952 replies to this topic

[bobdrake12]

Yes we should have indicted Saddam not tried to coopt the Grand Jury. That is my point we had a damn good case and only made it after the fact. We have never given due process the respect it deserved.

Damn good article by the way and a clear demonstration of too little too late. why wasn't this the approach of this adminstration from the beginning?

Lazarus Long,

The indictment would have needed to go beyond Saddam, but it should have been pursued.

bob

[bobdrake12]

Lazarus Long,

Oh? Can you please point me to two articles that you posted in this Forum delineating the horrors under Hussein's regime?

bob

There are more than two and more than two in the just the list I gave that you are replying to, did you examine them?

Lazarus Long,

What I noticed in those articles was an emphasis on WMD rather than the horrors of human rights violations under Hussein's regime.

It is the human rights violations aspect of Hussein's regime which I have been recently posting and emphasizing.

Do you recollect what Thomas posted?:

Thomas:

Reading about brutality of the Sadam's regime ... I ask myself, are those "peace protestors" stupid - or are they evil?

Is anything else possible?

I mean really: Are we - Bob, Kissinger and myself somehow blind - or what the hell is going on?

My response to Thomas was as follows:

Thomas,

Perhaps, they are unaware of history.

bob




Who in this Forum would like to live in a country governed by Saddam Hussein?


http://www.worldhist...com/hussein.htm



Saddam Hussein


28 April 1937 Saddam Hussein was born in Tikrit, Iraq. He was sent to live with his maternal uncle soon after he was born. During his early years, reports have linked Saddam to the murders of a school teacher and/or a cousin.
1955 Saddam moved to Baghdad.
1956 Hussein joined the Arab Baath Socialist Party.
1957 Hussein was denied the admission to the Baghdad Military Academy.
1958 Hussein married Sajida.
1959 Hussein attempted to assassinate the Prime Minister of Iraq. He was arrested for six months. Hussein was shot in the leg by the prime minister's bodyguard.
25 February 1960 After being convicted for his assassination attempt, Hussein was sentenced to death, although he later escaped to Syria and then to Egypt. 1962 Hussein completed his secondary studies.
1962-1963 Hussein studied law in Cairo, but he did not complete it.
8 February 1963 Hussein returned to Iraq after the Ramadan Revolution and was elected to the Baath Party.
14 October 1964 Hussein was arrested for charges accusing him of rebelling against the regime.
September 1966 While in prison, Hussein was elected the Deputy Secretary General of the Baath Party Leadership.
1967 Hussein escaped from prison.
July 1968 Hussein participated in a coup to overthrow Iraq's president and the regime.
1968 Hussein graduated from the College of Law.
9 November 1969 Hussein was elected the Vice-chairman of the Revolution Command Council.
1 June 1972 Hussein nationalized all of the oil companies in Iraq.
1 July 1973 Hussein was dubbed the rank of Lieutenant general and the Rafadain Order, First Class.
11 March 1974 Hussein helped to implement the Autonomy Law for Iraqi Kurdish Citizens. The Kurds were forced to go to Iran.
1 February 1976 Hussein was awarded M.A. Honors Degree in Military Sciences
8 October 1977 Hussein was elected the Assistant Secretary General of the National Pan-Arab Leadership of the Baath Party.
16 July 1979 Hussein was elected as the President of Iraq and as the Chairman of Revolution Command Council.
17 July 1979 Hussein was promoted to the rank of Field Marshall.
8 October 1979 Hussein was elected Deputy Secretary General of the Pan-Arab Leadership of the Baath party.
4 September 1980 Hussein initiated a war with Iran as he attacked the oil-reserves in Iran.
1982 Former President Bakr died mysteriously. It was widely suspected that Hussein was involved.
30 July 1983 Hussein was dubbed the Revolution Order, First Class.
1984 Hussein was awarded an Honorary Doctorate in Law from the University of Baghdad.
1987-1988 Hussein launched the Anfal Campaign against the Kurds. 180,000 Kurds disappeared and 4,000 villages were destroyed.
28 April 1988 Hussein was dubbed the Order of the People.
March 1988 The Kurdish town, Halabaja, was gassed. 5,000 people were killed and 10,000 were injured.
8 August 1988 Hussein agreed to a cease-fire with Iran. Iraq won the conflict.
August 1988 Many Kurdish villages on the Turkish border were gassed. Thousands of people died.
2 August 1990 Hussein seized Kuwait.
16 January 1991 The United States began bombing Baghdad in response to Hussein not turning over Kuwait.
February 1991 The Persian Gulf War ended. President George Bush of the United States declared a cease-fire.
1993 Hussein broke the peace terms from the end of the Persian Gulf War. The United States bombed Iraq as a result.
29 September 1998 The United States passed the Iraq Liberation Act. The Act stated that they wanted to remove Saddam Hussein from office and replace the government with a democratic institution.
October 1998 Hussein failed to comply with the united Nations weapons inspectors. This action led to a four-day bombing raid by the United States.
16-19 December 1998 The United Nations pulled their workers out of Iraq. The United States and the United Kingdom began air raids on Iraq called Operation Desert Fox.
1999 Throughout the year continual air strikes hit Iraq.
2000 It is reported that Hussein has used humanitarian funds to build presidential palaces and for other personal enrichment items.
2002 The United States began to initiate a plan to overthrow Hussein.
2002 Hussein allows the United Nations weapons inspectors to return to Iraq.
January 2003 Other Arab leaders in the middle east request that Saddam Hussein go into exile to avoid war with the United States.
February 2003 Saddam Hussein interviewed with news reporter, Dan Rather. Hussein said that he would not go into exile and that he would not surrender in a possible war. He claimed that Iraq does not have any weapons that go against UN resolutions.
17 March 2003 United States President George W. Bush gave Hussein an ultimatum. Either he leave Iraq within 48 hours with his sons or the United States would pursue military action.

