ClubRoadster.net banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
Writing in the September 2001 issue of The Progressive, Nagy cites recently declassified documents that show the United States was aware of the civilian health consequences of destroying Iraq's drinking water and sanitation systems in the Gulf War, and knew that sanctions would prevent the Iraqi government from repairing the degraded facilities.

During the Gulf War, coalition forces bombed Iraq's eight multi-purpose dams, destroying flood control systems, irrigation, municipal and industrial water storage, and hydroelectric power. Major pumping stations were targeted, and municipal water and sewage facilities were destroyed.

Article 54 of the Geneva Convention prohibits attacks on "drinking water installations and supplies and irrigation works."

Nagy says that not only did the United States deliberately destroy drinking water and sanitation facilities, it knew sanctions would prevent Iraq from rebuilding, and that epidemics would ensue.

One document, written soon after the bombing, warned that sanctions would prevent Iraq from importing "water treatment replacement parts and some essential chemicals" leading to "increased incidences, if not epidemics, of disease."

Another document lists the most likely diseases: "diarrheal diseases (particularly children); acute respiratory illnesses (colds and influenza); typhoid; hepatitis A (particularly children); measles, diphtheria, and pertussis (particularly children); meningitis, including meningococcal (particularly children); cholera (possible, but less likely.)"

Then U.S. Navy Secretary John Lehman estimated that 200,000 Iraqis died in the Gulf War, but many more have died since. UNICEF estimates that well over a million Iraqis have died as a result of the U.S-led sanctions regime, in place for the last decade. Some 500,000 children have died, and an estimated 4,000 die from various preventable, sanctions-related diseases, every month, says the U.N. agency.

saddam hussein was sentenced to death for killing 138 people.... we killed a million innocent iraqis... who's the real middle eastern terrorist?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
526 Posts
Bin Laden is the real middle eastern terrorist...

but, you have your head so far up Ted Kennedy's ass you can probably see his next shot of brandy before he swallows it.
 

·
ClubRoadster.net Founder
Joined
·
4,631 Posts
C'mon guys...watch it. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Although, let's try and keep the politics to a minimum, please, as per the posting rules.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
bin laden is a terrorist... as is the united states. he fights for religion, we fight for economics/politics

"Terrorism is a term used to describe violence or other harmful acts committed (or threatened) against those considered innocents by groups or persons for political, nationalist, or religious goals."

I accept that you don't agree with facts, but to deny our wrong doings and believe that no blood is on our hands is ignorant. as for the name calling... come on... is it really neccessary to say I have my head up a drunk (should have been convicted of murder in 1969) senator's a$$ ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
if saddam was such a bad guy why did we wait 25 years to go get him? our motives for going to iraq were politically charged and essentially the war on terrorism (in iraq) became the scapegoat for our inability to detain osama bin laden. there are far more "evil" people that the US military should have interest in and could have gone after...... hussein was just an easy target.

as stated by James A Baker (republican) of the iraq study group:

"Struggling in a world of fear, the iraqis themselves dare not dream. they have been liberated from the nightmare of tyrannical order only to face the nightmare of brutal violence"

I personally don't think saddam was such a great guy, but comments like some of the ones above seem unnecessary. they show a lack of "good taste" and an ignorant view of global politics. the reason why I may seem "left sided" to some of you is because I feel that spending 2 billion dollars EVERY DAY in iraq is unjustified (the original intent/reason for the united states going to war in iraq was because "they had weapons of mass destruction. it later became a liberation campaign when they failed to find wmd's)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
Yeah they didn't think over a good reason to go in and they problably shouldn't have, but we did. so america needs to except that. Yeah the US is spending an ass load of money on this, but we are help those people by spreading democracy.
Taking saddam out of power is one of the things we have done. We didn't execute saddam. We found him and gave him to iraq and left it to iraq to deal with it.

Saddam is a bad guy and he doesn't deserve leanance.
Saddam is going to hell and he is going to have a gay love affair with satan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
323 Posts
Yeah they didn't think over a good reason to go in and they problably shouldn't have, but we did. so america needs to except that. Yeah the US is spending an ass load of money on this, but we are help those people by spreading democracy.
Taking saddam out of power is one of the things we have done. We didn't execute saddam. We found him and gave him to iraq and left it to iraq to deal with it.

Saddam is a bad guy and he doesn't deserve leanance.
Saddam is going to hell and he is going to have a gay love affair with satan.
I agree that a complete troop withdrawl would essentially cause more bad than good, afterall, who's going to protect our economic (oil) interest in the region? Iran? Syria? or maybe we should have israel protect it... they did defeat some of the top players in the region during "the six day war" *sarcasm*. as for us bringing democracy to iraq, I think eventually it'll take root and work... or maybe it'll be the catalyst to an apocolyptic future ending on december 21, 2012!!! :shock: #-o

now for saddam, don't forget he's building a weapons of mass destruction facility in heaven....
southpark saddam voice:

"ca-mon gahd" :p

saddams trial, I love and hate noam chomsky, so forgive me or thank me for quoting him:

"In a (virtually unimaginable) fair trial for Saddam, a defence attorney could quite rightly call to the stand Colin Powell, **** Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Bush I and other high officials who provided significant support for the dictator, even through his worst atrocities.

A fair trial would at least accept the elementary moral principle of universality: The accusers and the accused must be subject to the same standards.

For a truly fair trial, it's surely relevant, as an abundance of congressional and other records show, that Washington made an unholy accommodation with Saddam during the 1980s.

The initial pretext was that Iraq staved off Iran ? which it attacked with U.S. backing ? but the same support continued well after the war was over.

Now, those responsible for the policies of accommodation are bringing Saddam to the bar of justice."

~just a little bit of food for thought.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,706 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
559 Posts
Yeah they didn't think over a good reason to go in and they problably shouldn't have, but we did. so america needs to except that. Yeah the US is spending an ass load of money on this, but we are help those people by spreading democracy.
Taking saddam out of power is one of the things we have done. We didn't execute saddam. We found him and gave him to iraq and left it to iraq to deal with it.

Saddam is a bad guy and he doesn't deserve leanance.
Saddam is going to hell and he is going to have a gay love affair with satan.
I agree that a complete troop withdrawl would essentially cause more bad than good, afterall, who's going to protect our economic (oil) interest in the region? Iran? Syria? or maybe we should have israel protect it... they did defeat some of the top players in the region during "the six day war" *sarcasm*. as for us bringing democracy to iraq, I think eventually it'll take root and work... or maybe it'll be the catalyst to an apocolyptic future ending on december 21, 2012!!! :shock: #-o

now for saddam, don't forget he's building a weapons of mass destruction facility in heaven....
southpark saddam voice:

"ca-mon gahd" :p

saddams trial, I love and hate noam chomsky, so forgive me or thank me for quoting him:

"In a (virtually unimaginable) fair trial for Saddam, a defence attorney could quite rightly call to the stand Colin Powell, **** Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, George Bush I and other high officials who provided significant support for the dictator, even through his worst atrocities.

A fair trial would at least accept the elementary moral principle of universality: The accusers and the accused must be subject to the same standards.

For a truly fair trial, it's surely relevant, as an abundance of congressional and other records show, that Washington made an unholy accommodation with Saddam during the 1980s.

The initial pretext was that Iraq staved off Iran ? which it attacked with U.S. backing ? but the same support continued well after the war was over.

Now, those responsible for the policies of accommodation are bringing Saddam to the bar of justice."

~just a little bit of food for thought.
I think the purpose for this war is to get mor countries on our side so the US can benefit from it.

Saddam was being charged for war crimes during the gulf war. Which was in the 90s. Again the US did not charge saddam Iraq did. So their court system may be diferent than ours.

Either way the douche needed to be punished. You can agree with me on that right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
692 Posts
haliburton did it, they gassed those kurds for oil money right? so they could plant bombs in the world trade center.... thats what i heard
 
1 - 20 of 65 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top