• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

The London bombers were set up:(

Christopher Brooks said:
I am not accusing these gents of a crime. It is up to
those who do to make a judicial and valid case to support the
allegations.

And the munition is? You forgot to include any facts.

Reference please.

Oh, that wins the debate. Not notice my little post on you recently? Why do you think so many just ignore you? Because they know your a hack. I just hate you. And your camel. Notice you didn't give any background. We know what you are.
 
teacher said:
Oh, that wins the debate. Not notice my little post on you recently? Why do you think so many just ignore you? Because they know your a hack. I just hate you. And your camel. Notice you didn't give any background. We know what you are.

Teacher, if you cannot provide evidence I will not be offended if you ignore me as you suggest others do.
 
Christopher Brooks said:
Teacher, if you cannot provide evidence I will not be offended if you ignore me as you suggest others do.

So as usual I destroy all your points and you cling to one thing.

Sentex I think.

Now you tell me what taggets are. Because that's how we know.

And you missed the Silverstump post on the 9/11 thread.

Any time you want a deabate boy you got it. Back and forth for all to see. Run away again.
 
Christopher Brook said:
I accept there is a question regards the exact numbers of casualties in Iraq. Some sources suggest my figure. This estimation includes the lives lost due to the invasion. What ever the real number, everyone of them is the result of an illegal invasion based on fraudulent evidence.

the numbers were produced by a team of UK civilians. it wasnt an exact figure obviously but it was the total Iraqi casualies from the first day on. the majority of Iraqi deaths (65%-70%) were from non-coalition forces. it so far has been the most extensive investigation into it and was made the official number. all im doing is quoting the most credible source we probably have on the issue.
 
Last edited:
teacher said:
Let the carnage begin.
...and you did exactly what you set out to do. Masterfully. :cheers:
 
Christopher Brooks said:
Greetings FiremanRyan, remember the "official story on WMD.
Remember that stream of lies put forward by Colin Powell.
Mobile chemical labs that were weather balloon support equipment.

I accept there is a question regards the exact numbers of casualties in Iraq. Some sources suggest my figure. This estimation includes the lives lost due to the invasion. What ever the real number, everyone of them is the result of an illegal invasion based on fraudulent evidence.
Iraq was not in an respect a threat to the US public.
It was a threat to the scarcity myth of oil because Saddam would not
play ball with OPEC. Iraq also abandoned the US dollar and made billions.
Iraq was not easily exploited by multi nationals but that has all changed now. Mission Accomplished.
I'd love to make a thread about this "fraudulent evidence" you speak of. Would anyone be willing to pay attention to it if I did?
 
Tetracide said:
I'd love to make a thread about this "fraudulent evidence" you speak of. Would anyone be willing to pay attention to it if I did?

Probably not. No fault of your own or others, it's just that the majority of those on this site have at least normal size brains and take these tin foil hat wearers with the grain of salt they deserve to be taken with. I've been asked here why I pay any attention at all. I only give them so much attention because I have less than zero patience with liars and those that disrespect those who lost their lives on 9/11 and now London. Also because I have time on my hands because I'm usually locked in the basement, and the fact that I have no friends because of obvious reasons. Mainly though because I'm an assh*ole. If you would like to post on that though a good place would be the thread "9/11 was an inside job" or this thread. I would read it but you better have your facts straight because I am a equal opportunity assh*ole. Though with you I'd be more polite. Unless you gave me reason not to be. And I always need fodder for top ten lists. Would you be willing to occasionally unlock the basement door when no one is looking if I paid you with Pez?
 