Works Cited
Saddam Hussein. Online. http://top-biography...sein/index1.asp.
Biography of President Saddam Hussein: President of Iraq. Online. http://www.uruklink.net/iraq/bio.htm.
Biography of President Saddam Hussein, President of the Republic of Iraq. Online. http://www.uruklink.net/iraq/bio.htm.
Biography of Saddam Hussein of Tikrit. Online. http://www.iraqfound...search/bio.html.
Howard Kurtz. "Off Camera, Saddam interviewed Rather." Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service http://www.gulf-news...ArticleID=78789

Sponsored by 10x Marketing, leader in Affiliate Marketing



bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 22 March 2003 - 06:56 PM.

[bobdrake12]

You asked my opinion and I gave it. IN fact all you had to do was listen to what has been being said by the protests going on around the world for the last few years at Davros, Seattle and other gatherings of the of GAT, IMF and othrs and you can confirm my allegations for yourself.

Lazarus Long,

Here is the string:

No one sees Saddam as having been beyond the law, or above it, what those that rationally protest is the idea that some think we are. The failure of Due Process in this case and for 12 years AND MORE can also be tied to ourselves. We have lowered the standards of diplomacy and juris prudence by our actions not raised the bar.

Lazarus Long,

Again, I would appreciate your providing sources as to why the protestors are protesting.

By ourselves, who do you mean? The entire UN or the United States?

By the term "we" in "we have lowered the standards of diplomacy..." can you get more specific?

bob

As to "why" people protest I will only add at the moment that there are those around the world that will fight Globalism under any and all circumstances and they perhaps are also against the UN and World Bank, as well as the IMF and ALL the institutions that the United States and the rest of the emerging technocracies have worked diligently to build, but what the demonstrators in this Nation generally are against is our abandonment of legitimate diplomatic channels prematurely and a demand for our intervention unilaterally in a region Moreover that it was done in such a manner that was not inclusive at all but seen by the inhabitants of that region as a resurrection of the ancient coalitions of the Crusades and is seen as a war of US against Them. If the quest to bring Democracy becomes a Crusade it will have no more effect at uniting that region then Christianity did for almost a millennium of conflict before.

Lazarus Long,

With due respect, you have not provided data.

To presume why the millions of people that so far have demonstrated without data appears to be a stretch.

I personally believe that there were a number of motives, but note I use the word "believe" rather than stating what I sense as a fact.

bob

I don't recall asking for your opinion but rather the sources for what you stated.

Now you are saying that all (or even the vast majority) of those protesting the war are the same people as those protesting GAT & IMF? Again this is a stretch without data.

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 22 March 2003 - 06:48 PM.

[Lazarus Long]

But the issue of Human Rights violations is one our government is uncomfortable with because it is our government that has routinely vetoed UN Condemnations of Israeli Human Rights Violations against Arabs and Palestinians, as well as other regimes in the past that we supported AGAINST (at my own better) judgement.

As the issue of Human Rights is engaged we appear more and more duplicitous to many groups around the world like Amnesty International that says we are supporters of torture and the repression of native movements worldwide for control over traditional lands and resources.

The murders of environmental activists in Latin America, the killing of ethnic dissidents in Asia and Africa, our decades long support of apartheid South Africa and on and on. If we want to be a defender of Human Rights then we should also be addressing our incompetant and CORRUPT application of Capital Punishment. The list goes on, but this is no reason why we shouldn't start now. I for one agree with you in principle and have never challenged for a moment your intent in raising these concerns for those that may be ignorant of their truth.

I just think we are inconsistent in terms of National Policy and Interests and I am unwilling to accept the coopting of a process at creating global Human Rights and dignity by those that have for too long denied its importance and still apparantly misunderstand the importance of the creation of a legitimate venue for the redress of grievence along with the force necessary for enforcement of such enlightened policy.

[Lazarus Long]

My response to Thomas was as follows:

Thomas,

Perhaps, they are unaware of history

I read it when you posted it and I found little I was unfamiliar with. I agree that this is true I also feel that it is a little one sided in that it fails to detail how we cultivated his brutality for our purposes, first as a proxy against the Soviets and later against Iran.

[bobdrake12]

But the issue of Human Rights violations is one our government is uncomfortable with because it is our government that has routinely vetoed UN Condemnations of Israeli Human Rights Violations against Arabs and Palestinians, as well as other regimes in the past that we supported AGAINST (at my own better) judgement.

Lazarus Long,

Each issue is a seperate one but there needs to be a degree of consistency. Human Rights violations are wrong when they are clear cut and should not be vetoed.

bob

[bobdrake12]

As the issue of Human Rights is engaged we appear more and more duplicitous to many groups around the world like Amnesty International that says we are supporters of torture and the repression of native movements worldwide for control over traditional lands and resources.

The murders of environmental activists in Latin America, the killing of ethnic dissidents in Asia and Africa, our decades long support of apartheid South Africa and on and on. If we want to be a defender of Human Rights then we should also be addressing our incompetant and CORRUPT application of Capital Punishment. The list goes on, but this is no reason why we shouldn't start now. I for one agree with you in principle and have never challenged for a moment your intent in raising these concerns for those that may be ignorant of their truth.

I just think we are inconsistent in terms of National Policy and Interests and I am unwilling to accept the coopting of a process at creating global Human Rights and dignity by those that have for too long denied its importance and still apparantly misunderstand the importance of the creation of a legitimate venue for the redress of grievence along with the force necessary for enforcement of such enlightened policy.

Lazarus Long,

The US government is inconsistent at times just because of changes in Administration, but I do agree that consistency is important.

Even so, to me the human rights violations are one of the core reasons for going to war.

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 22 March 2003 - 07:14 PM.

[Lazarus Long]

Thomas said:
Reading about brutality of the Sadam's regime ... I ask myself, are those "peace protestors" stupid - or are they evil?

Is anything else possible?

