Pages: 1 2 3 4 … 6

 

2009-12-28 08:12:16
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6178|what

With Bush in power, most of the focus was on Iraq.

Obama has committed more troops to Afghan and has inherited the war, so much so that he has always said he would continue to fight the Taliban even if/when pulling out of Iraq.

It's his quagmire now and it should receive the added attention.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2009-12-28 08:34:26
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6248|Escea

Longbow wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Yeah tbh fuck it. We shouldn't have stood up to Hitler either.
Saddam wasn't trying to conquer half of the world, neither he killed millions of innocent people. During Saddam's reign minorities were fucked, indeed. But majority was quite ok. Now whole Iraqi nation is fucked.
Majority was scared shitless.
2009-12-28 08:38:19
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|6801|Moscow, Russia

M.O.A.B wrote:

Longbow wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Yeah tbh fuck it. We shouldn't have stood up to Hitler either.
Saddam wasn't trying to conquer half of the world, neither he killed millions of innocent people. During Saddam's reign minorities were fucked, indeed. But majority was quite ok. Now whole Iraqi nation is fucked.
Majority was scared shitless.
you know this how? ever spoken to an actual iraqi person?
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2009-12-28 08:39:45
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5383|London, England

Shahter wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Longbow wrote:


Saddam wasn't trying to conquer half of the world, neither he killed millions of innocent people. During Saddam's reign minorities were fucked, indeed. But majority was quite ok. Now whole Iraqi nation is fucked.
Majority was scared shitless.
you know this how? ever spoken to an actual iraqi person?
I have. They were all terrified of Saddam. He didn't just pick on minorities, he would have any threat eliminated mercilessly. He and his leutenants also had a penchant for snatching up young girls off the side of the road and 'making women out of them'.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-12-28 08:46:12
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|6801|Moscow, Russia

JohnG@lt wrote:

Shahter wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Majority was scared shitless.
you know this how? ever spoken to an actual iraqi person?
I have. They were all terrified of Saddam.
"they all" or "all you've spoken to"? 

JohnG@lt wrote:

He didn't just pick on minorities, he would have any threat eliminated mercilessly.
and that is bad because..?

JohnG@lt wrote:

He and his leutenants also had a penchant for snatching up young girls off the side of the road and 'making women out of them'.
and that doesn't happen now? or won't happen when you've "made things right"?
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2009-12-28 08:47:49
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6248|Escea

Shahter wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Longbow wrote:

Saddam wasn't trying to conquer half of the world, neither he killed millions of innocent people. During Saddam's reign minorities were fucked, indeed. But majority was quite ok. Now whole Iraqi nation is fucked.
Majority was scared shitless.
you know this how? ever spoken to an actual iraqi person?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uday_Husse … misconduct

Here's some stuff Uday Hussein (Saddam's son) did that incited that fear. Saddam operated on fear. His own party members feared him, which is why they always kissed his ass.

Shahter wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

He didn't just pick on minorities, he would have any threat eliminated mercilessly.
and that is bad because..?
Wtf? So killing some innocent civvie who denounces Saddam is acceptable? What is this 30's Russia?

Last edited by M.O.A.B (2009-12-28 08:55:15)

2009-12-28 08:53:08
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5383|London, England

Shahter wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Shahter wrote:


you know this how? ever spoken to an actual iraqi person?
I have. They were all terrified of Saddam.
"they all" or "all you've spoken to"? 

JohnG@lt wrote:

He didn't just pick on minorities, he would have any threat eliminated mercilessly.
and that is bad because..?

JohnG@lt wrote:

He and his leutenants also had a penchant for snatching up young girls off the side of the road and 'making women out of them'.
and that doesn't happen now? or won't happen when you've "made things right"?
All of the ones I spoke to, which was a few hundred.

Because eliminating people just because they disagree with you is asinine. If your ideas can't stand up to debate then they're probably false.

How would it happen when there's a justice system in place? They're not electing kings over there you know.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-12-28 09:01:53
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|6801|Moscow, Russia

M.O.A.B wrote:

Shahter wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Majority was scared shitless.
you know this how? ever spoken to an actual iraqi person?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uday_Husse … misconduct

Here's some stuff Uday Hussein (Saddam's son) did that incited that fear. Saddam operated on fear. His own party members feared him, which is why they always kissed his ass.
i asked you a simple question and you answered me with wikipedia quote which is probably written by the likes of yourself? woot!

