Iraq Statistics

[Baghdad]

Do you guys really want me to post f*cking pictures of soldiers IN IRAQ? You wanna know where I get my news from....people that LIVE THERE! People that FIGHT THERE! People that are risking their lives to build SEWER SYSTEMS!

You told me to watch CNN, Al- Jazeera etc.....NO! Maybe YOU should get YOUR news from a better place....LIKE THE FRONT LINE!

Incase you havent guessed, I am from there and I have relatives living there... The closest you can get to the front line

I honestly would keep going over and over and keep obliterating each one of your arguments, but I must go now... I promise to get back to everyone of your arguments the first thing I wake up

And keep em coming; Hell, you can keep doing so all night... Ill be sure to get to each one of you tomorow

Much love and kisses

[PhatJoey]

Nothing is worse than people who blinding spout nonsense with no personal knowledge of what they are talking about. You are merely repeating stuff you have heard from various new sources / websites / conspiracy freak blogs / etc.

YOU DON'T HAVE ONE BIT OF PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF THE REAL SITUATION. So, why don't you go get it before you help the idiots in the world spread their nonsense and urban myths.

[bedub1]

Ill be sure to get to each one of you tomorow

I'm armed.....

But I'm happy to hear you actually do have first hand experience....maybe I'll go re-read some of your comments....

[PhatJoey]

Incase you havent guessed, I am from there and I have relatives living there... The closest you can get to the front line

Right. I'll bet you haven't even moved out of your momma's basement yet.

[silvanricky]

Incase you havent guessed, I am from there and I have relatives living there... The closest you can get to the front line

Right. I'll bet you haven't even moved out of your momma's basement yet.

LMFAO!!

[bedub1]

Baghdad, I notice your profile shows you in the US. Can I ask why you decided to leave Iraq and move here to the US? If you hate us, and our politics, and the decision the country made etc....why come here?

[PhatJoey]

Baghdad, I notice your profile shows you in the US. Can I ask why you decided to leave Iraq and move here to the US? If you hate us, and our politics, and the decision the country made etc....why come here?

Don't wait up for an answer. Right now he's skimming the Drudge Report, The Roswell Reporter, and Free Algeria TV for more stunning insight.

[got tonkaed]

its hard to really give some of these things their true merit because of the way such things get politicized. I think anyone who isnt devoid of their senses realizes that we are not over in Iraq on a purely humanitarian mission, you dont hold economic sanctions over a country for years at a time, and then go in and do humanitarian work, just because.

However, those of us who may be opposed to much of the Iraqi war, should not just casually dismiss some of the signs of progress, and optimism that is coming out of some circles. In many cases, things seem to be turning around. I would still certainly argue these things are coming at a tremendous cost that probably never should have been endured, but at this point, there are beginning to be signs of situations improving.

Still, its important to understand a few things. The notions of building sewers and improving education is nice, but through much of the world, things were probably far worse than the were in a relatively stable country before we invaded, even if it is headed by someone we dont like. The fact that improvements are easy to make is in large part because the preceding systems that werent destroyed were not that advanced to begin with.

Likewise, its important to avoid getting too caught up in all this percieved good we are doing. If you want to critically justify this war, part of the rationale has to be that we are trying to stablize iraq in order to create a foothold in an economic partnership in the region. Certainly a large part of that is creating economic sustainability with infrastructure. We arent doing this to be nice, we are doing this to do business.

Theres all kinds of politics on each side of these issues, so i have a feeling much of the needs of the iraqi people, the people we should really be trying to serve first, will in many ways be overlooked or lost....just a hunch.

[bedub1]

Nice statement. Personally, I've never agreed or confirmed how we arrived in Iraq. But since we are there, I believe we MUST do good, and MUST set something up that will last instead of it all being for waste. We are there, and can't just Bail out on them....

[2dimes]

What?!? Big Macs are going up?