Ok then, I'll post it here, and maybe we can have a civil debate. Those opposed to my comments bellow, feel free to dissect any part of it and I'm sure one of us conservatives can jump on you in no time. ;)

There were five major reasons all of which were authorized by Congress and stated numerous times. Those reasons consisted of;

(1) Saddam Hussein's Development of Weapons of Mass Destruction

(2) Saddam Hussein's Defiance of United Nations Resolutions

(3) Saddam Hussein's Repression of the Iraqi People

(4) Saddam Hussein's Support for International Terrorism

(5) Saddam Hussein's Efforts to Circumvent Economic Sanctions

(1) Weapons of mass destruction were one of the prominent and deal-sealing arguments that the media presented (due to their flare for the dramatic). Intelligence from a variety of different nations brought forth the same information, which lead hundreds of high ranking officials from each country to believe Iraq did indeed not give up his WMD program after 1991. This situation was best stated by the report by the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction said:
For commissions of this sort, 20/20 hindsight is an occupational hazard. It is easy to forget just how difficult a business intelligence is. Nations and terrorist groups do not easily part with their secrets--and they guard nothing more jealously than secrets related to nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. Stealing those secrets, particularly from closed and repressive regimes like Saddam Hussein's Iraq, is no easy task, and failure is more common than success. Intelligence analysts will often be forced to make do with limited, ambiguous data; extrapolations from thin streams of information will be the norm.
Two things could have happened; 1) WMD never existed, and the missing material had indeed – in some way – been destroyed or given away; 2) the WMDs, its research, and the suspected mobile development trucks all moved out of the country. We may never know. However, now that we have search Iraq a great deal, and found very limited evidence that there was a prominent, established WMD program under Saddam Hussein after 1991, this goal can be checked off. Saddam’s intent, along with his ties to multiple terrorist organizations, were too dangerous to ignore and IMO, we did the right thing in taking action instead of waiting.

(2) Now I know some see “hypocrisy” in us conservatives using U.N. Resolutions as a justification for war, while we did not abide to the U.N. Charter when we contemplated the authorization for war. I can understand this, however, in my opening comments, I said reasons, not justifications. Some of these are justifications, others are reasons. There is a difference – let me explain.

The following is a list of U.N. Resolutions that Saddam refused to abide to; (to be fair, the resolutions in red are resolutions passed after 1991)
UNSCR 678
UNSCR 686
UNSCR 687
UNSCR 688
UNSCR 707
UNSCR 715
UNSCR 949
UNSCR 1051
UNSCR 1060
UNSCR 1115
UNSCR 1134
UNSCR 1137
UNSCR 1154
UNSCR 1194
UNSCR 1205
UNSCR 1284


Now most of these resolutions have a common theme. “Iraq must allow UN and IAEA inspectors immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access.” was a common line. Same with “Condemns the continued violations by Iraq of previous UN resolutions.” You see, these, while being “flagrant violation” of the will of the entire world, are just words on a piece of paper. There are reasons they were put forth to the United Nations Security Council, and it was because Saddam was indeed defying important laws that were laid out after the first Gulf War. These actions, by the decision of the butcher of Baghdad became a common trend. Saddam thought he could stretch the rules, and year after year, he stretched farther and farther, until they snapped, and he fell right into a prison cell with a tremendous amount of evidence leading to his death.

These decisions by Saddam to test his ability to torture his people, not provide “immediate, unconditional and unrestricted access,” along with a variety of other things related to the Gulf War (missing property, missing Kurds), proved at least one thing – Saddam had no intention of following the rules, and that was a danger no one could or should have ignored. I’m glad he’s behind bars.

(3) Saddam Hussein violated his own countries constitution, when he ordered torture to a degree only seen by his police and his Sons. “According to former prisoners, torture techniques included branding, electric shocks administered to the genitals and other areas, beating, pulling out of fingernails, burning with hot irons and blowtorches, suspension from rotating ceiling fans, dripping acid on the skin, rape, breaking of limbs, denial of food and water, extended solitary confinement in dark and extremely small compartments, and threats to rape or otherwise harm family members and relatives. Evidence of such torture often was apparent when security forces returned the mutilated bodies of torture victims to their families.”

According to a British Foreign Office Report released December 2nd, 2002, “about 15% of Iraqi’s population have fled the country, rather than live under Saddam.” That 15% amounts to between three and four million. It should not be so quaint in the minds of Leftists, Saddam’s ability to systematically torture and starve his own people.

