Iraqi Constitution & Bill of Rights...

[SPEEDKILLAR]

Originally Posted by RC45 Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR Sine crazy Saddam was overthrown, there has been more casualties and massacre, and please RC 45 don't say It's not for the oil, do you realy think the Bush administration cares about the ppl in Iraq, don't think so. You really think the US would spend billion of dollars just to help the poor Iraqis, they want that money back. In fact It's the US who will chose who will be head of certain positions, etc... I could go on and on, you just have to admit that's how It is. Wanna open a third front? I am game for battling on all 3 fronts... but then they have to be battle worthy assaults...

Even one front is to much for you, you know why, because your vision on
this case is blurred. Why the US and it's coallition partners are in Irak
is only for the black gold. I mean I don't see any chemical weapons,
Blair even said Saddam could use them in a matter of hours, mmmm, they
still didn't found anything did they? They had no reason at all to start the war in the first place, I mean that's why Bush is going to loose against Kerry. Because Bushy, Blairy,... lied.

[aliendude012]

I think this constitution is more or less BS also. I was an opponent of the war from the beginning, because the two main reasons we entered it ended up false. We found no chemical weapons, and there is no link between Hussein and AlQaeda. He had nothing to do with 9/11. Im sure he liked watching it on tv, but no connection whatsoever. Then they decided to call it a liberation of the Iraqi people as a cover for their mistaken allegations in the first place. They killed his sons, and they captured him, which were all good things in my book, but they just stumbled upon them afterwards. It wasn't their original intent. Now we have been there almost a year(maybe more?), and we finally draft a temporary constitution? What have we been doing all this time? Oh yea, giving away rebuilding contracts to Haliburton(Cheney's 'former' oil company) and suppressing the remaining of his troops, along with riots and act-outs due to the fact that the people are glad we freed them, but like us the fuck out.


Come on, tell me we didn't go for oil. We had a huge fight with France and Germany because they wouldn't support us in the war but now wanted the spoils that come with it. And the vice president of the fucking United States' old company(which im sure he still has stake in) got most of the contracts offered! My gf's mom works for a somewhat struggling oil company here in houston that put in a lot of bids for a lot of contracts, and I'm sure they're willing to do it cheaper, they need work.

[Jabba]

Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR Blair even said Saddam could use them in a matter of hours, mmmm, they still didn't found anything did they?

He said they could be used in 45 minutes actually.

Remember we did find and eliminate several "weapons of mass destruction" though.

Saddam, Qusay, and Uday Hussein, Ali Hassan al-Majid "Chemical Ali" (responsible for killing 5,000 Kurds in Halabja with chemical weapons) to name but a few.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by aliendude012 I think this constitution is more or less BS also.

Elaborate please - how is their new constitution BS?

Please explain - you are the 3rd person to a T touting how it's BS yet cannot explain how or why?

[ahmedgiyab]

Originally Posted by aliendude012 I think this constitution is more or less BS also. I was an opponent of the war from the beginning, because the two main reasons we entered it ended up false. We found no chemical weapons, and there is no link between Hussein and AlQaeda. He had nothing to do with 9/11. Im sure he liked watching it on tv, but no connection whatsoever. Then they decided to call it a liberation of the Iraqi people as a cover for their mistaken allegations in the first place. They killed his sons, and they captured him, which were all good things in my book, but they just stumbled upon them afterwards. It wasn't their original intent. Now we have been there almost a year(maybe more?), and we finally draft a temporary constitution? What have we been doing all this time? Oh yea, giving away rebuilding contracts to Haliburton(Cheney's 'former' oil company) and suppressing the remaining of his troops, along with riots and act-outs due to the fact that the people are glad we freed them, but like us the fuck out. Come on, tell me we didn't go for oil. We had a huge fight with France and Germany because they wouldn't support us in the war but now wanted the spoils that come with it. And the vice president of the fucking United States' old company(which im sure he still has stake in) got most of the contracts offered! My gf's mom works for a somewhat struggling oil company here in houston that put in a lot of bids for a lot of contracts, and I'm sure they're willing to do it cheaper, they need work.

You're the MAN!!! You're 19...and you know more than "someone" who is 36...JW is full of surprises!!!

[ahmedgiyab]

Originally Posted by Jabba Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR Blair even said Saddam could use them in a matter of hours, mmmm, they still didn't found anything did they? He said they could be used in 45 minutes actually. Remember we did find and eliminate several "weapons of mass destruction" though. Saddam, Qusay, and Uday Hussein, Ali Hassan al-Majid "Chemical Ali" (responsible for killing 5,000 Kurds in Halabja with chemical weapons) to name but a few.

Who sold that chemical weapons to Saddam in the 70's & 80's????? The old Bush did... The US supported Iraq in the Iraq, Iranian war 1980-88...

[jon_s]

hahaqhah, this thread should get interesting!

[RC45]

Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR Why the US and it's coallition partners are in Irak is only for the black gold.

You have stated your point - now explain why you say this?

I have already pointed out how the USA imports more oil from sources OTHER than the Middle East - so what's the next motive?

You need to be more precise - In geopolitical terms, removing an unstable megalomaniac from the Middle East was a strategic one (oe anybody half competant would have done) - that does help preserve ONE of the regional sources for oil in the future (and that was more to the point of not having Saddam attack OTHER neighours rather than let the "USA steal all the Iraqi oil for free" which is somehow what all you folks think is happening)

[SPEEDKILLAR]

Originally Posted by Jabba Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR Blair even said Saddam could use them in a matter of hours, mmmm, they still didn't found anything did they? He said they could be used in 45 minutes actually. Remember we did find and eliminate several "weapons of mass destruction" though. Saddam, Qusay, and Uday Hussein, Ali Hassan al-Majid "Chemical Ali" (responsible for killing 5,000 Kurds in Halabja with chemical weapons) to name but a few.

Yes but those weapons where not armed or something, and as for the Kurds I also think the fat bastard was a brutal killer. But why didn't the world interveen(is this written coorectly) during that time.
I think they had to do this in a more refind way, by assasinating Saddam
or by infiltration dismantling his gouverment,... and an other millions way.
But by going to war, they would have more control and decide how the place has to be run,...black gold remember

[RC45]

Originally Posted by ahmedgiyab Who sold that chemical weapons to Saddam in the 70's & 80's????? The old Bush did... The US supported Iraq in the Iraq, Iranian war 1980-88...

Actually that would be German and French technology - the US simply supplied advisors, guns, munitions and missiles.

I guess that somehow exonerates Hussein et al from responsibility for their actions...

[SPEEDKILLAR]

Originally Posted by RC45 Originally Posted by SPEEDKILLAR Why the US and it's coallition partners are in Irak is only for the black gold. You have stated your point - now explain why you say this? I have already pointed out how the USA imports more oil from sources OTHER than the Middle East - so what's the next motive? You need to be more precise - In geopolitical terms, removing an unstable megalomaniac from the Middle East was a strategic one (oe anybody half competant would have done) - that does help preserve ONE of the regional sources for oil in the future (and that was more to the point of not having Saddam attack OTHER neighours rather than let the "USA steal all the Iraqi oil for free" which is somehow what all you folks think is happening)

Of course OTHER than the Middle East, but 15% is a lot, a lot, a lot. Mmmm, would be good for the economy,no?

[ahmedgiyab]

I'm not defending Hussein or anything...its just not fair at all!!! Like in the middle

ages... atacking a country for "no" reason??? The US is the "police" of the world???

So why is the UN there? Actually the US is controlling the UN... If they are really

the police of the world than what about North Korea??? ahhh...there is no oil...

[SPEEDKILLAR]

And by the way, why didn't you answer to ahmedgiyab remark about N-Korea,
I know why, by anwering it you'll proove all what you said is BS. Please just answer it.

[RC45]

Originally Posted by ahmedgiyab I'm not defending Hussein or anything...its just not fair at all!!! Like in the middle ages... atacking a country for "no" reason??? The US is the "police" of the world??? So why is the UN there? Actually the US is controlling the UN... If they are really the police of the world than what about North Korea??? ahhh...there is no oil...

Debate facts my dear... as I said before Baghdad Bob - don't just yell out pointless chants and rants - this is not a street gathering in downtown Dubai - please inject some of your MBA-backed logic to this debate.

We are waiting...

[ahmedgiyab]

"RC45"...tell me why do the US need to imort oil...????

Alaska, Texas...enough for the US...I told you check what the Arab World did to

the US in 73...

So you are saying that the US went for the help of the Iraqi people....not for the

oil??? Simply this is the summary of what you said? If so...then no need to go

further in this topic... :roll: