What are your views over the Iraqi war?

BLOOD FOR OIL... is that fair?

Isn't that the real reason this all started anyway?

FACTS:

1) Iraq was a much safer country when Saddam was ruling.
2) when saddam ruled there was no sunnni and sheeya.. everyone got along with every one just fine.
3) yes saddam killed a lot of iraqis for whatever reason.. but now that he's gone they are still getting killed but in bigger quantities.

When is this going to end?

.. I can't see another child dye and be pay for saddam's or bush's mistake.. someone has to speak out..

Blood for oil?

Hell yeah, why not! We've started wars for much more petty reasons in the past!

And your 3 "facts" just go to prove what little you actually know about the situation, especially the very immature line "yes saddam killed a lot of iraqis for whatever reason"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iAMfromHuntersBar

Blood for oil?

Hell yeah, why not! We've started wars for much more petty reasons in the past!

And your 3 "facts" just go to prove what little you actually know about the situation, especially the very immature line "yes saddam killed a lot of iraqis for whatever reason"

---

Hell yes why not? I bet you won't be saying this if they wer killing your son, daugter, mother, or any of your loved ones..

And I know exactly what I'm talking about.. im iraqi who lived in iraq... your the one who's far away and have no clue


And when I said saddam killed for whatever reason and now that he's gone they people are still dying means that nothing is improving..

How could you be OK with someone dying for oil? U know they kill people and chop them up and send them to their famalies in bin bags?
How would you feel if that was some 1 u cared about.. who's inecont.. will you truly be OK with that?

1. Saddam Hussein murdered literally 100s of thousands of his own people in his reign... not in nice ways either, using chemical weapons and other lovely methods!

2. There was no Sunni (not sunnni) or Shī'a (not sheeya, something I would expect a 22 year old Iraqi to know!) split because Saddam, a Sunni, used the Peoples Army to suppress the larger Shī'a population through fear of torture and death... they certainly didn't "get along".

3. We've already been there!

Who is "they" by the way... who are you blaming now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by iAMfromHuntersBar

1. Saddam Hussein murdered literally 100s of thousands of his own people in his reign ... not in nice ways either, using chemical weapons and other lovely methods!

2. There was no Sunni (not sunnni) or Shī'a (not sheeya, something I would expect a 22 year old Iraqi to know!) split because Saddam, a Sunni, used the Peoples Army to suppress the larger Shī'a population through fear of torture and death ... they certainly didn't "get along".

3. We've already been there!

Who is "they" by the way ... who are you blaming now?

---

And by your explination it makes it OK for innocent people to die.. is that what your saying? Its OK for innocent people to die?

Sunni and sheeya is how its pronounced in arabic smart guy.. and they had no problems. My mum is a sunni and my father is sheeya.

What color is the sky in your world!!

Your so called facts are typical rose tinted, media driven cobblers.

Saddam is responsible for one of the largest, most wide ranging genocides ever!!

Now while I don't agree with the reasoning behind the invasion, the result has justified the action.

Ps people DIE not DYE as this is color change!

What? Are you saying your 3 "FACTS" aren't facts now?

No, I'm not saying it's OK, I'm just saying that oil's as good a reason as any!

I'm within a hair's bredth of labelling you a troll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Curlyben

Saddam is responsible for one of the largest, most wide ranging genocides ever !!!

---

I agree with you there. But there are many genocides happening in Africa too and no large US contingent has "freed" them.

listen.. I know what saddam is.. I lived in his country. I know he killed people.. and it wasn't just that.. people were cut off from the real world.. no satellite-dish no mobile phones; and stuff like that.. even the mentality is different than other arabic countries.. I was brought up in UK but lived in iraq for few years.. anyway.. when I sor what happened after the war.. and I've lived there before the war and sor how much better life was before the war I was surprised.. and I lost many people I care about..
bottom line is.. people lost their value... as if its OK to be boomed, killed etc. and because of how unsafe it is; there are rape and kidnapping for money.. or u pay someone $100 to kill someone,. u know that's how much human is worth $100.. its crazy.. and its not just the Iraqis... I see those American solders that are so young and have all their future ahead of them losing their lives.. why? What for?
a friend came from iraq few days ago and he was saying that some americans are committing to suicide because they can't get out of the country because of their contract.
.. this is not about the big people who have power,. its about the little ones who don't... come on you can't be that heartless and say "hell yeah ok blood for oil"

"It is of course well known that the only source of war is politics ... war is simply a continuation of political intercourse, with the addition of other means."
Carl von Clausewitz

Since humans walked the Earth and more than likely up to the point we render ourselves extinct there has been, and will be wars for a whole host of reasons!

Quote:

---

1) Iraq was a much safer country when Saddam was ruling.
2) when saddam ruled there was no sunnni and sheeya.. everyone got along with every one just fine.
3) yes saddam killed a lot of iraqis for whatever reason.. but now that he's gone they are still getting killed but in bigger quantities.

---

1) much safer for the Tikriti I'm sure . I'm not so sure the Shia ;the marsh Arabs the Kurds and most of the Sunni would agree with you . During Saddam's reign of terror the killings were silent but they happened routinely... or are you unaware of the mass graves found all over the country ?

This argument really makes me laugh . When South Africa was being ruled by a minority regime the world did everything short of invasion to oust the ruling minority . While Saddam was butchering and otherwise brutally subduing the majority in Iraq the world turned a blind eye and winked at violations of sanctions that the UN imposed . Even those they would not have adopted if he had not had a history of attacking his neighbors .

Tell me , were Iraqi's safer when he fought a decade long war with Iran ?Millions were killed in that conflict. Was the Middle East safer when he invaded and plundered Kuwait ,and threatened Saudi Arabia ?

