> So what was in your point of view the real motives for that war.
>

I think Misfit has it partly right, but it's not so simple. The Middle East is a hotbed of anti-American feeling--and they may have good reason to hate us (but not to justify the attack on 9/11). Without going too deep, I think the reasons were a combination of American security (it could not be proven WMD were gone from Iraq), multiple violations by Saddam of UN approved ceasefire requirements (these violations were acts of war), a desire to have a secular, democratic government in the Middle East friendly to the US (Saudi Arabia is friendly but neither democratic nor secular).

I talked about this more fully in my earlier post, which no one has replied to, #43851,

43851

---

nice page ;-)
THE BUSH CONSPIRACY
THEORY GENERATOR
http://www.buttafly.com/bush/index.php

> > So what was in your point of view the real motives for that war.
> I think W "did it for dad". From an economical standpoint it would illogical
> to do it for oil if Bush profits from oil. Why? Its called the price the
> market place creates by supply and demand. Less supply & more demand
> makes for higher prices. If Bush profits, say, from Texas oil then he would
> have to be retarded for wanting to put Iraqi oil on the marked for purposes
> of profit. Maybe thats why as DB says, "alot of our Alaska oil is shipped
> to Japan." The best supply/demand example I can think of is the Energy
> Deregulation that happened here in California a few years ago, which was
> fraudulantly created. So yeah I think he did it for dad; and 9/11 and the war
> in Afganistan, combined with the high approval rate for the Afgan war, created
> him the perfect opportunity (in his mind) for him to do it.
>

OK so for you it wasn't for WMD ? therefore aknowledging bush had lied to the public.
All the rest REMOVING A DICTATOR, REBUILDING IRAK were just obligations and
logic consequences after invasion. So again Bush is still lying ?

So we are back to oil. Do you think Irak's oil production capacity were fully used
during Sadam's regime ? Do you think that since Sadam is gone American company
will be fully employed in the serch for oil and the benifit (make it indirect if you want)
from Irak producing more oil ?

I found it easier to get to the point by asking question then by making affirmation.
What I am looking for here is a valuable justification for all the peoples who have died
since the invasion, and the world consequence over long term. I am getting closer.

> nice page ;-)
> THE BUSH CONSPIRACY
> THEORY GENERATOR
> http://www.buttafly.com/bush/index.php
>

BEST LINK EVER!

Too bad that everyone will call me a Guido sympathiser now.

> > So what was in your point of view the real motives for that war.
> >
>
> I think Misfit has it partly right, but it's not so simple. The Middle East
> is a hotbed of anti-American feeling--and they may have good reason to hate us
> (but not to justify the attack on 9/11). Without going too deep, I think the
> reasons were a combination of American security (it could not be proven WMD
> were gone from Iraq), multiple violations by Saddam of UN approved ceasefire
> requirements (these violations were acts of war), a desire to have a secular,
> democratic government in the Middle East friendly to the US (Saudi Arabia is
> friendly but neither democratic nor secular).
>
> I talked about this more fully in my earlier post, which no one has replied
> to, #43851,

OK you also agree with misfit that the reasons presented to american publics and the world community has to find and detroy WMD was a lie. Since it could not be proven he didn't have WMD it could not be proven he did have WMD right ? OK so violation by Sadam of the UN sanctions and the desire to have a friendly administration in the middle east are the reasons for having Invade Irak. It look to me like...Since we don't have friend over there, what if we go and build ourselves one from zero. We remove Sadam, put a temporary pro american puppet, get rid of all opponents, and finally have a so friendly country that we could finally go ahead in developping it's oil capacity for our great benifit. In the mean time we have to rebuilt the country we have so badly destroyed. who will benifits from that? When normal people are sent to Irak to "paint the wall" for almost 2000$ week, don't you think his employer is actually getting a lot of contract money ? Like many said, the prices of oil is due to offer and demand. Do you think that by having full controll of one of the biggest oil producer, is somehow an economic advantage ? And make no mistake about it, the next Irak election will be won by the guy the US want to have in power. If the media and public oppinion can be so easaly manipulated here in the states, imagine how it will be easy over there...Look at afganistan, it's THE example. Did you ever heard of all the other candidates ? Did the Afgans did ? And make some search of the past of this new president.....Like you said The Middle East is a hotbed of anti-American feeling. Do you think this feeling has or will improved since the Irak invasion ? Do you think killing 100000 innocent muslims is a good way to make friends in the middle east ? You see, when you look at the Irak war from under, top, sides, etc you see that it is all for business. You see that the reasons your government have told you were lies, and they used them to make you scarred. WMD and immediate threats ? NOT at all. Removing old Friend Sadam ? Since when the US is against dictator ? (look at CIA history) Rebuilding Irak ? YES BINGO MONEY !!! OIL ? YES !!!! There will be a lot of jobs for texans business comming and we will make sure our new "friend" is producing at the max speed !!! Having friendly country in the midle east ? YES !!! Since we are too arogant to have some we have built one from zero, well not really, we have destroyed one (of course we choose Irak because it was an "Evil" country anyway), killed one houndred thousands of it's citicens, put a puppet prime minister that is fully at our feet, make sure we got rid of all the opponents to the new "democratic" regime, and BINGO !!! WE WON !!!!! America is saved ! No more terrorist, All the midle east loves us now, and the world can rest in peace MISSION ACCOMPLISHED GEORGES !!!!!
And once again may I insist that it has all been mastermized by the president you have just reelect for MORAL VALUES. Your pridedent has his hands so full of bloods for all the reasons you can or cannot imagine, anything exept MORAL. The world was and still is oppposed to that war, and they are right to be. Americans (republicans) are too patriotics to admit it and to see the truth. But time will do his job, as always and it will say that it was a very bad time in the short history of USA.

Now what is going to happen when terrorist hits you again ? Who will be on your
side this time ? Like I said Afganistan Invasion was justified, not Irak. What kind of coallition of the whilling will you be able to build ? I am afraid peoples all around the world will kind of think, well after all they were looking for it. And that alone, if was I was americans, would have been enough for not reelecting Bush. If his MORAL views are shared by a majority of americans, well....I really feel sorry for that because I am nor anti american and I hate to see innocent peoples suffers no matter where they come from. But it is obvious to me that you have made the wrong choice.

On récolte ce que l'on sème.
One recult one what seem

Now you can had those reasons for some.

-Revenge over muslims in general.
-Religious belief (often with wrong interpretation)
If anyone rebels against your orders and does not obey
every command you give him, he shall be put to death.
But be firm and steadfast. (Joshua 1:18 NAB)
-A profond feeling of fear and hates.
-TOTAL misunderstanding and ignorance of foreign countries.
-Too much TV and not enough general education.
-Too much violance and low level of news and programs on TV
-Desire to show how powerful the military is. I mean what's the point
in investing 500 billion dollars if it's too let the equipments rust ?
When you look at how Americans like guns, I bet all I have that some
guys are having erection when they see marines shooting muslims on the
TV news...
-etc...

Now if it makes some hangry at me because I picture such a bad image
of americans in general, and especialy since they will see French on
my profile, my answer is, 48% of americans agrees with that. The other
52% well, I guess most of them could not even point Irak on a world map.

That is how I see things Tom.

---

<img src="http://boinc.mundayweb.com/one/stats.php?userID=2384&amp;trans=off"><img src="http://img98.exs.cx/img98/1999/hamradio.gif"><img src="http://img54.exs.cx/img54/3872/cqkey.gif">

hey Misfit, if "W did it for dad" -- how come GHW Bush's book outlined in no uncertain terms why it would be a mistake to go into Iraq for "regime change?"

PS -- here are randomly generated conspiracies from the generator which seem true ;-)


George W. Bush rigged the 2000 election so that gun owners, oil companies, and the Christian Coalition could upset The French.

George W. Bush invaded Iraq so that the Jews and Rush Limbaugh could conquer Iraqis.

George W. Bush allowed 9/11 to happen so that oil companies, Republicans, and the Jews could oppress Muslims.

George W. Bush lowered taxes so that the Christian Coalition and Ann Coulter could oppress The French.