[got tonkaed]

Nice statement. Personally, I've never agreed or confirmed how we arrived in Iraq. But since we are there, I believe we MUST do good, and MUST set something up that will last instead of it all being for waste. We are there, and can't just Bail out on them....

its hard to necessarily disagree with those statements, but if you know me, you know i will anyway.....

i dont disagree that there is an important impetus on the US to "clean up the mess" so to speak. I also believe we are capable of doing such a thing. However, me being the liberal critical jerk that i am, i am unsettled by this notion as much as i am hopeful.

If you are in Iraq to eventually make them a stable partner for long term internation cooperation, what is your primary goal? Seemingly it is to make the country operational, promote safety, and increase growth. On the other hand, we have all kinds of humanitarian things that would be great to accomplish in Iraq and seem almost as necessary on a philosophical level.

The problem is, we probably dont have the support or resources in the long run to do both. So which one will probably end up getting chosen?

A lot depends on how we define bailing out....I think in the long run there probably has to be a civil war in Iraq for any democratic reforms to really take shape. Typically you can just give a group freedom and expect it to go over right away, such radical notions (and freedom is one of them) tend to have to be fought for because they change social convention. So a lot of the work we may put in, might not really last long any how.

[bedub1]

Nice statement. Personally, I've never agreed or confirmed how we arrived in Iraq. But since we are there, I believe we MUST do good, and MUST set something up that will last instead of it all being for waste. We are there, and can't just Bail out on them....

its hard to necessarily disagree with those statements, but if you know me, you know i will anyway.....

i dont disagree that there is an important impetus on the US to "clean up the mess" so to speak. I also believe we are capable of doing such a thing. However, me being the liberal critical jerk that i am, i am unsettled by this notion as much as i am hopeful.

If you are in Iraq to eventually make them a stable partner for long term internation cooperation, what is your primary goal? Seemingly it is to make the country operational, promote safety, and increase growth. On the other hand, we have all kinds of humanitarian things that would be great to accomplish in Iraq and seem almost as necessary on a philosophical level.

The problem is, we probably dont have the support or resources in the long run to do both. So which one will probably end up getting chosen?

A lot depends on how we define bailing out....I think in the long run there probably has to be a civil war in Iraq for any democratic reforms to really take shape. Typically you can just give a group freedom and expect it to go over right away, such radical notions (and freedom is one of them) tend to have to be fought for because they change social convention. So a lot of the work we may put in, might not really last long any how.

Yup. And as the USD continues to fall more and more....i start thinking more and more about myself. But sometimes you have to do the right thing, rise up and take on the challenge, screw what everybody else thinks. Hillary would just follow the flow and fold as she has no personal responsibility or honor, but I believe Bush has both of those, and will do what is right.

My Opinion of Bush
He's a smart guy, who is honest and will try to do the right thing, with ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE public speaking abilities. Which is why everybody thinks he's an idiot.

[sangfroid]

The first error that everyone (not just Americans) seems to make is the assumption that Iraq is a country in the sense that UK, France, Australia or US are. Iraq is not a NATION in the Western sense, however much it might be easier to think of it in such terms. The area is populated by different peoples who have never had the ability to determine that they want to be a unified country.

Britain set an administrative border around the areas (vilayets) of Baghdad (Sunni), Basra (Shia) and Mosul (Kurds) and named it Iraq.

In 1958, the Iraqi military took power and have ruled the country ever since under Abdul Kassim, Salam Arif, Abdul Arif and eventually Saddam Hussein who held the country together by suppression of the populace.

The biggest problem now is that Iraq is being forced to be a country when it never has been one, it’s been 3 regions stuck together. Therefore democracy will be doomed to fail because democracy relies on a sense of ‘nationhood’ which simply does not exist and people from these three areas have little or no ties between them to encourage the formation of the Iraqi nation.

Therefore a real solution needs to be found, not an ill-advised imposition by a country that understands nothing about the tribes, religions or politics of the area. US troops dying or rebuilding the infrastructure will not solve very much in the medium term.

[bedub1]

The first error that everyone (not just Americans) seems to make is the assumption that Iraq is a country in the sense that UK, France, Australia or US are. Iraq is not a NATION in the Western sense, however much it might be easier to think of it in such terms. The area is populated by different peoples who have never had the ability to determine that they want to be a unified country.

