Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

Are you bline to the fact, Humanist, that the USA is not deliberatly bombing villages and killing innocents? we have people over there, military and civilians, that are doing alot of good in iraq. Many of us are upset over the fact that our government is seeing that every iraqi citizen gets health care when they don't even take care of our own! should we have turned a blind eye to the jews and gays in nazi germany? should we have turned a blind eye to all the innocents that were dying and being suppressed by the former iraqi dictatorship? is it so bad that we are bringing democracy to a country that has been supressed for thousands of years? certainly any educated person will see that in bringing about a change, any change, will cause some unrest within the country. innocents will die in the course of change. "the lives of the few outweigh the lives of the many."
Now that i know you are a woman (i assume that from your post about liking a man in uniform. of course you could also be gay.)...but assuming you are a woman, would you rather be a woman in iraq 15 years ago, or now? answer that! and then condemn my country.....

GorrillaGal,

I know you mean well with everything you wrote about Iraq, but sounds to me, as if you have been listening to George and Laura Bush too much, or Donald Rumsfeld, who claims everything looks "normal" on the ground, as he flies overhead, probably at 30,000 feet.

As for women of Iraq 15 years ago. Well, this may come as a shock to you, but they were better off, living in a secular society. Present situation has taken the women and the country much further back then 15 years.

Stop listening to Idiots, like the Bush's. He's trying to save his image at the cost of our Boys & Girls dying in Iraq. We are not giving them, anything they did not have before. In fact, they are getting less of everything now, then they were getting, even with the sanctions in place, for 10 years, before 2003. Iraq was one of the best ran "Arab" country in the Middle East, given the circumstances, until we turned against our old friend Saddam. He was always a bastard, but for a long time, he was our bastard.

[Eliko]

You hit the nail on the head that time Kikapu, nice to have somebody voicing their own opinion and not the views of some obscure political upstart's contribution read from a book, the policy of 'division' has been perpetrated on a world-wide scale, it works for the politicians precisely because it agitates the masses and leaves them with a free hand to inflict misery on the population, while they continue with whatever 'hidden agendas' they dream up.

[GorillaGal]

Sorry Kikapu, i do not agree with your view as to the women being less better off in Iraq today than they were 15 years ago, secular society or not. all people are created equal, and should be treated as such. if they are truely not as well off today, that is only temporary as they adjust to thier new freedoms. after all it is a human trait to resist change, whether it be better or not. give it more time. as Iraq becomes more of a democracy, they will stabalize and things will improve. of this i have no doubt.

[mehmet]

Gorilla girl,

Have you even realised the amount of crimes against women, how they are kidnapped, raped and need escorting everywhere. How they are now veiled for their own protection? How they are finding it more and more difficult to use their qualifications to get jobs?

There were many faults of Saddam and I don't need you to give me any lectures on the subject I was arguing against him when he was USA's best friend. But undoubtedly one the position of women is worse now than before invasion. Not just women too, do you know how safe it is to be a Christian Arab in Iraq, most are fleeing to Syria, your next target if Bush is allowed to waste more US lives. Get off your soap box and admit you are in worse shit than Vietnam and it will be a long time till your public will allow your politicians to launch military adventures.

[cypezokyli]

Are you bline to the fact, Humanist, that the USA is not deliberatly bombing villages and killing innocents? we have people over there, military and civilians, that are doing alot of good in iraq. Many of us are upset over the fact that our government is seeing that every iraqi citizen gets health care when they don't even take care of our own! should we have turned a blind eye to the jews and gays in nazi germany? should we have turned a blind eye to all the innocents that were dying and being suppressed by the former iraqi dictatorship? is it so bad that we are bringing democracy to a country that has been supressed for thousands of years? certainly any educated person will see that in bringing about a change, any change, will cause some unrest within the country. innocents will die in the course of change. "the lives of the few outweigh the lives of the many."
Now that i know you are a woman (i assume that from your post about liking a man in uniform. of course you could also be gay.)...but assuming you are a woman, would you rather be a woman in iraq 15 years ago, or now? answer that! and then condemn my country......

