0
   

How the Left Betrayed My Country - Iraq

 
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Jan, 2005 07:34 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
gungasnake wrote:
D'artagnan wrote:
Another reason we don't attack No. Korea--they got the bomb. Their leaders may be crazy, but they're not stupid.


Having the bomb won't save them from starvation due to their stupid political system...


then let 'em starve....why nuke 'em..too slow..painless...not nasty enough for them...you of all people appreciate the logic in that right?


Starvation seems to be the ultimate ending for all leftwing political ideas. The prize of them all was having starvation in the Ukraine in the 20s and 30s. The Ukraine is the most natural farming area in the world, capable of feeding all of Europe from the Atlantic to the Volga. Starving there is like not being able to get laid in a whorehouse.
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Jan, 2005 10:19 pm
..and robbery is the logical end of capitalism. How else could a nation like Iraq be producing 2.5m bbls of oil a day and have chronic fuel shortages.

All thanks to Unka Dick's favourite charity......

Quote:
Halliburton already is under scrutiny for overcharging the government for supplying gasoline to U.S. military personnel and others in Iraq. Waxman on Wednesday revealed new information showing that Halliburton was charging twice as much for a gallon of gas as the Defense Department's own energy office.

Halliburton charged the U.S. government $2.64 a gallon to buy and transport oil from Kuwait to Iraq, using an inexperienced politically connected Kuwaiti subcontractor. The Defense Department's Energy Support Center had been doing a similar job at $1.32 per gallon, according to data that office gave Waxman's office.

Defense Department officials told Waxman's office that Halliburton charged the U.S. government $1.21 per gallon just to move the gas, compared with an average of 36 cents when the Defense Department's own office did the work.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 02:11 am
I know how we can make those against the war happy, we can remove our troops, free Saddam and let him be back in charge. That way they can still support a murdurous dictator and he can continue to fill mass graves with those that disagree with him.

By the way, why is it that those of you who scream and cry about the amount of money spent on the War and how broke we are, were the first ones to stand up and say we have to give more money to those in South East Asia after the tragic events that happened. Didn't giving this aide out just drive the US deeper into debt? Not to mention we are the primary mover of supplies in the region right now. Imagine how much money that is spending the American tax payer? Did you also know that private contributions here in the US already match those of the US govt contribution. The total amount of private donations from the US alone is going to beat most if not all contries combined in total aide?
0 Replies
 
hingehead
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 06:34 am
Seeing how this all started with one person's account of their perception of the conflict I thought I'd share another (from October 2004 - took ages for the Guardian to post it on their site):


Tigris tales

Iraq is stuck in a cycle of violence and despair to which no one can see an end ... sorry, am I boring you?

Ghaith Abdul-Ahad
Tuesday October 19, 2004
The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,,1330392,00.html

Here I am, back in London, sipping vodka-martinis, reading a very nice book, lying on the sofa and working very hard to forget the past two months in Baghdad.
I'm trying, but all people do here is ask me the same questions over and over again: "Is it really bad down there in Baghdad?" "Is it like what we hear in the news?"

Two months ago, I would have said, "It's not that bad", but now I answer: "No, it's ******* worse."

From here, Baghdad and its violence seems unreal; a million light years away. Apart from the usual ducking down every time a door slams, there is nothing to remind me of the horrors there. In any case, even when, during London dinner parties, people ask me about Baghdad, they wait impatiently for me to finish my why-Iraq-is-so-messed-up lecture, before launching into a conversation about a bloke called Harry who cheated in some exam and how property prices are going to collapse.

When you open your newspaper in the morning and read about the 35 Iraqi kids blown up the day before by one of Baghdad's many suicide bombers, the real misery, bewilderment and fear of the people there will never be captured nor translated into words. Over here, it's just another day, another suicide bomber.

The levels of fear, anxiety and violence that Iraqis experience on a daily basis pass unreported for two reasons: a) because the reporters themselves are besieged by the same anxieties and fears inside hotel compounds surrounded by concrete blast walls and checkpoints; and b) because Iraq equals war equals destruction, and a car bomb is not breaking news anymore.

For a few months after the fall of Saddam's regime, Iraqis became aware that they could actually live without fear. They might even have planned for their and their children's futures, something totally unimagined when war, persecution and execution were the norm. The first couple of car bombs soon shattered that initial relief; that, and when it became obvious that the long-awaited peace and prosperity promised by the Americans was not coming any time soon.