Britain set an administrative border around the areas (vilayets) of Baghdad (Sunni), Basra (Shia) and Mosul (Kurds) and named it Iraq.

In 1958, the Iraqi military took power and have ruled the country ever since under Abdul Kassim, Salam Arif, Abdul Arif and eventually Saddam Hussein who held the country together by suppression of the populace.

The biggest problem now is that Iraq is being forced to be a country when it never has been one, it’s been 3 regions stuck together. Therefore democracy will be doomed to fail because democracy relies on a sense of ‘nationhood’ which simply does not exist and people from these three areas have little or no ties between them to encourage the formation of the Iraqi nation.

Therefore a real solution needs to be found, not an ill-advised imposition by a country that understands nothing about the tribes, religions or politics of the area. US troops dying or rebuilding the infrastructure will not solve very much in the medium term.

That is an OUTSTANDING analysis.

Should the nations of the world sit idly by when Saddam was killing millions and neglecting his own people?

[sangfroid]

And as the USD continues to fall more and more....i start thinking more and more about myself. But sometimes you have to do the right thing, rise up and take on the challenge, screw what everybody else thinks.

You assume that the USD is falling because of the war, when substantially that's just untrue. It's because Americans over-borrowing on homeloans they have no real intention of repaying when things get remotely tough (and lenders being stupid enough to lend the money plus government allowing them to), which caused a housing crash when it was only really a slight downturn. (see US sub-prime crisis)

This has pushed losses in US real estate through the roof and crashed consumer demand, causing many non-US investors to pull their money out of the country. It's the exodus of this money that causes the USD to fall.

The reason for the exodus of money is threefold:

1) Nervousness about more losses coming in the future
2) Low interest rates when they can do better overseas
3) Reduced US consumer demand, which means a likely US recession

[sangfroid]

Should the nations of the world sit idly by when Saddam was killing millions and neglecting his own people?

They did for 35 years.....but I've never been against intervention in Iraq, purely the lies and manipulation that went into it. I'm saying a solution should have been thought of before the six-shooter came out!!

[radiojake]

Should the nations of the world sit idly by when Saddam was killing millions and neglecting his own people?

And again, I ask. Why don't you go into Zimbabwe and take out Mugabe's regime? Or the countless civil wars in Africa?

Hmmmm... not enough oil or resources to profit from once the US invades?

[radiojake]

I got MY facts from MY SON. He was there fighting to free those people from a merciless, genocidal maniac while you were sitting on your butt complaining about the price of Big Mac's going up!

Your son isn't fighting to free 'those' people. He is there because he is a chump who has been told to fight by his superior officer (he is a chump because he joined the army in the first place)

He is there to ensure the relative ease for multi-national corporations to come into the region and start profiteering in a whole new country that they were otherwise unable to enter. Go have a look at what companies are currently running the Iraqi National Bank (I'll give a hint, it isn't Iraqi)

Also - Big Mac's are disgusting, as are all McDonalds products

[Neutrino]

Should the nations of the world sit idly by when Saddam was killing millions and neglecting his own people?

They did for 35 years.....but I've never been against intervention in Iraq, purely the lies and manipulation that went into it. I'm saying a solution should have been thought of before the six-shooter came out!!

Ummm, unless Wikipedia has been systematically lying to humanity for quite a while, Saddam was only in power for 24 years.

[sangfroid]

Ummm, unless Wikipedia has been systematically lying to humanity for quite a while, Saddam was only in power for 24 years.

lol, I do stand corrected, the Ba'ath party ruled from 1968 - 2003. Saddam did not take the Presidency until 1979, although he was a major figure in the party from 1968.

The point stands regardless.

[Baghdad]

You have my respect Sieg... Atleast you know how to argue... Joey here just insults thinking that'll get em somewhere

But let me ask you this, kind sir... Who put Saddam into power? Shah al Shah? King Hussein? King Fahad? Osama Bin Laden? The US

Those are all criminals in one sense or another... They have all mass murdered their own people... So, let me ask you something... With all the might of the US, and her CIA, they were unable to figure out something was wrong with all those mass murdering in Iraq by Saddam?