Actually Bob this isn't even the begining of the thread on this. I wasn't just addressing your addition that perhaps they are ignorant of history, I am not and I have been protesting this course. BUT I have been protesting it because it squandered our opportunity to make the case you are only now making in an untimely manner and through social preemption we could have redirected this energy of protest into a force for unity and reason.

Very early in the debate Kissinger made the case this wouldn't happen, well my predictions turned out to be more reliable in this matter, now ask yourself why?

I would be standing alongside you in a minute if this approach had been given a chance from the very beginning but I found it all too often fell on deaf ears until it all too conveniently became the fall back position for failed diplomatic efforts. Perhaps it might have helped if we had acknowledged a past commitment to a failed policy.

I don't think we just failed to make the case, I feel we never really tried because of a wanton disrespect of hte Institutional Process and a secret desire on the part of many involved to overrule that institution if given the opportunity. Also I fear those that are opportunistically using this scenario to cover their own criminal past involvement.

[bobdrake12]

BUT I have been protesting it because it squandered our very opportunity to make the case you areonly now making and redirect this energy of protest into a force for unity and reason.

Very early in the debate Kissinger made the cse this wouldn't happen, well my predictions turned out to be more reliable in this matter, now ask yourself why?

I would be standing alongside you in a minute if this approach had been given a chance from the very beginning but I found it all too often fell on deaf easrs until it all too conveniently became the fall back position for failed diplomatic efforts. I don't think we just failed to make the case i feel we never really tried because of a wanton disrespect of hte Institutional Process and a secret desire on the partof many involved to overrule that institution if given the opportunity.

Lazarus Long,

I will let the Bush apologists defend the diplomatic efforts.

I want to be clear on how I feel on these diplomatic efforts be re-posting what I wrote to Limitless.

bob

*****

Limitless,

When you get a chance, please read the CNN article I provided the URL for.

The reason for the decision of using the paper is beyond me.

There is another article which I believe is excellent. Please click on the URL below:

http://www.msnbc.com...p?0cv=KA01#BODY

But no matter how can find fault with the Bush Administration's diplomacy (or lack of diplomacy), the article states the following:

"The United States will soon be at war with Iraq. It would seem, on the face of it, a justifiable use of military force. Saddam Hussein runs one of the most tyrannical regimes in modern history."

Yeah, but I thought this was all connected in Bush's grand "War on terror" -if that isn't an oxymoron.....Perhaps a better question would be: "What does Iraq have to do with Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, and the September 11th terrorist attacks  Bush claims they are connected, but has been a little light on proof regarding this subject, in my opinion.

I am not an apologist for the Bush Administration. I will leave that task for others in this Forum.

My point is simply the following:

"It would seem, on the face of it, a justifiable use of military force. Saddam Hussein runs one of the most tyrannical regimes in modern history."


Being a US citizens allows us the freedom to criticize governmental policies. That is a freedom that is not allowed in tryannical governments like those in Iraq.

bob

[Lazarus Long]

The US government is inconsistent at times just because of changes in Administration, but I do agree that consistency is important.

Even so, to me the human rights violations are one of the core reasons for going to war.

Yes they are, and they are one of the reasons the entire Islamic world finds our policy suspect. If we are to be seen as consistent then we need to establish our policy based upon our values and principles and then behave in accordence.

But this is NOT an Administration with a history on record of agreement with YOURS and MY opinion in this matter. This can be changed, but not through the chosen strategy.

OMG, you and I are involved in a very good review of the issues and I have to change tasks now for over two hours. I apologize and I only hope others come to understand the committment we have to truth and solutions that all too few are really seeming to be concerned with.

I will return to this later in the next few days as I can, again I apologize but duty calls.

[Lazarus Long]

Being a US citizens allows us the freedom to criticize governmental policies. That is a freedom that is not allowed in tryannical governments like those in Iraq.

Yes and more over it is only through exercise of that responsibility through OPEN DEBATE and PROTEST that there may be any hope of our survival. Freedom is much more than a Right, it is a responsibility that accrues to each of us as we are able to face it. It is all too often confused with license and priviledge by those not willing to study the issue.

I do not judge our actions against such unworthy examples as petty tyrants and pathetic or malicious cowards. I test our mettle against ourselves and assess our endeavors by their consistency with regard to the principles we claim as our own. I will never lower my standards to theirs, or appease them but I will not resort to using their methods either to attempt to justify two wrongs making a right that isn't.

Bob I am always impressed by our debates, regardless of agreeing with you or not, and in this case I can only hope others can see, and appreciate why.

Now you get the last word

[Lazarus Long]

For those that have multimedia capacity and the time I suggest a review of the Documentary Investigations this page provides:

http://www.pbs.org/w...tegories/1.html

[bobdrake12]

I would be standing alongside you in a minute if this approach had been given a chance from the very beginning but I found it all too often fell on deaf ears until it all too conveniently became the fall back position for failed diplomatic efforts. Perhaps it might have helped if we had acknowledged a past commitment to a failed policy.

I don't think we just failed to make the case, I feel we never really tried because of a wanton disrespect of hte Institutional Process and a secret desire on the part of many involved to overrule that institution if given the opportunity. Also I fear those that are opportunistically using this scenario to cover their own criminal past involvement.

Lazarus Long,

There is some truth in what you write. Maybe, someone who has been solidly behind the methods of diplomacy of the Bush Administration can adequately respond to this concern.

Even so, I still believe the ulitmate decision for going to war needed to be made. In some respects, it was made too late for a lot of people in Iraq.

Unfortunately, the significant point regarding the attrocities of the brutal government run by Saddam has been given little air time.

bob

http://www.iraqifd.org/NTS/photo.htm

A HISTORY OF TERROR (Note: Just two of many pictures are shown below. The Site whose URL is shown directly above has many more.)




A murderer at work




Saddam's thug empties his pistol after public execution

Edited by bobdrake12, 22 March 2003 - 11:07 PM.

[DJS]

Smashing Pumpkins
"Cherub Rock"

Freak out
And give in
Doesn't matter what you believe in
Stay cool
And be somebody's fool this year
'cause they know
Who is righteous, what is bold
So I'm told

Who wants honey
As long as there's some money
Who wants that honey?

Hipsters unite
Come align for the big fight to rock for you
But beware
All those angels with their wings glued on
'cause deep down
We are frightened and we're scared...

Yes, who is righteous and what is bold Lazarus? Look at the photos Bob has placed on this website, look at the faces of the dead children killed by poison gas. You would do nothing in the face of that. May all of the peace protesters of the world unite behind Saddam. They couldn't have found a better cause. By the way, you may need more glue for those wings...

[bobdrake12]

Bob I am always impressed by our debates, regardless of agreeing with you or not, and in this case I can only hope others can see, and appreciate why.

Lazarus Long,

What makes debate with you difficult is not your just knowledge but more importantly your heart. Lazarus, you have a very good heart.

I do not look lightly upon war. I don't think of it as a video game much less a joke. I look with disdain upon that kind of rhetoric.

I can assure you that I do not like seeing bombs drop on anyone with the impact being displacement, injury and death. This goes for soldiers on the enemy side as well for many of them simply believe they are defending their country. Other soldiers of Iraq are operating out of fear of Saddam's reprisals if they were to surrender. I believe those running this war understand this concept. The word "show" was used recently at one of the news conferences today, and the reporter was reprimanded for using such a word when this is a life and death situation for many.

The questions that have yet to be presented are: Should the war have been commenced earlier with Iraq? Was there a trigger point where the US had the responsibility to go to the UN earlier to have made this case?

These are rhetorical questions that probably could be answered better after the war is concluded with Iraq. But I believe these questions need to be thought through.

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 22 March 2003 - 11:49 PM.

[bobdrake12]

Look at the photos Bob has placed on this website, look at the faces of the dead children killed by poison gas.

Kissinger,

I have only included a few of the pictures.

Some of the pictures show the mothers trying to protect their children while both are dying.

This is a reality that many are unaware of.

From the feedback I have gotten, many people from Iraq living in the United States have been fearful about going forward to openly discuss these horrors committed by Saddam's regime. The reason for the fear is the threat of reprisals to their relatives still remaining in Iraq.

What kind of reprisals might there be when there is a serial killer with absolute dictitorial control running a country?

Click on the following URL:

http://www.iraqifd.org/NTS/photo.htm



One of Saddam Tortured victims - (no comment)



bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 22 March 2003 - 11:42 PM.

[Saille Willow]

It is because I am aware of the history and the ineffectiveness of "liberating" the people of their dictators in the past, that I think this war is in vain. No one disputes Saddam's Human Rights Abuses. I am fully aware of the horrors in Iraq but has seen worse in Africa.

[Lazarus Long]

A true Officer of Law and Peace must even be able to threaten their own family, friends, and neighbors if they are intent on stopping them from having a lynching. This is about justice, not taking a low and all too easy road. I call us the Bad Cop because that is how we are behaving.

I warn all this will get much worse before better. I am unimpressed by the Hollywood version of modern warfare, I am shocked and awed all right.

Our military has been using a massive amount of precision guided ordinance for urban renewal. This is much worse than the burning of the South Bronx I witnessed growing up. We have just built Stalingrad for a Stalinist clone, next door to a poor section of Nuevo Laredo. Not only that but Saddam's hardened core cadre of troops just went to ground (and litterally underground) incognito in da'hood.

Reality Check time America you are about to make Vietnam look easy.

This isn't about excuses and shoulda, woulda, couldas, this about myths being tested, and warfare in the street with women and children at their feet. I only wish it was just a question of my heart, my head gets in the way of my heart all the time. It makes me think and respect why I feel, and never forget I do.

You want tactics my friends? How about getting us to concentrate our forces and giving a suicide bomber with a WMD a target?

I really don't think most Americans have a clue as to the enemy, they are fighting a Hollywood scritpted campaign and may be about to have their confidence tested in the worst possible way. If we succeed in taking Baghdad quickly we only have to pull off an occupation, if we fail we can make the Nazis' look nice in their Warsaw ghetto.

Oh. and Kissnger don't patronize me, I told you I was raised around forensics, you must fail to understand I have gotten the wonderful blessing of actually handling dead and mutilated bodies, up close and personal in the dead flesh. I learned as a child to open them up and learn. You people only fantasize and study pictures. Your turn to learn, your turn to smell, your turn to pick up the pieces of other people's flesh and try and make sense of such madness.

Stop thinking you have anykind of a moral highground or even a tactical advantage. You are playing childlike games with WMD's and risking apocalyptic failures.

Why is everyone so blind to the fact we are still dancing to the enemy's tune? Do you think they are ignorant savages unaware of our Star Wars Self Made Persona?

Does anyone who has seen real combat think that those who are willing and about to die don't expect much of what is coming?

That they are so naive, ignorant, and uneducated that they haven't a clue?

Then why do you think them capable of building WMD's in the first place?

If it has been going too easy, maybe that is because they are trying to make us overconfident and want a seige, and now that we have devasted all their prepared bunkers from above and covered them with debris, we have given them a killing zone for hand to hand combat just like the German's did at Stalingrad, Lenigrad, and the Warsaw Ghetto. We may have in fact outsmarted ourselves this time.

I hope I am wrong, you better pray I am.

[bobdrake12]

It is because I am aware of the history and the ineffectiveness of "liberating" the people of their dictators in the past, that I think this war is in vain.

Saille Willow,

Nazi Germany also had a tyrant that ran the government, yet Germany was effectively liberated. By "liberated", I mean that Germany no longer is run by a tyranical dictator. It can be done.

It is not just the war itself, but what happens after the war that is critical. Granted, it is not an easy task, but it has been done before.

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 23 March 2003 - 05:16 AM.

[bobdrake12]

I hope I am wrong, you better pray I am.