Saddam not only captured, arrested, or killed random and strategic enemies, but most distinctively he gassed his own people using weapons of mass destruction. In March of 1988, Saddam ordered a massive mustard and cyanide gas attack on the city of Halabja in northern Iraq, killing more than ten thousand innocent Kurdish civilians.
 
Last edited:
(There's a size limit to posts? Come on!)

(4) I made a good point about Saddam’s support/tolerance for international terrorism at my blog, but I wont put you though the torture of reading through. Here is a transcript of a State Department release I quote in my blog:

State Department said:
Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)
a.k.a. Fatah Revolutionary Council, Arab Revolutionary Brigades, Black September, and Revolutionary Organization of Socialist Muslims

Description:
International terrorist organization led by Sabri al-Banna. Split from PLO in 1974. Made up of various functional committees, including political, military, and financial.

Activities:
Has carried out terrorist attacks in 20 countries, killing or injuring almost 900 persons. Targets include the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Israel, moderate Palestinians, the PLO, and various Arab countries. Major attacks included the Rome and Vienna airports in December 1985, the Neve Shalom synagogue in Istanbul and the Pan Am flight 73 hijacking in Karachi in September 1986, and the City of Poros day-excursion ship attack in Greece in July 1988. Suspected of assassinating PLO deputy chief Abu Iyad and PLO security chief Abu Hul in Tunis in January 1991. ANO assassinated a Jordanian diplomat in Lebanon in January 1994 and has been linked to the killing of the PLO representative there. Has not attacked Western targets since the late 1980s.

Strength:
A few hundred plus limited overseas support structure.

Location/Area of Operation:
Al-Banna relocated to Iraq in December 1998, where the group maintains a presence. Has an operational presence in Lebanon, including in several Palestinian refugee camps. Financial problems and internal disorganization have reduced the group's activities and capabilities. Authorities shut down the ANO's operations in Libya and Egypt in 1999. Has demonstrated ability to operate over wide area, including the Middle East, Asia, and Europe.

External Aid:
Has received considerable support, including safe haven, training, logistic assistance, and financial aid from Iraq, Libya, and Syria (until 1987), in addition to close support for selected operations.


Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)

Description:
Founded in 1974 as a Marxist-Leninist insurgent group primarily composed of Turkish Kurds. The group's goal has been to establish an independent Kurdish state in southeastern Turkey, where the population is predominantly Kurdish. In the early 1990s, the PKK moved beyond rural-based insurgent activities to include urban terrorism. Turkish authorities captured Chairman Abdullah Ocalan in Kenya in early 1999; the Turkish State Security Court subsequently sentenced him to death. In August 1999, Ocalan announced a "peace initiative," ordering members to refrain from violence and withdraw from Turkey and requesting dialogue with Ankara on Kurdish issues. At a PKK Congress in January 2000, members supported Ocalan's initiative and claimed the group now would use only political means to achieve its new goal, improved rights for Kurds in Turkey.

Activities:
Primary targets have been Turkish Government security forces in Turkey. Conducted attacks on Turkish diplomatic and commercial facilities in dozens of West European cities in 1993 and again in spring 1995. In an attempt to damage Turkey's tourist industry, the PKK bombed tourist sites and hotels and kidnapped foreign tourists in the early-to-mid-1990s.

Strength:
Approximately 4,000 to 5,000, most of whom currently are located in northern Iraq. Has thousands of sympathizers in Turkey and Europe.

Location/Area of Operation:
Operates in Turkey, Europe, and the Middle East.

External Aid:
Has received safe haven and modest aid from Syria, Iraq, and Iran. The Syrian Government expelled PKK leader Ocalan and known elements of the group from its territory in October 1998.


Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK or MKO)
a.k.a. The National Liberation Army of Iran (NLA, the militant wing of the MEK), the People's Mujahidin of Iran (PMOI), National Council of Resistance (NCR), Muslim Iranian Student's Society (front organization used to garner financial support)

Description:
Formed in the 1960s by the college-educated children of Iranian merchants, the MEK sought to counter what it perceived as excessive Western influence in the Shah's regime. Following a philosophy that mixes Marxism and Islam, has developed into the largest and most active armed Iranian dissident group. Its history is studded with anti-Western activity, and, most recently, attacks on the interests of the clerical regime in Iran and abroad.

Activities:
Worldwide campaign against the Iranian Government stresses propaganda and occasionally uses terrorist violence. During the 1970s the MEK staged terrorist attacks inside Iran and killed several US military personnel and civilians working on defense projects in Tehran. Supported the takeover in 1979 of the US Embassy in Tehran. In April 1992 conducted attacks on Iranian embassies in 13 different countries, demonstrating the group's ability to mount large-scale operations overseas. The normal pace of anti-Iranian operations increased during the "Operation Great Bahman" in February 2000, when the group claimed it launched a dozen attacks against Iran. During the remainder of the year, the MEK regularly claimed that its members were involved in mortar attacks and hit-and-run raids on Iranian military, law enforcement units, and government buildings near the Iran-Iraq border. The MEK also claimed six mortar attacks on civilian government and military buildings in Tehran.

Strength:
Several thousand fighters based in Iraq with an extensive overseas support structure. Most of the fighters are organized in the MEK's National Liberation Army (NLA).

Location/Area of Operation:
In the 1980s the MEK's leaders were forced by Iranian security forces to flee to France. Most resettled in Iraq by 1987. In the mid-1980s the group did not mount terrorist operations in Iran at a level similar to its activities in the 1970s. In the 1990s, however, the MEK claimed credit for an increasing number of operations in Iran.

External Aid:
Beyond support from Iraq, the MEK uses front organizations to solicit contributions from expatriate Iranian communities.


Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)

Description:
Broke away from the PFLP-GC in mid-1970s. Later split again into pro-PLO, pro-Syrian, and pro-Libyan factions. Pro-PLO faction led by Muhammad Abbas (Abu Abbas), who became member of PLO Executive Committee in 1984 but left it in 1991.

Activities:
The Abu Abbas-led faction is known for aerial attacks against Israel. Abbas's group also was responsible for the attack in 1985 on the cruise ship Achille Lauro and the murder of US citizen Leon Klinghoffer. A warrant for Abu Abbas's arrest is outstanding in Italy.

Location/Area of Operation:
PLO faction based in Tunisia until Achille Lauro attack. Now based in Iraq.

External Aid:
Receives support mainly from Iraq. Has received support from Libya in the past.

Saddam tested his bounds, and we caught him. I don’t have to quote the 9/11 Commission Report when they clearly detailed meetings of Iraqi intelligence officers with Al-Qeada leaders, do I?; or the part where they discuss the communications between Saddam and Osama, where Saddam offers safe heaven to him. That alone should scare anyone.

(5) The UN Oil-for-Food Program (OFF) was one of sound, and warranted motivation but the OFF was a band-aid, attempting to fix a broken arm. According to Peter van Walsum, a Dutch diplomat who headed the Iraq sanctions committee in 1999 and 2000, the UN “never had clear decisions on anything. So we just in effect condoned things.” In an interview with the New York Times, he also stated, "Everybody said it was a terrible shame and against international law, but there was really no enthusiasm to tackle it,"

A Congressional investigator reported as late as August of 2004 that $5.7 billion was earned from selling oil outside of the OFF. That was $5.7 billion that was, under UN sanctions, supposed to go to the starving Iraqi people. It didn’t. The Independent Inquiry Committee into the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program submitted a report on February 3rd, 2005 describing their findings. According to the Committee, “There can be no question that bribes and other abuses, including shipments of overpriced or substandard goods, provided many opportunities for illicit gains, often part of a deliberate effort by Iraq to ‘reward friends’ or cultivate political influence.”