2) yeah the minorities were effectively put down under Saddam . This observation of yours seems a little dated. Have you been following the news from Iraq lately ? It appears that al-Qaeda's attempt to foment civil war has been successfully countered. Yes it got dangerous last year after the terror bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra .But cooler heads have emerged . It was recently revealed that even the Kurds would prefer a united Iraq over division plans that have been proposed. Large sections of Iraq have been handed over to Iraqi authorities to govern. Just this week Basra was handed over to complete civilan control Most Iraqis live in peace.

3) see my comments to #2 . All recent news accounts by the press, that was reluctant to report any good news from Iraq ,are confirming that there has been a dramatic drop in violence across the board since the "Surge" began in earnest this summer.

Edit : Bill Roggio takes a good look at the released data about civilian deaths in Iraq .The graphs provide an excellent illustration of the decline .

Iraq by the numbers: Graphing the decrease in violence - The Long War Journal

Let's address 'Blood for Oil' . From the London Times Iraq - the best story of the year | Tim Hames - Times Online

Quote:

---

By any measure, the US-led surge has been little short of a triumph. The number of American military fatalities is reduced sharply, as is the carnage of Iraqi civilians, Baghdad as a city is functioning again, oil output is above where it stood in March 2003 but at a far stronger price per barrel and, the acid test, many of those who fled to Syria and Jordan are today returning home.

---

Quote:

---

The BBC said that its correspondent in Baghdad reports that the improved security is bringing "all sorts of dividends in the country, some of which could be enormously lucrative." Increased oil production by Iraq, which is estimated to have the world's third-largest proven oil reserves after Saudi Arabia and Iran, is good news for the world as well.

Earlier this year, IEA's chief economist warned that the world faces a major crisis because of the scarcity of oil unless Iraq is able to increase its exports exponentially by 2015. According to the IEA only Saudi Arabia and Iraq are capable of increasing oil production. Demand for oil, despite higher prices, is expected to increase in 2008 by as much as 10 percent.

Contrary to claims by critics of President Bush, the invasion of Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein from power was not "all about oil." But the continued recovery of Iraq's oil industry is certainly an argument in support of Gen. Petraeus' request not to halt the military surge by withdrawing troops before July, when the plan is to revert to the pre-surge level of 130,000 troops.

---

Charleston, SC Latest Editorial News: Iraq surge is paying dividends

The difference is that now the revenue will go to the Iraqi people ,not to a jackbooted dictator.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loveyoupeople

What are your views over the Iraqi war?

BLOOD FOR OIL... is that fair?

isnt that the real reason this all started anyways?

FACTS:

1) Iraq was a much safer country when Saddam was ruling.
2) when saddam ruled there was no sunnni and sheeya.. everyone got along with every one just fine.
3) yes saddam killed a lot of iraqis for whatever reason.. but now that hes gone they are still getting killed but in bigger quantities.

when is this going to end?

.. I can't see another child dye and be pay for saddam's or bush's mistake.. someone has to speak out..

---

You are just saying this to get people started right, there is no way anyone can seriously believe that it was a safer place? And no sunni or sheeya, I guess they all just appeared when Sadamm lost power.

I can't reply since the "facts" are so silly they don't deserve any resspect of an answer

You know what I can't believe that your all that ignorant to see what's really going on; your tottaly brainwashed by media

When saddam was there there was islam who are either sunni or sheeya which wasn't an issue at all... as I said my mother is sunni my father is sheeya.. so am I.. I'm sheeya they mix have no problems with each other.. now if you believe it or not that's a fact.. and arguing about all this with an iraqi who lives there is just plain stupid..

Don't believe everything you hear on the news... whats being said on the news and what's really happening to country very different...
Was it safer when saddam was there.. HElLL YEAH.. and I'm not a sunni or a tikriti.. my sister got married to a kurd.. they seem fine as well...
U have all said that it wasn't safe when saddam was ruling.. well guess what it isn't safer now. So imagine how worse it got..

Everything I have said in these posts are facts.. this is what's happening.. me being connected directly to iraq.. make me the real sours here not the media..

Hello love:

I agree with you. Saddam wasn't a nice guy, but he wasn't a lot different than lots of the world's not so nice guys. Actually he wasn't ANY different, and there are WORSE than him as we speak... He DID kill some of his people. He DID gas about 5,000 Kurds. He ran his country with an IRON hand. I didn't like him. I'm a Jew.

However, an ordinary Iraqi, whether he was a shia or a sunni, could walk the streets in safety. He could do business (Iraq was very PRO business). He could support his family and live in a home with running water and electricity.

NONE of that is possible now. IF Iraq was DINGED before we went in, it's totally DESTROYED now.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello love:

I agree with you. Saddam wasn't a nice guy, but he wasn't a lot different than lots of the world’s not so nice guys. Actually he wasn't ANY different, and there are WORSE than him as we speak....... He DID kill some of his people. He DID gas about 5,000 Kurds. He ran his country with an IRON hand. I didn't like him. I'm a Jew.

However, an ordinary Iraqi, whether he was a shia or a sunni, could walk the streets in safety. He could do business (Iraq was very PRO business). He could support his family and live in a home with running water and electricity.

NONE of that is possible now. IF Iraq was DINGED before we went in, it's totally DESTROYED now.

excon

---

Thank you for sharing my views and being realistic about it. X

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loveyoupeople

What are your views over the Iraqi war?

BLOOD FOR OIL... is that fair?

isnt that the real reason this all started anyways?