Lazarus Long,

Have you talked with anyone that is a US citizen that is originally from Iraq yet?

If you do, you might just change your opinion.

bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 23 March 2003 - 05:11 AM.

[Lazarus Long]

"Shock and Awe" strategist worries about fallout from bombing blitz
Sat Mar 22, 5:54 PM ET

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The strategist who developed the "Shock and Awe" tactics adopted by the US military said that the heavy bombing of Baghdad is right but will be misunderstood by the rest of the world.

Harlan Ullman, a former navy commander and Vietnam War veteran, prefers the British expression "Effects Based Operations" to describe the blasting of Baghdad that US-led forces started in earnest on Friday.

"It is much better," he told AFP, bemoaning the way his "Shock and Awe" phrase -- used to describe the overwhelming use of quick force to win a war -- has echoed around the globe in recent weeks.

"This has meant the rest of the world has been against the United States from the start, linking it to the killing of Iraqi civilians. 'Shock and Awe' will be used to condemn us," said Ullman, who spoke as a new round of global anti-war demonstrations were being held.

"It will take a long time to put the record straight and probably we never will," added Ullman, who said he believes that, if properly carried out, "Shock and Awe" can save lives. "You get them to quit before they die," he said, pointing to the relatively low casualty figures reported by Iraq (news - web sites).

Ullman also believes the United States may have been too hasty to enter the war and should have sought a new UN resolution but now accepts the decision made by President George W. Bush (news - web sites).

"If there had been more inspections, some progress might have been made -- but now that's irrelevant," he said.

And Ullman has no doubt that the United States was right to try to eliminate Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) with the first raids on Thursday and that it will crush the Iraqi army in an almost "unfair" fight.

"To beat the enemy, you have to win the war. It is not the way you fight the war that matters so much," he said.

The presumption is simple. With its undisputed technological superiority, there is no longer the need for the United States to field the huge armies such as that sent into the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites).

Enemies can be brought to their knees before a war really gets underway: bomb their computers and radars so they are blind, destroy their communications so they are deaf.

Ullman and James Wade, a former US undersecretary of defence, started work after the 1991 Gulf War on finding the best way to maintain US military dominance in the post-Cold War era.

Their 1996 book -- "Shock and Awe: Achieving Rapid Dominance", which is heavily influenced by the theories of Sun Tszu, the Chinese strategist from the fifth century BC -- called for a better-equipped, more flexible and mobile army.

And Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has made "Shock and Awe" or "Effects Based Operations" the basis of US policy since the September 11 attacks in 2001 forced the United States into a complete rethink of the threats it faced.

"The Pentagon has not told us that they have taken up 'Shock and Awe', and I don't really know what exactly what they have adopted," Ullman said modestly.

But he does acknowledge an unimaginable revolution in warfare since his fighting days in Vietnam and the use of numerical superiority in the last Gulf War, when Colin Powell, a former pupil of Ullman's at the National War College and current secretary of state, was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"Imagine us in the jungle fighting the Viet Minh, scared out of our minds, afraid of booby traps all around us. Their AK-47s were probably as good if not better than our M-16s. That was probably a fair fight."

The Iraqis, he insisted, "almost certainly face an unfair fight."

"If they do fight, we will pound them to pieces."

Ullman said he would not be surprised if other Iraqi divisions follow the example of the 51st Division, which surrendered on Friday.

The US superiority over Iraq is 10 times greater than during the last Gulf War because of better training and technology. "And our boys and girls have seen a lot of action since then in Somalia, Kosovo and Afghanistan," he said.

[Saille Willow]

Bob

The track record of the West in the Middle East, after the "Liberating", does not inspire any confidence. It is the root of the problems we are now facing. It can be done, but will it be done? Only 36,7 million has been pledged by governments so far for UN reliief work, against an anticipated cost of 123,5 million. Or will History just repeat itself?

[Saille Willow]

For some alternative viewpoints;

Sunday Times

'I fell down and found my blood everywhere'

Air raids wreck civilian homes in Baghdad

Gulf War special feature

Rising anger grips the Middle East

Tutu slams 'immoral' war

South Africa reacts to Iraq war

[bobdrake12]

Saille Willow,

Nazi Germany was transitioned properly into a democratic German state.

Iraq needs to be handled properly including sufficient relief work after the war (and actually during the war). It will require a sustained commitment.

To presume the transition is easy is incorrect.

Also just because the people of Iraq hate Saddam does not translate into them initially considering the US as their friends.

The problem in Iraq is far more complex than this thread has covered so far. It is easy for the press to write such things as:

"Tossed aside with cynicism are the voiceless. The children who live under heavy bombardment. The mothers who are sacrificing their sons and daughters to death."

The above sentence shows the lack of knowledge of the total issue related to Iraq. Unfortunately, "containment" was not working in many ways including a humanitarian one related to the people of Iraq. Putting "pressure Iraq into sticking to its commitments" sounds good but it had its negative consequences. Under "containment" the children of Iraq were dying as well. Some estimates were more than 4,500 a month under the age of 5 died if we cite statistics released by the United Nations in late 1996. Who was writing about that tragedy?


bob

Edited by bobdrake12, 23 March 2003 - 12:11 PM.

[Lazarus Long]

Another small descrepancy in the propaganda that is fed to our people Bob is that for twelve years, many of those now protesting made consistent and clear claims of the humanitarian failure of the Containment policy to the US Government and to the World. Very few of those in power here, BOTH Democrat and Republican took heed or cared: So why have so many found heart now?

The distrust of this new found "homegrown humanitarianism" is that those claiming to have suddenly "found God" don't behave in accord with their claims. That said, I can only hope they are so committed as they claim because they will need all the strength of committment they are capable of to turn this potential debacle into a miracle.

Toward that end I can only say I will try and be ready to work to put my words where my mouth is but I don't sit in the bleachers rooting, I go down to the field and get dirty and participate.