Or Iran at the time of the Shah?
Or Afghanistan?
Or Saudi Arabia?
Or Jordan?

And the best part, the US put all 5 cold blooded killers into Power...

Shah? Overthrown... American assistance wasnt able to sustain him in power
Saddam? "Bomb 'em back to the stone Age"- US General Curtis E. LeMay
Fahad? Died of old age.. (Uncle Sam kept him in power because of all the oil since 1975)
King Hussein? US puppet. Stayed in power until he got blood cancer and died
Osama Bin Laden? Rofl. God knows where hes at... Probably in the White House sipping Champagne with Good ol' Bush and having a blast...

And no, debub, I never said I hated the US. I love the US. Always have and always will. But being Patriotic, you must look at the Pros and Cons of your government... The Pro in the US government is that its serving the people well (?). The Con is that its being as capitalist as they can overseas and are causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands... Whether it be Iraqi or African

I love the US, but hate the Government and her policies over seas...

[comic boy]

The first error that everyone (not just Americans) seems to make is the assumption that Iraq is a country in the sense that UK, France, Australia or US are. Iraq is not a NATION in the Western sense, however much it might be easier to think of it in such terms. The area is populated by different peoples who have never had the ability to determine that they want to be a unified country.

Britain set an administrative border around the areas (vilayets) of Baghdad (Sunni), Basra (Shia) and Mosul (Kurds) and named it Iraq.

In 1958, the Iraqi military took power and have ruled the country ever since under Abdul Kassim, Salam Arif, Abdul Arif and eventually Saddam Hussein who held the country together by suppression of the populace.

The biggest problem now is that Iraq is being forced to be a country when it never has been one, it’s been 3 regions stuck together. Therefore democracy will be doomed to fail because democracy relies on a sense of ‘nationhood’ which simply does not exist and people from these three areas have little or no ties between them to encourage the formation of the Iraqi nation.

Therefore a real solution needs to be found, not an ill-advised imposition by a country that understands nothing about the tribes, religions or politics of the area. US troops dying or rebuilding the infrastructure will not solve very much in the medium term.

That is an OUTSTANDING analysis.

Should the nations of the world sit idly by when Saddam was killing millions and neglecting his own people?

The short answer is that in a perfect World no nation should be terrorised by murderous dictatorships..but they are and always have been. The USA has helped prop up dozens of nasty regimes to suit its own ends, so have others of course and its politely known as politics. In the Middle East both Iraq and the Islamic fundamentalists were directly funded by the USA , yet you would have us think that the invasion was for humanitarian reasons ! The United Nations has a tendency to sit on its hands, and is notable for its nepotism and corruption, but it is still a far better bet to sort out International problems than any single country which will always have its own agenda.

[Napoleon Ier]

The real question is whether it is at all useful for us to remain in Iraq,and if so, how to create a solution. This solution ought to be a splitting of Iraq into three seperate nations, and very rapid withdrawal of our troops outside of any sector not concerned with terrorism potentially harming the West.

[comic boy]

The real question is whether it is at all useful for us to remain in Iraq,and if so, how to create a solution. This solution ought to be a splitting of Iraq into three seperate nations, and very rapid withdrawal of our troops outside of any sector not concerned with terrorism potentially harming the West.

I think that eventually something similar to this must happen otherwise there will be civil war, as in the Baltics it is simply not possible to create a country from bitterly opposed groups.

[Napoleon Ier]

With all the might of the US, and her CIA, they were unable to figure out something was wrong with all those mass murdering in Iraq by Saddam?

Afghanistan and Iraq posed a risk. After having been screwed over by al Qaeda, the US decided it was time to hit them hard, as best I can make out. Alot can be said about various lies, but, nonetheless, if you look at the cost of th War Effort and the fact that frankly US companies have made very few profits from Iraq, I'd say the whole "they're raping iraq's natural resources" argument is just a straw man