Will these withdrawing troops now become part of the plan to create in Iran what has been such an outstanding success in Iraq..?

Who cares... as long as gas prices stay below 3 bucks a gallon....

Await the inevitable Islamist regime that will take hold in Iraq and watch as oil rockets its way to $150 a barrel.
Well done Dubya/Cheney (not sure who is in charge); history is going to have a field day with the pair of you.

#1 & #2

Thank you Mr. & Mrs. Negative for you lovely comments.

The liar, war criminal and mass murderer Bush has apparently spent $1.6 trillion so far in his attempt to control the oil in the Middle East. He could have completely wiped out poverty in his own country with all that money. How long is it going to take for the American public to wake up to the activities of this megalomaniac?

The photo caption is great, no? "A US soldier stands out in an otherwise almost normal scene as people shop at a market in Baquba, north-east of Baghdad."

Oh, he 'stands out' alright!

1 how come oor petrol price arenae so cheap cossidering the UK support for Dubya & Cheney ?
Opps I forget Broon and his glove-puppet chancellor have them taxed so high so we're doing oor bit to save the planet.

2. Scullion

Spot on.

The USA can't afford to keep them there; Bush has been rumbled. The sanctions and invasion have achieved millions of deaths, fortresses in the Middle East, untold wealth for the neocon gangsters, rocketing oil prices. Mission accomplished - time to bail out - let somebody else sort out the mess as usual.

Hidden costs will boost the price of the US' wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to $3.5 trillion within the next decade, according to a new report.

About $1.6 trillion will have been spent by the end of next year - double the $800bn so far requested by the Bush administration, a report by Democrats on the Joint Economic Committee said on Tuesday.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/FB053225-B01A-4725...

My words are addressed to those who don't stop ranting and raving about Bush and Iraq´s war. Iraq was not only invaded for humanitarian reasons but also for Golf oil, most of the people know that.
But, remember that is, precisaly,oil who has to do with your standard of life, your comfort, and even your culture. Would you give up all those things for the sake of iraquis? I don´t think so.
Think, think a little....before write or talk.

8. Isab

"But, remember that is, precisaly,oil who has to do with your standard of life, your comfort, and even your culture. Would you give up all those things for the sake of iraquis? I don´t think so."

Isab, I would give up my standard of life, my comfort and my culture just to save one life.

With your attitude, life would be meaningless.

#2 You are right i'm afraid. We are already seeing the oppression of women in Iraq as the once secular country get's ready to live under the Yoke of Iranian controlled Islam.

Not exactly the mission statement but as inevitable
as day follows night. Is this what the americans mean by democracy and freedom ?. I wonder what dictionary they took their definitions from.

Most disgusting sight of the week was the vice president, Dick (5 Draft exemptions) Cheney at the
service for war veterans, I suppose George (War dodging) Bush was too busy clearing brush down in crawford.

We all have to pull out sooner or later. It will never be perfect, that's why we went in, in the first place.

#12 .Can you run that past me again?

Why did we go in ?.

# 13 Number 6, looking for my prayer book

Mass murder by Sadam Hussain, was the reason, if not the excuse.

Oh if you think that the UK got some oil deal think again. Most of the oil contracts have gone to Germany, who sent the sales men in about five minutes after the troops.

#8 & #12 talk so much sense....

#14 Dan, why go in when we did ?Do you accept that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.

Why stop chasing Bin-Laden when we had him cornered.

Why has bush made the CIA dis-band the section
dedicated to hunting AL Quida.

Mass murder is a vile crime , but hardly unique to Iraq. Look at the civillian casualties caused by the coalition.

Why have we reduced the country to ruins , economically and physcoloically.

Is leaving the country in the hands of a shia run goverment not the actions of madness. Are you aware of the differences between shia and sunni?
I have no idea what you are refering to when you say "Oh if you think UK got some deal think again".

Finally , why lie about the reasons for attacking Iraq,
the free world know it was in the planning for years,
why talk of WMD and obstuction of weapons inspectors, another shameful lie.

Surely the ends don't justify the means. Or is that how you see it?

#17 What's wrong jenny dear . It would seem you have an opinion but no idea how you formed it.
Hence the fustration.

20. Wini

Of course my concern for lives include those lost during Saddam's era.

You seem to be unaware that in 1982 and 1983, the years of the atrocities you mention, that Saddam was working for the USA in the war against Iran which cost millions of lives on both sides.

Glad to correct you again.

BTW, what gives you the false idea that I support and encourage Islam fundamentalists?

in this crowd of men, there is only one woman and how peculiar is it that she is the only one dressed in black?
-is this photo op a fashion statement or a political statement?

