Just to piss Maha off......

[oldrider]

America and the UK set about wiping out Iraq's societal infrastructure thereby ensuring the sanctions would have greatest effect.
Cold, calculated genocide.

USA and UK lost me when they invaded Iraq and even more so when they pounded the infrastructure into oblivion revealing that their agenda was totally floored!

[Crasherfromwayback]

Yes.... because before sanctions all those poor starving children who are now dieing in their thousands were well fed, healthy and driving Ferraris....

Oh wait!

That's right - they were poor and starving BEFORE the sanctions were imposed and their government would rather let them starve than as opposed to letting weapons inspectors in to make sure they weren't trying to build NBC weapons.

(remembering of course that Mr Hussein was quite happy using chemical weapons on the kurdish villagers in Iraq)

Oh the Agony of choice - being gassed to death by an actual genocidal nutjob or enduring the hardships bought on by the same genocidal nutjobs refusal to play ball with the west.

And of course - we are the bad guys - because we didn't do enough to stop the genocide of the Kurds and when we did do something, we are the bad guys cause we our sanctions kill children en-masse

You wouldn't have a fucking clue.

[Katman]

An interesting review of Hans Von Sponeck's book.

http://gicj.org/index.php?option=com...d=97&Itemid=59

I'll have to hunt me down a copy.

[TheDemonLord]

Saddam Hussein was never going to rival Gandhi or Mother Teresa in the annuls of human kindness but the average Iraqi was certainly not poor and starving before the sanctions were imposed.

America and the UK set about wiping out Iraq's societal infrastructure thereby ensuring the sanctions would have greatest effect.

Cold, calculated genocide.

How then do we deal with a torturing, Genocidal dictator?

Bombs and Bullets - that went down so well in both the popular press and in practice
Sanctions - causes pain and suffering to the population (although the real question is does it cause more or less than having your village carpet bombed by a B52?) but gives the government in power a clear way to stop the suffering.

My challenge to all of you who complain about how evil the west is/was is this:

How would you remove a Genocidal dictator that is both more humane and less costly (in terms of human suffering, not monetary hardship)?

I put forward that the west is between a frying pan, a fire and an incinerator:

Do nothing - we are the bad guys as we stand by while kurds are gassed and tortured
Impose sanctions - we are the bad guys because we enforce policy that causes suffering
Engage in a military campaign - we are the bad guys because War and killing is bad and innocents suffer.

[TheDemonLord]

USA and UK lost me when they invaded Iraq and even more so when they pounded the infrastructure into oblivion revealing that their agenda was totally floored!

You do know that attacking an enemies infrastructure is a very effective military tactic - the same infrastructure supports the average Iraqi also helps support the Industrial Military complex.

same reason in WW2 we bombed train lines, bridges, factories and dams (and the Germans did the same to us)

[Katman]

How then do we deal with a torturing, Genocidal dictator?

Bombs and Bullets - that went down so well in both the popular press and in practice
Sanctions - causes pain and suffering to the population (although the real question is does it cause more or less than having your village carpet bombed by a B52?) but gives the government in power a clear way to stop the suffering.

My challenge to all of you who complain about how evil the west is/was is this:

How would you remove a Genocidal dictator that is both more humane and less costly (in terms of human suffering, not monetary hardship)?

I put forward that the west is between a frying pan, a fire and an incinerator:

Do nothing - we are the bad guys as we stand by while kurds are gassed and tortured
Impose sanctions - we are the bad guys because we enforce policy that causes suffering
Engage in a military campaign - we are the bad guys because War and killing is bad and innocents suffer.

You should do a bit more reading.

Your silly posts betray your naivety.

[TheDemonLord]

You should do a bit more reading.

Your silly posts betray your naivety.

Oh Great Katman - Enlighten us with your knowledge:

post up a solution that would both remove Saddam from power, whilst being less damaging to the Iraqi people.

If I am so naive - you should be able to post something up quite easily.

[TheDemonLord]

You wouldn't have a fucking clue.

Actually I find the whole history of the middle east fascinating - it is a testament to good (but misguided) western intentions, Flawed attempts by the CIA to control a country whose people believe in a higher power, the power that greedy corporations can exert in the west etc.

But make no mistake when I say this:

For all the bad that the west has done (and there is a lot the west should have to answer for,) it is less evil than what Saddam did to his own people - how much less evil or how you determine the scale of evil is up for debate.

I think the late, great Mr Hitchens said it best when he pointed out the 3 things a country needs to do to loose it's sovereignty (according to International Law) and that Saddam had done all 3.

[Crasherfromwayback]

post up a solution that would both remove Saddam from power, whilst being less damaging to the Iraqi people.

If I am so naive - you should be able to post something up quite easily.

Should've been left to it. If not for wanting their oil, he would've been. To think it was about anything else, is indeed naive. How did arming the Teliban work out for the Yanks? How come we had no IS when Saddam was about? The Yanks backing Israel? How's that working out for the poor people of West Bank? How many Dictators have the Americans removed from their places of power in Africa? So it's not about *saving the people* from such people is it? Like I said...you wouldn't have a fucking clue.

