Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

**plenderj** · Mar 25th, 2003, 03:54 AM

Was looking at the news this morning, and a lot of Iraqi people were so very angry at the US and the UK for invading their country.

One guy was saying that yes, Saddam might be a bad president, but he's their president, and its up to them to get rid of him if they want.
Its no-one else's decision.

But not only that, Iraqis are coming back from places like Jordan and what not to help fight the Americans and the British.

Looks to me like a gross miscalculation of the Iraqis on the Allies' behalf.

**honeybee** · Mar 25th, 2003, 06:18 AM

People are flying in from the US, Britain and Australia to fight the Iraqis. No wonder the Iraqis would fly in from Jordan and other countries to fight them off

.

**MerrionComputin** · Mar 25th, 2003, 06:36 AM

One of the miscalculations is to treat "Iraqis" as one nation. In reality they are 3 people's locked in one country (kinda like Yugoslavia was) and they are mortal enemies.

The Kurds and Shi'i muslims will welcome the allies because this will give them a chance to overthrow their traditional enemies. The Suni and (I can't rememeber the name..) others will resist this because - well, nobody likes being overthrown especially as this involves decapitation in that part of the world.

Of course the Iraqi ex-patriot community reflect this mix and many (usually the young men as there is an inbuilt reflex to fight in young men) wish to fight on one or other side.

The real shame is that this whole "one of us is better than one of them" thing was adequately explained away by Dr. Seuss in his book "Star-bellied sneeches" which should be mandatory reading for anyone wishing to be a politician.

**Juan Carlos Rey** · Mar 25th, 2003, 07:38 AM

posted by MerrionComputin

One of the miscalculations is to treat "Iraqis" as one nation. In reality they are 3 people's locked in one country (kinda like Yugoslavia was) and they are mortal enemies.

That's don't give you the right to invade. In fact, USA is not one nation, is three nations in it: Britains, Latins, Africans. Is that a reason to invade you?

**crptcblade** · Mar 25th, 2003, 07:43 AM

Originally posted by Juan Carlos Rey
In fact, USA is not one nation, is three nations in it: Britains, Latins, Africans. Is that a reason to invade you?

I think its a few more than that

. Plus, I don't think MC was arguing in favor of the invasion.

**honeybee** · Mar 25th, 2003, 07:46 AM

Originally posted by Juan Carlos Rey
That's don't give you the right to invade. In fact, USA is not one nation, is three nations in it: Britains, Latins, Africans. Is that a reason to invade you?

He didn't claim it to be a reason for the invasion...

.

**Juan Carlos Rey** · Mar 25th, 2003, 08:56 PM

Not at all.

Was looking at the news this morning, and a lot of Iraqi people were so very angry at the US and the UK for invading their country.

MerrionComputin was trying to justify the fact that iraqis wasn't all that thankfull to the US soldiers that came to free them from a tirane like Saddam.

Who likes to have their country invaded and destroyed in the name of what...?

And I was mixing and twisting everything up.

**hellswraith** · Mar 25th, 2003, 11:24 PM

Originally posted by plenderj
Was looking at the news this morning, and a lot of Iraqi people were so very angry at the US and the UK for invading their country.

One guy was saying that yes, Saddam might be a bad president, but he's their president, and its up to them to get rid of him if they want.
Its no-one else's decision.

But not only that, Iraqis are coming back from places like Jordan and what not to help fight the Americans and the British.

Looks to me like a gross miscalculation of the Iraqis on the Allies' behalf.

That is funny, on my news it showed Iraqi people praising the troops, and little kids taking candy from some of the troops. They all seemed real happy the troops were there.

They also had a bunch of Iraqi people that have left Iraq talking about how they would love to go back as soon as Saddam is gone.

It is funny how the news is shown in two different parts of the world. Both of our news crews are skewing the information they are giving to the audiences it is intended for.

**Arc** · Mar 26th, 2003, 12:23 AM

Originally posted by plenderj
Was looking at the news this morning, and a lot of Iraqi people were so very angry at the US and the UK for invading their country.

One guy was saying that yes, Saddam might be a bad president, but he's their president, and its up to them to get rid of him if they want.
Its no-one else's decision.

But not only that, Iraqis are coming back from places like Jordan and what not to help fight the Americans and the British.

Looks to me like a gross miscalculation of the Iraqis on the Allies' behalf.