Saddam continued to stretch his slack, and he was caught. The reasons of which we went to war stand, and now our objectives are to create a stable government, and allow the Iraqis themselves to hold their own. Until them, and not a second before or after, we will leave and welcome home our men and women in uniform that are deserving of our respect and support.
 
All lies!...Never happened!...War for oil!...Everything's America's fault!...Cheney is Darth vader!...Hillary's the Messiah!...

Sorry, Tet...I'm just prepping you for the upcoming Liberal Borg responses...;)
 
Most impressive Master Tetracide. You've done your homework, which always pleases teacher. You are a welcome addition to this site. Neatly laid out facts with the sources are the bane to the lefties who generally say things to support their argument like "no it's not" and "nuh-uh" and Bush lied". I think you fill a niche here. That combined with the styles of others in our camp rounds out our team nicely. For instance we have GySgt, a Marine who has been on the ground in Iraq a gives hands on eye witness. Though he is logical and intelligent and articulate. (Odd for Jar Heads who are usually
limited to putting on their war faces and screaming Oh-ra). cnredd seems to have a grasp on this too. There are others in our camp (forgive me for not listing you guys) but you seem to have taken the lead in the "pure documented facts" niche. And then there is me. With GtSgt and cnredd doing such a great job and now you with your "facts" straight it leaves me in my favorite niche of circling the enemy camp with my monkey army flinging feces at them and occasionally rising to logical debate and pointing out illogic and inconsistencies and lies as you saw me do with one of my favorite targets, Mr. Brooks. And of course timely insults, scathing smack and Top Ten lists. A well rounded team indeed. Now before your head gets all swollen (that's my niche), let's see if you can pass muster in the arena of abstract thought, deep thinking, big picture, and long term prediction.



Tetracide said:
Two things could have happened; 1) WMD never existed, and the missing material had indeed – in some way – been destroyed or given away; 2) the WMDs, its research, and the suspected mobile development trucks all moved out of the country. We may never know. However, now that we have search Iraq a great deal, and found very limited evidence that there was a prominent, established WMD program under Saddam Hussein after 1991, this goal can be checked off. Saddam’s intent, along with his ties to multiple terrorist organizations, were too dangerous to ignore and IMO, we did the right thing in taking action instead of waiting.

You are one of the few to point out the fact of trucks moving out of the country. I've only seen it commented on by myself and GySgt, (sorry others if I missed your posts on same). Myself and cnredd both predicted the Sudan would be next then all of a sudden Sudan announced they were stopping martial law and going back to a normal democratic government. News that was only briefly reported and then went away.

Now it's time to think.

Why is it so underreported and what does that indicate?

Where did they go? (The trucks). Why the sudden change in Sudan?

From where they went and other news what do you think is going on at the highest levels and the outcomes so far?

A while back it was reported that the military found some 100 plus sites now vacant but had indications of WMD's. I only saw this report a couple of times only and it quickly "went away". Why is that and what does it indicate?

The former administration, the Bush administration, and the UN all stated that Saddam had WMD's but then Bush said later that he was mistaken.

Why?

Not knocking you most excellent posts. Well written and researched indeed. But anyone can do that. I don't have the patience for it. And besides I already know. I refuse to research for others. Can you take all the information out there and put it together to figure out what is not "being said". This is a test. If you can't figure it out or are wrong in your conclusions, don't sweat it. Most can't. And they are much older than you. Just ask and I'll lay it out. But I'd like for you to figure it out on your own. It will greatly increase your confidence of our country. This is not all about politics. This is serious business. Again I am most impressed by your posts. You should be proud. Don't hesitate to lay it out there. Others have your six.
 
What teach said....
 
Wow, I didn't know I was joining a fraternity. lol

I'll mix something up, and PM it too you. This isn't the appropriate place. And just to note, there is no right or wrong answer when it comes to speculations like the ones you described.
 
Tetracide said:
Wow, I didn't know I was joining a fraternity. lol
Well you are. Don't get too pompas because you are the newest therefor you get to clean the monkey pens until the the next new guy.