FACTS:

1) Iraq was a much safer country when Saddam was ruling.
2) when saddam ruled there was no sunnni and sheeya.. everyone got along with every one just fine.
3) yes saddam killed a lot of iraqis for whatever reason.. but now that hes gone they are still getting killed but in bigger quantities.

when is this going to end?

.. I can't see another child dye and be pay for saddam's or bush's mistake.. someone has to speak out..

---

All right. Let's study these "facts" of yours and see if they really are FACTS or just drivle.

During Saddam Hussein's reign, the following occured:

- Use of rape as a piolitical tool.
- Kidnap and indoctrination of children as young as 5 years olf into the "Ashbal Saddam" (Saddam's Cubs) in which they were taught cruelty to animals and other humans as a way to make them into "soldiers" for Saddam's army.
- Murder of 80,000 Kurds in Halabjah by poison gas in March 1988
- Al Anfal Massacre: as many as 100,000 Kurds killed by Sarin, Mustard and nerve agents in 1988. Thousands of others imprisoned or "disappeared".
- April 1991, Saddam kills 100,000 Kurds and 130,000 Shiites using Sarin, Mustard and nerve agents.
- In 2003 and since, several mass graves with thousands of bodies of people murdered by Saddam Hussein were found. More are still being found today.
- Execution by Saddam of as many as 4,000 prisoners in Abu Ghraib prison.
- Torture, rape and murder of thousands of women by Uday Hussein, Saddam's son.
- Torture of professional soccer players who did not perform up to Uday's standards.
- Use of torture devices such as Iron Maiden, Iron Mask, Pear of Anguish, and other devices by Uday against political and personal enemies.


All in all, under Saddam, roughly half a million people were massacred under Saddam's regime, and millions were improsoned, tortured, raped, etc. And this number doesn't include INDIVIDUAL killings, only group killings. These are also only the events that have been documented, not the ones that have not been proven to have occurred... the ones that happened, but for which there is no evidence.

By comparison, Iraq Body Count, as of today, estimates the number of civilian deaths from violence in Iraq since the invasion of Iraq at 85,713.

So you tell me, based on the numbers, was Iraq safer under Saddam? I think not. Iraqis are NOT being killed in "bigger quantities" than under Saddam.

Finally, under Saddam, the Sunni and Shia did NOT get along... or if they did, it was at the point of a gun. Saddam committed genocide of the Kurds and of Shia by the tens of thousands. His Sunni's, which account for less the 10% of the population of Iraq, were first-class citizens, while Shia and Kurds and other groups were second and third class citizens. The abuse of Shia and Kurds by Sunnis is well-documented.

As to your assertion that we went to war for oil... where is all that oil we are supposed to have captured? If we gained all that oil, where is it? Why are oil prices going through the roof if we have all this extra oil? Who has it? Which American companies are taking that Iraqi oil?

In short, your statement is pure baloney. It has no basis in actual fact. It is untrue. It is drivle. It's a tired, old bumber-sticker slogan from anti-Bush, leftist idiots who don't bother with facts.

Elliot

Oh sure yeah he did kill some people...

Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq under Saddam . Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 Iraqis died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers are 70 and 125 civilian deaths the government was responsible for per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power.

Oh but the rest of the survivors were happy as clams as they went about their business with no contact to the outside world with

Quote:

---

"no satellite-dish no mobile phones; and stuff like that."

---

That they lived in fear of saying anything against the fearless leader with his spies on every corner... or fear of having their daughters brought to one of Uday's rape rooms or having their family fed into wood chippers for Saddam's sons amusement is of no consequence. So long as they were selling dates and figs to each other all was well.

The fact that most parts of the country lived in abject poverty to a point that the UN decided to ease up on sanctions in a futile attempt to get aid to the people is of no consequences in a nation that had one of the top oil reserves in the world . That Saddam was plundering the "oil for food " funds was of no concern .

Please ; I can buy into and debate many of the objections to the invasion of Iraq. But I cannot stomach arguments that say the people were content or there are other dictators we should've remove first .

Quote:

---

BLOOD FOR OIL... is that fair?

Isn't that the real reason this all started anyway?

---

Can anyone tell us how Bush has benefited from Iraqi oil since the invasion? If you want facts on why we went to war they are here and here.

Quote:

---

FACTS:

1) Iraq was a much safer country when Saddam was ruling.

---

It's easier to keep the peace under threat of torture and/or execution.

Quote:

---

2) when saddam ruled there was no sunnni and sheeya.. everyone got along with every one just fine.

---

One good Anfal campaign and a few hundred thousand Marsh Arabs later and I think folks can find a way to coexist for a while.

Quote:

---

3) yes saddam killed a lot of iraqis for whatever reason.. but now that he's gone they are still getting killed but in bigger quantities.

---

Perhaps you should really think about this part of your post and then get back to us: "for whatever reason"

Quote:

---

.. I can't see another child dye and be pay for saddam's or bush's mistake.. someone has to speak out..

---

I think more than enough people have spoken out. Had more people (UN, France, Germany, Russia, etc... ) taken serious action against Saddam rather than just "speak out" (or scheme with Saddam), perhaps all this could have been avoided.

As for when it will end who knows, but it's way too late to turn back and if you don't want to see more children die in this, the right thing to do would be to support our efforts in Iraq.

Can I go out in the streets now in iraq? No because its nt safe.. before when saddam was leading.. it was safe enough to go out. It wasn't that bad when he was leader.. if you don't mess with him he won't mess with you...

Don't believe the estimates of how many are being killed now... they never tell you the truth..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Can anyone tell us how Bush has benefited from Iraqi oil since the invasion? If you want facts on why we went to war they are here and here.

