Opperation Desert Storm

[Y2A]

Do you think that the first gulf war was a justified attack against Hussien???

[Intifada]

what did the attack actually do for the iraqi people? at least 150000 people were massacred using depleted uranium, napalm, cluster bombs, air-fuel bombs, cruise missiles and other "smart bombs".

the war was about oil.

after the first gulf war at least half a million more iraqis were killed because of sanctions.

today the ongoing crimes against iraq goes on.

[SittingBull47]

I believe it was a more justifiable war because Iraq was trying to take Kuwait. Imperialism should be deterred in all it's forms, so I think we did a good job in that one. (If you don't look at all the other fuck-ups we did while we occupied the area).

[Y2A]

As for myself while I do agree that the war was justified I also believe that we should have oust Saddam at that time and not have waited until now. This would have prevented the Sactions from hurting the Iraqi people, but unforutunately we can not go back in time.

[Y2A]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 03:38 PM
after the first gulf war at least half a million more iraqis were killed because of sanctions.
What is your point IHB? If the American forces would have taken the battle to Bagdad you would denounce it as imperialism despite the fact that it would have prevented the sanctions that ended up hurting the Iraqi people.

Edit: I have to go, keep up the discussion.

[Intifada]

my point being, that sanctions ended up doing nothing for the people of iraq, but killing thousands upon thousands of innocent people.


For [over] a decade an inhuman campaign of sanctions — the most complete ever in recorded history — has destroyed Iraq as a modern state, decimated its people, ruined its agriculture, educational and health care systems, as well as its entire infrastructure.

All this has been done by the United States and United Kingdom, misusing United Nations resolutions against innocent civilians, leaving the tyrant Saddam Hussein more or less untouched.

— Edward W. Said


If the American forces would have taken the battle to Bagdad you would denounce it as imperialism

the war, right from the beginning was about oil and imperialism. anyway what is the difference between imperialism and sanctions. innocent people would end up being oppressed and killed either way.

the only reason the americans didnt invade iraq then was because they felt that all they had to do was bomb it into a pre-industrial condition and then grind them into submission with endless sanctions.


They know we own their country. We own their airspace... We dictate the way they live and talk. And that’s what’s great about America right now. It’s a good thing, especially when there’s a lot of oil out there we need.

— U.S. Brig. General William Looney
Washington Post, August 30, 1999

[redstar2000]

Do you think that the first gulf war was a justified attack against Hussien???

No.

:redstar2000:

The Redstar2000 Papers (http://www.redstar2000papers.vze.com)
A site about communist ideas

[John Galt]

Yes

[Vinny Rafarino]

Do you think that the first gulf war was a justified attack against Hussien???


Silly question don't you think?




what did the attack actually do for the iraqi people? at least 150000 people were massacred using depleted uranium, napalm, cluster bombs, air-fuel bombs, cruise missiles and other "smart bombs".



Yes...share that ultra-left nonsense some more....Don't forget to mention that plug for Greenpeace, those absurd "Animal Liberation Front" geeks, PETA and some other patchouli soaked "save the rainforests" rag.

It's okay to display publically that the "effort" to "aid Kuwait" was absolute bullshit, however let's keep the liberal nonsense with those that still think Birkenstock's are wicked.

Let's be real here, it does not take a scientist to gather enough information that was publically known about "desert storm" to see what it truly was about but dropping nosense about D.U. after reading an article in the pathetically sad "guardian" is way over the top.



I believe it was a more justifiable war because Iraq was trying to take Kuwait. Imperialism should be deterred in all it's forms, so I think we did a good job in that one. (If you don't look at all the other fuck-ups we did while we occupied the area).

Now I have a splendid idea...Let's stop Iraq's imperialism so we can colonise the area ourselves....This comment was not thought through.


As for myself while I do agree that the war was justified I also believe that we should have oust Saddam at that time and not have waited until now. This would have prevented the Sactions from hurting the Iraqi people, but unforutunately we can not go back in time

Any other tired assed right wing rhetoric you want to use here kid? Let's see, we have Hussein's "ouster"....we have that pseudo "sensitivity" about how much your dick hurts over the "poor Iraqis" being deeply troubled by our "unfortunate use of sanctions"....Gee whiz sonny, throw in some bollocks about "regime change", "possible Al-Queada ties" and triple dog secret "weapons of mass distruction" that are hidden in the sand dunes and you could easily apply for a gig at Fox News.



my point being, that sanctions ended up doing nothing for the people of iraq, but killing thousands upon thousands of innocent people.


