h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I'd say they was full of envy

I'm not being remotely sarcastic. I'm afraid what I said is very true. The only way that the Iraq's suffering will end will be when Saddam is deposed. If that means having to take a lot of hip-thrusting machismo from the American's as they blow bits of the country up, then so be it. I'm not going to let the Iraq's continue to be starved just so I can thumb my nose at George W Bush.

And forget all that "lift the sanctions" stuff. It's not going to happen.

Sorry, Kid but until America learns that the reason so many in the Middle East hate it has nothing to do with envy, then you guys will never sort out the world situation.

The main reason for anti-US feeling is it's support for Israel and everything it does, not matter how extreme. The Arab's see "white" people sticking together and that causes resentment and a massive sense of unfairness. There is also the Iraqi problem. To contain Saddam, half a million Iraqi's have died owning to sanctions and bombing. The US considers these dead people a "necessary casualty". This makes Arabs think that their lives are considered worthless to those of European descent. And no matter how many are killed, none of the politicians who order the action can legally be touched. That also causes resentment.

Regarding Jealousy, there is a small country in the Middle East called the United Arab Emirates. It is very rich, but does not attract the animosity of poor Arab countries in the way the US does. I'll let you work out why.

ZAGREB:

Did I mistake you for an american in my previous posting?

I was sure you were.

I don´t know if giving an apology, would be appropriate in this thread though.

Anyway.

I agree with you that Saddam should probably be gotten rid of.This I think should be done in an intelligent way though. There ARE such methods as supporting resistance groups and going in and take him alive.
I know this is difficult and it´s much easier to just bomb the hell out of Iraq; which I believe is done daily anyway.Or to hang him from the nearest lamppost (Mousolinni style I suspect),run him over, or whatever we can think of in our rage.

If we use the same methods as our opponents/enemies we are not one inch better than them, and that is exactly what we do if we take the law in our own hands; that be democratic countries or the sigle individual.Let´s face it; to put it hard : I couldn´t give a damn about 500.000 innocent Iraqis or 3000 americans far far away from where i live safe and sound.But I do care about the people down the road, and if i DO know that a wife down there is being beaten up by her husband and the children are probably being abused, would it be ok to gather a bunch of people and give the guy a beating or kill him. I think not.The best thing to do would be to let court deal with him and let haim have a fair trial.Just the same with world dictators or war criminals, as it is being done in the case of mr. Milosevic.The problem is that the international war tribunal is not going to work properly until some years from now, and also that USA did not approve of it, out of fear that americans might be taken to court also (such as mr.Kissinger or foot soldier and commanding officers).And with the world´s only superpower not participating (officially) it is very hard to give it the proper weight.

All in all, I don´t think even Saddam, Milosevic, Kissinger, Dubya, the foot soldier, the commanding officer or the ugly guy down the road deserves to be hung by the nearest lamppost (I´m sure that those Somalis killing and dragging american soldiers through the streets was thinking just the same way as expressed in your posting now that I think about it; but you would probably say that THEY wrere wrong), run over (by a woman) or even take a serious beating without having a proper trial; some in national courts and some in international courts


BTW:

Here in Denmark we just had a case 3 months ago where the public got to know that a former highranking Iraqi officer (I don´t have his name right here, but I will try and come back w/that) has been staying here on so-called "toleratet residence".Supposedly he was one of a group of former officers living outside Iraq, and a serious bet as to a new start in Iraq.I know that USA questioned him, but he wasn´t allowed to travel to a meeting with those other officers to discuss an alternative to when Saddam was out of there.

And also this is big politics, and we all know there is so much more to it, and a lot of things we DON`T EVEN WANT TO KNOW ABOUTout there.




T´mershi Duween.

T´mershi,

The allies are talking about supporting resistance groups in Iraq. I agree that should be their main priority rather than more bombing. Whatever, it needs to be done *quickly* - no war of attrition lasting months. Iraq is pathetically weak and shouldn't be too difficult to defeat, but the US is far too fond of doing things at a great height from the air.