It's easier to keep the peace under threat of torture and/or execution.

One good Anfal campaign and a few hundred thousand Marsh Arabs later and I think folks can find a way to coexist for a while.

---

Support the USA to kill more people.. are you kidding me?

1999 The US led NATO bombed Kosovo and Serbia for 60 straight days to force the removal of Serbian dictator Slobodan Milosevic ;to force the Yugoslav army out of Kosovo (a Serbian province) while allowing a NATO force to occupy the province.

The justification for this action was that Serbia under Milosevic had committed genocidal ethnic cleansing against Bosnia and it was suspected that ethnic Albanians were being slaughtered in Kosovo. There was an additional justification for this action . There was a generally approved consensus prevalent that the international community's primary task was dealing with rogue states behaving in ways that violated international norms. The fact that the US was the only nation that could project such power gave the US the responsibility to lead .

Russia was opposed to the operation ,but besides preventing the UN from giving the operation it's official stamp of approval ,the Russians could do nothing else to prevent this course. There was no general worldwide opposition to this at all . Since there was no known reserve of oil in the Balkans no one could accuse the US of "blood for oil " . Perhaps another reason for the quite acquiesce was that the US President was Democrat Bill Clinton and not Republican George W Bush.

Could someone tell me what the difference is between freeing Iraqis from the genocidal jackboot of Saddam Hussein and freeing the Kosovarians from Milosevic's reign of terror ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Could someone tell me what the difference is between freeing Iraqis from the genocidal jackboot of Saddam Hussein and freeing the Kosovarians from Milosevic's reign of terror ?

---

Hello tom:

Sure.

We stopped Milosevic because he was IN THE PROCESS of killing people, like RIGHT NOW.

Saddam, on the other hand, WASN'T killing anybody, as in RIGHT NOW. So, we weren't STOPPING a genocide. We were INFLICTING punishment. That's not the same thing. It's not even close.

If you're trying to tell us, that we went in to SAVE the Iraqi's, I'm laughing my butt off.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loveyoupeople

support the USA to kill more people.. are you kidding me?

---

Now why I be kidding? Just how many Iraqis do you suppose will die if we leave? And no, I'm not kidding, it's a serious question.

Laugh all you want to ; here is the pertinent part of the Iraq War Resolution (declaration of war passed by Congress)

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;
Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loveyoupeople

can I go out in the streets now in iraq? No because its nt safe.. before when saddam was leading.. it was safe enough to go out. It wasn't that bad when he was leader.. if you don't mess with him he won't mess with you...

---

Yeah... gangs in the USA are the same way. That doesn't make it "safe" to be around them.

And yes, it is safe now to go out in the streets of Iraq in most cities. In fact, the only place where there is any serious ongoing violence is in Baghdad, and the violence there is decreasing exponentially. In fact, there have been a number of reports talking about how businesses, including street vendors, are starting to see increased foot traffic in most of Iraq.

Quote:

---

don't believe the estimates of how many are being killed now... they never tell you the truth..

---

But we should believe you because... well, because you say so. You have no evidence to back up your statements, but we should believe you over those who have documentation to back up their claims? Including those who's job it is to track civilian casualties, like Iraq Body Count? You have better information than they do?

If you could at least provide some PROOF of what you were saying, rather than saying "trust me, I know better", we might be able to take you more seriously. But you haven't done that. You have made broad claims that:

1) Bush invaded Iraq for the oil, and
2) Iraq was better off before the invasion.

You have provided absolutely NO PROOF for either of these claims. And when others have provided proof that is contrary to these claims, your response has been that you "know better than we do". Well then prove it with some hard facts, not blanket statements and accusations.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Saddam, on the other hand, WASN'T killing anybody, as in RIGHT NOW. So, we weren't STOPPING a genocide. We were INFLICTING punishment. That's not the same thing. It's not even close.

---

Ex, from the Human Rights Watch 2003 report:

Quote:

---

The Iraqi government continued to commit widespread and gross human rights violations, including the extensive use of the death penalty and the extrajudicial execution of prisoners, the forced expulsion of ethnic minorities from government-controlled areas in the oil-rich region of Kirkuk and elsewhere, the arbitrary arrest of suspected political opponents and members of their families, and the torture and ill-treatment of detainees...

The government continued to implement its "Arabization" policy of forcibly expelling Kurdish, Turkman, and Assyrian families from their homes in areas under its control in Kirkuk, Khaniqin, Sinjar, and other areas, and replacing them with Arab families brought from southern Iraq. The vast majority of those expelled were Kurds, who were moved to Kurdish-held areas in the northern provinces, with a smaller number expelled to southern Iraq. In September, Human Rights Watch interviewed scores of expelled Kurdish and Turkman families, some within days of their expulsion. Officials forced them to leave their homes with very few personal possessions, and stripped them of all documentation except for their identity cards. In the majority of cases, one immediate reason for expulsion was their refusal to sign the so-called nationality correction forms, which were introduced by the government in 1997 to force non-Arabs to alter their ethnic identity by registering as Arabs. Other reasons included their refusal to join the Ba'th Party or the failure of male family members to undergo military training for the Jerusalem Army (Jaysh al-Quds) or, in the case of children age twelve through seventeen, for Saddam's Cubs (Ashbal Saddam). Many reported that the government continued to ban the use of non-Arab names when registering newborns, and that in some cases they pressured non-Arabs to adopt Arab names upon marriage. In April, the authorities were reported to be giving additional incentives, such as plots of land, to Arabs resettled in Kirkuk who brought the remains of dead relatives for reburial in the city's cemeteries. Government officials told the U.N. special rapporteur on Iraq (see below) in April that registration by ethnic minorities as Arabs was "optional and not compulsory," and that the confiscation of lands belonging to expelled families was for "agricultural purposes."

