• This is a reminder of 3 IMPORTANT RULES:

    1- External self-promotion websites or apps are NOT allowed here, like Discord/Twitter/Patreon/etc.

    2- Do NOT post in other languages. English-only.

    3- Crack/Warez/Piracy talk is NOT allowed.

    Breaking any of the above rules will result in your messages being deleted and you will be banned upon repetition.

    Please, stop by this thread SoccerGaming Forum Rules And Guidelines and make sure you read and understand our policies.

    Thank you!

BREAKING NEWS ! Saddam Has Been Captured : CONFIRMED

Paul

Fan Favourite
Originally posted by LilPlayaJosh
And what he has to say about the French, the Germans and Russians who at some point all helped Saddam so its not just the USA that had one time helped Saddam. All yall do is find stuff to go against America yet yall overlook any other countries involvement with the same situation.... I mean some of yall are critical of the US no matter what. I mean yall overlook the positives and exagerate the negatives. I mean I know some stuff the govt is doing is questionable but that goes the same for most govt's around the globe the US is just the only country that is on everyones news channels, over here the news channels rarely talk about what other countries are doing unless its about something the we are also involved in. And Rhizome what do you mean about global domination? you are exagerating so much Bush would never do that and you know it. Thats a pretty stubborn comment. Let me guess Bush is the next Hitler... lol ok

People like rhizome are arguing with ppl half their age... what do you expect.

Just like rhizome (and others, just so he doesn't feel isolated), the media NOW focuses on the bad things about the war on iraq, the media fails to focus on some of the good things that have come out of this incursion, even if the primary goal hasn't been completed.

"The uncovering of Saddam's mass graves is likewise barely mentioned. Nor are the big protests in Iraq against the terrorist "resistance". Nor are the polls that show Iraqis feel better off having been liberated, and don't want US troops to leave for at least a year."
 

rhizome17

Fan Favourite
Originally posted by LilPlayaJosh
I typed in "project for a new american century" and looked around the site for a bit, but I havent seen anything actually written or quoted by anyone from the current bush adm. But can you please tell me atleast one specific publication that is a actual member of the current Bush Adm., because I didnt look through everyhting so I probably missed it.. I appreciate it

Go back to the documents on Iraq and the Middle East from 1997-2000. There you will find articles by John Bolton and Paul Wolfowitz.

Anyway, Vice President Dick Cheney is a founding member of PNAC, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is the ideological father of the group. Bruce Carlos*son, a PNAC director, served as a Pentagon official for Ronald Reagan before leaving government service to take a leading position with the weapons manufacturer Lockheed Martin.
 

rhizome17

Fan Favourite
Originally posted by Paul

even if the primary goal hasn't been completed.

what was that again?

Originally posted by Paul
The uncovering of Saddam's mass graves is likewise barely mentioned. Nor are the big protests in Iraq against the terrorist "resistance". Nor are the polls that show Iraqis feel better off having been liberated, and don't want US troops to leave for at least a year.

Mass graves were mentioned in the media numerous times after the war had started. And I expect if any new ones are found, they will be reported also. I have seen plenty of footage of Iraqis protesting against resistance bombings. But since the US response usually kills more civilians than resistance fighters, it is no surprise that the resistance continues to build. As for polls, would be nice if you could link me some. And just because people realise thay are better off without Saddam, is not the same as people thinking they are well off with the US there. But until a decent Iraqi police force and/ or military can be created, then it isn't a surprise if people want US troops to stay, if they are the only ones able to maintain a semblence of order.

And anyway, such polls are meaningless unless broken down into regions. People in Tikrit are less likely to want foreign troops around than say, the Kurds or people in Basre.
 

rhizome17

Fan Favourite
Actually Paul I have done my own little research and come up with an interesting article regarding the polls apparently showing the results you state.

You see, there was indeed a poll that was quoted by Dick Cheney as showing that Iraqis did not want the US troops to leave in a year. Now, this was the first poll undertaken in Iraq, and it was done by Zogby International. You can find their site here http://www.zogby.com/index.cfm. So far so good. This was indeed the poll quoted as saying the things you yourself say.