#25

Ah Wini and her rose tinted glasses, did you leave your guide dog at the bus stop again?

There are widespread reports of systematic violations of human rights in Zimbabwe not to mention outside observers routinely alleging corruption/rigging in voting, Mugabe's critics accuse him of conducting a “reign of terror” and in fact has compared himself to Hitler.

The opposition leader beaten up by police, Robert Mugabe told his supporters his rival "asked for it". Women who oppose Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe suffer violence, rape and repression, his secret police the much-feared Central Intelligence Organisation, spreads dread in the cities, especially the poorer townships after dark. The 1983 Ndebele massacre during the early days of his regime where around 20,000 people are alleged to have been killed.

Has anything been done about him…sanctions! Still in power, why? No oil, therefore nothing worth invading for!!

#11 Number 6: I am the new number twenty-nine ...

It's probably that whoever wins control over Iraq will be someone willing to do business with the rest of the world. They might or might not be hardline Islamist but they'll almost certainly want to make some money off the world's second biggest oil reserve.

The odd thing about Saddam was that he was more into taking over the rest of the middle east by force rather than sitting back and letting the petrodollars flow in. You might even say this is what caused his downfall.

#22 bill2, why do you let wini bait you? No-one *seriously* believes what he posted in #20.

25. Wini

You are totally and utterly wrong.

Saddam was in cahoots with the USA for over thirty years, from the time they helped him into power until when he invaded Kuwait with their blessing.

Go and read some history books and improve your knowledge before you post again.

#30 Boab, you say saddam was interested in taking over the middle east by force. Who was he targeting
when this war began then ?.

#25 Wini do you really believe Saddam was not in partnership with the US ?. He was secular, do you know what that means. The US feared the rise of fundamentalism in Iran hence their support for Saddam.

Would you like a list of US firms who sold him chemicals ????.

It's about time the troops were pulled out!

#4 you are right!! I didn't vote for shrub either time, it was the wealthy AND the military that got him in office the 2nd go round. I have never been able to understand some peoples' thinking and wanting that joker in office a 2nd time. This country is going to hell in a handbasket, but they have trillions of $$ to spend in the Middle East. Let the researchers develop an alternative fuel and the Middle East will become a thing of the past for all of us

it dose`nt matter who`s in control in Iraq or anywhere else they will sell their oil to the US.
It was never about oil, it was about getting rid of Saddam! the Americans have started to reduce their forces, if all you anti Americans are correct, then Iraq should be bone dry by the time the last troops pull out.

#32 Number6: I give up. Who?

#34 oder: 'It was never about oil, it was about getting rid of Saddam!'

You could argue it was about both. Maybe the idea was to get rid of a brutal dictator; then money and stability would flow in because of the oil, creating a nice middle class who would help to spread liberal democracy in the region. So far it hasn't worked out that way.

#34

“Oil has literally made foreign and security policy for decades…it…provoked the division of the Middle East after WW1; aroused Germany and Japan to extend their tentacles beyond their borders; the Arab oil embargo; Iran vs Iraq; the Gulf War. This is all clear.”

Bill Richardson, U.S. Secretary of Energy, 1999 an American!

Or try and read Iraq and the International Oil System: Why America Went to War in the Gulf (by oh yes another American) Stephen C. Pelletiere the CIA’s senior Iraq specialist during the Iran-Iraq War.

It's good to see GWB "pulling out"!

It's a pity his Dad didn't "pull out" at the crucial moment 50 odd years ago!

Tell me Bill2 you filthy Nazi, do you sleep with Mein Kampf under your pillow? Did your father wake you in the night, take you to the basement and have you pledge undying loyalty to the Nazis while zig heiling a faded photo of Hitler? Do you masturbate to death camp photos? Be honest now Bill you are a hater of Jews and a lover of Palestinians with no regard for facts because you are a fanatic along with other Euro cowards like you.

You're a Christian? LOL, so was Hitler until he was in control. He loved the Muslims though and the Muslims love Hitler.

Hitler-"You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?"

Abdullah el-Faisal-"They should be killed very soon, as by Hitler. You can use chemical weapons to exterminate the unbelievers. Is that clear? If you have cockroaches in your house, you spray them with chemicals."

Mohammad Amin al-Husayni-"Our fundamental condition for cooperating with Germany was a free hand to eradicate every last Jew from Palestine and the Arab world."