Second, there is a subtle and dangerous mistake many people are making about Saddam, yes he has claimed to admire Hitler, but he is not a little Hitler despite how well this caracature plays to Western Public sentiment, Saddam is a Stalinist. He idolizes Stalin.

If you went through the background information I suggested on him you will discover intelligence assesments that attempt to clarify his shady past. He was intitially trained in the Soviet Union and at first before being conscripted by the CIA to work for us against the Soviets he was supported by them. But as should be obvious to us now, they found him a rogue as well When one reporter was taken into his personal study for an interview the reporter was shocked to discover the depth and breadth of texts about the life and times of Joseph Stalin.

When directly asked, and by his stated references, it is apparant that the archetype for this man, his personal hero is Stalin. Please attempt to reassess this man's behavior in this light. It demonstrates a vulnerability on our part to call something evil and thus be unable to distinguish nuance, to recognize that there is a difference between stereotypes and "psychological profiles" is reality.

Our people have made pacts with the Devil before and WWII despite how the myth's in the movies was also won by Stalin and the Soviets that faught back against Hitler with all their resolve BEFORE we did when their Nation was invaded, and this is even THOUGH Stalin was possibly even more brutal and ruthless than Hitler. We should be more considerate and grateful becuase if they hadn't STOPPED Hitler we wouldn't have been able to later join in defeating him.

Stalin killed more people domestically than Hitler did and was definitely more brutal. Stalin also developed many of the strategies that Saddam employs, in particular to confront the German Blitzkrieg.

Now Bob I understand that you will read this and recognize no attempt at apology, I just hope that our more immature partners will stop glorying in the technology of war the way German troops rushing off to Barbarossa did and realize the true nature of our enemy before they are given the only test that really matters.

I fear that we are too reliant on machines and not the minds & hearts of man. We are doing this to stop something we are starting in order to stop and we are putting ourselves where those that failed to build the delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction are going to get a cear and unfettered shot to deliver these up close and personally the way that traitor tossed a grenade into his own command center yesterday.

We are fighting OUR war but they are fighting theirs, and their's comes from the strategies of the "thieves of Baghdad" they are going to use deception, assassination, subterfuge, and treachery. They will retreat to the street and fight "underground" and have been preparing for this war not ours. This is the war we now need to prepare for because we aren't.

For example ven the bunkers we have hit may not have been destroyed under the ground. I suggest further that with the fires we have burning on the top of the rubble pile have created a cloak that masks the actual location under the rubble of the surviving bunkers to our infrared detection ability.

They are capable of delivering chemical & biological weapons in a water truck and a tactical nuke warhead from our arsenal is so small today it can be carried on a mule. Delivery gets easier for them the closer we get and the targets we are offering are getting more sensitive and strategically more tempting. We are about to engage an enemy willing to make the battle personal and used to historically knowing that most people have little stomach for real combat.

It is common for warring tribes to disband in the face of an overwhelming enemy and simply return to their villiages, or go "to ground" in fact we are asking them to. They on the other hand have a five thousand year history of wars of occupation.

Why do our countrymen and allies think that just because the toys are shiney, new and very powerful that somehow we have reinvented war?

To those that want to play cheerleader I say you are a distraction, if you want victory don't confuse rational dissent for treachery, rational dissent is the strength of a Democracy and the only way we can actually claim any superiorty of culture, it is how we are detemined to be "objective" and keep ourselves hoonest and "true" to our objectives.

Democracy is not a perfect system, it is only the best we have, and it is better for the practice of it, not weakened. The difference Mr. Kissinger between your predictions and mine, is that mine have already a demonstrably greater probability of realization.

Stop blaiming Cassandra for the message and beware of Trojan Horses. Remember the words of virtually every important Commander in history BOTH Good and Evil, "to find victory, know your enemy". The kind of debate we are engaged in here in this forum ironically is both the greatest test and a demonstration of the true power of Democracy, and this is clear to both our enemies and our friends.

I am not trying to just stop foolishness by exposing it. I am not a traitor for dissenting. Traitors tell you what you want to hear and then they take advantage of you. I, and many of those who protest are the voices of reason trying to make sure that we the People have objectively analyzed the dilemma in its fullest detail and met the most dangerous challenges, before the unthinkable happens again.

[Lazarus Long]

Bob said:
Nazi Germany was transitioned properly into a democratic German state.

Yes Bob it was but not until after the death of tens of million of their inhabitants and this in addition to the 8 million killed in the death camps. Over a hundred million people died around the world in that war and these kids don't have the reality and scope of this in their minds as they play at war. They fail to understand the shifting tides and alliances that create such conflict and they play with the statistics forgetting that behind each ONE is a living soul.

We didn't reinvent democracy for the Germans, we were able to remind them of what they had forgotten and protect them long enough to cultivate it. It required generations of harvest before the garden of these delights has borne fruit with a tree of social commitment so strong that they too will never forget.

But then ask instead; why do they look at us and see themselves and fear what we are becoming?

I fear the game of Social Capitalism, I am concerned this is becoming little more than a numbers game. It treats populations based upon the supply and demand for souls. Supply is quite high at the moment, which depreciates the value of individual life for evil minded fools, it dimishes the demand for life.

Germany also did not become a Democracy without appeal to its OWN Democratic Traditions and institutions the same ones that had succeeded in Swiss Cantons, and Germanic Federations because rather than build a superstate they had kept themselves more insulated and defined in a local sense.
Swiss History

And third, the magnitude of commitment that we made AND the entire Western World in the aftermath of that war with the Marshall Plan was vastly greater in scope then even current projections for this situation grant, especially in light of inflated costs, and those are all well beyond what most folks like Kissinger are prepared to pay.

[bobdrake12]

humanitarian failure of the Containment policy

One view is shown below by the National Catholic Reporter.

One of my friends, a US citizen who was born in the Middle east, made me aware of the reported cost of life from the containment policy. Containment in Iraq sounds much nicer than its reality.