---

From Amnesty International's 2001 report on Iraq:

Quote:

---

Scores of people, including possible prisoners of conscience and armed forces officers suspected of planning to overthrow the government, were executed. Scores of suspected anti-government opponents, including people suspected of having contacts with opposition groups in exile, were arrested. The fate and whereabouts of most of those arrested, including those detained in previous years, remained unknown. Several people were given lengthy prison terms after grossly unfair trials before special courts. Torture and ill-treatment of political prisoners and detainees were systematic. The two Kurdish political parties controlling Iraqi Kurdistan detained prisoners of conscience, and armed political groups were reportedly responsible for abductions and killings...

Political prisoners and detainees were subjected to systematic torture. The bodies of many of those executed had evident signs of torture. Common methods of physical torture included electric shocks or cigarette burns to various parts of the body, pulling out of fingernails, rape, long periods of suspension by the limbs from either a rotating fan in the ceiling or from a horizontal pole, beating with cables, hosepipe or metal rods, and falaqa (beating on the soles of the feet). In addition, detainees were threatened with rape and subjected to mock execution. They were placed in cells where they could hear the screams of others being tortured and were deliberately deprived of sleep.

---

From SADDAM HUSSEIN: crimes and human rights abuses by the UK's Foreign & Commonwealth Office:

Quote:

---

Torture is systematic in Iraq. The most senior figures in the regime are personally involved... Saddam presides over the all-powerful Revolutionary Command Council, which enacts laws and decrees and overrides all other state institutions. Several RCC decrees give the security agencies full powers to suppress dissent with impunity. An RCC decree of 21 December 1992 guarantees immunity for Ba’ath party members who cause damage to property, bodily harm and even death when pursuing enemies of the regime.

Saddam has, through the RCC, issued a series of decrees establishing severe penalties (amputation, branding, cutting off of ears, or other forms of mutilation) for criminal offences. In mid-2000, the RCC approved amputation of the tongue as a Torture new penalty for slander or abusive remarks about the President or his family. These punishments are practised mainly on political dissenters. Iraqi TV has broadcast pictures of these punishments as a warning to others...

Saddam Hussein’s Treatment of Women

Amnesty International (2001) – A 25 year old woman known as Um Haydar was beheaded in the street without charge or trial at the end of December 2000 after her husband, suspected by the authorities of involvement in Islamist armed activities, fled the country. Men belonging to Saddam Fidayeen took Um Haydar from her house in al-Karrada district, in front of her children and mother-in-law. Two men held her arms and a third pulled her head from behind and beheaded her in front of the residents. The beheading was also witnessed by the ruling Ba’ath Party in the area. The security men removed the body and the head in a plastic bag and took away the children and mother-in-law.

Human Rights Alliance, France (2002) – A young woman was arrested because her husband had refused to join the war against Iran. Pregnant at the time, she gave birth in prison on 3 December 1989. “I breast fed my son, but they took him away when he was seventeen days old – so that he would not become like me. I am still looking for him, I never had any further news of him”. This woman, who was also horribly tortured in prison, says she still suffers endless torture: the torture of not knowing where her son is.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~

Conditions for political prisoners in Iraq are inhumane and degrading. The following
Description of prison conditions is based on British Government sources.

The “Mahjar” prison located on the Police Training College site in central Baghdad formerly housed the Police Dog Training Centre. The normal occupancy of the “Mahjar” is 600-700 people. Thirty of the cells are underground and thirty other cells used to be dog kennels. Prisoners are beaten twice a day and the women regularly raped by their guards. They receive no medical treatment, but some prisoners have survived up to a year in the “Mahjar”. Two large oil storage tanks each with a capacity of 36,000 litres have been built close to the “Mahjar”. The tanks are full of petrol and are connected by pipes to the prison buildings in the “Mahjar”. The prison authorities have instructions to set light to the petrol and destroy the “Mahjar in an emergency.

The “Sijn Al-Tarbut” (the casket prison) is located on the third underground level of the new Directorate of General Security (DGS) building in Baghdad. The prisoners here are kept in rows of rectangular steel boxes, as found in mortuaries, until they either confess to their crimes or die. There are around 100-150 boxes which are opened for half an hour a day to allow the prisoners some light and air. The prisoners receive only liquids.

The “Qurtiyya” (the can) prison is located in a DGS compound in the Talbiyyah area of the
Saddam City district of Baghdad. This consists of 50-60 metal boxes the size of old tea chests in which detainees are locked under the same conditions as the “Sijn Al-Tarbut”. Each box has a tap for water and a floor made of mesh to allow the detainees to defecate.

---

Sounds like it was a nice place, right up to the time we went in.

I couldn't believe there are some people in this world who would actually say it straight out there is no problem with innocent people dying for oil. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be saying the same thing if it was the other way around. But I don't blame you, the television and magazines and other News aren't showing the truth of what is happening in Iraq, Palestine, and what happened last summer in Lebanon. Wars start for land, power, money, oil and other things, but that doesn't make them right! What happened in iraq in the past was not right, but the US's solution did not solve anything, it just made things worse, and its profiting from the situation.. no one has the right to decide when to end someone else's life not for oil, land, money, power or anything! Would you allow someone that power over your life?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silent Breeze

I couldnt believe there are some people in this world who would actually say it straight out there is no problem with innocent people dying for oil. I'm pretty sure you wouldnt be saying the same thing if it was the other way around. But I dont blame you, the television and magazines and other News arent showing the truth of what is happening in Iraq, Palestine, and what happened last summer in Lebanon. Wars start for land, power, money, oil and other things, but that doesnt make them right! what happened in iraq in the past was not right, but the US's solution did not solve anything, it just made things worse, and its profiting from the situation.. no one has the right to decide when to end someone else's life not for oil, land, money, power or anything! would you allow someone that power over your life?

