quote:

ORIGINAL: ermood

I would advice you one thing, go visit these counries;)

You're such a dumb boy...

quote:

Iran had years of war with Iraq, tell me why would Iran suddenly support the Iraq wich they had years of war with?
And its the US who helped the Shia's to power in Iraq, thats why Iran and Iraq are such good friends now;)

Go try to find some facts that are not meant to spread propaganda;) with other words... real facts.

quote:

Zionists...interesting phrasing.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Its worth noting as well that Iraq Body Count (the prime NGO for monitoring casualties in Iraq) has stated that over 80% of civilians killed were murdered not by the US but by insurgents. Syria and especially Iran should take a bow for that one.

This ignores how great a part of the insurgency from early on was lead by Sunni troops and officers of the Iraq Army who were discharged during the possibly misguided de Baathification process instituted by the Coalition Provisional Authority.

There are a variety of criticisms of the IBC. Understandable, tho. It is a complex task.

I didn't say Iran and Syria were exclusively to blame but they were a factor, especially Iran. The IBC is primarily criticised for being anti-American so they can hardly be blasted for whitewashing American input but they do keep rigidly to the figures unlike so many who inflate them to a multiple of the reality.

Another useful source of research is the Lancet which demonstrated in a paper some months ago that the Iraqi insurgents almost always hit soft civilian targets.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Its worth noting as well that Iraq Body Count (the prime NGO for monitoring casualties in Iraq) has stated that over 80% of civilians killed were murdered not by the US but by insurgents. Syria and especially Iran should take a bow for that one.

This ignores how great a part of the insurgency from early on was lead by Sunni troops and officers of the Iraq Army who were discharged during the possibly misguided de Baathification process instituted by the Coalition Provisional Authority.

There are a variety of criticisms of the IBC. Understandable, tho. It is a complex task.

I didn't say Iran and Syria were exclusively to blame but they were a factor, especially Iran. The IBC is primarily criticised for being anti-American so they can hardly be blasted for whitewashing American input but they do keep rigidly to the figures unlike so many who inflate them to a multiple of the reality.

Another useful source of research is the Lancet which demonstrated in a paper some months ago that the Iraqi insurgents almost always hit soft civilian targets.

And i didn't say the Baathists were exclusively responsible, did I?

quote:

ORIGINAL: ermood

Simply correct friend;) people can say whatever they want about nukes but they bring certain amount of safety and securety to an country...

quote:


And i didn't say the Baathists were exclusively responsible, did I?

quote:

He should be at The Hague answering war crimes charges, along with his buddies Blair and Howard.

quote:

Tweak my feelings on Bush almost match yours…But…The fault also lies with Saddam Hussein. If he had not invaded his neighbor then when defeated refused to follow the UN resolutions Bush would not have felt entitled to invade.

quote:

Responsibility for all deaths in Iraq lies primarily with the party who started the conflict ie. the USA and GWB in particular, and the so-called 'Coalition of the Willing'. Had the US not invaded, who knows what would have happened? Prior to the invasion, there was no terrorism or Al Quada presence in Iraq. There is no reason to suppose that any of the subsequent deaths would have occurred.

quote:

The first and final fault was with Iraq not the US.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

quote:

He should be at The Hague answering war crimes charges, along with his buddies Blair and Howard.

Tweak my feelings on Bush almost match yours…But…The fault also lies with Saddam Hussein. If he had not invaded his neighbor then when defeated refused to follow the UN resolutions Bush would not have felt entitled to invade.

The first and final fault was with Iraq not the US. Yes Bush made almost criminally stupid mistakes but you do not send someone to the Hague for stupidity...instead we send thousands of our boys and girls to their graves.

Butch

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Tweak my feelings on Bush almost match yours…But…The fault also lies with Saddam Hussein. If he had not invaded his neighbor then when defeated refused to follow the UN resolutions Bush would not have felt entitled to invade.

Butch . . . update: Iraq did follow ever more stringent UN Resolutions:

As a result of the U.S. and British campaign, and after prolonged negotiations between the United States, Britain, France, Russia and other U.N. Security Council members, the United Nations declared that Iraq would have to accept even more intrusive inspections than under the previous inspection regime - to be carried out by the U.N. Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) - or face "serious consequences." Iraq agreed to accept the U.N. decision and inspections resumed in late November 2002. On December 7, 2002, Iraq submitted its 12,000 page declaration, which claimed that it had no current WMD programs. Intelligence analysts from the United States and other nations immediately began to scrutinize the document, and senior U.S. officials quickly rejected the claims.

Iraq complied, Bush lied, our boys and girls died.

quote:

Chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix has said there is little new information in Iraq's weapons declaration.

"There is a good bit of information about non-arms related activities. Not much information about the weapons," he said before delivering his official report to the UN Security Council.

What was missing was evidence that weapons that were known to exist in the 1990s had really been destroyed.

The UK ambassador to the UN, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, said after the briefing that the document contained "serious omissions".

"The declaration is inadequate", he said, calling it "deeply disappointing".

But Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's chief scientific adviser said Baghdad was "not worried" about Mr Blix's reaction.

The advisor, Amir al-Saadi said that while little in the document would be news to the weapons inspectors, it did contain information the Security Council had not seen before.

He added that it was a sign of Iraq's compliance with the UN-mandated weapons regime that its declaration contained no new information.

"There is nothing that [the UN] doesn't know about Iraq's weapons programme, full stop," he said.

quote:

Once again Vincent you're being very selective. Few on here (including myself) think the Iraq War was anything other than a terrible mistake but the US (and others) had good reason to reject the 12,000 page document as nothing other than recycled bullshit

quote:

ORIGINAL: ermood

Your post already proves that you don't know anything about it;)