one, where its leaders followed the revolution. When Khomeini arrived it was all done. The idea of pan Islamism is spread by Irans far reaching tentacles, whith massive amounts of money being funneled into Iraq, Chechnia, Indonesia, the Phillipines, the Sudan, Algeria and any Country with a Muslim population. Evey time the price of oil goes up must bring a laugh to the present Iranian Kleptocracy. Of course being an Islamic Country alcohol is strictly forbidden, but drugs like opium and heroin are cheap. I have been told that a balloon of heroin is cheaper than a can of soda. Anything to keep a largely teenage population docile. Ahmadinejad was appointed, because the fundamentalist hardliners saw their powerbase starting to slip away. Present day Iran is the most dangerous Country in the region and maybe the World. Most of the Arab Countries are afraid of Iran. Why else would the Saudis and Kuwaiti's have given Saddam Hussein billions every year to continue the war with Iran. Well, the Kuwaiti's got Saddam's thank you later on, when he invaded them. BTW, the forerunner of al Qaeda and all the other smaller groups was the Islamic Brothergood in Egypt. Founded with an initial payment of 5,000 pound from BP and later financed with BP and U.S. money. The idea was that a non nationalistic Islamic movement would create a bulwark against Communism. Well, beware of what you wish for. They should have consulted with Australia, in how not to build a boomerang. Teutone (aka Horst K)

Last edited by teutone.; 05-11-2006 at 06:59 AM.
teutone. is offline  
post #46 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-11-2006, 06:47 AM
RBs
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Apr 2006
Vehicle: 2001 S430
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 62
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You didn't mention that Saddam was also a U.S. bought and paid for guy. He even ASKED us through the U.S. Ambassador (April Gless? can't remember) if it was OK to invade Kuwait. She basically said that "the United States has no position on the matter. Diplo speak for: Sure! So he did, then he's shocked at the reaction. Granted, it was ALL her, but the incompetent State type was probably MOST responsible for much of this MESS.

Saddam BADLY wanted to be "Our man in Baghdad" even after all of this. He still likes Reagan - recently praised him for " giving him weapons and support".

Lesson? Don't try and change everything without some serious thought, it can have unintended consequences...
RBs is offline  
post #47 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-11-2006, 06:59 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBs
You didn't mention that Saddam was also a U.S. bought and paid for guy. He even ASKED us through the U.S. Ambassador (April Gless? can't remember) if it was OK to invade Kuwait. She basically said that "the United States has no position on the matter. Diplo speak for: Sure! So he did, then he's shocked at the reaction. Granted, it was ALL her, but the incompetent State type was probably MOST responsible for much of this MESS.

Saddam BADLY wanted to be "Our man in Baghdad" even after all of this. He still likes Reagan - recently praised him for " giving him weapons and support".

Lesson? Don't try and change everything without some serious thought, it can have unintended consequences...
Exactly which weapons did Reagan give Saddam? Inquiring minds want to know.

Saddam engineered his own coup and later, liquidation of parliamentary liquidation. We provided some ag assist to Saddam and some tactical remote sensing intel during his bloody-ass war with Iran. We bought his oil. The USSR was his military and intel source and also his source for nukular technology, until Israel put an end to that. In contrast to the Shah, Saddam was always his own man, not ours. Saddam played the USSR against the USA to his own ends.
Botnst is offline  
post #48 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-11-2006, 07:04 AM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Apr 2006
Vehicle: 1985 500SEC
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RBs
You didn't mention that Saddam was also a U.S. bought and paid for guy. He even ASKED us through the U.S. Ambassador (April Gless? can't remember) if it was OK to invade Kuwait. She basically said that "the United States has no position on the matter. Diplo speak for: Sure! So he did, then he's shocked at the reaction. Granted, it was ALL her, but the incompetent State type was probably MOST responsible for much of this MESS.

Saddam BADLY wanted to be "Our man in Baghdad" even after all of this. He still likes Reagan - recently praised him for " giving him weapons and support".

Lesson? Don't try and change everything without some serious thought, it can have unintended consequences...
It's been said before: In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
teutone. is offline  
post #49 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-11-2006, 09:08 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Saddam was the leader of a powerful movement, one that attracted a lot of support. Our biggest mistake was in portraying him as some sort of hated dictator, where the cheering populace would welcome us as he was carted off to jail. The Bush Propaganda Machine did a great job of convincing the American people that Saddam's movement and Al-Queda's idealogy were one and the same, when nothing was more further from the truth. Saddam was popular among Sunni Arabs, and secular Shiite, Kurdish and especially Christian leftists, and this constitutes a majority in the madness that is called Iraqi society. These people were pursuing an Arab nation and a socialist utopia, and like many movements of that type came under the sway of a personality cult.

America, on the other hand, was attacked by the elements that in Iraqi society were the ones Saddam was at war with - the fundamentalists who saw Saddam as an ultimate enemy. These are obvious facts. Why then, oh Bush supporters, did Bush attack the side that was opposed to those who attacked us? Look at the results: The ruling party emerging in Iraq is closely allied with Iran. The furture president of Iraq is obviously Muqtar Sadr, a man who hates democracy with a passion, rails against it in his speeches, and commands a militia that will easily destroy the "Iraqi" army the day we walk out. In the end, Iraq will be ruled by a Muslim fundamentalist dictator instead of a socialist dictator. The oil supplies of both Iraq and Iran will be controlled by religious crazies with atom bombs. Brilliant.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #50 of 58 (permalink) Old 05-11-2006, 12:39 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kvining
Saddam was the leader of a powerful movement, one that attracted a lot of support. Our biggest mistake was in portraying him as some sort of hated dictator, where the cheering populace would welcome us as he was carted off to jail. The Bush Propaganda Machine did a great job of convincing the American people that Saddam's movement and Al-Queda's idealogy were one and the same, when nothing was more further from the truth. Saddam was popular among Sunni Arabs, and secular Shiite, Kurdish and especially Christian leftists, and this constitutes a majority in the madness that is called Iraqi society. These people were pursuing an Arab nation and a socialist utopia, and like many movements of that type came under the sway of a personality cult.

America, on the other hand, was attacked by the elements that in Iraqi society were the ones Saddam was at war with - the fundamentalists who saw Saddam as an ultimate enemy. These are obvious facts. Why then, oh Bush supporters, did Bush attack the side that was opposed to those who attacked us? Look at the results: The ruling party emerging in Iraq is closely allied with Iran. The furture president of Iraq is obviously Muqtar Sadr, a man who hates democracy with a passion, rails against it in his speeches, and commands a militia that will easily destroy the "Iraqi" army the day we walk out. In the end, Iraq will be ruled by a Muslim fundamentalist dictator instead of a socialist dictator. The oil supplies of both Iraq and Iran will be controlled by religious crazies with atom bombs. Brilliant.
Given that Saddam was a murderous dictator, how would you portray him other than as a murderous dictator?
Botnst is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome