Skip to main content

I've read a lot of posts on how President Bush is wrong to wage war on Iraq. In spite of sterling evidence provided by myself and Lea of Saddam's desire to obtain nukes and other weapons of mass destruction--in clear violation of the 1998 UN Resolution that demands he disarm or face military action, there are some on this forum who question the motives of our government, as if the United States was the despotic tin-horn dictatorship.

But just what do you know of Saddam?? Not very much do you.

Well that's why your pal Bankins is here. To enlighten and inform you of the kind of human garbage many here are lining up to defend.

For example, here's a short list of atrocities curtesy of the Iraqi dictator;

...4000 prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib Prison in 1984.

...3000 prisoners were executed at the Mahjar Prison between 1993 and 1998.

...About 2500 prisoners were executed between 1997 and 1999 in a "prison cleansing" campaign.

...122 male prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib prison in February/ March 2000. A further 23 political prisoners were executed there in October 2001.

...In October 2000, dozens of women accused of prostitution were beheaded without any judicial process. Some were accused for political reasons.
Women prisoners at Mahjar are routinely raped by their guards.

...Methods of torture used in Iraqi jails include using electric drills to mutilate hands, pulling out fingernails, knife cuts, sexual attacks and 'official rape'.

...Prisoners at the Qurtiyya Prison in Baghdad and elsewhere are kept in metal boxes the size of tea chests. If they do not confess they are left to die.

Again, that's the short list. This is the human slime some of you wish to defend.

For the complete story, click on the link below...

IRAQ UNDER SADDAM HUSSEIN
http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page6123.asp


big grin big grin big grin
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Of course not, The U.S is international law, how can they violate it. Only small weaker nations violate international law. The U.S is on the right side of justice and history. Sadaam is a despot and the U.S speaks with moral clarity when they say he should be disarmed. Sadaam will threaten his neighbors and primarily the great but evil State of Israel. The US must protect Israel even if it means Americans will die. The U.S. has never nor will it ever violate international law.

-------------------------
By all standards, some creatures are just plain strange, making us do double takes because their compositions or habits or appearances defy our sense of logic and our way of viewing reality. Take the wildebeest, the warthog, the hyena, the brown pelican, the Shar-Pei. These animals, seemingly wrought by committee, make us laugh or shake our heads. Another such creature, of the human kind -- and perhaps the strangest of all -- is the black Republican. "

Bill Maxwell

More to come later!

Your Brother Faheem
In support of those of us (like myself) who distrust the motives behind this campaign, the evils you mention about Saddam Hussein (Mr. Bankins) also describe many of our allies, past and present. We're not attacking him because he's had prostitutes beheaded. If that were true, then we should demand that Bush invade the north of Nigeria as well, not to mention the Saudis. I wonder what Kuwaitis do to their prostitutes?

We're not in this because Saddam is a scumbag. We're in it for other reasons. What we believe those reasons to really be forms the crux of our difference of opinion.
If this is a war on terrorism, why not attack them. If we are forcing countires to abide by un resolutions, why not force israel to abide by those resolutions levied against them?

Too many double standards and lies by the bush crew for me to justify sending our young men and women to die for the "BUSH' cause.

Bush should've done us all a favor and accepted the duel!
I-Man and Jazhawk, thanks.

Vox

You're a reasonable guy, and we may have to agree to disagree on yet another issue....

But ask yourself this;

....I've posted a link to Britian's dossier on Saddam. Given all the info that can be attained from that link, How comfortable are you that this fruitcake will attain nukes if the US does nothing??

....And, will you be among those who are still today crying about Bush's knowledge beforehand of 9/11, and make similar accusations when Saddam or maybe one of his sons commits an identical crisis in the future, if allowed to develop said nukes??

Just curious....(borrowing whoop's line.. wink )


big grin big grin big grin
We have 2 choices
1 we can act now to keep nukes out of the hands if people like Saddam who would have no problem using them if the chance arose.

2 we can turn or heads and look the other way and when one of those nuts does launch a missile or detonate a nuke we can retaliate with a few nukes or our own.

Saddam knew and understood the sanctions when he agreed to them, so he should get what he deserves.
Either way someone is not going to be happy.
Last edited {1}
Saddam is a bad guy. What about Musharaf in Pakistan? Is he bad too, he has tested nukes in 1999 and we know that the Taliban has made Pakistan one of their happy little homes. What about the Russians who used "something" on some hostages a few weeks ago and killed 118 people. Pick up the latest issue of National Geographic and see who has weapons of mass destruction, and it will definitely surpise you. At least some of you. All I'm saying and I think what some of the others have been saying on this board is that how can the US criticize and threatened Iraq when other enemies of the US also have weapons of mass destruction. Do you really think countries like Russia, Pakistan or North Korea are true allies. Take a moment and think about it. I think that you will come to the conclusion that they are associates of the US at best.