M.O.A.B wrote:

Shahter wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

He didn't just pick on minorities, he would have any threat eliminated mercilessly.
and that is bad because..?
Wtf? So killing some innocent civvie who denounces Saddam is acceptable? What is this 30's Russia?
just how, pray tell, "some innocent civvie" in iraq could become a threat to saddam?


JohnG@lt wrote:

All of the ones I spoke to, which was a few hundred.

Because eliminating people just because they disagree with you is asinine. If your ideas can't stand up to debate then they're probably false.

How would it happen when there's a justice system in place? They're not electing kings over there you know.
well, i guess we'll just have to wait till teh jedi leave iraq and see.

Last edited by Shahter (2009-12-28 09:07:11)

if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2009-12-28 09:08:50
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6248|Escea

Shahter wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Shahter wrote:


you know this how? ever spoken to an actual iraqi person?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uday_Husse … misconduct

Here's some stuff Uday Hussein (Saddam's son) did that incited that fear. Saddam operated on fear. His own party members feared him, which is why they always kissed his ass.
i asked you a simple question and you answered me with wikipedia quote which is probably written by the likes of yourself? woot!
Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Ok I'll ask you something, ever spoke with an Iraqi who wasn't scared out of his mind by Saddam?

I posted that link as an example of what Saddam's son's would do, because under their father's rule, they could get away with it. Open your bloody eyes. You might think Saddam was the good old grandad who wouldn't harm a fly, but the reality is vastly different. Show me some evidence that suggests he wasn't a tyrannical maniac and that Iraq's population weren't terrified of him.

Shahter wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Shahter wrote:

and that is bad because..?
Wtf? So killing some innocent civvie who denounces Saddam is acceptable? What is this 30's Russia?
just how, pray tell, "some innocent civvie" in iraq could become a threat to saddam?.
People would be killed for that. Its that simple.

Last edited by M.O.A.B (2009-12-28 09:11:18)

2009-12-28 10:26:37
Vilham
Say wat!?
+580|6792|UK

Longbow wrote:

Vilham wrote:

Yeah tbh fuck it. We shouldn't have stood up to Hitler either.
During Saddam's reign minorities were fucked, indeed. But majority was quite ok. Now whole Iraqi nation is fucked.
During Hitlers's reign minorities were fucked, indeed. But majority was quite ok. Now whole German nation is fucked (cold war ruined eastern Germany).

Im amazed you can't see the similarity.
2009-12-28 11:01:34
venom6
Since day One.
+247|6584|Hungary
How come that USA and EU cant win a war against some poor equipted "terrorists" who dont got high tech stuff, jets, artillery, uav and so on.
That whole "war" is a big fucking lie. Military superpowers cant win that war since when? 2001 or when did they moved into that country?
2009-12-28 11:14:02
Shahter
Zee Ruskie
+295|6801|Moscow, Russia

M.O.A.B wrote:

Jesus, Mary and Joseph. Ok I'll ask you something, ever spoke with an Iraqi who wasn't scared out of his mind by Saddam?
no i didn't. i also haven't heard of a country where everybody was scared shitless of their leader. iraq must be the one and only, right?

M.O.A.B wrote:

I posted that link as an example of what Saddam's son's would do, because under their father's rule, they could get away with it. Open your bloody eyes. You might think Saddam was the good old grandad who wouldn't harm a fly, but the reality is vastly different. Show me some evidence that suggests he wasn't a tyrannical maniac and that Iraq's population weren't terrified of him.
i must prove something? really? it's you who said saddam was "a tyrannical maniac" of whom everybody was "scared shitless", so the burden of proof lies with you. and as you don't have any personal experience you'll have to excuse me for not valueing your wikipedia-based opinion very high.

M.O.A.B wrote:

Shahter wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Wtf? So killing some innocent civvie who denounces Saddam is acceptable? What is this 30's Russia?
just how, pray tell, "some innocent civvie" in iraq could become a threat to saddam?.
People would be killed for that. Its that simple.
but they would have to become a threat first, right?
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
2009-12-28 11:22:35
King_County_Downy
shitfaced
+2,791|6623|Seattle

Our military is designed to destroy everything in it's path. Period.

The problem is those darn civilians who double as miltia forces. We were never meant to be a policing and occupying force.  And with no one person in power, how do they surrender? I think your looking for some other sort of "win" here. We're now trying to help those countries police themselves. It's tough to do when they don't want to help themselves.