---

I am absolutely amazed there are people that make the claim it was all for oil without furnishing a shred of evidence.

I'm even more amazed that anyone can know about Saddam's brutal reign, his 12 years of defying the world in violating UN resolutions, cheering the murder of 3000 Americans on 9-11, paying families of suicide bombers, gassing his own people, public tortures and executions, displacing an ancient culture while destroying the southern marshes, forced "Arabization," and on and on and on - and then complain because someone finally did something about it. Since this war has cost us roughly a half trillion dollars where exactly has the US profited?

How do we choose which genocidal dictators are worth taking out? Flip a coin? Skin color? None? Which threats are worth removing? Any?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silent Breeze

I couldn't believe there are some people in this world who would actually say it straight out there is no problem with innocent people dying for oil.

---

There is plenty wrong with innocent people dying for oil. However, there is not one shred of evidence (only supposition and propaganda) that that is what is happening in Iraq.

Quote:

---

I'm pretty sure you wouldn't be saying the same thing if it was the other way around. But I don't blame you, the television and magazines and other News aren't showing the truth of what is happening in Iraq, Palestine, and what happened last summer in Lebanon.

---

I certainly agree with that. It took months of ignoring the story and downplaying the events in Iraq before the media started admitting that violence is actually down in Iraq and that there is definite progress in Iraq. You are right... the media isn't telling us the truth. Where you are wrong is about what the truth really is.

Quote:

---

Wars start for land, power, money, oil and other things, but that doesn't make them right! What happened in iraq in the past was not right, but the US's solution did not solve anything, it just made things worse,

---

What is your evidence for this statement?

Quote:

---

and its profiting from the situation..

---

Who is profitting? What evidence of this do you have?

Quote:

---

no one has the right to decide when to end someone else's life not for oil, land, money, power or anything! Would you allow someone that power over your life?

---

Then I assume that you are anti-abortion, pro-life. After all, nobody has the right to decide when to end someone else's life, right?

But please keep in mind that we freed 25 million Iraqi people from a despot who used torture, rape and murder as political tools and killed about a million of his own people, and tortured millions more. We didn't take away the Iraqi people's power over their lives, we returned it to them after it was stolen from them for 20+ years by Saddam.

Elliot

From the anti-American anti-Iraq war publication the UK Guardian :

A surge of their own: Iraqis take back the streets

Attacks plummet as Shias join Sunnis in neighbourhood patrols to tackle militants and reunite communities.

Quote:

---

Though they are still dominated by Sunnis, the patrols' make-up increasingly reflects the ethnic and sectarian community they are guarding. An increasing number of Shia are now joining their ranks, some in a bid to counter the influence of Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi army in their area.

---

A surge of their own: Iraqis take back the streets | Iraq | Guardian Unlimited

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

Yeah... gangs in the USA are the same way. That doesn't make it "safe" to be around them.

And yes, it is safe now to go out in the streets of Iraq in most cities. In fact, the only place where there is any serious ongoing violence is in Baghdad, and the violence there is decreasing exponentially. In fact, there have been a number of reports talking about how businesses, including street vendors, are starting to see increased foot traffic in most of Iraq.



But we should believe you because... well, because you say so. You have no evidence to back up your statements, but we should believe you over those who have documentation to back up their claims? Including those who's job it is to track civillian casualties, like Iraq Body Count? You have better information than they do?

If you could at least provide some PROOF of what you were saying, rather than saying "trust me, I know better", we might be able to take you more seriously. But you haven't done that. You have made broad claims that:

1) Bush invaded Iraq for the oil, and
2) Iraq was better off before the invasion.

You have provided absolutely NO PROOF for either of these claims. And when others have provided proof that is contrary to these claims, your response has been that you "know better than we do". Well then prove it with some hard facts, not blanket statements and accusations.

Elliot

---

Proof? I am Proof! I'm an Iraqi who Lives in Iraq... what more proof you want? I see what's going on in my country.. what people say.. what solders are doing.. no business.. no money.. a lot of who I know died..

Americans solders shot my guard, broke into my house and trashed everything.. I can't go out of the house because it's not safe... I found a hand in my garden..
I lived there before the war and after.. you can't compare... in saddams time we had a normal life.. people didn't have %100 freedom but we had freedom.. safety.. business, now when they say someone close to you died.. we feel so numb because of the amount of people who DIE A DAY that we hear about.

Listen.. there is.. media.. government.. politics.. and then there is real life, real people and real experience

Media, government and politics LIE because if you will know the truth you will not accept it.
They try to feed you brain with reason that are unreal so you accept the war so they get what they want... which is OIL.


You can't come to me and say what media said; what you have read or watched on TV and tell me oh you no what.. it is safe.. its better than before or whatever.. THE FACT IS ; I LIVE THERE, YOU Don't.. and what I say will be more real then what you know WHAT YOU READ IS WHAT I LIVE.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loveyoupeople

im an Iraqi who Lives in Iraq......
THE FACT IS ; I LIVE THERE

---

Hmmm IP addresses tell a very different American story.