---

Hi, I´m from Argentina. I will try to expose my opinion on this subject (sorry for my english).
I have been reading all the posts and I can affirm I agree with the european arguments (mainly). So I won´t post about that.
I would like, otherwise, to tell you how USA is seen in South America. Briefly, we believe americans are mainly ignorants and fanatics. About the ignorance: recently half of the students weren´t abble to locate the Pacific Ocean...(where´s your country??). About the fanaticism: I quote Carl Christensen´s statistics.
USA is an empire, but a global empire: it´s structure is unique in the history of imperialism. It´s characteristics seems to be "freedom", "science", etc. what freedom? the possibility of choising McDonald´s menues? Were Kerry or Bush so different?. It´s freedom is so delimited that the choice became futile: it has already been taken by the ones who present you the "options".
How is it possible that Bush have won this elections!!!!!????? He´s an idiot! He doesn´t know where he is!. Americans vote him for his moral values...he kills people!!!!!!!! HE IS NOT MORAL!!!!!!
AWAKE!!!!!! PLEASE!!!!

---

"Raggio spezza, amista lunga"

> How is it possible that Bush have won this elections!!!!!????? He´s an idiot!
> He doesn´t know where he is!. Americans vote him for his moral values...he
> kills people!!!!!!!! HE IS NOT MORAL!!!!!!
> AWAKE!!!!!! PLEASE!!!!
>

I'm sorry you are so angry, Luca. I am an American (there are more than 250 million of us and we are all unique individuals), and I don't think I fit your description.

All countries make mistakes, for example, when the military dictator of Argentina attacked the Falkland Islands because the Argentine economy was so bad that the attack seemed like a nice patriotic distraction from the country's economic woes. But I don't hold you responsible for that.

If you look honestly at the history of this Iraq war, you will see it was not a mistake, but a reaction to the criminal acts of Saddam. You have chosen to believe the propaganda about President Bush that is repeated in this thread without question, and that's fine, but don't disparage the majority of the American People who heard the campaigns of the candidates and chose the leader who is best for us. I don't think anyone in the US was concerned about your irrational dislike for either candidate.

---

Rove: Bush Serious About Gay Marriage Ban

HAHA, yeah, some "morality" from a bunch of venal hypocrites. The RepugliKKKans would be the first to actually put into the Constitution the removal of freedoms (other than the "freedom to persecute others" that the rednecks love).

---

> I'm sorry you are so angry, Luca. I am an American (there are more than 250
> million of us and we are all unique individuals), and I don't think I fit your
> description.
>
> All countries make mistakes, for example, when the military dictator of
> Argentina attacked the Falkland Islands because the Argentine economy was so
> bad that the attack seemed like a nice patriotic distraction from the
> country's economic woes. But I don't hold you responsible for that.
>
> If you look honestly at the history of this Iraq war, you will see it was not
> a mistake, but a reaction to the criminal acts of Saddam. You have chosen to
> believe the propaganda about President Bush that is repeated in this thread
> without question, and that's fine, but don't disparage the majority of the
> American People who heard the campaigns of the candidates and chose the leader
> who is best for us. I don't think anyone in the US was concerned about your
> irrational dislike for either candidate.

First of all, I would like to thank Tom Koenig for the response to my last post. The way he made it and the terms he used shows he doesn´t fit (totally) my description. Although I will try to show that he fit it partially:
1) I agree with this "there are more than 250 million of us and we are all unique individuals". That´s the cost everybody incurrs in when he is talking of "averages".
2) I also agree with this "All countries make mistakes". But I believe we have to work to solve them, no to make them worst.
3) With what I cannot agree is with this "for example, when the military dictator of Argentina attacked the Falkland Islands because the Argentine economy was so bad that the attack seemed like a nice patriotic distraction from the country's economic woes. But I don't hold you responsible for that". First of all, I would like to thank you again, in this occasion because of your knowledge of argentinian History. About this subject I would like to say that I´m auxiliar lecturer of "Economic and Social History of Argentina and Latin America" in the University of La Plata, here, my city. I don´t mean with this that I have the only truth, but instead that I have some idea of what I´m talking about. I agree with the description about the causes of the "Malvinas" War (by the way, this islands are 200 km from our shores and 10.000 km from England)(would you like if we steal Manhattan from you?). You have given to me my argument: the one who initiate the war (I don´t know if it´s particularly a mistake) was a DICTATOR WHO REACHED THE POWER WITH AMERICAN MONEY AND SUPPORT!!
WE DIDN´T VOTE HIM!!! WE WANTED TO KILL HIM!! (and we don´t want americans to support dictators in our contry!!) So, what I´m preventing you from is DON´T VOTE A DICTATOR TO YOURSELVES!!, you that are able to choice (and there is no "americans" to destroy you will). By the way, I won´t feel responsible por the acts of that dictator, YOU, AMERICANS WHO PAYED HIM, ARE MORE RESPONSIBLE THAN ME!! (or, at least, those who voted the ones who payed).
4) About Iraq: you can´t be right in any aspect ever. If Hussein was a dictator, UN was to confront him, not you!!. By the way, IF YOU ARE SO AGAINST DICTATORS AND SO IN FAVOR OF DEMOCRACY, WHY DID YOU PUT HUSSEIN IN THE GOVERNMENT IN FIRST PLACE? WHY DID YOU PAY LATIN AMERICA´S DICTATORS??