What exactly would be a "win" with either of these countries we're talking about here?
Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
2009-12-28 11:52:48
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6742

Shahter wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Longbow wrote:


Saddam wasn't trying to conquer half of the world, neither he killed millions of innocent people. During Saddam's reign minorities were fucked, indeed. But majority was quite ok. Now whole Iraqi nation is fucked.
Majority was scared shitless.
you know this how? ever spoken to an actual iraqi person?
Saddam is Sunni and most of Iraq is Shiite. So yeh...

To Downy:

The military's job today is more policing and providing security than destroying shit.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
2009-12-28 11:54:27
King_County_Downy
shitfaced
+2,791|6623|Seattle

Cybargs wrote:

To Downy:

The military's job today is more policing and providing security than destroying shit.
My point exactly. How do we judge a win or a victory or whatever, anymore?
Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
2009-12-28 12:52:38
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6436|'Murka

Shahter wrote:

i asked you a simple question and you answered me with wikipedia quote which is probably written by the likes of yourself? woot!
You must've missed this part of the wiki article:

References
   1. ^ Saddam's Inner Circle, Izzat Ibrahim ad-Douri CBS News. Retrieved on 3 November 2006
   2. ^ a b c d e f g Ala Bashir and Lars Sigurd Sunnana [ed.], Getuigenissen van Saddam's lijfarts ("Testimonials from Saddam's personal physician", originally publicised in Sweden under the titel "Saddams fortrolige"), ISBN 90-712-0610-6, NUR 686
   3. ^ Amazon.com: Saddam Hussein and the Crisis: Judith Miller: Books
   4. ^ SI.com - Sports Illustrated - The Magazine - From Sports Illustrated: Son of Saddam - Monday March 24, 2003 05:00 PM
   5. ^ Uday's torture chamber opened: World: Iraqi Dossier: News24
   6. ^ Guess Who Yahoos? Saddam's Son
   7. ^ a b Suzanne Goldenberg (23 July 2003). "Uday: career of rape, torture and murder". UK Guardian Unlimited. http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0, … 4,00.html. Retrieved 2006-11-05.
   8. ^ a b FOXNews.com - Obituary: Uday Saddam Hussein - U.S. & World
   9. ^ Brian Bennett and Michael Wiesskopf (25 May 2003). "The Sum of Two Evils". TIME.com. http://www.mafhoum.com/press5/147P57.htm. Retrieved 2006-11-05.
  10. ^ Aparisim Ghosh (2003). "Iron Maiden Found in Uday's Hussein's Playground". TIME.com. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/ … 9,00.html. Retrieved February 7 2006.
  11. ^ Arnett, Peter. "Blood and Betrayal". Playboy (Playboy Enterprises) (April 2005).
  12. ^ FOXNews.com - Report: Saddam Hussein’s Son Plotted London Assassination Attack - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News
  13. ^ "Iraq informant set for $30m reward". CNN. July 23, 2003. http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/07/ … ndex.html. Retrieved 2008-12-15. "Uday, 39, and Qusay, 37, had a U.S. government bounty of $15 million each for information leading to their arrest or proof they had been killed. When asked why the informant was in protective custody, the officer involved in the raid said: "People around here know who owned the house.""
  14. ^ http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/07/24/sprj.i … index.html
  15. ^ Column: Displaying foes' dead hurts cause

[edit] See also
Clearly MOAB just making shit up, right?

Don't suppose you could be fucking bothered to look beyond "wikipedia" and actually click the links embedded in the articles/references, could you? No...that would just be too fucking hard. Might accidentally educate yourself or something.

Easier to just mock the source rather than try to actually expand your knowledge beyond your preconceptions.

Shahter wrote:

no i didn't. i also haven't heard of a country where everybody was scared shitless of their leader. iraq must be the one and only, right?
Pretty sure most Western people aren't "scared shitless" of their leaders.

What paranoid world do you live in?

Oh...nevermind. The former Soviet Union. I forgot.

Last edited by FEOS (2009-12-28 12:55:31)

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2009-12-28 13:00:11
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6248|Escea

Shahter wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Shahter wrote:

just how, pray tell, "some innocent civvie" in iraq could become a threat to saddam?.
People would be killed for that. Its that simple.
but they would have to become a threat first, right?
God this is pointless. Denouncing Saddam was considered a threat by the Ba'ath party, because if one person could get away with denouncing it, others would, and then some srious opposition could rise up. That's why it was a threat, and that's why those people were imprisoned, executed or maimed.
2009-12-28 13:02:25
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6677|USA

venom6 wrote:

How come that USA and EU cant win a war against some poor equipted "terrorists" who dont got high tech stuff, jets, artillery, uav and so on.
That whole "war" is a big fucking lie. Military superpowers cant win that war since when? 2001 or when did they moved into that country?
They can win, do we have your permission to unleash our military as needed, or shall we try to keep fighting with both hands tied behind our backs by PC rope, leaving you the the opportunity to ask your smug, insipid, condescending question?
2009-12-28 13:37:33
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6646|London, England
Well to be fair even the Soviets did the whole "Hoorah" approach and it didn't even work out for them either
2009-12-28 14:26:19
FatherTed
xD
+3,936|6526|so randum
point nicely raised mek.