On the contrary, the sanctions did plenty for the Iraqi people....they did exactly what they were designed to do. Soften up a terget until it's easy to crush and discard.

[elijahcraig]

Do you think that the first gulf war was a justified attack against Hussien???

Justified in what sense? Law, ethically, morally?

[iloveatomickitten]

Justified in what sense? Law, ethically, morally?

Oh come on to start ethical and moral are the same and the law is not a justification.

[Commie Girl]

:huh: Didn't the U$ know about, and perhaps encourage, the invasion of Kuwait?

No, there is no justification for Imperialism, no matter how well disguised :D

[Y2A]

Any other tired assed right wing rhetoric you want to use here kid? Let's see, we have Hussein's "ouster"....we have that pseudo "sensitivity" about how much your dick hurts over the "poor Iraqis" being deeply troubled by our "unfortunate use of sanctions"....Gee whiz sonny, throw in some bollocks about "regime change", "possible Al-Queada ties" and triple dog secret "weapons of mass distruction" that are hidden in the sand dunes and you could easily apply for a gig at Fox News.

I never said that Iraq had ties to Al-Queda or WMD's nice try kid, but not good enough. You didn't even make any good points. Typical of a rich suburban self-proclaimed "communist" to just attack but fail to provide any real solutions.

[LuZhiming]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2004, 01:08 AM
:huh: Didn't the U$ know about, and perhaps encourage, the invasion of Kuwait?
Yes, they in fact did. They lured him into the war. Kuwait was a part of the mission too. They purposely extended their oil holdings to Iraqi territory, and sold extremely cheap oil which was driving oil prices down for Iraq. I don't like to say this, but Saddam's invasion was the justified one. I also think the U.S. was plotting this all along. I think the outcome of the Iran/Iraq War was supposed to lead to this. The U.S. after all did in fact give a green light to Saddam to invade Iran, and give weapons to both sides to increase casualties.


i have a question for you intellectual midgets. if the war was for oil why didn't we stay in Kuwait occupy their fields and take the oil? why didn't we take Iraq then? why have oil prices stayed so high? may i suggest something for you red retards? install a glass belly button as soon as possible because your heads are so far up your asses you'll need it to see

What the U.S. did was ensure the implementation of the U.N. sanctions as well as bomb Iraq. This came down hard on the Iraqi population, and made them rely on Saddam Hussein. Now that Saddam Hussein is gone too, there is utter anarchy. The U.S. probably thought such a devastated population wouldn't put up much of a fight, but that seems to be the opposite of the case.

[Vinny Rafarino]

I never said that Iraq had ties to Al-Queda or WMD's nice try kid, but not good enough

:lol: perhaps you should read my post again sonny.



You didn't even make any good points


Was it really that? Or was it simply that the points I posted made yours seem more like they really were? I think we both know the answer to this one.



Typical of a rich suburban self-proclaimed "communist" to just attack but fail to provide any real solutions

And here comes some more tired right wing rhetoric....Once someone removes the cute litlle lacy veil to show the real face, you shout and scream about how that person is in actuality a "rich suberbanite". Trust me son, if I were rich, I would not bother with this shit. I would be too busy buying your parents.

[Liberty Lover]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2004, 03:38 PM
what did the attack actually do for the iraqi people?
It was not intended to do anything for them. The operations primary objective was the expulsion of Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

[Intifada]

The operations primary objective was the expulsion of Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

no the primary objective was oil and always has been when it comes to iraq.

[__ca va?]

Everybody knows that the war was only an imperialist one under the cloak of justice. It was only fought for oil. Where was justice when the US sold weapons to both Iraq and Iran? Was that ethical? :huh:

[Liberty Lover]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2004, 05:22 PM

The operations primary objective was the expulsion of Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

no the primary objective was oil and always has been when it comes to iraq.
Then perhaps you would care to explain why exactly Iraq's oil fields were not seized by the military.

[Intifada]

they didnt have to seize them.

all they had to do was send a fierce message to saddam. is it just a coincidence that saddam decided to prohibit U$ oil companies from investing in or buying iraqi oil before the start of the war?