YOU HAVE THREE OR FOUR, NOT ONE BLANKET IN YOUR EYES: YOU READ HISTORY THE SAME WAY YOU WATCH CARTOONS. TRY TO THINK ABOUT IT!
(and in this case, Tom Koenig is a very illustrated american, who knows about our war. ask anybody else what do they know about "Malvinas" ("Falklands"))

---

"Raggio spezza, amista lunga"

Marc, when you asked me:
> > > So what was in your point of view the real motives for that war.
> > >
**I thought you were being serious. It turns out that you weren’t interested in my attempt at an honest explanation, from your answer it seems that you have twisted my reply to make another hateful attack on Americans and President Bush. I’m getting tired of it, because I’ve heard it from you and all the others in this thread who accuse, but do not back their accusations with either logical arguments or fact.

You said:
> OK you also agree with misfit that the reasons presented to american publics
> and the world community has to find and detroy WMD was a lie. Since it could
> not be proven he didn't have WMD it could not be proven he did have WMD right
**I never said that. If I told you that I’m 52 years old (because I believe I am 52) and you dig up my birth certificate that says I’m 53 years old, did I tell you a lie? The truth is that Saddam did have WMD in the past, and he agreed to remove those WMD and allow inspections; but he went back on his promises. Did you not read my earlier post that said that these violations by themselves are an act of war that justifies the attack on Saddam? Why don’t you respond to that?

You ask:
> ? OK so violation by Sadam of the UN sanctions and the desire to have a
> friendly administration in the middle east are the reasons for having Invade
> Irak. It look to me like...Since we don't have friend over there, what if we
> go and build ourselves one from zero. We remove Sadam, put a temporary pro
> american puppet, get rid of all opponents, and finally have a so friendly
> country that we could finally go ahead in developping it's oil capacity for
> our great benifit. In the mean time we have to rebuilt the country we have so
> badly destroyed. who will benifits from that? When normal people are sent to
> Irak to "paint the wall" for almost 2000$ week, don't you think his employer
> is actually getting a lot of contract money ? Like many said, the prices of
> oil is due to offer and demand. Do you think that by having full controll of
> one of the biggest oil producer, is somehow an economic advantage ? And make
> no mistake about it, the next Irak election will be won by the guy the US want
> to have in power. If the media and public oppinion can be so easaly
> manipulated here in the states, imagine how it will be easy over there
**Marc, don’t you remember the French involvement in Vietnam? Just a few posts back, you seemed to agree how important it is that Iraqi oil production is protected for the advantage of the Iraqi people. Were you just lying when you said that? Did the United States “profit” or “benefit” in the re-development of Kuwaiti oil after the first Gulf War? No, the Kuwaiti people have been profiting from soaring oil prices that Americans are paying (no matter who we actually buy the oil from).

You said:
> ...Look
> at afganistan, it's THE example. Did you ever heard of all the other
> candidates ? Did the Afgans did ?
**Did the Afghans ever have a choice of president in the past? Maybe someday they will be politically sophisticated enough to understand that splitting their opposition vote between 15 candidates will almost guarantee that the incumbent will win. That would happen in France, it would happen in England, it would happen in Israel or Germany, and it happened in Afghanistan. That’s how democracy works. And international observers have said the election was valid.

