The Inside Assyria Discussion Forum #5

=> Re: okay Arrow

Re: okay Arrow
Posted by Arrow (Guest) - Thursday, November 10 2011, 19:44:06 (UTC)
from 80.239.242.63 - v03-16.opera-mini.net Network - Linux - Opera
Website:
Website title:

I get the impression you don't believe what you write

I don't have to. It is not a requirement for a debate.

but do so maybe out of enjoyment or to spice things up.

Isn't that the whole purpose of a discussion forum? Are we trying to achieve something beyond verbal discourse?

First, you mentioned torture and I assume you view it as a bad thing just as I do,

It is possible to argue in its favor. The act of torture is a mean that cannot be morally judged in isolation from its designated purpose. For example, the information that were extracted in Guantanamo may have been crucial in averting another terrorists attack, thus saving thousands of innocent lives. Did you see the Samuel Jackson movie, Unthinkable?

Killing as well... murdering your uncle to inherit his money is one thing while killing an aggressor in self defense is another. Stealing... can it be justified in certain circumstances? Is stealing a medicine from a pharmacy to save a dying mother wrong?

and you condemned Saddam for it, but what about the US which also does that?

Saddam used torture to quell dissent and instill fear in the population, thus maintaining an iron grip on power. The US tortures for security reasons and, unlike Saddam, it does not torture and kill is OWN citizens.

the US sanctions murdered 600,000 Iraqi children under the age of five. Saddam never killed even 500 children but UN admitted that many children had died at least

I wasn't trying to vindicate the US.

A wise leadership would have sorted out the conflict of interest between Iraq and the United States, thus sparing the Iraqi people from all the sufferings that had befallen them. Ofcoarse sacrifices at Iraq's expense would have had to be made in order to achieve this. Had there been a wider involvement of the public in the decision making process, i.e. democracy, none of those children would have died.

You agreed that Saddam was backed by the US in 79 but you don't believe he was picked for their interests so what for then?

They backed the Baath party in their revolt against Qassem because the latter was bringing Iraq under the tutelage of the Soviet Union. They believed their policies were closer in line with the US foreign policy. If they received money and expert advice it doesn't necessarily mean that they became technically their puppets.

they wanted to put an end to the united states of Africa.

There wasn't going to be any United States of Africa!

Gaddafi was a prolific liar. One shouldn't count on what he used to say in public.One time he forcibly evicted Palestinian refugees in Libya, leaving them stranded in the desert outside the border until Syria decided to take them. Another time he eliminated Musa Al-Sadr, a prominent Shia figure and a foe to Israel. He did it as a favor to them.

Gaddafi was under no obligation to step down because the west demanded so and the people were killed because they were in favor of him.

If the majority favored him, why then didn't he put himself in front of elections?

You can't convince me 8 months of bombings didn't kill tens of thousands of people. Those "rebels"(which were mostly foreigners anyway) could not have lasted even a week.

The highest number of causalities were among those who where directly involved the conflict. As for civilians, I don't think they are in the tens of thousands. I rely on UN reports, but perhaps you have other sources you would like share.

The only people who hated Gaddafi in Libya were radical Muslims(they not human anyway) and a few of the supporters of the dictator Idris.

We saw the demonstrations in Benghazi and other cities. They were huge.

Just last month over 1,3 million Libyans appeared in Tripoli alone in support of Gaddafi and this was already when Libya was on its last string.

1.3 million? Are you sure it's not 1.2?!

Iraqis were already celebrating when Saddam wasn't even officially gone but Libyans still fighting the occupation and still showing support for Gaddafi.

The Iraqi army knew it was no match to the Americans, while Gaddafi's men were fighting ragtag rebels with no combat experience or proper armaments. Had there been an internal revolt in Iraq, it would have lasted for months.

I trust independent writers, speakers, journalists and othe professionals

Like who?

there are 4 million homeless in America

Yeah why is that? Mexicans have been illegally crossing the border to work in the US and yet those homeless can't find jobs?

I been enjoying the talk and looking for more.

Thanks for calling me a friend... I have enjoyed it as well.



---------------------


The full topic:



Host: www.insideassyria.com
Cookie: *hidded*
Content-type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded
Referer: http://www.insideassyria.com/rkvsf5/rkvsf_core.php?okay_Arrow-34cy.2Odl.REPLY
Accept: text/html, application/xml;q=0.9, application/xhtml+xml, image/png, image/webp, image/jpeg, image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, ...
Accept-language: en-US,en;q=0.9
User-agent: Opera/9.80 (X11; Linux i686; U; en) Presto/2.9.168 Version/11.51
X-forwarded-for: 94.249.61.156
Content-length: 5487
Connection: close



Powered by RedKernel V.S. Forum 1.2.b9