[TheDemonLord]

Should've been left to it. If not for wanting their oil, he would've been. To think it was about anything else, is indeed naive. How did arming the Teliban work out for the Yanks? How come we had no IS when Saddam was about? The Yanks backing Israel? How's that working out for the poor people of West Bank? How many Dictators have the Americans removed from their places of power in Africa? So it's not about *saving the people* from such people is it? Like I said...you wouldn't have a fucking clue.

If you can honestly suggest that he should have been left to it - then you sir, have no fucking clue.

In fact:

Take a good look at this:



This is what using Chemical weapons on innocent children looks like. And this is only a handfull of those lucky enough to be killed outright, as opposed to dieing from complications resulting from the largest Chemical weapons attack against a populated area in History.

Take a good. Fucking. Look.

Don't you dare try and play the holier than thou card whilst outright saying that the best solution was to leave Saddam in power.

[Katman]

Don't you dare try and play the holier than thou card whilst outright saying that the best solution was to leave Saddam in power.

Countless millions of innocent people have died throughout history's wars.

America only went after Saddam Hussein because they had an alterior motive to do so.

To think America set about destroying Iraq as a nation because they were 'thinking of the children' is taking naivety to the extreme.

[Crasherfromwayback]

Take a good. Fucking. Look.

Don't you dare try and play the holier than thou card whilst outright saying that the best solution was to leave Saddam in power.

And what sort of horrific images are we now seeing you fucking clown? IS beheadings live? Where was IS when Saddam was in power? That's right...no fucking where. Docile prick. Every fucking where the Americans have set foot, is now total chaos. Holier than thou card be fucked. Moron. And you didn't bother to answer the question regarding not bothering to remove all of those nasty African dictators? Why aren't you up in arms about that eh? I'll answer that for you then. It's because you haven'y got a fucking clue.

[Katman]

Don't you dare try and play the holier than thou card whilst outright saying that the best solution was to leave Saddam in power.

Indonesian forces are currently commiting genocide in West Papua - right on our doorstep.

Does America care?

Do you even care?

[TheDemonLord]

Countless millions of innocent people have died throughout history's wars.

America only went after Saddam Hussein because they had an alterior motive to do so.

To think America set about destroying Iraq as a nation because they were 'thinking of the children' is taking naivety to the extreme.

Did I ever say that? - I frequently agree that America had Ulterior motives - but that doesn't change the fact they still were the ones who finally put an end to the Tyranny of Saddam.

If anything - you are the ones complaining about the dead children, yet you complain when I point out that without the west's influence - Saddam was quite happy committing the largest Chemical warefare attack against a populated area in history - so if you have the audacity to decry sanctions because of dead children, you had best be damned sure you know what the alternative was and that you can live with the Hypocrisy of your arguments.

The simple fact is that Saddam was a monster who systemically murdered almost 200,000 Kurds In one military campaign, he frequently used Torture and extra judicial execution (disapearances)

And if you say that the price we have to pay to remove such a monster is that we have to do sly deals with corporations, in this instance - I pay it gladly.

And what sort of horrific images are we now seeing you fucking clown? IS beheadings live? Where was IS when Saddam was in power? That's right...no fucking where. Docile prick. Every fucking where the Americans have set foot, is now total chaos. Holier than thou card be fucked. Moron. And you didn't bother to answer the question regarding not bothering to remove all of those nasty African dictators? Why aren't you up in arms about that eh? I'll answer that for you then. It's because you haven'y got a fucking clue.

So its better to sit by letting people get tortured, gassed etc. and do nothing because we are all too scarred that we might make it worse? Sitting by and doing nothing is how we ended up in this mess - who is the Docile prick now?

As for African dictators - I am pretty sure in other threads I have said numerous times that I take great um-bridge with western foreign policy in that it picks and choices where to intervene, frequently due to commercial rather than humanitarian interests.

But even if the sole and only reason for America stepping in to some of these areas is for commercial interests - it is STILL better than standing by and doing nothing.

IS - they are just the logical by product to America's attempt to be the good guy and handle Iraq with Kid gloves (mainly due to the complaints by people like yourselves) - what Saddam did to make sure there was no IS was to make sure that he was much MUCH worse than IS. Sure IS decapitate people and burn the occasional Jordanian alive, but they have yet to systematically herd an entire group of people (the Kurds) into modern day extermination camps - IS didn't exist because they knew if they even held a fart up to Saddam, they would be taken in the middle of the night, tortured for days, then executed in public whilst their families were forced at gun point to clap and applaud.

Saddam knew this, the people that IS knew this, and the people that formed IS know that the west won't ever do something like that so they are pretty much free to do as they please.

As for who hasn't got a clue - answer me this:

What is a better way?

But since neither of your have answered it, I will answer it for you:

you both know that there is no better way - Military action results in civilian suffering, sanctions result in civilian suffering and doing nothing results in even more civilian suffering. Does any of us have perfect foresight to know which solution will result in the least amount of suffering?

[TheDemonLord]

Indonesian forces are currently commiting genocide in West Papua - right on our doorstep.

Does America care?

Do you even care?

If it is on our doorstep - why do we need America?

Why don't we grow a pair and do it ourselves?

I do care, but I am also a realist - The 'War is bad' brigade have forgotten that sometimes in order to stop evil, we must send people to their deaths - Unless of course - you can suggest an alternative?