The key to the report shown below is that it does quote UN statistics rather than just "arm waving".


bob

http://www.natcath.c...397/052397a.htm



Iraq's horror is worst activist has seen
By ROBERT McCLORY
Special Report Writer

She has visited many of the world's hot spots in the past nine years -- Bosnia, Croatia, Haiti, Jordan, Nicaragua -- in her role as one of America's most active pacifists. But nothing she encountered in other war-torn venues prepared her for the unrelenting horror of Iraq some six years after the end of the Gulf War.

"The children are dying -- more than 4,500 a month under the age of 5," said Kathy Kelly, citing statistics released by the United Nations in late 1996. "What we are doing is waging biological warfare against a civilian population."

Since the end of the war some 600,000 Iraqi children have perished due to starvation and disease, according to the United Nations.

Indeed, the sanctions imposed on post-war Iraq are the most severe laid on any nation in modern times. And though they have failed to provoke the ousting of President Saddam Hussein or to convince a special U.N. commission that he is not still smuggling arms into his country, they have had a decided effect. Iraq, whose economy is based almost entirely on the sale of oil, is able to export only a trickle. It cannot purchase medicine, machinery, spare parts, agricultural supplies or even chlorine to purify the water. Malnutrition and water-borne diseases like cholera and typhus are rampant, with the youngest, the oldest and the poorest most vulnerable. The country's once modern infrastructure is falling apart, and the unemployment rate is estimated at 85 percent.

People sit in the streets of large cities like Basra and Baghdad offering for sale their electrical appliances, clothing, blankets, even the doors from their houses, in order to buy food. These pervasive city-wide flea markets have proven attractive to foreigners looking for bargains.

A sewage pumping station in Basra broke down more than a year ago, turning many streets into permanent rivers of raw waste.

The middle class as well as the poor have been deeply affected by the sanctions. According to a Time magazine report, the head of a government department uses his car as a taxi after work. His wife takes in laundry. A woman fluent in four languages, who formerly ran a flourishing car rental service, has been forced to sell her furniture and cooking utensils.

Yet, noted Time, the middle class is not in a revolutionary mood. It is simply trying to survive. Meanwhile, the ruling class and the very wealthy live as comfortably as ever. According to an American diplomat, "The Iraqi leadership has chosen to spend its money on itself and not on its starving population."

Kelly, 44, is a soft-spoken, gentle-appearing Chicagoan and a veteran of the Catholic Worker movement who has been arrested more than 40 times and spent a year in federal prison for her anti-war efforts. She was a part of the 72-member international Gulf Peace Team that camped on the border between Iraq and Saudi Arabia in 1991 just as Operation Desert Storm was getting underway. The protesters were forcibly removed by the Iraqi military when the shooting started.

Now Kelly is a major organizer of a group called Voices in the Wilderness, which has been carrying food and medicines into Iraq for more than a year in open violation of the sanctions. Others prominent in the group include veteran anti-war activist Bradford Lyttle, Northwestern University graduate student Brad Simpson, Sacred Heart Fr. Robert Bossie and Catholic Worker organizer Chuck Quilty. In the most recent visit in late March, Kelly and a few others distributed their meager supplies at Baghdad's Al Mansur Hospital where they had previously encountered many children suffering from leukemia.

"We showed the doctor a picture taken last August of two children -- Muhammad and Noora," said Kelly. "We wondered if the medicines we brought might be used to help them." Calmly, she recalled, the doctor explained that Muhammad had died two days before their arrival and Noora two weeks before that.

The condition of hospitals all over the country is abominable, Kelly said, with the sick lying on blood-stained beds without sheets or on the floor. At the Pediatric and Gynecological Hospital in Basra, they saw a row of 14 incubators standing idle because replacement parts are unavailable. In one wing of the hospital housing scores of sick people, only one toilet was working. Since the electricity goes off five or more times a day, much of the life-sustaining electrical equipment that still works is virtually useless.

"I held dying children in my arms," said Kelly. "Some were gasping for breath, too weak to move. I asked a mother if she had any message for the United States. She said, 'I would only ask them what they would do if this was their child.' "

Amid all this tragedy, Kelly was struck by the strength and courage she encountered. "So many examples of heroism," she said. "We met doctors working around the clock for next to no income, hotel desk clerks who introduced us to the neediest families in their neighborhood, a widow managing somehow to care for eight children, a civil engineer who vented his frustration to us and immediately said, 'Now what can I do to help you.' We saw all of these people laboring to share with other needy people their resources, income, homes and even their seemingly impossible hopes."

Kelly was especially struck by Dijbraeel Kassab, the Chaldean Christian archbishop of southern Iraq. He is, she says, "the inheritor of Archbishop [Oscar] Romero's mantle, a genuine voice of the poor." Kassab, one of the few priests still active in Basra, had opened all church buildings to the homeless and was relentless in trying to secure clothing, food and supplies for the poor. "He is constantly in the streets," said Kelly, "visiting the sick, begging for help anywhere he can find it."

Last December, the U.N. passed Resolution 986, which allows Iraq to sell $1 billion in oil every six months; this has resulted in the establishment of thousands of emergency food stations throughout the country. Kelly said the help amounts to a drop in the bucket and crisis conditions still prevail everywhere. Kelly, who raises the awful specter of Iraq in numerous public appearances, asked, "Are we in this country content to just let this go on? Are we prepared to take responsibility for a whole future generation of malnourished and stunted persons?"

She is well aware that the United States places blame for the human devastation in Iraq on Saddam's shoulders, but she rejects what she calls "a consistent policy of suffering imposed on the innocent for our political gains." Last January during the Senate confirmation hearings for Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Kelly and four other members of Voices in the Wilderness interrupted the proceedings to plead their cause.