Anyway, what is interesting is that one of the directors of the polling company, James Zogby, has published his own response to Cheney's comments. And you know what? He felt so strongly about Cheney's comments that he titled the article "How the Poll Results on Iraq Were Manipulated" :|. Thats right, the very man responsible for the poll has written here http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1022-12.htm about how Cheney misused the results. On the issue of wanting US troops to stay, for example:

"When given the choice as to whether they "would like to see the American and British forces leave Iraq in six months, one year, or two years," 31.5 percent of Iraqis say these forces should leave in six months; 34 percent say a year, and only 25 percent say two or more years.

So while technically Cheney might say that "over 60 percent (actually it's 59 percent) ... want the US to stay at least another year," an equally correct observation would be that 65.5 percent want the US and Britain to leave in one year or less.

Other numbers found in the poll go further to dampen the vice president's and the AEI's rosy interpretations. For example, when asked if "democracy can work well in Iraq," 51 percent said "no; it is a Western way of doing things and will not work here."

And attitudes toward the US were not positive. When asked whether over the next five years, they felt that the "US would help or hurt Iraq,"50 percent said that the US would hurt Iraq, while only 35.5 percent felt the US would help the country. On the other hand, 61 percent of Iraqis felt that Saudi Arabia would help Iraq in the next five years, as opposed to only 7.5 percent, who felt Saudi Arabia would hurt their country. Some 50. 5 percent felt that the United Nations would help Iraq, while 18.5 percent felt it would hurt. Iran's rating was very close to the US', with 53. 5 percent of Iraqis saying Iran would hurt them in the next five years, while only 21. 5 percent felt that Iran might help them.

It is disturbing that the AEI and the vice president could get it so wrong. Their misuse of the polling numbers to make the point that they wanted to make, resembles the way critics have noted that the administration used "intelligence data" to make their case to justify the war. " (taken from the article).

So basically, whoever you got your quote from, has not done his/her own research as to Cheney's comments.

So there you go.
 

monkee

Senior Squad
45(little hovering o) :D

Was gonna reply to LilPlayaJosh, but there's no need to repeat what has already been said by others.

However, not once did I say that the 'anti-war' coalition did not help Saddam commit his attrocities, but neither does that take away from the fact that those that are against him now, were once very much for him, right down to the very people, in the case of some in the US administration. At least the UK govt can say that it was people like Thatcher that supported Saddam, and they are no longer the current UK govt.

Then there's US representatives ignoring and denying facts and figures which are printed (as fact) in US govt documents. I thought I alluded to that in my previous post but I'm not going to check because I can't be arsed. I guess, what I'm saying is that these are flagrent, audatious lies, that you have to be blind not to see and stupid not to get angry/embarrassed about. I haven't seen the French, when asked questions saying things like, 'you can't say that, you're a liar.'

Your govt likes to argue against it's own published facts, which it will recognise if it suits itself, and accuse others of lying when they are used against it. Amazing.

But then I guess you don't want to be accused of being unpatriotic if you question Dubya.inc
 

Torsten Frings

Youth Team
Did anyone see the documentary with John Pilger? Last week on SBS, it had footage of Rumsfeld and Hussein shaking hands like the buddies they were.

Good God, the American (Administration) are morons. Wish bin Laden would bomb the White House. (With Bush in it). Only Bush, though. And maybe Rumsfeld.

That's not too cruel is it? :(
 

$teauA

Superstar
Originally posted by Torsten Frings
Did anyone see the documentary with John Pilger? Last week on SBS, it had footage of Rumsfeld and Hussein shaking hands like the buddies they were.

Good God, the American (Administration) are morons. Wish bin Laden would bomb the White House. (With Bush in it). Only Bush, though. And maybe Rumsfeld.

That's not too cruel is it? :(

:kader: :kader: :kader:
 

rhizome17

Fan Favourite
Originally posted by Torsten Frings
Did anyone see the documentary with John Pilger? Last week on SBS, it had footage of Rumsfeld and Hussein shaking hands like the buddies they were.

Good God, the American (Administration) are morons. Wish bin Laden would bomb the White House. (With Bush in it). Only Bush, though. And maybe Rumsfeld.

That's not too cruel is it? :(

Then there would be nowhere for the first female US president to go (H)

That video is available on the web too.
 


Top