Whoooosh did you see that, it was your credibility flying out the window.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silent Breeze

I couldnt believe there are some people in this world who would actually say it straight out there is no problem with innocent people dying for oil. I'm pretty sure you wouldnt be saying the same thing if it was the other way around. But I dont blame you, the television and magazines and other News arent showing the truth of what is happening in Iraq, Palestine, and what happened last summer in Lebanon. Wars start for land, power, money, oil and other things, but that doesnt make them right! what happened in iraq in the past was not right, but the US's solution did not solve anything, it just made things worse, and its profiting from the situation.. no one has the right to decide when to end someone else's life not for oil, land, money, power or anything! would you allow someone that power over your life?

---

I can't believe it either.. people saying hell yeah why not blood for oil.. will they say the same when they see their child blown into 1000 bits all over their house.. see their mother burnt?. loose their hand or leg.. I'm sure they wouldn't be saying "hell yeah blood for oil, why not"

All you can say BRAIN WASHED!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Curlyben

Hmmm IP addresses tell a very different American story.

Whoooosh did you see that, it was your credibility flying out the window.

---

Your profile picture says a lot about you...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loveyoupeople

your profile picture says a lot about you...

---

As does yours I believe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Curlyben

As does yours I believe

---

I got mine from the best.. I got it from you.. smart guy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ETWolverine

Yeah... gangs in the USA are the same way. That doesn't make it "safe" to be around them.

And yes, it is safe now to go out in the streets of Iraq in most cities. In fact, the only place where there is any serious ongoing violence is in Baghdad, and the violence there is decreasing exponentially. In fact, there have been a number of reports talking about how businesses, including street vendors, are starting to see increased foot traffic in most of Iraq.



But we should believe you because... well, because you say so. You have no evidence to back up your statements, but we should believe you over those who have documentation to back up their claims? Including those who's job it is to track civillian casualties, like Iraq Body Count? You have better information than they do?

If you could at least provide some PROOF of what you were saying, rather than saying "trust me, I know better", we might be able to take you more seriously. But you haven't done that. You have made broad claims that:

1) Bush invaded Iraq for the oil, and
2) Iraq was better off before the invasion.

You have provided absolutely NO PROOF for either of these claims. And when others have provided proof that is contrary to these claims, your response has been that you "know better than we do". Well then prove it with some hard facts, not blanket statements and accusations.

Elliot

---

Some people are questioning.. ' who said Bush is doing this for Oil'





IF IRAQ HAD NO OIL.. WOULD AMERICA GO TO WAR? The answer would be NO.. They wouldn't.. they couldn't care less.. and to prove it.. now that their in the country.. they are not doing anything for the people.. we are unhappier, unsafe and not getting any richer..

There is absolutely no advantage of this war to any iraqi.. I swear I swear I swear it got to a stage where I have to walk over the dead bodies in the streets... apart from the kidnapping, the theft, the rape, the young people who turned disable and apart from the stories of what happens in kidnapping.. drilling a whole in some ones head.. ACTUALLY USING AN ELECTRIC DRILL.. pulling eyes out.. chopping fingers off. EVEN ANIMALS HAVE MORE MERCY THAN WHAT AMERICA HAS DONE TO IRAQ.



Now please... before you reply.. take a minute to think.. not as an american.. or a politician.. think as a human being.. think of the people who are going through this every single day.. think of what will they be replying to your comments..
When they are going through this and you reply with " oh well the media says .." or " Oil is a good reason to go to war" or "no no it is safer now after war".. think what will they be saying to you.. and if you were them; what will you be saying to me!

I think Curlyben is correct.. The narrative you tell is stuff that was popular to regurgitate as late as last year. But even news organizations like Guardian UK who were always opposed to the war grudgingly admit that security in most of the country has dramatically improved ;even in Baghdad.

Honey?. have you read a thing of what I wrote!

Oh, we read it. We just don't believe you.

When even the anti-Bush media is saying that there is progress in Iraq...

When even Congressional Democrats are saying that there is progress in Iraq...

When Sunni, Shia and Kurdish sources all agree that there is progress in Iraq...

When one of the moderators for this website says that your IP is not from an Iraqi source after you claim to be in Iraq...

When you have not been able to offer one shred of evidence, not one publication, not one statistical figure, not one hard fact...

... then I think we are fully justified in not believing what you have written.

Oh, and by the way, why did you have a "guard" that was shot by American troops? Do all Iraqis have personal guards? What was this guard doing at the time he was shot? What was he guarding? Who are you that you need a guard? There's a lot here that brings the entire story into question.

Whatever.

Elliot

If you do not believe me its your problem.. it does not change all the facts that I told you... and it just prooves how brainwashed you are... you know being all cool with drilling some ones brain out...


All people who are wealthy need guards in Iraq for protections.. not because of the war.. but have a big house and its important to have someone protecting the house. And after war I had to get more guard to protect me from being kidnaped.

And yes the americans did come into my hosue and shot my guard.. trashed the place.. I never knew why.. I am not a politician in Iraq or anything.. just a normal citizin who has money.. or lets say who had money.. (after war no business) plus I can't do much because I'm stuck in the house because there is no safety.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loveyoupeople

If you do not believe me its your problem.. it does not change all the facts that I told you... and it just prooves how brainwashed you are... you know being all cool with drilling some ones brain out...

---

If it were happening, I probably wouldn't be "cool" with it, unless the guys who it was being done to were terrorists. Then I say go for it. But we have no proof of any such thing happening except your word.

Quote:

---

all people who are wealthy need guards in Iraq for protections.. not because of the war.. but have a big house and its important to have someone protecting the house. And after war I had to get more guard to protect me from being kidnaped.

---

Let's compare this statement with other statements you have made earlier in this string.

"everyone got along with every one just fine."
"was it safer when saddam was there .. HElLL YEAH"
"b4 when saddam was leading.. it was safe enough to go out."

