http://develnet.org/ThisAndThat/DaddyWhyDidWeHaveToAttackIraq

Great site this, made me chuckle..

very very nice work that, long but worth the read :)

Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to invade his country?
A: Well, for one thing, he tortured his own people.
Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq. China is a good economic competitor, where millions of people work for slave wages in sweatshops to make U.S. corporations richer


Sums it all up, really :mrpimp:

Very good, clever and gets the point across.

great read..thx for the link

Q. But daddy, why did we invade them when they offered this?:

-Allowing US inspectors to visit Iraq to inspect for WMD;

-Holding free and fair elections within a specified period of time;

-Concessions to the US in the oil sector and "business dealings";

Concessions to help the Arab-Israeli peace process;

-Handing over Abdul Rahman Yasin, a top al-Qaeda suspect wanted in connection with the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

A: Er... ummm...we don't do deals with dictators.

Q. But what about Pakistan?

A. They are our friend.

etc...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3247461.stm

very clever... loved every minute of it :)

Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to rename French fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast.
Q: Do we always rename foods whenever another country doesn't do what we want them to do?

:funny:

Q: That doesn't make sense. Why would they choose to die if they had all those big weapons with which they could have fought back?
A: It's a different culture. It's not supposed to make sense
Q: So if a country lets its people be exploited for American corporate gain, it's a good country, even if that country tortures people?
A: Right.
Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is Communist.
Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just Cuban Communists are bad


hehe my favorite parts (H)

Man, I hope the US never go to war against Mexico, I wouldn't like to go to Del Taco (yes I live in the US) to buy "freedom rolled tortilla with meat inside" or something of the like.

:funny:

DOWN USA!!!!!!


NEW WORLD ORDER!!!!!!!!!


THE BRAINWASHING IN EDUCATION!!!!!!!


ITS GOD'S GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:f***:

(H) :mrpimp:












































:kader:

Moron. :rolleyes:

thats his name... :rolleyes:

he lives by it too

Indeed he does.

Originally posted by Moron

ITS GOD'S GOVERNMENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


:funny::funny::funny:

and im the queen of england!

Originally posted by hiryuu.com
Man, I hope the US never go to war against Mexico, I wouldn't like to go to Del Taco (yes I live in the US) to buy "freedom rolled tortilla with meat inside" or something of the like.

Del Taco's the ****. My friend and I ate there on a long bus trip and we were ****ting and farting all the way home, much to the shagrin of the rest of the bus.

Clever read. I should write one of my own.

Son: Why do human rights activists complain about innocent people being murdered, tortured, worked to death, and imprisoned because of political beliefs, but then complain when the governments of those countries are displaced?

Daddy: That's not the point. We just have to pretend to care because it makes us feel good inside.

Son: So you only do things to make you feel good inside?

Daddy: Yes, and because we hate President Bush. He looks like a monkey, stole the election, can't say nuclear, is a cowboy unilateralist, and only went to war to give Haliburton a good contract.

Son: I get it! So why is it that the Democratic Party is becoming irrelevant in the USA?

Daddy: Oh that's because of the Patriot Act and being silenced by the government.

Son: Who has been silenced, can you name someone?

Daddy: No, we only say it for propaganda purposes because the more you tell a lie the more truthful it becomes.

Son: Thanks Dad, I can't wait to be like Moron!!



:-paul:

Originally posted by Elder
Daddy: No, we only say it for propaganda purposes because the more you tell a lie the more truthful it becomes.

You said it.

...and the 'oh, we should've used the Saddam's-an-oppressive-dictator-that-we-supported argument. Leaving out the part where we say how much support we gave him at the height of his attrocities bit of course' resurfaces. The argument surrounding Iraq has become so predictable. Maybe another case for the war should be found. I know, how about money. It hasn't been tried before...

It's obvious that anyone concerned about the real motives behind the war are pro-Saddam, and that everyone pro-war before it all kicked off were really, really concerned with the welfare of the people of Iraq. The whole argument seems to have gone North-South.