Best solution off the top of my head would be for a joint allied force of British, German, Russian (and anyone else we can get onboard. The US will be loathe to commit ground forces to an invading force but that's their problem) troops to invade from the North, arming any anti-Saddam forces along the way. The US can take out any air-defences. Most of the Iraqi army will probably surrender/desert. Saddam will go crazy and start killing all his deputies. Revolution will probably sweep Iraq and Saddam will hang from the nearest lampost

I very much doubt Saddam will ever be put on trial. It may be the fair and legal thing to do but I have to say if the Iraqi's do murder him it won't bother me too much.

One of the problems that I have with what you have said Zagreb is that we should arm the dissidents in the area. Seems to me like everytime we've done that, we've regretted it later. These people have long memories. Just because we arm them, that doesn't mean they'll somehow be saying how great we are to all their buddies.

Invade Iraq? Yes. Why? Because they are a threat to our national security. Because, I believe they are a terrorist state, if only because of the inclinations of their leader. One of his goals is supremecy over the US. I'm not interested in him seeing the actualization of his goals.

But, I say that there should be a coalition of countries-perhaps even UN lead if I thought that the right leader could be found(under which all nations would fight)-with the goal of toppling his regime, and creating the a climate that would best represent the interests of people. Honestly, I could care if a monarchy is what they decide to do. So long as (s)he's friendly to the world community and more specifically to my own home the US.

But then I said much the same for Osama, and they didn't take my advice with that one really either.

A trial? I would agree to that. But you have to topple his government first. You have to destroy his resources. And you have to take him alive, which I very much doubt will occur.

My 2 cents. Did anyone miss my militant voice?

Perium, I don't know if "missed" is the word

When I said arm anti-Saddam forces, I didn't mean permanently. They would be under the jurisdiction of the allied forces. The important thing is to send a message to the Iraqi's that this is their war too.

I don't think Saddam is the great threat to the world that he will be made out to be before the war starts. He's had plenty of time to use this great power he's supposed to have and he's done nothing. His resources have diminished over time, not increased. I see the priority as being removing Saddam and therefore not only removing a possible, though unlikely, terrorist threat to the West, but also ending the suffering of the Iraqis who have had ten years of Saddam and sanctions. Not a nice combination.

I'm sure the US doesn't care if some nutcase takes over in Iraq as long as he's pro-western. Personally, I hope the other allied countries will try and foster some sort of democracy in Iraq.

As for a trial - Sorry but I would undoubtably get some satisfaction from learning that Saddam had been beaten to death by an angry Iraqi mob. But if they capture him alive, then I suppose a trial it will have to be.

"Under the jurisdiction of the Allied forces". Oh to do get real!
These people have their own agendas. To impose any sort of outside command on the supposed nationals would automatically lead to the Vietnam/Afghanistan scenarios.
The US appears to only be waiting for the final shipments of their air launch cruise missiles(Boeing is making a squillion). All the online intelligence sites are betting that the US will launch an attack on Iraq within four to six weeks. Looks like someone is not going to enjoy Easter.
Meanwhile.......
Keep your eye on Georgia, Chechnya, Kazakhstan and Turkey. The US is currently pouring troops into these places, as well as the Sinai and the Gulf states.
Apart from the stated reasons the only link between all these states is OIL.
The game goes on........................

Rod

"he still managed to deliver a lecture to the Chinese about democracy and religious freedom with a straight face."

Yes, pure po-faced hypocrisy.

Exsqueeze me? Lentilla, I have a problem with what you say, because I cannot believe Saddam Hussein is as bad as you Americans paint him. Here in NZ, all our news (except for the BBC World Service) comes through an American filter, and after the news lately, abt yr news Office of Strategic Disinformation - sorry, Incorrectness (or whatever it is), well, I never did take the news as truth without a filter, but now! (Of course this office will continue to exist, it just won't be publically known..)