If it was so safe in Iraq under Saddam's rule, why did you need a guard? To guard against who or what? It was safer under Saddam, according to you.

Quote:

---

and yes the americans did come into my hosue and shot my guard.. trashed the place.. I never knew why.. I am not a politician in Iraq or anything.. just a normal citizin who has money.. or lets say who had money.. (after war no business) plus I can't do much because I'm stuck in the house because there is no safety.

---

So you say. But somehow, people are conducting business in Iraq just fine. Schools are open too, so kids are able to move around safely. Hospitals are open, so patients are able to move around safely. But for some reason, you seem to be having trouble. Assuming what you have said is true, for which I have my doubts.

But if little kids can get to school, and sick patients can get to the hospital, then perhaps you need to actually get your a$$ out of your home, stop b!tching and moaning, and start earning some money instead of blaming America for your misfortune. Your economy has been opened up, there are economic opportunities that have not existed in Iraq for decades, and you have the opportunity to become richer than you could have ever dreamed.

Or you you can sit there and moan about how terrible America is for giving you these opportunities.

Choice is yours, LYP. You decide.

Elliot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by loveyoupeople

you know being all cool with drilling some ones brain out...

---

Yeah, I read that in today's news also...

Quote:

---

Blood-splotches on walls, chains hanging from a ceiling and swords on the killing floor — the artifacts left a disturbing tale of brutalities inside a suspected al-Qaida in Iraq torture chamber. But there was yet another chilling fact outside the dirt-floor dungeon. Villagers say they knew about the torment but were too intimidated by extremists to tell authorities until now.

Stories such as these — claims of insurgent abuses and the silence of frightened Iraqis — have emerged with increasing frequency and clarity recently as U.S.-led forces push deeper into former extremist fiefdoms and forge alliances with tribes seeking to reclaim their regions.

The reports and tips now pouring in build a harrowing portrait of rule under al-Qaida and its backers: mass graves, ruthless punishments, self-styled Islamic courts ordering summary executions.

Such a lead brought soldiers earlier this month to the hidden room in Muqdadiyah, about 60 miles north of Baghdad, the U.S. military said Thursday. Graffiti on the building proclaimed "Long Live the Islamic State" — a reference to the Islamic governance, or caliphate, sought in Iraq by Sunni extremist groups that include al-Qaida.

Scrawled in white paint above a bed in the torture area was a Quranic phrase in Arabic normally used to welcome a guest. But the context suggested only sadistic mockery: "Come in, you are safe."

The floor was littered with food wrappers, plastic soda bottles and electric cables that snaked to a metal bed frame, presumably where detainees were shocked, according to the U.S. account of the discovery during a Dec. 8-11 mission.

The rooms "had chains, a bed — an iron bed that was still connected to a battery — knives and swords that were still covered in blood," said U.S. Army Maj. Gen. Mark P. Hertling, the top U.S. commander in northern Iraq.

Nearby were nine mass graves containing the remains of 26 people, he said.

Villagers knew about the torture site, but did not tell authorities as they were afraid of reprisals from the militants, a local policeman told The Associated Press. He spoke on condition of anonymity as he was still afraid of being targeted by extremists.

He said he thought the chamber had been used for a year.

It was not the first such torture chamber discovered in Iraq. But it serves as a reminder of the extremist grip in parts of Iraq despite growing optimism as violence continues to fall.

And Diyala province — where the grisly discovery was made — remains one of the most volatile regions as U.S. and Iraqi forces struggle to match the clear advances against extremists made in Baghdad and the western desert of Anbar.

The province is mixed between Sunnis and Shiites — often called a "little Iraq" and a remnant of Iraq before sectarian bloodletting partitioned many parts of the country along religious lines. Diyala's capital, Baqouba, also is the self-proclaimed seat of the insurgents' caliphate.

"I think that is why al-Qaida wants that province so very much, because it is 'a little Iraq,'" Hertling said. "It gives them access to Baghdad and it also ... is considered their caliphate capital."

American commanders say they are a long way from declaring victory in Diyala.

The weapons caches found during the Muqdadiyah raids included a surface-to-air missile launcher, sniper rifles, and 130 pounds of homemade explosives, Hertling said.

"You know, there's going to be continued spectacular attacks," he said. "Are we confident we can protect it? As soon as I say, 'Yeah, we're confident,' it's going to blow tomorrow."

It was not the first apparent torture site found after U.S. forces moved into former extremist strongholds.

In March, U.S. troops discovered a similar site in the village of Karmah just west of Baghdad that was used by Sunni insurgents for torture and summary executions. They rescued two Iraqi captives, who apparently had been spared immediate execution because the militants' video camera broke and they wanted to film the killing.

The captives told U.S. soldiers they had been sentenced to death by an insurgent court and had the choice of either beheading or a fatal gunshot.

Both Sunni insurgents and Shiite militia death squads regularly torture their captives before killing them — sometimes with power drills. Most of the hundreds of bodies that have turned up in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq show signs of torture

---

We're not cool with that which is one of the reasons we took Saddam out and why we sent more troops this year.

Quote:

---

all people who are wealthy need guards in Iraq for protections.. not because of the war.. but have a big house and its important to have someone protecting the house. And after war I had to get more guard to protect me from being kidnaped.

And yes the americans did come into my hosue and shot my guard.. trashed the place.. I never knew why.. I am not a politician in Iraq or anything.. just a normal citizin who has money.. or lets say who had money.. (after war no business) plus I can't do much because I'm stuck in the house because there is no safety.

---

If you "had" money how are you paying for guards? By the way, the IP address thing? I tend to believe Curlyben on that, too.