This isn't the appropriate place. And just to note, there is no right or wrong answer when it comes to speculations like the ones you described.

True, but my speculations all come true. Mine and cnredd's about Sudan is documented. So I'll just assume they're correct until I start being wrong.
 
cnredd said:
All lies!...Never happened!...War for oil!...Everything's America's fault!...Cheney is Darth vader!...Hillary's the Messiah!...
Well said!
14789046_F_tn.jpg
 
Greetings, Tetracide!! I echo teacher and cnredd. The quality of this thread is improving by leaps and bounds... :mrgreen:
 
good posts Tetracide. you bring up a lot of the points that most war critics dont like to tackle.
 
i really dont like to theorize over things i personally dont have a lot of evidence for, but what i suspect is that Iraq did have WMD's or at least had the materials to build them and were in the process of doing so. after refusing to allow UN inspectors in during the 90's, they moved the operation out of the country because Saddam was scared that the US would put pressure on the UN to enforce those resolutions and in turn would find WMD. well, Clinton didnt do that, the materails were evacuated, and here we are today. we have the intellegence, other countries did as well, yet nothings there.
 
So you see young Master Tetracide, there is indeed a fraternity here. How prescient of cnreed with his first post to you. The first to answer was 26x world champs. He's the leader of the dark side. Or champs thinks he is. Damn I just used "champs" and "thinks" in the same sentence. That's funny and by itself worthy of a basement spot.

Now here's where your membership in our little fraternity (which makes me think said fraternity needs a name. Please post suggestions in the Top Ten thread. Something with monkeys in it perhaps?) gives you a heads up. This guy champs. He lies. One thing about this site is when you say something you better stick to it. It's all in vauges little CPU somewhere just waiting to be recalled. Which I did to champs in something called "The Monkey Fiasco". With help from GPSflex of course. Go to the forum "The basement and Flame on" thread "Top Ten Lists and teacher abuse" posts #57 and #58 to see champs caught red handed lieing. Kinda shows ones character don't it. And just to twist the knife, champs won't talk to me. His stated reason being that I'm a bigot and idiot. The last time champs talked to me he told me he never viewed the top ten thread and never would. Not ten minutes later I found him there in "who's on line". That was way funny.


Everyone else. Tetra and I had a little E-mail chat about the questions I posed to him at the end of #36. He got an A+.

Congratulations Tetracide. I now officially commission you to help lead my monkey army. Your rank: 2nd Lieutenant. Now while you officially outrank GySgt don't ever presume you know more. Listen to him in private and he will salute you in public. Otherwise, are you familiar with the term "fragging"?

Petitions to join will be accepted in the top ten thread. You already know my rank.

Dismissed.

PS. Hey butter bar, the pens need cleaning.
 
Diogenes said:
Greetings, Tetracide!! I echo teacher and cnredd. The quality of this thread is improving by leaps and bounds... :mrgreen:

That was quite good wasn't it? A history lesson right here for anyone with a brain to read and reflect on.
 
FiremanRyan said:
i really dont like to theorize over things i personally dont have a lot of evidence for, but what i suspect is that Iraq did have WMD's or at least had the materials to build them and were in the process of doing so. after refusing to allow UN inspectors in during the 90's, they moved the operation out of the country because Saddam was scared that the US would put pressure on the UN to enforce those resolutions and in turn would find WMD. well, Clinton didnt do that, the materails were evacuated, and here we are today. we have the intellegence, other countries did as well, yet nothings there.

FiremanRyan and war supporters,

No one has ever argued that Iraq had no military.
No one has ever argued that Iraq has anything like a
noble history.

Bush and Blair presented a blatantly fraudulent case to the world to
justify the Iraq invasion.

Bush and Blair presented evidence that was false.

Bush and Blair lied their way into an illegal attack on a sovereign state.

The case presented claimed that Iraq was an immediate threat to the world.

We were all presented evidence that turned out to be complete rubbish.

