ohh please not the stupid DU argument again. Ther eis zero proof DU is an hazard, now the mustard gas and nerve gas found in the Tigirs and euphrates (Where saddam dumped it quite a bit of it post 91) will cause birth defects.
Here, read about it from World Health Organization.
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/
Also, BBC has a collection of articles on DU (Including googling can give you more results).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uranium/0,,419839,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/europe/2001/depleted_uranium/default.stm
News Journal.
http://www.news-journalonline.com/special/uranium/
The Office of the Special Assistant for Gulf War Illnesses (Organization)-You can call the number to find out more about it.
1-800-472-6719
Also, the British RoyalSOC did their own research, it's your choice if you go ahead and dig up information on the subject, rather scientists in the US have also been saying the samething, also DU was used in Kosovo and research is being carried out their as well on contaminated sites. Water & Air carry the particles, and people inhale, etc, continue to suffer the affects.
check out a map, the bulk of Iraq's shia population is confiend to slums in baghdad which was never part of the NFZ's which basically only helped the Kurds and Marsh Arabs. Iraq's jails adn torture chambers were never empty under Saddam. In fac tthere are very rleiable reports that prisons had to be emptied out with mass executions.
You need to check out the map, their are Shia's in and around Baghdad but the vast majority of the population lived below the No-Fly Zone just dig a demographic map and compare it to the Ex-NFZ
Uhmm it was still Muslim vs Muslim and as for the US. Iran did attack the US and seize it's sovergien territory and citizens in a blatant cassus belli.
Please, provide proof cause as far I know they seized UAE (or) Kuwait oil islands, and that by no means is US territory and neither was US attacked. Rather US, themselves send those ships down as a sign of force against Iran, didn't the Iraqi's accidentally struck a US ship as well back then.
Also, don't show proof it was US territory of re-flagging ships mainly oil tankers, during the war US should have stayed away.
Excpet the marsh Arabs, Kurds (ie NFZ) the israelies and Palestinians (you wer eof course aware that Saddam funded the suicde bombers with deaht payments lockingthe two peoples into a vicious cycle of punch counter punch that derailed the peace process)
Even before Saddam their was fighting going on, and neither side sat down. Doesn't matter who funds who, their are groups who did it even without funds. Israel itself de-railed the peace process many times as well, so lets' not put the blame on 1 side.
Ever heard the phrase- The excpetion proves the rules? sunni/shia inter marriage was not the norm.
Then you certainly have alot to learn on that subject then.
Who exactly was goign to attack? Israel was tied up, non of the arab states had ever made war on Iraq and the US under Bush 41 and Clinton was not interested in another war instead looking for the mythical "peace dividend" after the cold war ended.
Baloney, we all seen the bombings US been doing even after the war. Let alone threats can come from many places rather than surrounding neighbors. What if Iran attacked? If Clinton and Bush 41 didn't want to attack, then why Bush? Where are his weapons? If war can be created on a false pre-text then obviousally you have to be pre-pared, just as US threatened Pakistan.
"Arms bring peace" - and US is a bigger example.
The hate stems mostly from ignorance. America has its share of misdeeds but less than most. We do have at least a semi functioning system of checks and balances.
Seems at times Bush uses more power than given. I personally never believed in these checks and balances, I seen my share of those.
Thats a nice bit of revisionism, the tribal mindset with an emphasis on Vendetta goes back to well before Islam. The schism only added fuel to the fire that already existed.
British historians who studied the area even said in their books, that both sides got along really well and their was no internal strike, rather it started to come about with Wabahism an external fact, just as US is an external factor now.
Embargo 1.5 million fault- Saddam he could have openly disarmed and he could have refraiend form diverting the oil for food money and actually used the sale to help his people.
Iran-Iraq war 1 million total
Kuwait- upto 30,000
Kurds 10,000+
other Iraqi 1-300,000
other 2000+
Every nation has the right to defend itself, and their should be no reason to dis-arm, it's like me asking US to dis-arm would they? NO, so I see no reason for Saddam to. Yes those deaths occurred, but tell me knowing full well the situation their would it have been better for US just not to attack it might have stopped the rift, and Saddam's sons could have ruled with an Iron hand stopping the divide where their will be factions fight each other. It might have been bad, but at least their was law and order, where no it's the opposite chaos.
Where people could have walked outside freely, no they can't knowing something will get blown and it might be them along with it, this invasion has created more fear than any good.
No multi-ethnic schizophrenic empire will long survie the death of its strongman. US invasion, natural causes, coup de tat it didn't matter when Saddam fell all hell was going to break loose. many sources credit the US presence with keeping a lid on the violence and at least preventing an Africans tyle famine or genocide as well as preventign a wider Sunni/Shia war.
Well, what we have in front of our eyes is different than what those sources predicted or given credit where it wasn't due. Don't you think it would have been wise to ask people of that region / or matter of fact listen to them (Ex. King Hussein, Queen Noor, KSA kings), who knew the real ground realities than the short sided generals and politicians.
Yes, you do as well. The moronic idiot who thinks' god is talking to him, along with his buddy Blair "Witch".
funny thing history, it really has a hard time lying. Here is an odd fact for you- The Muslims invaded the Christian lands first. The Christians had no quarrel with the early Muslism until invaded. The much talked about crusadeshad a very clear goal- The LIBERATION od the Holy land from the invaders. It was the Muslims who would not allow peace and caused the European age of colonisation. If the Ottoman Turks had jsut left the remnant sof the Byzantine empire alone, not invaded the Eastern Med trading outposts of the Italian city states, and not closed the Silk Road Columbus never would have sailed. So go ahead blame Christianty for adapting to and basically winnign a war it didn't want to fight and didn't start.
lol, omg. Muslims caused European colonization sir I urge you take an Early to Modern European class in History to learn about colonism, it revolves around UK, France and Germany who were rising powers, and wanted to project their military and economic power over another which caused bitter hate between them, its a long story but do so and take some classes on it. Rather Christianity lost the war back them, once we took over the Byzantine who fallen once their own allies struck them and all, dude silk road had nothing to do with this rather their was still trade going on between the 2 continents. Rather, it Europeans who used Baghdad "House of Knowledge", and Egyptian libraries, etc, to get themselves out of the dark age.
Also, this current conflict has nothing to do with the past, rather regional assets mainly "OIL". Which drives western and far eastern economics and they are dependent on it. After WWII US requested the British govt. for a stake in oil, I remember reading that it was US NAVY officers who said it doesn't matter which company makes them but it has to be American. Let alone America's cold war which dragged the region all together.
I feel this is going to turn into a pissing contest which I don't want to get into, cause we can both find information on each side to put the blame on, rather then let it drag onto nothingness, Mods lock the thread if Zraver agrees to it as well.