You said:
> And make some search of the past of this new
> president.....Like you said The Middle East is a hotbed of anti-American
> feeling. Do you think this feeling has or will improved since the Irak
> invasion ?
**After World War II it took decades for Germany to be economically and politically stable. Yet you ask that Iraq and Afghanistan run perfectly in months, despite an active insurgency that is bent on destroying these countries' infrastructure and terrorizing their citizens. When the insurgency is stopped, and the people have an opportunity to vote for their leaders (something that has not been done for 40+ years), I hope you will see some appreciation for what has been done in these countries.

You ask:
> Do you think killing 100000 innocent muslims is a good way to make
> friends in the middle east ? You see, when you look at the Irak war from
> under, top, sides, etc you see that it is all for business. You see that the
> reasons your government have told you were lies, and they used them to make
> you scarred. WMD and immediate threats ?
**I am sorry some innocents died in the war. I’m not sure that your figure of 100,000 is completely correct, as Saddam’s army numbered about 4 million, and nowhere near that number were killed or captured, so probably a large number of that 100,000 were army members who stripped off their uniform and continue to fight. Even now, insurgents are fighting coalition and Iraqi troops. Some of those insurgents are former Iraqi army members, but they’re not wearing the Iraqi army uniform. Do you call insurgents civilians?

> NOT at all. Removing old Friend Sadam
> ? Since when the US is against dictator ? (look at CIA history) Rebuilding
> Irak ? YES BINGO MONEY !!! OIL ? YES !!!! There will be a lot of jobs for
> texans business comming and we will make sure our new "friend" is producing at
> the max speed !!! Having friendly country in the midle east ? YES !!! Since we
> are too arogant to have some we have built one from zero, well not really, we
> have destroyed one (of course we choose Irak because it was an "Evil" country
> anyway), killed one houndred thousands of it's citicens, put a puppet prime
> minister that is fully at our feet, make sure we got rid of all the opponents
> to the new "democratic" regime, and BINGO !!! WE WON !!!!! America is saved !
> No more terrorist, All the midle east loves us now, and the world can rest in
> peace MISSION ACCOMPLISHED GEORGES !!!!!
**Your hatred for George Bush is clear. But you don’t seem to understand that it has colored your logic and impartiality to where you just sound like a raving maniac.

> And once again may I insist that it has all been mastermized by the president
> you have just reelect for MORAL VALUES.
**Don’t be so simpleminded. There was more than one issue in the election and you know it.

> Your pridedent has his hands so full
> of bloods for all the reasons you can or cannot imagine, anything exept MORAL.
> The world was and still is oppposed to that war, and they are right to be.
> Americans (republicans) are too patriotics to admit it and to see the truth.
> But time will do his job, as always and it will say that it was a very bad
> time in the short history of USA.
**We’ll see.

> Now you can had those reasons for some.
>
> -Revenge over muslims in general.
> -Religious belief (often with wrong interpretation)
> -A profond feeling of fear and hates.
> -TOTAL misunderstanding and ignorance of foreign countries.
> -Too much TV and not enough general education.
> -Too much violance and low level of news and programs on TV
> -Desire to show how powerful the military is. I mean what's the point
> in investing 500 billion dollars if it's too let the equipments rust ?
> When you look at how Americans like guns, I bet all I have that some
> guys are having erection when they see marines shooting muslims on the
> TV news...
**Nice rant, but it is not valid for me or the majority of Americans. Let’s say you find one American (or 10 or a hundred) that fits the description you just gave. How can you say that all Americans are like that, or it was the justification for the war? Are you stupid and ugly just because there are some stupid ugly Canadian/French? I gave you a legal justification for the war and you have all but ignored it. (Perhaps because you know it’s true.) Your accusations are just that, based on assumptions that are provably wrong. Americans don’t hate Muslims or Muslim governments, we’re not stealing oil. And as for your comment that some (American) guys are “having erection when they see marines shooting muslims on the TV news...” that is just your own perverted, sick, disgusting, immoral, ignorant prejudice. But then, it shows how much you hate Americans! In the past you have tried to remain balanced and honest in these discussions, but your insults here show your true motivation.

> Now if it makes some hangry at me because I picture such a bad image
> of americans in general, and especialy since they will see French on
> my profile, my answer is, 48% of americans agrees with that. The other
> 52% well, I guess most of them could not even point Irak on a world map.
**I can point to Iraq on a map. And I know where to find your head, too.