Souljah
I'm all for cleaning out some closets in Pakistan, Iran, nKorea, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, etc ..... big grin,
but I do realize that global politics is very big. Are we showing double standards, most definetly!!!! What drives our thought process as who to get and who is our friend confuses the hell out of me.

I am not a good person frown. I applauded the Russians for killing the terrorist and I wasn't concerned at the methods.
Believe it or not, I agree with much of your post. With friends like Russia, Pakistan, and North Korea, we don't need enemies.

Past admininstrations have sat back and allowed rogue nations obtain nukes and done absolutely nothing...even helped them. Vox's point is well taken.

The utterly useless UN postures as being the worlds peacekeepers, and waves their finger at rogue nations and say "bad, bad boys" and passes resolutions after resolutions that other countries simply ignor.

Unfortunately, there was no 9/11 crisis back then, and a president with the resolve to end terrorism. Now there is. When China and Russia no longer have the Saddams of the world to do business with, their terrorist abeting programs will dry up, and they will be forced to come up with conventional means to fund their evil empires.

Finally, we have a president that takes foreign policy and the defense of weaker nations seriously. Saddam cannot be allowed to possess weapons of mass destruction.

As we say in the video gamers community, for Saddam it's.....

"Game Over!!"


big grin big grin big grin
Hello Bankins,

quote:
When China and Russia no longer have the Saddams of the world to do business with, their terrorist abeting programs will dry up, and they will be forced to come up with conventional means to fund their evil empires.


This is an interesting point. Several months back I was reading that one of the ways we defeated the Soviets was by bankrupting them. Reagan did an arms race, and the commie Soviets lacked both the money to keep up, and a culture of innovation. If China, Pakistan, and Russia have no back door means of hitting us through terrorists, it could make things much simpler when it comes to dealing with them.
There you go jumping to conclusions again. I DO NOT JUSTIFY Saddaam Hussein. Just when Mr B Bankins said, "in clear violation of the 1998 UN Resolution that demands he disarm or face military action", I thought "hmm, like the USA hasn't violated laws."

And unlike the US, the Saddaam Hussein regime is only opressive on his people and not other countries in the world.

If the USA gave a flying f*** about the Iraqi people, I would be the first advocate of this war.
Last edited {1}
quote:
Originally posted by ArabianQueen:
There you go jumping to conclusions again. I DO NOT JUSTIFY Saddaam Hussein. Just when Mr B Bankins said, "in clear violation of the 1998 UN Resolution that demands he disarm or face military action", I thought "hmm, like the USA hasn't violated laws."

And unlike the US, the Saddaam Hussein regime is only opressive on his people and not other countries in the world.

_If the USA gave a flying f*** about the Iraqi people, I would be the first advocate of this war._


I don't give a flying F*** about the Iraqi people, nor the Palestinians. I think we should let Israel do whatever they feel they need to do.

I DO care about the United States. Any country or organization who threatens the stability of my country, threatens the stability of me, my family, and my way of life. If Saadam is a threat, he should be taken out. Obviously, if he treats his own country people with disdain, he will do so with us since he hates us.

Prior to 9/11, I did NOT support the US government stances on the Mid East. I thought it should have been more evenly divided as a matter of fairness. But after seeing Mid Eastern reaction and how they loathe my country, to hell with them all!!!!
Last edited {1}
My personal opinion is that even through other countries had nukes they were smart enough to realize what would happen if they popped one on our soil. I believe that Saddam either doesn't understand the results of using weapons of mass destruction or just doesn't care, but that is what makes him so dangerous. Even the russians knew what to expect if they attacked with us nukes because of that a new term came into existence during the cold war...MAD... Mutual Assured Destruction, bascially you may destroy us but there will be nothing left of your country either. That whole throught I'm sure made more then one person on either side think twice about pushing the buttom.
quote:
Originally posted by B Bankins:
_ Vox _

You're a reasonable guy, and we may have to agree to disagree on yet another issue....

But ask yourself this;

....I've posted a link to Britian's dossier on Saddam. Given all the info that can be attained from that link, How comfortable are you that this fruitcake will attain nukes if the US does nothing??




Well, it's not that easy a question for me. There used to be, in the mall below the WTC, a sign that said that there were over 600,000 people in lower Manhattan during any given minute during the work day. That means that the population of Baltimore, or San Fran, was covered in ash that day. Had that been a chemical attack, there would be over 600,000 dead. That means that this is not a question to be answered based on how one feels about the US government, or about GW Bush. Anybody who does look at that way is being foolishly short-sighted.