I am really sorry GG but you have not brought democracy. you have brought civil war. the policy of G.W. brought the country from dictatorship to chaos. do you really think that this is better ?
and above all nobody asked you to do that.
who gave you the right to do that ?

yes they will end up in ....something. probably another state divided along ethnic divisions. and lets assume (and hope) that this will happen soon. did the cost to achieve that worth it ?
who are we to judge (and choose) that democracy of others could as well cost them , 60 - 500 thousand lives !


i dont want to brake your bubble , but the US didnot attack iraq bc it wanted to "make good" , and "bring democracy".


.........
as for women.... they were not oppressed in most of the times of saddams regime. only in the last years there was a deterioration of their lives and that was a result of the US sanctions. i can still recall the western newspapers some time ago : "women voted in iraq".... nobody bothered to mentioned if they also had such rights before.
now.... their sons , and husbands are being killed - yes ofcource they are better.
now.... the power vaccum created is shifting the society towards more radical islamism. ofcource the west will blame the islam clerics. nobody will bother to ask as to why people are turning towards islam. what situation forced them to that decision ?


this is from HRW

Historically, Iraqi women and girls have enjoyed relatively more rights than many of their counterparts in the Middle East. The Iraqi Provisional Constitution (drafted in 1970) formally guaranteed equal rights to women and other laws specifically ensured their right to vote, attend school, run for political office, and own property. Yet, since the 1991 Gulf War, the position of women within Iraqi society has deteriorated rapidly. Women and girls were disproportionately affected by the economic consequences of the U.N. sanctions, and lacked access to food, health care, and education. These effects were compounded by changes in the law that restricted women's mobility and access to the formal sector in an effort to ensure jobs to men and appease conservative religious and tribal groups.

http://www.hrw.org/backgrounder/wrd/iraq-women.htm

[Pyrpolizer]

Our friend Kikapu showed us figures some time ago showing that the value of oil produced at Iraq, is less than what it costs the Americans to have the Iraq war and sustain their presense there. So I wonder what is the REAL reason they did it.

[cypezokyli]

Our friend Kikapu showed us figures some time ago showing that the value of oil produced at Iraq, is less than what it costs the Americans to have the Iraq war and sustain their presense there. So I wonder what is the REAL reason they did it.

this way of thinking implicitly assumes two things :

1. we can always determine the real targets of war from its results

2. that the americans have achieved that target.


.......
i believe that both of the above dont hold.
the targets of war usually change - especially for lonlasting wars.

the americans are not even clear to whatever target they might have had. that is why the word "failure" is all over the western media (even from what used to be supporters of the attack) .... i believe that too often we overestimate the abilities of the americans

they didnot attack iraq , just to take its oil. i think that saddam posed a more complex threat, that had to be eliminated

[Natty]

The idea that 'The West is perfect', makes me feel slightly uncomfortable...Of course The west has achieved (and continues to achieve), many, many things that it should be proud of...but it most certainly isn't perfect...Countries that are considered part of the West, have committed so many crimes 'behind the scenes'...crimes that have affected so many peoples lives...

[Eliko]

"The horse with the mange, will always throw it's arse highest", that is an old Irish saying and it fits the American concept of decency admirably.

[rawk]

Humanist

Could you give us a bit of background history on Iraq prior to the coalition invasion. Just a few facts about the massacres, the gassing of Kurdish villages etc.

I know all those graves full of women clutching infants being dug up doesn't fit with your opinions on the coalition invasion or all your rhetoric, but a few comments would be welcome.

The sectarian mess that is Iraq needs no apologist who blames invasion.

Perhaps it needs someone who can say,

"Yes, they got rid of a 20th century dictatorial dinosaur but they didn't plan for the ensuing chaotic aftermath!"

Rawk