Even if the USA went all out, and the tanks rolled through and decimated anything that had any link with insurgency, the problem would still exist. Why? Because the problem in Afghanistan isn't a material thing - It isn't something you can shoot/bomb/nuke - It's a mentality, an idea. And by attempting to shoot/bomb/nuke the mentality, you'll only further galvanize it.
Small hourglass island
Always raining and foggy
Use an umbrella
2009-12-28 14:33:31
Commie Killer
Member
+192|6412

Longbow wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:

Iraq will turn out alright, not good, but alright. I equate Iraq to South Korea and Afghan to South Vietnam. It might take Iraq a while to get its shit together, but it will happen eventually.
I lol'ed. You srsly believe in what you just wrote? Iraq will never recover. It is driven back to stoneage by islamic religion extremists. Plus two different branches of islam. Plus kurdish people. The only force that was capable to keep islamic religious opposition down was bloody dictator, who was successfully taken out and assasinated (you call that a legal justice? hahaha) by allied coalition. Too bad allied leaders havent learned principle of minor evil.
Think long term, obviously Iraq is fucked up, but its a hell of a lot better then it was in 2006, and the situation is improving, SLOWLY. I don't believe we should have went into Iraq, while I do believe that we should have went into Korea, but that is not the reason I drew the parallels. I equate the two because Korea took decades to fully become a real democracy and a stable country, Iraq will most likely work out the same way. I know you've only been out of your mothers cooter for 12 years but the world events have been happening for longer then that.
2009-12-28 14:38:49
Mekstizzle
WALKER
+3,611|6646|London, England

FatherTed wrote:

point nicely raised mek.
Also the Soviets didn't even have to build a new Government/Army as we did. They already had one in Afghanistan that was allied with them from the beginning. And they all still lost
2009-12-28 14:45:51
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6436|'Murka

Mekstizzle wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

point nicely raised mek.
Also the Soviets didn't even have to build a new Government/Army as we did. They already had one in Afghanistan that was allied with them from the beginning. And they all still lost
Key difference: The Afghan people aren't supporting the insurgency this time around. During the Soviet period, they did. If the people are supporting the insurgency, you can't win. Period. Vietnam and Soviet-era Afghanistan proved that.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2009-12-28 14:46:28
Commie Killer
Member
+192|6412

ghettoperson wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:


Yeah, I've gotta agree with this. Like Iraq, once we leave it's going to collapse, so why waste our time there? Unfortunately Obama seems to have decided Afghanistan is where we're going to concentrate on now. I guess the only positive side of that is that you'll get more international assistance on Afghanistan than Iraq, but both are a complete waste of lives and money.
Iraq will turn out alright, not good, but alright. I equate Iraq to South Korea and Afghan to South Vietnam. It might take Iraq a while to get its shit together, but it will happen eventually. Afghanistan on the other hand is plagued by apathy, if that turns around it will be a miracle.


EDIT: The one benefit that Afghanistan has over South Vietnam is the lack of a North Vietnam, they only have to tackle their internal problems, which, if they can do, the Afghanistan Taliban will probably direct their attention towards Pakistan, an entirely different cluster fuck.
Ok Dubya.
I know your sitting their with that crystal ball, and you already know whats going to happen, so I'd love to know why I'm being equated to that "God told me too" mental fuck-up.
2009-12-28 14:55:59
Commie Killer
Member
+192|6412

Mekstizzle wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

point nicely raised mek.
Also the Soviets didn't even have to build a new Government/Army as we did. They already had one in Afghanistan that was allied with them from the beginning. And they all still lost
Carpet bombing towns helped them a lot. It all comes down to education. Out in the middle of bumble-fuck Afghan, where news travels by word of mouth, its hard to for people to form an accurate opinion on events they are marginally informed upon at best. The challenge is getting unbiased news and information to the Afghan people, especially in the tribal areas, so they can form their opinions and vote(hopefully the elections won't be strewn with fraud next time) accurately, maybe the country might have a chance. Depends on what people think unbiased is though, as everyone has a bias.

 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 … 6

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard