Author Topic: When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......  (Read 474 times)

Offline mosgood

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1548
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« on: June 16, 2004, 08:17:12 AM »
what's the line in Vegas on how long it'll take for them to screw it up again?

Offline VOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2313
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #1 on: June 16, 2004, 08:34:45 AM »
Iraq is always going to be....Iraq. On the bright side, there's nowhere to go but up, and so far they're doing ok. Not great, but ok. Prosperity isn't going to happen tomorrow, or next year, or the year after that....

Offline mosgood

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1548
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #2 on: June 16, 2004, 08:43:03 AM »
The other bright side is that if they DO screw it up, Bush will have a chance to be a wartime president again , if he gets re-elected!


:)

He's practically guarenteed an enemy!!!

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18655
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #3 on: June 16, 2004, 08:56:48 AM »
the good guy usually has a few ...
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2004, 09:01:46 AM »
US has been involved in Iraq politics for decades...
Like for prime example helping to raise Saddam in power and then later on after couple wars switch to an another goverment.

If I remember correctly.. wasn't the other opposing candidate for Saddam a democractic president...
Anyway, we can only wonder what would Iraq be like today if US wouldn't been involved in raising Saddam into power.

Also good to keep in mind that the most messed up countries in middle east are the ones which has been heavily influenced by big countries from outside middle east.
US and SU being two of the most influental.
Israel is also a good candidate, with the active support of US over the years and major involvement of UK in the further past.

So it isn't big wonder why theres terrorists and other people who dislikes western powers and russians.
It's just ironic that in Afganistan US supported fighters known as "Mujahadeen" and later on many of the same fighters are known as anti-western terrorists :rolleyes:


Can't fault just the terrorist for the mess in middle east.
It's surprising how many western people are wondering why theres anti-western terrorists in middle east - "for they have done nothing to them"
Ignorance surely isn't going to win the war against terrorism, thats for sure.


and no this isn't any anti-american or pro-terrorist speech.
the truth might hurt but thats pretty much whats causing the trouble.
cooking of the mess pretty much began a few decades ago and now it's boiling.
« Last Edit: June 16, 2004, 09:16:02 AM by Fishu »

Offline Sikboy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6702
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2004, 09:23:37 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Fishu
US has been involved in Iraq politics for decades...
Like for prime example helping to raise Saddam in power and then later on after couple wars switch to an another goverment.

If I remember correctly.. wasn't the other opposing candidate for Saddam a democractic president...
Anyway, we can only wonder what would Iraq be like today if US wouldn't been involved in raising Saddam into power.
 


Are you sure you're not confusing Saddam with the Shaw of Iran? I thought Saddam murdered his way to power by purging the Baath party. IIRC, there was something getting close to a democratic movement in the 50s (around the same time Mossadique was deposed by us in Iran) but that had died of internal causes without help from the CIA (unless maybe it was a reaction to what happened in Iran).

We've stuck our finger in a lot of pies in the Middle East, but I don't thinkw Saddam needed or had our help in his rise to power. Yes, he recieved considerable support between '79 and '90, but this was after he had seized the reigns.

(like fishu, I'm going off memory here, so I'm sure I'm wrong about at least some of this).

-Sik
You: Blah Blah Blah
Me: Meh, whatever.

Offline sling322

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3510
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2004, 09:34:54 AM »
I believe  you are right....he was in power and we helped back him at that point against Iran.  I dont recall the US being involved in his rise to power however.

Offline Krusher

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2246
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #7 on: June 16, 2004, 10:53:04 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Fishu
US has been involved in Iraq politics for decades...
Like for prime example helping to raise Saddam in power and then later on after couple wars switch to an another goverment.

If I remember correctly.. wasn't the other opposing candidate for Saddam a democractic president...
Anyway, we can only wonder what would Iraq be like today if US wouldn't been involved in raising Saddam into power.




you can believe what suits your agenda but saddam was not put in power by the usa.  

------------------
While receiving aid from Egypt, he finished high school at the age of twenty-four and continued his political education. While in Egypt, he was arrested on at least two occasions for threatening a fellow student and chasing another down the street with a knife, both for political differences. In 1961, he entered Cairo University School of Law, but did not finish his studies there. In 1963, a group of Baathist army officers tortured and assassinated General Qassim. This was done on Iraqi television. They also mutilated many of Qassim's devotees and showed their bodies (in close up) on the nightly news for more than one night. Saddam, hearing the news, quickly rushed back to Iraq to become involved in the revolution. And involved, he was, as both an interrogator and torturer at the infamous "Palace of the End", in the basement of the former palace of King Faisal.

According to reports by Hanna Batatu (a government reporter), Hussein rose quickly through the ranks, due to his extreme efficiency as a torturer. The Baathist party split in 1963 and Saddam had supported the "winner" in the latest party struggle. He was appointed by Michel Aflaq to be a member of the Baath Regional Command. In 1964, Hussein was jailed by some "rightist" military officers who opposed the Baathist takeover. Through other political influence provided by his older cousin, General Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr, Hussein became deputy Secretary-General of the Baathists in 1966.

In 1966, Hussein escaped from prison and set up a Baathist internal party security system known as the Jihaz Haneen. It was to serve as the continuation of his political and real rise to power in Iraq. In 1968, another major upheaval in Iraq gave Hussein the greatest opportunity for further advancement; his mentor, Gen. Bakr and the Baathist seized the government. Hussein was made Deputy Chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, in charge of internal security.

At the age of thirty-one (31) he had acquired what could have been deemed the number two spot in the Baathist party. He would continue in the position for approximately the next ten years. During that time, he would continue to consolidate his power by appointing numerous family members to positions of authority in the Iraqi government. In his position of Deputy in Charge of Internal Security, he built an enormous security apparatus and had spies and informers everywhere in the circles of power in Iraq.

During this time, Hussein also began to accumulate the wealth and position that he so relished as a poor sheep-herder in the desert of al-Auja. He and his family, now firmly entrenched in the infrastructure of the country , began to control the country's oil and other industrial enterprises. With the help of his security network and several personal assassins, Hussein took control of many of the nation's leading businesses.

In 1978, Saddam had been working with othe r Arab nations to ostracize Egypt for it's diplomatic initiative in resolving Israel/Arab questions. An ally, President Hafez al-Assad of Syria, almost became the undoing of Hussein's ascension. If a Syrian/Iraqi federation were formed against Egypt, Assad, not Hussein, would rise to a position of greater power in the relationship. President Bakr would lead the federation with Assad as second in command. Hussein could not allow that to happen and began to urge the President to step down. Again with the help of his family and security apparatus, Hussein was able to accomplish his task.

On July 16, 1979, President Bakr resigned, officially due to health problems, but in reality a victim of Hussein's political in-fighting. Moving quickly to consolidate his power, he called a major Baathist meeting on July 22, 1979. During the meeting, various family members and other Hussein devotees urged that the party be "cleansed". Hussein then read a list of names and asked that they step outside. Once there, they are taken into custody.

A high-ranking member of the Revolutionary Command, the head of the labor unions, the leading Shiite member of the Command, and twenty (20) others are then systematically and personally killed by Hussein and his top party officials. During the next few days, reports indicate that as many as 450 other military officers, deputy prime ministers, and "non-party faithful" were rounded up and killed. This purge insured Hussein's consolidation of power in Iraq.

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #8 on: June 16, 2004, 12:09:41 PM »
blaablaa agenda blaablaablaa..

Weren't I clear enough, when I clearly stated this before saying it:
"If I remember correctly.."

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27251
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #9 on: June 16, 2004, 12:10:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Fishu
blaablaa agenda blaablaablaa..

Weren't I clear enough, when I clearly stated this before saying it:
"If I remember correctly.."


Good rebuttal after getting pwn3d! :rofl

Offline mosgood

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1548
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #10 on: June 16, 2004, 12:14:19 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Eagler
the good guy usually has a few ...


brilliant observation!  Oh wait.... don't bad guys have enemies too.....?:confused:


I'm starting to suspect that that was a trick answer....   hmmmm    :confused:

Offline Red Tail 444

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2497
      • http://www.redtail.org
Re: When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #11 on: June 16, 2004, 12:20:24 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by mosgood
what's the line in Vegas on how long it'll take for them to screw it up again?


Again...or more?

Saddam will be back in power in NO time, he'll clean it up pretty fast, I gather...:lol

Offline Sikboy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6702
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #12 on: June 16, 2004, 12:21:23 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by GScholz
Perhaps not like the Shaw, but ...

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/attack/2002/0923monster.htm


That pretty much agrees with my post. I admit that I thought took power in the mid 70s, and that was wrong.

-Sik
You: Blah Blah Blah
Me: Meh, whatever.

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #13 on: June 16, 2004, 12:31:36 PM »
Geez who knows. I think the war was stupid and hypocritical. But good things could come of it. Lets hope. Those poor buggers have suffered enought and enought young westerners have died there. Lets hope it can be at least better. It will never be canada but maybe they will make it to an egypt level of oppression?

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
When Iraq is given back to Iraqi's......
« Reply #14 on: June 16, 2004, 12:32:38 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Good rebuttal after getting pwn3d! :rofl


Why do you think I said in first place "IIRC"?
Because I weren't sure did I remember correctly.. isn't that sort of self-explonary?
It clearly indicates I'm willing to admit it's wrong in the case I did not remember the thing correctly.
How can you pwn in that kind of case?

Oh well.. I don't understand logic of some people anyway and obviously some are too hard cooked to learn actual logic.