Iraq destroys missiles

[Larissa]

Iraq destroys missiles - but Bush and Blair don't blink
By Colin Brown, Philip Sherwell in Baghdad and Julian Coman in Washington (Filed: 02/03/2003)

Iraq began decommissioning its arsenal of banned al-Samoud 2 missiles last night as ministers disclosed to The Telegraph that America and Britain are prepared to launch military action immediately after the United Nations Security Council votes on a second resolution, regardless of its outcome.

Senior ministers said that Tony Blair was prepared to override the objections of his backbenchers and launch military action, irrespective of whether Britain, the United States and Spain secured a majority vote for a
second resolution in the UN.

+++Rest of the article:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...requestid=10048 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/03/02/wirq02.xml&sSheet=/portal/2003/03/02/ixportaltop.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=10048)

How is it that Lynn Snowden Picket said?
"I'm full of rage and I want to beat someone up. I want to know what it is to have physical power over men. I want to inspire fear. I want to matter."

[Larissa]

More from Associated Press:
Two people wearing masks depicting U.S. President Bush, left, and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein pose for a photograph in front of a shop for carnival supplies in the western German city of Duesseldorf Friday. Iraq agreed to begin destroying its Al Samoud 2 missiles within 24 hours, Iraqi sources said. Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix, who set the Saturday deadline, called the decision "a very significant piece of real disarmament."

[CheViveToday]

Bush Regime: You guys better let U.N. Inspectors back in or we'll attack.

Iraq: Ok, we let them back in.

Bush Regime: You guys better write up a document accounting for every weapon you own or we'll attack!

Iraq: Ok it's done and it's 50 billion pages long. Here you go.

Bush Regime: Start destroying those Al Samoud missiles or we'll attack!

Iraq: But those aren't even weapons of mass destruction you idiots!

Bush Regime: Do it or die!

Iraq: Okay okay, it's done, they're gone!

Bush Regime: Ummm....excuse us while we think of some other ridiculous request. We have to come up with one that you won't comply to, so we can attack and get the oil!

[Larissa]

I know it's sad and upsetting but I couldn't avoid laughing :biggrin: You have very smart sense of humor, just like the bushy-hitler pic you posted on another thread.

[Pete]

I smiled in the laughing way :) Ack. What was I going to say? This happens too much to be healthy. Oh yea. Isn't a cruise missile more deadly then any of those Al Samoud missiles?

[Cobber]

I can still see the Bush Administration finding something else that is in breach of UN resolution 1441.

Perhaps the next ultimatum will require Saddam to shave his mustache...

[hawarameen]

i am not amused by that in the slightest, you really dont know what your dealing with, there is a growing world oppinion that saddam hussain is a good guy who is being bullied.

i cant deal with this
i wont be posting about this particular war again, it seems that people (not neccesarily this thread) do not want to hear from people who have actually lived in iraq and have actually experienced saddam's regime.

[Pete]

Saddam is an evil bastard. Bush is an evil bastard who is threatening to nuke saddam, the evil bastard, and kill hundreds of thousands of innocence. If America wanted a regime change, would they have not supported the revolutions of 1992? Would they allow Turkey to bomb the Kurds in Northern Iraq? The people of this board have judged between to evils and found america the greatest. I think change is more likely to occur if a power closer in strength to Iraq was to attack. If america attacks they win and it is all over, no chance for a change for the better.

[Angie]

Quote from hawarameen:
i wont be posting about this particular war again, it seems that people (not neccesarily this thread) do not want to hear from people who have actually lived in iraq and have actually experienced saddam's regime.I'm afraid that I'm going to be supporting CrazyPete's post here, Hawarameen - we're all aware of how bad Saddam is, and yes, we're hoping for any crimes against humanity to end. But you need to understand that Bush doesn't care for the Kurds. In this respect, CrazyPete is spot on - the American government (both past and present) have allowed the Turks to bomb the Kurds. It merely suits the Bush administration's purpose right now to pretend they like the Kurds and wish to free them - it makes them look morally better than Saddam.

Only they are not.

Unfortunately, it's going to be a very rough road for the Kurds for a lot longer, because America isn't going to free them out of the goodness of their own heart. They claimed they would, but the same thing was said about Afghanistan, a country which is slipping right back down the drain again as we speak.

The Afghans deserve better. The Kurds deserve better. The Iraqis deserve better. We all deserve better. We're standing up against America because there are other ways of dealing with this situation, and we have to use them instead.

At all costs.

[Beccie]

Hawar,

Don’t stop posting because some people are giving you a hard time. You are entitled to your opinions just like everyone else. You should not be silenced. Some people here lack compassion just ignore them.

[hawarameen]

i am not here to convert anyone onto my way of thinking i am merely trying to make people understand what it is like from my perspective yet many here namely redstar dismiss my perspective (this sounds absurd but i cant think of a better way of describing it) how does redstar or anyone else for that matter know what the iraqi people want, the loss of life is terrible but many would rather die than suffer the loss of dignity, this happens all over the world, hell is no place for anyone to be alive in.

i would love for the iraqi and kurdish people to stand up and revolt against the regime, this is my ultimate dream but what happens when the people cannot revolt are they condemned to a life of evil for generations?

my philosophy is that the liberation of the masses is far far more important than anything else, there are people concearned, with lives and families and a barrel of oil or a piece of paper with an americans portrait on it doesnt even come close.

i do not know what will happen in the future and so neither can anyone else tell me that this or that will or will not happen, i live in hope, hope for the people of iraq and kurdistan.

first and foremost i want the overthrow of an evil dictator then i along with the people of iraq and kurdistan will take what life has to offer.

[Pete]

The second Communist International said that by opposing war a socialist revolution can come about easier. Ofcourse only Russian communists listened, that is why there was only one Red Revolutoin in the 1914-1918 period.

[vodun]

Quote: from CheViveToday on 9:24 pm on Mar. 2, 2003
Bush Regime: You guys better let U.N. Inspectors back in or we'll attack.

Iraq: Ok, we let them back in.

That was exactly reason the inspectors were permitted back in. The threat worked.

Bush Regime: You guys better write up a document accounting for every weapon you own or we'll attack!

Iraq: Ok it's done and it's 50 billion pages long. Here you go.

It was a rehash of old reports and did not account for specific types and amounts of chem/bio agents that Saddam was known to have. It could be 100 billion pages long and still be incomplete or full of shit.

Bush Regime: Start destroying those Al Samoud missiles or we'll attack!

Iraq: But those aren't even weapons of mass destruction you idiots!

The U.S. never claimed they were WMD. The missiles violated U.N. resolutions because of their range, not the nature of the warhead. Do your homework.

Bush Regime: Do it or die!

Iraq: Okay okay, it's done, they're gone!

False. They're not gone. It's a piecemeal delay tactic.

Bush Regime: Ummm....excuse us while we think of some other ridiculous request. We have to come up with one that you won't comply to, so we can attack and get the oil!

If we only wanted the oil, then we would have been buying it from them instead of imposing sanctions, or better yet, we would have taken it from them at the successful termination of the first Gulf War.

[CheViveToday]

Apparently you completely misunderstood my point. I wasn't trying to prove that each thing the U.S. said was wrong, I was simply showing how ridiculous it was that Bush kept coming up with a new thing for Saddam to do.


The U.S. never claimed they were WMD. The missiles violated U.N. resolutions because of their range, not the nature of the warhead. Do your homework.
Take your own advice about the homework. There have been conflicting reports as too how far these missiles are actually capable of travelling, and whether they would violate any U.N. resolution to begin with. Also why did the U.S. just recently order them to be destroyed? They knew about them all along. Seems to me like they just needed to think of something else for Saddam to need to do quick.


If we only wanted the oil, then we would have been buying it from them instead of imposing sanctions, or better yet, we would have taken it from them at the successful termination of the first Gulf War.
The U.S. couldn't have taken it at the end of the Gulf War, because Saddam was still in power. Also the U.S. government would rather get the oil cheaply from a post-war puppet government, than buy it full price from the current Iraqi Regime.

P.S.-I'm just curious...should you be in the politics forum??

[Angie]

Quote from Commie01:
Don’t stop posting because some people are giving you a hard time. You are entitled to your opinions just like everyone else. You should not be silenced. Some people here lack compassion just ignore them.Since there were only two posts between Hawarameen's and your posts, those two posts being CrazyPete's and my own's, I don't believe either CrazyPete's post nor my own post were lacking in compassion or attempting to silence Hawarameen - hence are very curious as to how you came to the conclusion that people were trying to silence him or lacked compassion.

By all means, please point out where we were, I'm very interested to know. I'm sure your post was meant to be generalised, but if not, please point out to me where I lacked compassion and why I deserved to be ignored. Thanks.


Quote from Commie01 - from the 'Disarming Saddam' thread:
I don’t think this war is going to free Kurdistan that is one of the reasons I do not support it.This appears to mirror what I had been trying to put forward. Hence my earlier request.

(Edited by Angie at 11:26 pm on Mar. 8, 2003)

[Beccie]

My earlier post was in no way directed to you angie, I thought your reply was thoughtful and I agree with the points you have put forward. Sorry for the confusion comrade!

Read Hawarameen’s first reply in this thread. He said that it was people not necessarily in this thread didn’t care to hear his opinion. I think that he was referring to redstar2000 who made some comments in the disarming Iraq thread that (in my opinion) lacked compassion. I was simply trying to say that Hawarmeen should not allow himself to be silenced because of someone who didn’t seem to acknowledge his opinions. I’m not saying that redstar should have agreed with Hawarmeen. Redstar’s arguments were extremely intelligent and persuasive but I do think he should have addressed Hawarmeen with a little more compassion.

Read the disarming Iraq thread and I think you will understand what I am talking about.

So many people (including myself) oppose this war because of Imperalism forgetting the main reason why we should oppose the war. That is the death and destruction it is going to cause.

[hawarameen]

my post about other people was a general one, made up of more than one thread. although redstar made good posts (i expect it from many people on this forum) he would not recognise that the people of iraq have to be liberated. this is where we had a difference in opinion, i believed the liberation of iraqi's was more important while he thought that halting american imperialism was more important. both are vitaly important but we had different opinions.

also i thought i was completely alone in my opinion so i considered my arguments futile but in another thread it apears that some other people share my opinion to some extent.

[Angie]

Thank you both for clearing that up. I apologise if I sounded like I was jumping down any throats - it was not intended. :)