Living under Saddam, most people knew the rules of the game. They knew how to survive: keep a low profile; cross the street if you spot nasty-looking Mukhabarat officers; don't think about politics (actually, better if you don't think at all).

But the situation now is so volatile, the people have lost that sixth sense for surviving. What are the new rules? No one knows. Is it not to be seen with the Americans? Is it not to get a job with the new police and security services? Is it not to work with the new government at all? It's certainly good to avoid driving into areas filled with IEDs? But where are they exactly?

How can the Iraqis be expected to lead their daily life, let alone build a democracy, when they leave the house not knowing if they are ever coming back?

The fear is not generated just by car bombs and mortars. It is the whole atmosphere of lawlessness and anarchy that engulfs Iraq right now. The real problems facing the average Iraqi family are things such as corruption, banditry and kidnapping for ransom. It's worse if you are a doctor, professor or businessman; then it is not only the resistance that are after you as a potential collaborator, but also a wide range of gangs and looters, too.

That's even without mentioning the American factor. You're in line for a very bad day if an IED exploded an American vehicle close to your house and it turned out that one of your cousins is a Sunni officer.

It seems that both the insurgents and the Americans have agreed that violence is the best way to take each other on. To solve Iraq's problems both want to kick each other out of Iraq. Neither know what the Iraqis want.

The Iraqis themselves seem unable to comprehend what is happening; most are totally disenchanted with American efforts - if any exist - to help rebuild the country. These feelings are exacerbated by the American actions on the ground and are, in turn, translated into hatred - in the best case, mere apathy - towards the Iraqi government and its US backers. The insurgency feeds on this hatred. With more hatred comes more violence, with more violence more Iraqis die and with more death, the economic disaster continues. The cycle goes on and on and no one seems to be able to break it.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 08:08 am
Baldimo wrote:
By the way, why is it that those of you who scream and cry about the amount of money spent on the War and how broke we are, were the first ones to stand up and say we have to give more money to those in South East Asia after the tragic events that happened. Didn't giving this aide out just drive the US deeper into debt?


No. According to the radio article on NPR yesterday morning, the gov't office that manages the foreign aid doesn't even need a boost in their budget.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 08:18 am
Baldimo wrote:
I know how we can make those against the war happy, we can remove our troops, free Saddam and let him be back in charge. That way they can still support a murdurous dictator and he can continue to fill mass graves with those that disagree with him.

By the way, why is it that those of you who scream and cry about the amount of money spent on the War and how broke we are, were the first ones to stand up and say we have to give more money to those in South East Asia after the tragic events that happened. Didn't giving this aide out just drive the US deeper into debt? Not to mention we are the primary mover of supplies in the region right now. Imagine how much money that is spending the American tax payer? Did you also know that private contributions here in the US already match those of the US govt contribution. The total amount of private donations from the US alone is going to beat most if not all contries combined in total aide?


Baldimo giving tsunami aide is saving lives and giving comfort........I and many here are certain that if a war hardened tough guy like you were in charge they wouldn't receive anything from the US....if it is your intention to impress with your rock hard toughness and garner respect from it somehow I would suggesdt a trip back to the drawing board....and why, since you have no empathy or care for the poor and downtrodden if they are a drain on our resources would you not agree that the best thing would be to get out of Iraq, let them slaughter themselves, and not spend any more money there? After all, they're just third world sand animals anyhow right?
0 Replies
 
candidone1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Jan, 2005 11:43 am
Baldimo wrote:

By the way, why is it that those of you who scream and cry about the amount of money spent on the War and how broke we are, were the first ones to stand up and say we have to give more money to those in South East Asia after the tragic events that happened. Didn't giving this aide out just drive the US deeper into debt? Not to mention we are the primary mover of supplies in the region right now. Imagine how much money that is spending the American tax payer? Did you also know that private contributions here in the US already match those of the US govt contribution. The total amount of private donations from the US alone is going to beat most if not all contries combined in total aide?


That's an apples to oranges comparison in terms of dollar amounts, as I have outlined examples of Iraq spending in another thread.
It's a mere drop in the bucket.

The financial cost of the war represents only a fraction of the arguments people criticize about the war.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/14/2021 at 04:52:38