Kelly, the first to rise up in the visitors' section, said, "A half million Iraqi children have died because of U.S.-U.N. sanctions. Please, Mrs. Albright, you could do so much good." Kelly was promptly ushered out of the hearing, but the others raised their voices one by one, creating a lengthy disturbance. When calm returned Albright said, "I am as concerned about the children of Iraq as any person in this room. ... Saddam Hussein is the one who has the fate of his country in his hands."

The next day Albright was praised in the press for displaying "her celebrated cool under fire." Kelly and the other protesters issued a press statement saying, "Iraqi children are totally innocent of oil power politics. All those who prevent the lifting of sanctions, including Madeleine Albright, are not. One-line disclaimers of responsibility may appear admirable, but the children are dead and we have seen them dying."

The slow genocide has aroused the concern of other individuals and organizations as well. In a letter to the chairman of the U.N. commission investigating Iraq's compliance with the weapons ban, former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark wrote, "No failure to comply with the U.N. condition can possibly justify the collective punishment of the entire nation and the direct deaths of infants, children, the elder population and the handicapped. You are fully aware that no hidden arms or arms program in Iraq can possibly pose the threat to life anywhere that the sanctions inflict on Iraq every day. These sanctions kill more people each week than Iraq with all its armies and materiel ... could inflict on foreign armies ... when Iraq was under assault" in 1991.

Each time Kelly or other Voice of Wilderness members go to Iraq they advise the State Department of their intentions. And each time they receive a letter of warning: "You and members of Voice in the Wilderness are hereby warned to refrain from engaging in any unauthorized transactions related to the exportation of medical supplies and travel to Iraq."

The penalties, they are informed, range up to 12 years in prison and more than $1 million in fines. Yet federal authorities have made no attempt to arrest or charge those who flaunt the ban. Kelly hopes she and her companions will be prosecuted during one of their future trips. "What an opportunity!" she said. "To go before a jury with the evidence of starvation and malnutrition, to show the small supplies of medicine and food our government forbids us to bring the dying. I would dearly relish such an opportunity."

Another Voices in the Wilderness delegation is slated to travel to Iraq in late May. Among the visitors will be a U.S. veteran of the Gulf War.

National Catholic Reporter, May 23, 1997

Edited by bobdrake12, 23 March 2003 - 05:37 PM.

[bobdrake12]

And third, the magnitude of commitment that we made AND the entire Western World in the aftermath of that war with the Marshall Plan was vastly greater in scope then even current projections for this situation grant, especially in light of inflated costs, and those are all well beyond what most folks like Kissinger are prepared to pay.

Lazarus Long,

The Rand Report which I posted earlier in this thread estimated the cost being a total of $1.9 Trillion over 10 years. Going off memory, the total federal tax taken in during 2002 was about $2 trillion. Also, the US has been having an ever increasing National Debt since 1976. The National Debt currently is $6.4 trillion.

bob

[bobdrake12]

http://www.washingto...-2003Mar23.html

Rumsfeld: Iraqi Footage Violations Geneva Convention

Reuters
Sunday, March 23, 2003; 10:59 AM

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said on Sunday Iraqi television footage apparently showing American prisoners of war was a violation of the Geneva Convention.

On CBS "Face the Nation," Rumsfeld was shown footage relayed by the Arabic satellite station Al-Jazeera that Iraq television claimed were captive U.S. soldiers.

"That's a violation of the Geneva Convention, those pictures you showed," Rumsfeld said of the international law on treatment of prisoners of war. He said the convention prohibits the photographing or interrogation by media of those captured in battle.

© 2003 Reuters

[bobdrake12]

The following section only includes Part II of the Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War.


http://193.194.138.1.../menu3/b/91.htm



Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War
Adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of
International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva
from 21 April to 12 August, 1949
entry into force 21 October 1950

PART II

GENERAL PROTECTION OF PRISONERS OF WAR

Article 12

Prisoners of war are in the hands of the enemy Power, but not of the individuals or military units who have captured them. Irrespective of the individual responsibilities that may exist, the Detaining Power is responsible for the treatment given them.

Prisoners of war may only be transferred by the Detaining Power to a Power which is a party to the Convention and after the Detaining Power has satisfied itself of the willingness and ability of such transferee Power to apply the Convention. When prisoners of war are transferred under such circumstances, responsibility for the application of the Convention rests on the Power accepting them while they are in its custody.

Nevertheless if that Power fails to carry out the provisions of the Convention in any important respect, the Power by whom the prisoners of war were transferred shall, upon being notified by the Protecting Power, take effective measures to correct the situation or shall request the return of the prisoners of war. Such requests must be complied with.

Article 13

Prisoners of war must at all times be humanely treated. Any unlawful act or omission by the Detaining Power causing death or seriously endangering the health of a prisoner of war in its custody is prohibited, and will be regarded as a serious breach of the present Convention. In particular, no prisoner of war may be subjected to physical mutilation or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind which are not justified by the medical, dental or hospital treatment of the prisoner concerned and carried out in his interest.

Likewise, prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity.

Measures of reprisal against prisoners of war are prohibited.

Article 14

Prisoners of war are entitled in all circumstances to respect for their persons and their honour. Women shall be treated with all the regard due to their sex and shall in all cases benefit by treatment as favourable as that granted to men. Prisoners of war shall retain the full civil capacity which they enjoyed at the time of their capture. The Detaining Power may not restrict the exercise, either within or without its own territory, of the rights such capacity confers except in so far as the captivity requires.

Article 15

The Power detaining prisoners of war shall be bound to provide free of charge for their maintenance and for the medical attention required by their state of health.

Article 16

Taking into consideration the provisions of the present Convention relating to rank and sex, and subject to any privileged treatment which may be accorded to them by reason of their state of health, age or professional qualifications, all prisoners of war shall be treated alike by the Detaining Power, without any adverse distinction based on race, nationality, religious belief or political opinions, or any other distinction founded on similar criteria.


© Copyright 1997 - 2002

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Geneva, Switzerland

Edited by bobdrake12, 23 March 2003 - 06:05 PM.