But because I don't know for sure, this is an issue I don't mind being somewhat on the fence -- or CLOSE to the fence -- about. The thing is, BB, the link you provided is completely silent on Kuwait's slant drilling. Iraq was complaining about that for the whole year before they invaded, and yet, the British link blames the decision to invade Kuwait on other motives far less important orjustifiable. This leads me to believe that there are a lot of other points that the link either glosses over or distorts. Rumsfeld and Bush both have recently cited, as reasons to believe that Iraq is a threat, how many times in the last "month" of "few months" Iraq has shot at planes patrolling the no-fly zone. But they've been doing that for years, ever since Desert Storm. We're getting a lot of distorted information from our leaders, and I really have to say, if this guy is enough of a threat to us to actually pre-emptively attack him like this, it seems to me that we don't NEED distortions. The whole truth should work in favor of attacking. The whole truth should tell us we need to act. Distortions telling us to act make me question the motives of the distorters. I was pro-war earlier this year, before I started getting all the distortions. Now, I'm suspicious.

You know what I mean? In the wake of 9/11, when the very idea of terrorists and rogue states possessing weapons of mass destruction makes your skin crawl, why do I have reservations? Why don't I feel comfortable about this? I see the void in the NYC skyline every day. I had middle easterners living in the apartment next door to me, who lived there for 3 months before abruptly moving out, 5 weeks before 9/11, along with three others right across the path from me. Can you imagine how creepy that felt after 9/11? A bunch of alums from my high school died in the attacks. I want blood. And yet, the questionable information I'm getting from my government (and Britain) is causing me to step back and say, 'wait a minute.' It should be much easier than this. The fact that it's not is why I have my doubts.

I don't doubt that Saddam is evil. But if he's the threat the government tells us he is, then the prime minister's dossier shouldn't have been afraid to tell us that Kuwait's slant drilling across the Iraqi border was a prime reason why Iraq invaded Kuwait. The dossier sounds like propaganda, rather than information. And anyway, we should have much more concrete info about Iraq's capabilities AND their motives; it is, after all, the most monitored country on earth.
Last edited {1}
Line up the scum the racist, bigoted, vile and lowlife white apartheid regime perpetrated against South Black Africans, then examine Communist China who is not a friend of the US and possess Nukes! If as the President Bush claims, that "we must get Saddam before he gets us," then for Gods Sake explain why Castro and Cuba is still here! Explain why we haven't disarmed the Communist Chinese and North Koreans who both HAVE NUKES NOW!

The President is using jingoism, propaganda, outright lies and war in attempt to shore up a weak president and secure a second term! The President of the United States is a BOLD FACE LIAR!!!!
GW Bush is the absolute worst, most horrible and terrible liar I've have ever seen occupy the White House!!!
The president is relying on the majority of the populus to keep believing what they are told and not think for themselves.

I'm afraid, that is exactly what has taken place. Most americans, as witnessed by the elections of a week ago, have been told to forget the fact that the economy is dead and focus on a non-threatening leader 6,000 miles away.

For the last year or so, we've been fed a steady diet of fear mongering by the hoodwinks in office until most americans actually believe sadaam is going to send a nuke into their living rooms. I don't think hollywood could've written a better script.

To top it off, some of the same generals who fought in Iraq during the gulf war have said this conflict is unwise and certainly not needed.

I hope those who seek war will be willing to do the right thing and help fight this war by signing up. No excuses, just act on what you say you believe.
I just don't understand your distrust of President Bush. I already know you don't approve of him, but what has he done in his past that makes him untrustworthy?

In my lifetime, only Nixon and Clinton have been untrustworthy presidents.

Also, information and intellegence is extremely difficult to come by, because it is next to impossible to infiltrate the Muslim world. Don't believe those James Bond movies. The majority of what we know comes from Iraqi defectors and captured smugglers.

If Saddam is so innocent, why is he now refusing to allow the UN inspectors into the country when only a few months ago, he agreed to "unconditional access" to Iraq.

And why is he shooting at planes in the No-Fly Zone, if there's nothing to hide? Don't you find it odd that he would shoot at planes that aren't attacking him??

And finally, Saddam has threatened his neighbors with chemical weapons if they aid the US in attacking Iraq.