Zagreb, this begins to sound really scary! Like the beginning of WWIII, something the Americans want - some of them so's to bring about the 'End Times', so I believe... We have no right! What if Chirac up and decided to invade Scotland, perhaps to free some category of person/being? An international force going in like gang-busters? This is not acceptable - or am I being naive?

Oh, Rod - tell me it's not true! If so, all my employment and study problems will become moot, as the world (or civilisation at least) all expire in a great big ball of fire...

You're right Rod, the US is going to start a war with Iraq. Now, do you think the other allied powers should join in and keep the US level-headed or do you think we should stay out, whinge ineffectually from the sidelines, and leave poor Iraq to clumsy US "diplomacy"?

And what is there in Iraq that a US invasion will remove that is so precious to so many of you people, anyway?

As for my "under allied jurisdiction". I'll grant you, it's a fair point that it's not easy to make sure the armed Rebel forces behave after the invasion and subsequent revolution. I'm just hoping they'll see the invasion forces as on their side against Saddam, rather than the US against another arab state. There may even be places for some of the anti-Saddam force leaders in the new government, so they could be kept sweet that way.

Della,

Scotland and France are old friends, Chirac would up and invade England rather than us. Come to think of it, some Scot's might muck in and help him

But seriously, I don't think it'll be WWIII. Both previous world wars had two massive forces facing off against each other before shots were fired - that isn't present here. You could say the unlikely Iraq-Iran alliance, but I don't think Iran wants war with the West. Iran has only been isolated because Bush and his cronies clumsily failed to realise that Iranian politics have changed enormously in the last ten years. Someone might get round to telling them soon, and that problem may be over. Anyway, even Iraq and Iran combined is piddling compared to the forces the West can commit.

Oh well then, infamy is just as nice I suppose....


I believe the Saddam has never ceased to be a threat. I think that one of the laws of motion tends to play here, objects in motion ten to stay in motion....On the impetus of the worldwide terrorist hunts comes the resurgence of a supposed 'new' threat from Saddam/Aideed/Osama. The threats aren't new, just seemingly forgotten by the public in general.

But human objects has "free wills" opposed to dead objects (and let´s leave the animals out right now ok?), and can consiously take another cause of action or stop actioning at all(suicide); so I think that´s a very naive way of looking at it.


TD.

Who's Aideed?

Mohamed Farah Aideed was the Somali warlord that the US chose not to talk to.
Closely related (philosophically at least) to the 'al quaida' network.

It turned out to be a very messy affair, 'Blackhawk Down' the movie only shows what can happen when you make the wrong choices and underestimate the enemy.
A typical US affair, in that it rapidly degenerated into a Vietnam type affair.
The score was 18 US dead. 500-1000 Somali dead.
Rod

On the world war three thing... Hasn't Bush set his sites on Georgia (and its attendant oil reserves)? That's not going to please Russia for very long (who are going through a 'control the press' phase which doesn't look good for this fledgling 'democracy'. I think we have the beginnings of a new imperialism which will cause just as many problems as the great empires of the past (of which the creation of Afganistan was one).
These things just don't work out, especially if its entirely based on the prospect of installing friendly governments (or puppets as they are sometimes know) to further the interests of your oil-selling, pension stealing buddies.
People keep saying Bush is isolationist, but that's wrong. He is a fervant protectionist (though he'll never admit it) willing to do anything for big (American) business. One thing he appears to have done is declare war on the American people - just check out some of his recent legislation - and the populous seem to love him for it. Taking away their rights improves his approval rating.

Rant over... for now.

Zagreb _ I've been unable to get here for a while so I didn't see yr post...

"Anyway, even Iraq and Iran combined is piddling compared to the forces the West can commit."

The problem is where everyone says "Ooh, can I play as well?" and with a web of alliances and obligations, it's all on!