---

It's the absolute hubris, chutzpah, and hypocrisy for Americans to claim they are all against dictators like Saddam, considering they have loved 'em in the past, especially in Iran, Guatemala, Nicaragua, not to mention one democratically-elected Allende who was killed (ironically on the date "September 11th" -- 1973) in favor of the heinous Pinochet!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende

Not to mention the current "allies" of the US include the military dictatorship of Pakistan, Kazakhstan, and that of Saudi Arabia.

---

Ten&eacute;s que darte cuenta de algo: La corrupci&oacute;n es una mala calidad human que siempre existi&oacute; en todo los sistemas pol&iacute;ticos. La &uacute;nica diferencia entre las cagadas de ac&aacute; y las cagadas en &#x266a;mi Buenos Aires querido&#x266b; es que la mierda que ocurre en la Rep&uacute;blica es m&aacute;s consistente y m&aacute;s barato.

Now how many of you knew about 9/11/73 before 9/11/01? I think less than today's 1%, and I'm speaking very generously of American knowledge.

Well, Luca, you started out calmly but then began to argue irrationally. (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you don't know that ALL CAPITAL LETTERS is the same as yelling on the internet.) I don't want to hear about your hatred of my President, I want to hear reasons why my country did the wrong thing.

Regarding the Falklands (the English name, because it is, and was in British hands), what diplomatic efforts were there to restore the Islands to Argentina? What efforts were made to compensate the British citizens who lived there for generations? The attack, as I remember, was quite abrupt. The British did not have a defensive military capability anywhere close. I don't bring this up to justify America's action in Iraq, just so you remember that countries and their leaders, yours included, do make mistakes.

The US gives aid to lots of countries, and some are led by dictators and kings, but the US did not decide to attack the Falklands. You make the same logical error that Petit Soliel has made: that America has made mistakes, therefore the war in Iraq was a mistake.

The US removed a brutal dictator, who used WMD on his own people and in his war against Iran, and who violated cease fire agreements and supported terrorists (not the ones who attacked the US on 9/11, but terrorists nonetheless), and who stole money from his own people to build lavish palaces while his country starved--I could go on. Tell me why this was a mistake without referring to mistakes the US has made in the past. Yes, we once supported Saddam, as we once supported your country. You say it was up to the UN to confront Saddam, but it turns out he was bribing UN officials, so they might never have agreed, and again, his acts of war needed to be addressed immediately. I have no blankets over my eyes, but your emotional response shows how clouded is your judgement.

---

How about this Tom --- the US made terrible mistakes thanks to right-wing Nixon-era hacks such as Kissinger, Rumsfeld, Cheney etc. And these right-wing Nixon-era hacks still surround Dumbya Bush in one form or another. One can conclude that they are still making the same mistakes based on their past history.

---

I've got to remind you (Or maybe you already know this) that if it weren't for the Malvinas, Argentina would still be an anything-does, no-holds-barred dictatorship where the citizens would come up with any excuse to vindicate their government.

The reason why Luca is speaking out is not because of an invasion force or a grassroots democracy campaign, but rather because the dictatorship send 18-year-olds off to two insignificant islands, with insufficient training to have even a cap gun in their hands, and they all got killed. If it weren't for that, we'd still be looking the other way and celebrating World Cup wins. So in essence, the dumbest move ever made in Argentine history resulted in the path to democracy. Kinda weird that way.

As for "The US removed a brutal dictator", there are so many brutal dictators - Why just Saddam? Why wasn't Pinochet put in his place? Or Deng Xiaoping after Tiennamen Sq.? I'd have an easier time swallowing that argument if I could point to a precedent other than Manuel Noriega...

@Luca: Hacenos una gauchada - Us&aacute; min&uacute;sculas, <b>, y <i>, &iquest;por-fa?

> Now how many of you knew about 9/11/73 before 9/11/01? I think less than
> today's 1%, and I'm speaking very generously of American knowledge.
>
Not really, 80% of US highschool graduates cannot correctly locate Canada on an unmarked globe of the earth. (that little fact comes from a study done by the National Geographic Society)

---

Account frozen...

You've gotta be kidding! How can you miss a country that's always painted red!?!?

Anyway... <lang=es_ar> Yo aún me acuerdo de este cartel en la autopista llendo a Ezeiza...</lang>