[Dirty Commie]

The US intevention in the situation was just as bad as Saddams attack on Kuwait. We went into Desert shield to defend Saudi Arabia, and when Kuwait was overtaken, we went in there to re-install the dictator, who by sheer coincidence, sold america oil at prices below that of OPEC.

And lately, I heard that Iraq had nver intended to attack Saudi Arabia, and that the intelligence reports give to prez. Bush about Iraqi tank buildups near the border. were total lies

[Capitalist Imperial]

I really hate it when you ignorant commie pukes blame "U.S. Sanctions" on the death and suffering of the Iraqi people post-GW1. I will explain this relatively simle concept for the 100th time for you red-stupids:

The US/UN allowed for a myriad of provisions in the form of food/supplies/medical for the iraqi people so that they would not suffer from the trade sanctions. However, saddam circumvented and manipulated these for his own benefit, diverting them for his and his regime's personal use, and denying his citizens the provisions that the US/UN had set aside for the citizenry.

Thus, as is poar for the course in Iraq, the oonly party responsible for the suffering of the Iraqi people is Saddam Hussein, not the USA.

Stupid commie pukes, don't you guys understand the party is ovver? There will be no uprising. Nobody wants it. People like democracy, that is what everyone is striving for and that is what the world is becoming.

We won, you lost.

Get over it.

USA, USA, USA, USA, USA

[Intifada]

the oonly party responsible for the suffering of the Iraqi people is Saddam Hussein, not the USA.



what utter bullshit! :rolleyes:

before the war, the united $tates, with british compliance, was blocking $5billion worth of humanitarian supplies from the people of iraq. these were shipments already approved by the UN office of iraq, which is authorised by the security council. they included life-saving drugs, painkillers, vaccines, cancer diagnostic equipment.

[LuZhiming]

Originally posted by Capitalist [email protected] 5 2004, 02:18 AM
I really hate it when you ignorant commie pukes blame "U.S. Sanctions" on the death and suffering of the Iraqi people post-GW1. I will explain this relatively simle concept for the 100th time for you red-stupids:

The US/UN allowed for a myriad of provisions in the form of food/supplies/medical for the iraqi people so that they would not suffer from the trade sanctions. However, saddam circumvented and manipulated these for his own benefit, diverting them for his and his regime's personal use, and denying his citizens the provisions that the US/UN had set aside for the citizenry.

Thus, as is poar for the course in Iraq, the oonly party responsible for the suffering of the Iraqi people is Saddam Hussein, not the USA.

Stupid commie pukes, don't you guys understand the party is ovver? There will be no uprising. Nobody wants it. People like democracy, that is what everyone is striving for and that is what the world is becoming.

We won, you lost.

Get over it.

USA, USA, USA, USA, USA
This very point itself is ridicolous, Saddam was building palaces in the 80's as well. I will put aside that most research suggest many of Saddam's luxuries were made from smuggling profits and simply point out some words from uncontroversial sources on the Iraqi sanctions. One report of the sanctions, from the U.N., which is specifically about how the sanctions have affected births and nothing else, estimates that 500,000 children lost their lives. Actually other studies say 1.7 million children have died, though that may be for more than just the affects on births. Now for just that segment, that is quite a lot of deaths. And it's obvious how the sanctions hurt Iraq, it was turned from perhaps the country with the best living standard in the Persian Gulf to the worst, and also a Fourth World country. Two U.N. officials resigned from their posts in protest of what these sanctions were doing to the country. The World Health Organization reported in 1996 a six-fold increase in infant morality since the implementation of the sanctions! That same year, the UNICEF reported that "4,500 children under the age of 5 are dying each month from hunger and disease... The situation is disastrous for children. Many are living on the margin of survival." That organization and the World Food Program reported that "One out of every 4 Iraqi infants is malnourished... Chronic malnutrition among children under five has reached 27.5 per cent. After a child reaches two or three years of age, chronic malnutrition is difficult to reverse and damage on the child’s development is likely to be permanent."


I would really like you to explain the history of the great call of Democracy from the U.S. in terms of its relations with the following figures:

Mohammad Mossadegh
Jacobo Arbenz Guzman
João Goulart
Juan Bosche
Salvador Allende
Daniel Ortega
Hugo Chavez