It's obvious that anyone concerned about the real motives behind the war are pro-Saddam, and that everyone pro-war before it all kicked off were really, really concerned with the welfare of the people of Iraq. The whole argument seems to have gone North-South.

Not pro-Saddam, just unwilling to do anything about him. That's the point I was trying to make about Human Right's activists. I hear them complain, but when the man is removed, they complain about innocent people being killed in the process. The main point is.. you can't have it both ways. Either you have Saddam killing thousands upon thousands for years and years to come, or some thousands for a year or 2 and hope the torture and murder doesn't continue after the US leaves.

The pro war people were concerned about the welfare of Iraqi civilians or they would have just advocated carpet bombing the whole country. But more importantly, war supporters were more worried about the welfare of their own citizens after 9/11 happened.

Whether that is right or wrong is always up for debate.

Originally posted by Elder
The main point is.. you can't have it both ways. Either you have Saddam killing thousands upon thousands for years and years to come, or some thousands for a year or 2 and hope the torture and murder doesn't continue after the US leaves.
I think the point is that if you can't learn from your mistakes and stop supporting oppressive regimes then what gives you the right to go in there and claim your helping the innocents when you're stealing off them in the process?

I'm not going to disagree that freeing the Iraqi people of Saddam is a good thing, in fact I completely agree with you. But I still question the motives of those who decided that now was the best time to get rid of him.

Contrary to hoping that oppression doesn't continue after they leave I think that it's now the US' (and all the other countries involved in toppling Saddam) responsibility to make sure that the torture and murder doesn't continue in Iraq after they leave. Realistically though do you think they'll stay much after they've finished pilfering as much as they can from the country they've attacked? Do you also think that they are hurrying along with getting Iraq in a stable condition so as its people can govern themselves asap?

Another point, which was made in the article posted by hermolt is blatently that if you are going to make the argument about attacking Iraq because of it's regime then why stop at Iraq when there are other places committing similar acts?

I don't think I'll go into what threat Iraq was to the national security of the countries that attacked it.

I think the point is that if you can't learn from your mistakes and stop supporting oppressive regimes then what gives you the right to go in there and claim your helping the innocents when you're stealing off them in the process?

How about I raise you one better.. We supported 2 oppressive regimes at the same time! In doing so, I guess the thought was that they would wipe each other out... Obviously, that didn't work. It's funny though how after supporting countries, they tend to resent you.. Germany, France, South East Asia, Iraq.. Next time, I say the US stays out of it..

But what are we stealing? That is simply silly. The US government just signed the bill for 87 BILLION dollars to go towards Iraq.. There were no loans, all grants. That's not stealing, no matter how you cut it.

I'm not going to disagree that freeing the Iraqi people of Saddam is a good thing, in fact I completely agree with you. But I still question the motives of those who decided that now was the best time to get rid of him.

Good, we agree. But how long is long enough? 14 years is quite a long time, but I would have supported ending Saddams regime 14 years ago the first time.. Too bad we had a president who couldn't stand up to the UN and finish the job.. It's funny how his son is doing just that.

Realistically though do you think they'll stay much after they've finished pilfering as much as they can from the country they've attacked? Do you also think that they are hurrying along with getting Iraq in a stable condition so as its people can govern themselves asap?

The troops will be there for a loooooooooooong time to come. After all, we still have troops in the Balkans and theyw ere supposed to be gone years and years ago. And yes, they are hurrying very quickly to get the government in order... US elections are next year, if you know what I mean... But again, what is being pilfered?

Another point, which was made in the article posted by hermolt is blatently that if you are going to make the argument about attacking Iraq because of it's regime then why stop at Iraq when there are other places committing similar acts?

I am not convinced that Iraq is the last stop.......... And on China and North Korea.. China has the largest standing army in the world and nukes.. North Korea may have nukes, and is in artillery range of downtown Seoul, South Korea.. Big differences between them and the bucket of sand called Iraq. There are more lives at stake, which is what the author may not understand.

But in the end, it's just a mess no matter how you spin it.