If He does not possess these weapons, how can he make these threats??


big grin big grin big grin
The condition. Sahu, was the name given a people/person who relied on external means for education, edification(Books) and on the same coin, exact opposite side, Par excellence. Par Excellence speaks for itself and describes a truly supreme people capable of gathering knowledge from within themselves and the earth itself, signs. Now the Sahu are swayed with the bells and whistles the 'slick talk', but never puts together the simple connections, never sees the 'BIG' picture. Nearly a million of our EARTH NEIGHBORS not enemies, gathered in florence to say what most of you are too scared or brainwashedto say. damn ALL OF YOU FLYIN RED WHITE BLUE and never had a simple pay back until CLINTON apologized while this BUSH executed 90 NINETY of our BLACK MEN(not all innocent)in TX. WHEREs the post about Nearly a million folks screaming what we're scared to accept.
T H I S S H I T IS W R O N G
It is 2003, cave men are running the earth and their slaves are cheering, yeah a rib shot "SLAVES". NO "OFFENSE", just using the bill of rights broadly. 9/11 an unspeakable tragedy should of been the wake up to GROW UP not ... Global tuff guy challenge via poor ass folks and m-16's, THUMBS up gestures the roman crowd, let him be dispatched!!!, What is this primetime microwaved Niggerism, what happened to our people our struggle and movement our leaders gunned down and bombed by these same folks and You so called chose sides. Amidu Dialo, Bobby Hutton, Patrice Lamumba, Sheik Anta Diop what happened arm chair survivalists rooting for the strongest EVIL not the PUREST RIGHT AND TrUE. MOST of you didnt give a damn about or even could point out certain things on a map of southeast asia and the gulf region, THE MIDDLE EAST where is middle east compared to middle north or west??!! - Rewind Yourselves to decades leading up to 9/11 and the attempts before etc. Silly you all to banish our heritage to take up the swastika flag of our people a dark day in hell when the first AFRICANS to make it here would dream of their own loin raising their fist in UNITY with their captors without reaping our revenge. Revengfully building ourselves to out do those who wrote in books of our inequality to even their race let alone their grandest society.
And U'll debate and raise points in their favor and never once hold a serious NOTE WORTHY conversatin about our re-building. Do you think they stop improving upon themselves and their possesions and position, hiring us and others to improve it as well. You all give this talk/debate educatd people gathering energy?. Its done the war will be here but are you ready for the outcome?, the enemy is not just Saddam, or a MUSLIM (BOOHOO SCARY MONSTERS) but an ideology set in the thinking of all of their misfortune stems from the global policy of good ole' america and its 6 out of ten obese citizens consuming all of what they wont share. The medicine technology etc, Rome didnt last forever and its citizenry was almost all roman. When in rome do as the roman, when in america do as the neighborhood dictates. You buy gas from your terror enemy, subway sandwichs cause jarred lost weight from them, gas from them, convenient store squishies from them. Now where will you go BP and the crown of england or bush and his people drilling up alaska more and more. When will we be able to make world decisions and not just babble on over powering technology like children with calculators. A voiceless people forever talking, and about what? not themselves!, not their collective future lookin down the barrel of AIDS and CRACK REMEMBER!!!!
If SADDAM got'ta go to stop the hair parlor talk then I'll get'em, if when I return You, my net friends, can hold one permenant forum about US!!
Peace I still have love and wish the clouds will break so U'll see the light
Khem Saqa
Last edited {1}
In short, the MISEDUCATION OF THE BLACMNAN has come full circle.

Take a close look at some the opinions and thoughts posted here and look at people like clarence thomas, condi rice, colin powell and others of that slave mindset!

....and we wonder why we can't get it together as a people!
Yet another report of Iraq firing on American planes in the no-fly zones, of course American war planes had to destroy what the government reports as radar and other enemy sites. Since Dessert Storm, the US government has for years reported being fired upon with not a single loss of coalition aircraft! Are the Iraqis that bad of a shot that in 10 years the US Government claims Iraq has been firing on coalition aircraft without ever downing a single aircraft? More LIES told by white people or more specifically our US government. But since Jesus is white and Negroes unconditionally believe in Jesus, then so it goes that they believe in white folk, i.e., GW Bush!!
quote:
Originally posted by B Bankins:
I just don't understand your distrust of President Bush. I already know you don't approve of him, but what has he done in his past that makes him untrustworthy?

In my lifetime, only Nixon and Clinton have been untrustworthy presidents.

Also, information and intellegence is extremely difficult to come by, because it is next to impossible to infiltrate the Muslim world. Don't believe those James Bond movies. The majority of what we know comes from Iraqi defectors and captured smugglers.

If Saddam is so innocent, why is he now refusing to allow the UN inspectors into the country when only a few months ago, he agreed to "unconditional access" to Iraq.

And why is he shooting at planes in the No-Fly Zone, if there's nothing to hide? Don't you find it odd that he would shoot at planes that aren't attacking him??

