Why the Iraq war was morally right

Again, Lick has failed to give any credible proof for the crap he spews. In reality, he is just another conspiracy theorist looking for alliens in the skies. To Lick, anything other than what he reads is neocon brainwashed and changed information. If it didn't come from where he reads, it isn't true. It's funny to see someone who uses the dictionary to type so much stuff say absolutely nothing worth while.

 

True dat, bandit.

I mean why the hell else would someone say something like this and then provide links to stalinist front organisations like antiwar.com and newsletters from "violently anti 'smooth jazz' jazz rock fusion" musicians? All that while denigrating as "warmongers" people who link to Human Rights Watch to substantiate Saddam's crimes? Its a joke. In fact the closest I can come to a compliment would be "predictable".

And on that note, I calculate a 78% probability that the next Lick post contains one of the following words or phrases: conflate, paradigm, groupthink, LOL, sheep, duly, Fox News, Page Three Girls.

 

Oh rich coming from another of our resident war trolls who does little more than join in the chorus of media regurgitations and right wing backpatting circle jerks.

One need only look to the posting history of each of you dupes to see the dependence upon right wing blogs (ah yes legitimate researched and annotated source material there) and the most reknown of neocon spin sites which duly revise or ignore any sufficient historical context and Washington's significant role in creating crisis after crisis in the first place.

The same mantras were spewed by the likes you sorry misinformed lot when we invaded grenada and killed vile dangerous cuban construction workers building an airport along with hundreds of others to rescue non-existant American hostages all on the routine and status quo contrivance of a cold war inspired mentality. It was the great Red Scare back then, and today its the "great shadowy terrorist boogeymen" scare providing the thinest of covers for renewed US hegemonic war of aggression, pure and simple.

And you are so enamoured of the ideological groupthink and ego boost of the oo-rah show of might that you willingly gobble down the oft repeated definitions of who is what so that you can continue to feel smug in the myth that we are the good guys. lol.

Keep on swallowing it all, dupe, and wonder in the coming years why all the destabilisation, which we who opposed this from the start said would come to pass, carries on and on. Clearly precious few can or wish to recall the revelations of precisely this same official policy of systematic lies and inflated (yet never proven) claims that embroiled and kept us in Vietnam, duly exposed in 1971 in the Pentagon Papers. Nope, Our nation is a nation of instant gratification and momentary fads, so the task of realising just how consistent and enduring the policies governing our aparatus of state truly are is something that eludes those like yourself. Much easier to happily accept the new packaging and utterly miss the repeat of the operative principle previously revealed as fraud.

Yes, much easier to just defer to the official sanitised, decontextualised soundbites and convince yourself that this is all completely different today.

 

Give PB a cookie, make it two actually one for guessing at words he obviously needs a dictionary to comprehend, the second for once again showing that he never bothered reading any evidence duly provided to debunk his allegation ridden offerings (yes even HRW offered no proof, only claims from people who were always politically opposed to Saddam and aligned with Iran during the Iran Iraq War, as duly exposed by Pelletier). Ah yes PB, do delight us with you shallow comprehensions of the "facts" of the Vietnam era or any other period of foreign policy history.

Even Balbus finally realised how point-less you actually are after spelling out the actualities your "commie", "stalinist" drenched mind was incapable of incorporating from the historic record itself.

Lame ass.

 

Huh Oh, Lick has reverted to the highly intelectual art of name calling. Tell ya what Lick, tell me what you are doing to make a difference. I believe I have asked you this several times and you never come out and say. So until then, you are just another fat ass sitting behind a pc pissed off at America because your gov check didnt arive on the 15th, so you moved to another country that gives you everything you need to sustain life without working.

 

mmmhmm. Yep.
Moon_java listens to Christian radio I believe. Yeah, I would trust that as a reliable news source...

It is beyond me how anyone can despise Saddam and yet worship Bush. It is impossible unless you have some sort of mental disorder, which I believe a majority of Americans do.

 

Whoa. Quite a silly generalization. I think you might be this type of person since you repeatedly accuse everyone else on here of this. I don't match this description in the least. Just one more reason to disregard your posts.

 

Well sometimes right wing publications are correct. For example in 1933 British prime minister Winston Churchill was right about Hitler, both him and the British communist party were then in alliance about the dangers of trying to appease Hitler.

Everyone on the pro-Iraq war side does not deny that Washington was wrong to support Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein in the past. They admit that the situation which led to Iraq being a rogue state was partly the Wests fault. But that does not mean that we believe that it would be wrong for the West now to try to bring democracy to Iraq. In the same way that once the West took part in the slave trade, then many years later helped to enforce a ban on the slave trade.

 

In my opinion it is wrong to try to force our cultural values on any other part of the world. If Iraq wanted democracy then we should have stood with them when they wanted our help. When they were ready to rebel and fight. Thats how we brought democracy to ourselves.

We aren't setting up democracy there for the benefit of Iraq. We are doing it for our benefit. There is another agenda at work here.

And you will never in a million years convince me that it is morally right.

 

If memory serves me correctly, you are the fat-ass salesman from texas, so I wouldn't resort to that kind of name-calling if I were you.

 

but the thing is, no democracy will be set up at all! its just another phoney tv system. the global elite know who will pretend to be in charge of iraq when the time comes.. just like afganistan, the Us and god knows where else

 

Wow - one point for "groupthink", one point for LOL, and three points for "duly" - used three times. Like I said, predictable.

One of Lick's favorite tactics is to repeat things over and over again so that eventually everyone will assume they are true. Kind of like George Bush. For example, if Lick says I rely on "right wing blogs and the most reknown of neocon spin" over and over again, then it must be true, even if no evidence is provided, right? (Note to Lick - reknown is a noun, reknowned is the adjective, and you are still tripping over your own pompous verbiage).

Well, no actually, I rarely if ever use "right wing blogs" to back up my posts, mostly because I don't read them. In total, I read one "right wing" blog, and the guy voted for Kerry. Normally, I link to organisations like Human Rights Watch because anything else will be assumed to be part of the global media/corporate/neocon conspiracy. Of course in this case Lick thinks HRW is part of the global media/corporate/neocon conspiracy, so what can you do?

The fact that I don't read antiwar.com doesn't make me a right wing extremist. Neither does that fact that I don't think mossad piloted remote controlled missile firing airplanes into the world trade center make me a dupe. And believing that Saddam massacred the Kurds is not a view confined to right wing blogs. The extremist here is Lick.

 

Look, Americans are pathetic. We deserve a reinstatement of the draft so that those idiots who let themselves be talked into war can find out what war is really like. And as for those who are anti-war, or peaceful, then this will be their chance to exit America.

 

But they did want democracy it was just that anyone who tried to speak out against Saddams' regime was arrestted, imprisoned and tortured. There was no chance of any rebellion or democracy under Saddams' brutal rule. Saddam ruled the country with an iron fist killing, imprisoning and torturing anyone even suspected of critiscing him.

Oh and by the way there was a mass uprsing against Saddams' rule in 1991 at the end of the first Gulf War, it was brutally and ruthlessly smashed leaving tens of thousands dead, many executed and throw into mass graves. We had a duty to humanity to overthrow just a cruel and evil regime and bring the leaders of it to trial for crimes against humanity!

 

Yes, but did we overthrow it WHEN it would have been proper? No, and look at how many died. You think the survivors are going to look at America with thankful eyes? I'm not trying to be an asshole, I'm just trying to instill some of my logic in you.

 

How you ignore the necessary factual context of that 1991 uprising though, as per usual in your simplistic ideological media-fed assessments, treehouse.

That uprising came only upon the promise of support by Bush sr. A promise he never intended to keep as he knew full well that ultimately the Shia's would want a theocratic rule and that simply did not fit with the Bush family corporate network plans for the region, especially after failing to dislodge Khomeni using their pefectly acceptable proxy, Saddam, for 8 years in the attempt.

Thus, when the Shia's rose up, Washington knew full well that they would be crushed, just as surely as any group of US citizens attempting such against Washington would be crushed and with similar brutality and destruction.

Seems though that youd readily accept such displays of federal might at home regardless of how many tens of thousands would be killed, simply because it would of course be sold by the media as a necessity against "criminal" or "terrorist" elements seeking to "disrupt our way of life".

Of course, when another government does just as any of our leaders would (and with our own civil war as historic testament to that fact), those with the willingness to just run, unquestioningly and unreflectively, with the emotive surface rhetoric applied to the matter by our corporate media (to serve the vested big money interests of our bloated MIC) are the ones who can be counted on to chant for war and destruction the loudest.

Its the most transparent hypocrisy imaginable and, in the past few years, a fresh reminder to the billions watching the US of just how gullible and forgetful of history our citizens truly are.

 

ha! You forgot to mention "War Trolls."

You know what I think is funny? People who disagree with the right wingers here just love the phrase, "You just can't tolerate a viewpoint different from your own."

Yet name calling such as "war trolls" is a very good indicator of intolerance of a different viewpoint.

interesting........

 

There are just as many sheep on the Left as there are on the Right. The real trick is to walk down the middle.