To now theorize that Iraq was able to trick the world is sheer imagination.

Try that argument before a judge and jury and you would be rightfully laughed out of court.

While compiling a military resume of Iraq and it`s history of misadventures and casualties I hope you do a comparison with the US.

Many are so blinded by the "Muslim Terror" propaganda that you are blinkered if not completely blind to a rational judgment of facts.

Iraq , like all sovereign countries had every right to a military defense policy and force.

America is littered with WMD from coast to coast yet you guys seem to think that your existence is superior to other nations who might choose to defend their nation from a dishonest, to say the least, US corporate conquest veiled behind a raft of exposed documented lies.

Of course a weapon fired in defense from Iraq is a "terrorist" act but the coalition of the willing invasion is bringing democracy and peace.

Can you guys be serious?

It is a testimony to the propaganda cloud you guys seem unable to escape that even though the media and your government have confessed that the
WMD case was "mistaken" your still inventing imagined hypothesis which avoid the gravity we all face that our governments are criminal and in the service of powerful corporate agendas to accelerate profits and reshape the
world according to a Zionist vision.

I do agree that Iraq was in some sense a great danger to US corporate interests . Before Gulf War 1 Iraq was the most rapidly advancing country in the region and Saddam had thrown of the Zionist corporate yoke plunging billions of dollars into health facilities, education and social facilities.
Iraq was a secular country demonstrating what could be done for their own people in contrast to the quisling corrupt leadership in most other middle east countries.

This was very dangerous if other nations had followed Iraq`s example and
contained the extremist elements that employ their manufactured fanaticism to keep the masses uneducated and easily controlled.

Saddam`s Iraq was one of education and progress until the Gulf War 1
invasion. The US manufactured a pretext by encouraging Iraq to reclaim
Kuwait. Kuwait was then and still remains an apartheid dictatorship serving
the Zionist corporate agenda.
 
Mr. Brooks, your eloquent language does not hide the lack of facts you have to back your case. I’d respond to a bunch of your contempt-filled tangents, most of which contain flagrant conspiracy theories about corporate interests, but you seem to have your mind made up. I make a long and drawn out case backed with facts and links, and all you can do is repeat your rhetoric and the Left’s punch line “Bush lied”, without links, without fact, without foundation.

Not only have you used false assumptions to spit on the Iraqi and coalition lives lost in the liberation of Iraq, you have also attempted to belittle my country by painting our national defense initiatives as hypocritical and unfair. You show support for dictators like Saddam Hussein by making the argument that the country was in good hands before the invasion, and in turn, look down on all those who think otherwise.

Can you be serious?

Take a step down from the pedestal you have placed yourself on, and use your head to make a case with a little substance. Otherwise, with every post with the same manner as your latest, your credibility as a debater will plummet.

Good luck. You’ll need it.
 
Tetracide,
Perhaps you could clear up a little issue at this stage.

Is it your claimed opinion that the information presented as evidence to justify an invasion of Iraq was honest and truthful?

Do you believe our politicians and military leaders should be honest and truthful?

Do you believe Bush , Blair and Colin Powell are intelligent men?
 
I'd be happy to bring you out of the cloud of confusion Mr. Brooks! I'm here for the people.

It is my claimed opinion that the information presented as evidence to justify an invasion of Iraq was honest and truthful. Plenty of Terrorist organizations have been documented as being supported by Saddam, and tolerated to operate in his country. Evidence of the brutal torture Saddam initiated on his own people has arisen. It was also abundantly obvious Saddam did not intend on playing by the rules when it comes to U.N. resolutions and U.N. sanctions, which brings me to the Oil-For-Food program. You remember it right? The program that Saddam gutted and cost the Iraqi people $5.7 billion. It is the largest scandal known to man in terms of dollars.

And finally, weapons of mass destruction. I have yet to see conclusive evidence that Saddam indeed had relinquished the material that was missing. That scares me even more than the brutal torture Saddam was known to order.
 
Back
Top Bottom