And finally, Saddam has threatened his neighbors with chemical weapons if they aid the US in attacking Iraq.

If He does not possess these weapons, how can he make these threats??


big grin big grin big grin


The trust question, like I said before, is based on what the administration has said about the current threat. It doesn't sound right to me. It's not the trustworthiness of the man (which I can't speak on), it's the trustworthiness of the message, that has me questioning. When you tell me that this guy has elevated himself to the level of nuclear menace to America, when he wasn't seen in that light before 9/11, justify attacking him on grounds other than that he's shot at planes over the no-fly zone in the past month. He's shot at them for the past 240 months, and there has been no terror threat from him during that time. The info has kind of an 80's Soviet feel to it; I get the sense that I'm getting propaganda more than information. That's the reason.

As for his past, I can't say I know. But I do know that his family is rooted in the oil industry, and they have a questionable past regarding world events. There's a troubling connection between His grandfather and the Nazis. And the erosion of civil liberties imbedded in many of his bills... there is a lot of reason not to be going along with what's happening.

As for why he's shooting at planes in the no-fly zone, I don't see myself not doing what I can do to show my displeasure at foreign planes patrolling my own airspace to keep me from flying in it. No matter how wrong he is, it's understandable and easy to see. We can't be arrogant enough to think our enemies are going to be so compliant. However, the point isn't that he's doing it, it's that his doing it was cited as a reason why he's suddenly become a chem/bio/nuclear threat worthy of attacking. That doesn't make sense.

Finally, as for the threats he's made, that depends on the source of that info. If this guy is trying to deny that he has them, then I seriously doubt he would turn around and threaten their use.

But now that he's decided to go along with the inspections, we'll see. He needs to understand that if he doesn't have them, there's no reason not to comply. These are dangerous times, and he needs to understand that nobody will tolerate him having these weapons. So if he plays games, he'll understand that will constitute reason to attack him in a world wary of such threats. Whatever Bush's motives, Saddam needs to not play games or face the 'quences.
I dug up this old thread (thanks for opening it, MBM) just to bring an old debate under newer light. This concerned the pre-war debate about whether we should invade Iraq. We had a super-staunch right-wing black conservative arguing that Bush was right...

The thing is, looking at my position and those of the other anti-war arguers in this thread, there is NOT ONE SINGLE POINT THAT I WOULD CHANGE TODAY, knowing what we know now.

It was unbelievable to me back then that anyone would favor Bush's position. And since then, every one of our concerns about has pretty much been proven right.

Certainly, I would have preferred a candidate who saw from the start what bullshit this war was going to be, because it has ALWAYS been so obvious that we were right, that it doesn't seem like equivocation was ever necessary. But the bottom line is... here we are, 2 years later, and a chance to bounce from the White House a clown who (among other things) led our country to a wasteful war under fraudulent circumstances, that has made the whole world far less safe than we ever were before. There are a legion of reasons to want Bush out; this is but one. For me, right now there's nothing else to say except...

VOTE!!!!
A black conservative is a walking oxymoron....so why would you expect any logical, rational thought from them....all i ever expect them to do is to pander to racist whites at the expense of their people and be happy they got to sit at massa'a feet on the porch......a sad species of animal indeed.....the negroes were stupid then.....and are now....still stupid...........
Puleeze...it is their nature to tuck their tails and tear azz in another direction.....on any of that illogical, self-loathing way of thinking they entertain, particularly on issues relevant to black people.........they seem to live in deference to whites and that appeasing them( an imaginary concept) is more important than thinking or acting on behalf of black people as a collective..........they never cease to amaze me....sigh....
No one believes the U.S. 'jumped' Saddam because he is a human rights violator.

No one believes the U.S 'jumped' Saddam, because he had weapons of mass destruction.

No one believes the U.S. 'jumped' Saddam to bring democracy and freedom to the Iraqi people.

No one believes the U.S. 'jumped' Saddam only because he violated U.N. Resolution 1441.

No one believes the U.S. 'jumped' Saddam for 9/11, OR Al Qaeda.

There are two reasons the U.S. 'jumped' Saddam.

1. Daddy

2. Oil.

PEACE

Jim Chester
Why should we care about what Saddam did to his people in his region with his neigbors? How does it affect you, or us? It doesn't. And it won't.

He's been contained for over a decade. If the oil wasn't there, we wouldn't even be bothered. Open your eyes!!!!1
There are brutal dictators all over the world. Hell, in the middle east, Saudia Arabia and the United Arab Emerites run the LARGEST child slavery importation ring in the world. Where's the outrage on that? i could go on and on.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×