Rofl? You are suprised? NO! That's exactly what you were hoping and praying for! HAHAHA.

Are there a few psychos that would rather Saddam stayed in power? Yah ofcourse there is. There are also the few who aren't sure that Saddam is Really going to be removed yet and are still afraid to say what they "really" think.

As you can see from the Uprising in Basra, once the locals get wind they we aren't here to dick around and we really mean business they start to uprise in droves.

I also have seen MANY Iraqis on TV greeting soldiers with smiling faces. I've also seen some unhappy people... i guess you are either only getting one side of the news, or you are closing your eyes to the other side.

Haha you are hillarious and so predictible plenderj.

**plenderj** · Mar 26th, 2003, 03:57 AM

Originally posted by Arc
Rofl? You are suprised? NO! That's exactly what you were hoping and praying for! HAHAHA.

Are there a few psychos that would rather Saddam stayed in power? Yah ofcourse there is. There are also the few who aren't sure that Saddam is Really going to be removed yet and are still afraid to say what they "really" think.

As you can see from the Uprising in Basra, once the locals get wind they we aren't here to dick around and we really mean business they start to uprise in droves.

I also have seen MANY Iraqis on TV greeting soldiers with smiling faces. I've also seen some unhappy people... i guess you are either only getting one side of the news, or you are closing your eyes to the other side.

Haha you are hillarious and so predictible plenderj.

1) Once again, incessant insinuation.

2) A lot of people in Iraq want Saddam gone.
But what you don't seem to realize is how delicate a situation it is over there.
And also add to that the fact that the Iraqi people in the cities are mourning the death that the American bombing raids caused.

The Iraqi people aren't just one nation.
Some of them will greet the US, the ones who don't want their country occupied by a force from abroad will not.

The US isn't planning on going anywhere.
They don't want the UN involved in the rebuilding of Iraq.
That's really going to piss off the Iraqi people.

**honeybee** · Mar 26th, 2003, 07:09 AM

Originally posted by hellswraith
That is funny, on my news it showed Iraqi people praising the troops, and little kids taking candy from some of the troops. They all seemed real happy the troops were there.

They also had a bunch of Iraqi people that have left Iraq talking about how they would love to go back as soon as Saddam is gone.

It is funny how the news is shown in two different parts of the world. Both of our news crews are skewing the information they are giving to the audiences it is intended for.

That could only mean some people are happy and some people are not, because I have seen photos of civilians together with the US forces, and civilians raising their firearms to protest against the invasion.

.

**swatty** · Mar 26th, 2003, 07:34 AM

Originally posted by hellswraith
That is funny, on my news it showed Iraqi people praising the troops, and little kids taking candy from some of the troops. They all seemed real happy the troops were there.

They also had a bunch of Iraqi people that have left Iraq talking about how they would love to go back as soon as Saddam is gone.

It is funny how the news is shown in two different parts of the world. Both of our news crews are skewing the information they are giving to the audiences it is intended for.

You need to check as many resources as you can.
As long you can only watch US news , you'll only see the things GWB wants you to see.

That is a big reason why so many US citizens are still behind their president.

Time will tell.

**nad_scorp** · Mar 26th, 2003, 09:21 AM

Watch new other than those of the US and u'll get some truth

**Maven** · Mar 26th, 2003, 09:23 AM

Originally posted by swatty
You need to check as many resources as you can.
As long you can only watch US news , you'll only see the things GWB wants you to see.

That is a big reason why so many US citizens are still behind their president.

Time will tell.

You mean the things that CNN wants you to see and the things that Fox wants you to see, see where this is going? LOL.

**plenderj** · Mar 26th, 2003, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by Maven
You mean the things that CNN wants you to see and the things that Fox wants you to see, see where this is going? LOL.

I watch the ITV news, the BBC news, RTE news and Sky News.
BSKYB - the people who own sky news - are pro-war.
I don't know about the rest.

So you cannot accuse me anyway of looking at purely anti-war or anti-american news sites and news programs.

**run_GMoney** · Mar 26th, 2003, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by nad_scorp
Watch new other than those of the US and u'll get some truth

Will you please not talk anymore? That statement implies that what you're seeing is the truth. And how do you know this?

**plenderj** · Mar 26th, 2003, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by run_GMoney
Will you please not talk anymore? That statement implies that what you're seeing is the truth. And how do you know this?

By your own arguments you're saying the exact same thing though - that the evidence the US present is the truth.

**Xanith** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:15 AM

Originally posted by plenderj
I watch the ITV news, the BBC news, RTE news and Sky News.
BSKYB - the people who own sky news - are pro-war.
I don't know about the rest.

So you cannot accuse me anyway of looking at purely anti-war or anti-american news sites and news programs.

A lot of the British press is very liberal. Even the New York Times here in the US is making it look like coalition forces are losing the war.

X

**Xanith** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by plenderj
By your own arguments you're saying the exact same thing though - that the evidence the US present is the truth.

People will believe what they want to believe. You are quick to believe we are killing all these civilians even when you know that coalition forces are taking tremendous care in making sure they don’t die, even to the point of losing their own lives.

X

**plenderj** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by Xanith
A lot of the British press is very liberal. Even the New York Times here in the US is making it look like coalition forces are losing the war.

X

Well you're certainly not convincing the people of Iraq.
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0...275851,00.html

**plenderj** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by Xanith
People will believe what they want to believe. You are quick to believe we are killing all these civilians even when you know that coalition forces are taking tremendous care in making sure they don’t die, even to the point of losing their own lives.

X

Don't get me wrong. I'm sure you're doing your very best to minimize civilian deaths.
But at the end of the day you're still causing them.

And you'll keep getting stuff like this happening :
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0...275851,00.html

**Maven** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by plenderj
Don't get me wrong. I'm sure you're doing your very best to minimize civilian deaths.
But at the end of the day you're still causing them.

And you'll keep getting stuff like this happening :
http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0...275851,00.html

Saddam is causing the civilian deaths, he puts them in harms way in order to protect himself. They build military next to schools so we wont' bomb them. His army grabs civilians and use them as shields so our troops can't shoot back. I dont' see how we are to blame for that.

**plenderj** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:37 AM

Because you're the ones who bomb them.
So you're saying that if I put a barracks next to a school, and your bombs blow the school to pieces, that its my fault that the children died ?

**Maven** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by plenderj
Because you're the ones who bomb them.
So you're saying that if I put a barracks next to a school, and your bombs blow the school to pieces, that its my fault that the children died ?

In a word: Yes

Your purposely putting civilians in harms way, using civilians to protect your barracks. It's being a coward.

Just like when they take civilians and use them as shields to protect themselves. You may refer to it as a smart way of doing battle but quite frankly it's what cowards do.

**plenderj** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:55 AM

Originally posted by Maven
In a word: Yes

Your purposely putting civilians in harms way, using civilians to protect your barracks. It's being a coward.

Just like when they take civilians and use them as shields to protect themselves. You may refer to it as a smart way of doing battle but quite frankly it's what cowards do.

I went to school in a school called St.Mary's College in Rathmines in Dublin.
Around that school is a very large barracks.

If someone bombed my school by accident, I can guarantee you I would blame the people who bombed the shool - not the people who put it there in the first place.

**Maven** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by plenderj
I went to school in a school called St.Mary's College in Rathmines in Dublin.
Around that school is a very large barracks.

If someone bombed my school by accident, I can guarantee you I would blame the people who bombed the shool - not the people who put it there in the first place.

I would blame the military for hiding behind the kids.

**swatty** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by Maven
In a word: Yes

Your purposely putting civilians in harms way, using civilians to protect your barracks. It's being a coward.

Just like when they take civilians and use them as shields to protect themselves. You may refer to it as a smart way of doing battle but quite frankly it's what cowards do.

In a way your correct him beeing a coward.

But lets say ten of your enemies came to bash you , then who is the coward if they need to be with ten to take you ?

**swatty** · Mar 26th, 2003, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by Maven
I would blame the military for hiding behind the kids.

Good one, and maybe you could try and take them military out without harming those kids.

**plenderj** · Mar 26th, 2003, 11:02 AM

Originally posted by Maven
I would blame the military for hiding behind the kids.

And what if I told you the school was built after the barracks ?

Thread: Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Thread Tools

Display

Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Well ...

Well ...

Re: Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Re: Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Re: Re: Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Well ...

Re: Re: Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Re: Re: Re: Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Re: Re: Re: Re: Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Something that has surprised me about the Iraqi people

Posting Permissions