Hitler's Mein Kampf currently ranks sixth on the best-seller list among Palestinian Arabs.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F...
http://www.themiddleeastnow.com/musnazi.html

35. Boab, Glasgow

The US will still be able ot buy all the oil they what from Iraq regardless of who in power,the main object was Saddam was to be remove, which has bee done! if it was about both the Ameican troops would be staying.

36. PJ, Edinburgh

no doubt it will make interesting reading how ever does`nt explain why the Americans are leaving and Iraq will still have oil to sell.

This story is garbage, the only reason we see some troops coming home is for Chirstmas, so it's good for PR, then they'll be back in.
The US will NEVER leave Iraq. Do you really think that the US is going to leave all that oil fields unprotected???? The US will be in that country forever, well untill the oil and gas runs out. Also why are they building massive millitrary bases?? Could it be that they want to keep the option of hitting any country that steps out of line, or if Israel wants someone hit?
Just a thought.

#39

That one is easy by the end of this week, the House and Senate are planning to vote on a $50 billion measure for operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The bill would require Bush to initiate troop withdrawals immediately, which on the face of it seems to have started.

#38 Don't do it, bill2! He's not worth it!

#38 Post up pro-Hitler quotes from the world's other 999,999,998 Muslims and I might believe your lame theory.

Roflmao You best listen to your nanny Bill.

20 - and of course Bambi told the truth, the whole truth, and nowt but the bloody truth.
His future father-confessor has a load of work on his hands....

34 - it was never about oil ?
ha ha ha !!! hee hee hee !!!!

Well, I see the discourse is at its normal level here.

When we do what we believe to be in our best interests, we're the villan. When we do what others think we should do, we're the villan.

Regardless of what bits of propaganda you throw around in your arguments, one thing is abuntantly clear. Either you hate the US or you don't. Quit trying to justify your opinions with garbage and just save yourself some time. Just type that you hate the US and move on.

I have engaged in many useful discusions with people on the other side of various issues and consider it a great benefit when I can learn something new and useful. This name calling and and bickering is worse than useless.

Not every action is a conspiracy. Sometimes what they say a war is about, is what it is about. You can just debate that, you don't have to come up with some lame bunch of cr*p to make your argument seem more interesting. If you find this to be necessary it may point ot a weakness in your view to begin with. There is nothing wrong with being against the war, but to make up odd motivations on the other side of the issue makes you look lame.

The war in Iraq is about the whole Middle East. It is about the world supply of oil. Remove oil and the world would just moan about the deaths caused by various dictators there. The real debate is whether we should be getting involved in any countries affairs just because of the resources they have there. Now that's a debate.

Personally, I would rather we, all Western countries, were less dependant on the resources of others. I do think in the short term we need to keep oil available. Long term, make it our goal to have the luxury to turn our backs or get involved because it is what we want, not because we need to.

To change the debate, put nukes in the hands of the jahadists. Oil becomes a mute point.

The Brute

Boab, I consider Bill a Neonazi so by extension you must be a Nazi sympathizer. I usually don't suffer fools, but I will tell you that it is more than a lame theory. It's historical fact. Read a book.

As long as Muslim leaders and Mullahs spout their vile rhetoric I will take it that the vast SILENT hoards of Muslims are generally in agreement.

A Muslim who doesn't agree with leaders and finds parts of the koran wrong is a very bad Muslim. They don't want to be bad muzzies so it has to be said that, for the most part, they are in agreement.

46. Pilrig., Livingston

then if your right Iraq will have no oil when the troops pullout? YES... NO? pointless to invade over oil then leave before you bleed the place dry!now that does sound funny... hee!.... hee!...ha..ha..

"I would give up my standard of life, my comfort and my culture just to save one life."

I call BU77 54IT...

you wouldnt sacrifice ANYTHING... you are too yellow...

you consistenetly ridicule, rebuke, and defame those who would lead us in any such endeavor....

you jump up and down and scream OIL.. OIL.... OIL.... like some chimpanzee on amphetamines....

READ the american Declaration of Independence... READ the US constitution... the preamble is rather interesting... it talks about ALL men... not all WASP men.... ALL men...

the very nature of the statements of America's founding fathers imply and require sacrifice... a sacrifice you give lip service to, but ridicule at EVERY turn...

again I call BU77 54IT on you....

47 Actually Brute I agree with you. I post on forums where people are treated with respect and their opinions thoughtfully considered. These forums, on the other hand, are unmoderated and rife with insults and nastiness.

I rarely come back.

50. mike - across the pond

Fortunately I am not a USA citizen, so I don't need to read the Declaration of Independence, nor the constitution, nor the statements of your founding fathers, nor do I have to make sacrifices for Bush's gangsters or have to jump up and down and scream oil.

What sacrifice are you making?

We can agree to be thankful you are not a US citizen. Good.

I believe it is you who claimed great willingness for sacrifice not Mike.

The sacrifices I have to make are generally those I am forced to make by the Liberals in my country, then again I guess that would be theft by them not sacrifice by me, wouldn't it.

I did vote for Bush twice, the sacrifice I make is in listening to LIES as if they are fact, just because they get thrown around with repitiion.

I am unhappy with my President not because of the war but because he spends too much time worrying about the opinions of people like you, who are citizens, and not enough standing by and defending those decisions.

I agree war sucks and I wish we could do without it. Now if you have a consructive idea of how to make things work, lets hear it. If your just going to advocate the destruction of our (all Western countries) economy for your sensiblities then that is all you need to say. You can be rest assured that argument will convince very few to jump off the cliff with you.

52. bill2

Fortunately? Why do you have such disdain for the United States? They have done wonders in such a short period of time.

4. Guga II, Rockall

http://groups.msn.com/enlargementmethods/

Hope this helps

Brute... I don't hate the US - I have been there... have many friends there...
But if I read much more CLAPTRAP in a similar vein to your post at 47, then I could very well join that 75% of the world's population who do hate the US...
Watch Farenheit9/11 - an enlightened film by an enlightened American, then get yourself a life....

53. Brute

Now if you have a consructive idea of how to make things work, lets hear it.

How about stopping killing, wounding and exiling millions of people in the Middle East? It only breeds vengeance and terrorism, something we can well do without.

Jonboy,
That term 'Johnboy" has a euphamistic meaning here, perhaps you are aware of that.

If you are citing fahrenheit 911, a piece of propaganda, as evidence then you are already in the "75%". It is like citing Mein Kampf as proof that the Jewish people are the source of all the world's ills. Next you will be talking about aliens causing Global Warming and your latest ghost story. I mean the tin foil hat looks good on you but don't tell me to try one on for size just because you are such a fan.

That having been said "Good night Johnboy."

I've read through the posts, save for a couple of you that post the same thing everytime.... Wasn't this about a troop drawdown? Wouldn't most agree that this is a good thing and not the actions of 'empire building' as so many posters suggest? Bill2, kind of picks up where we left off yesterday. Mike was right to call BU77 54IT on you. How can you say today that you don't need to read the these doc's when you were referring to US law and it's governance of US soldiers yesterday? You're definitely not a Nazi, as CC says, but take off your Captain anti-American cape for a bit. The withdrawal of troops is a good thing, but it's going to be years until it really happens. Enjoy the moment that hopefully leads to a better Iraq. Also, Condor, BOAB's no nazi. Not sure you really understand the nature of nazism. But, your post brings up a very real cooperation that occured between Hitler's henchman and the Mufti of Jerusalem. http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/gallery/ Also, I agree, silence regarding an action equals tacit approval of the action.

Bill2

You mean by 'stopping', we should pull out.

For one, we are going to I think.

To arbitrarily pull out will not stop the killing, it will escalte it. One side will kill off the other, as much as the rest of the world will allow.

I can respect the statement 'We should not go in' or 'We should not have gone in' but this conspiracy bunk gets a little old.

How do we leave, without millions being slaughtered. Evidence, Vietnam. Pulling out of there allowed the winning side to "cleans" the population.

Are you advocating a "cleansing" in Iraq?

If we pull out without some authority ready to take our place, it is "cleansing" you will get.

As far as our presence breeding vengence and terrorism that is a one sided argument. Terroroism is no different than any other ism. It is caused by its proponents not a reaction to them. They may be able to make hay with an opponent to point at but that does not mean we should not oppose them.

To one extent I agree we all need to evaluate where we are going to stick our noses into.

Ideally, we would not go into any other nation unless they threatened us directly.

In the Middle East there are countries who are quietly asking us to get involved. They were threatened by the former Iraqi regime and are threatened by the current Iranian one. That does not mean we should be there, but it is not just us deciding from On High to go in like some have portrayed.

For some we are the bad guys when we do act and we are the bad guys when we don't. For them, it is an excuse to berate us.

Good honest debate and criticism are not bad things. But lies and distortions can only be responded to as insults.

Wini. The US hasn't taken over Iraq. It's a temporary condition.

#51 Com CONDOR

Your last post is breathtaking in it's duplicity.
I'm sorry but I suspect that you are very very ill....a raving lunatic indeed..

The US has afforded the Iraqis a sufficient amount of time to sort their affairs out. What happens next is up to them. It is indeed time for the US to follow the UK's leak and wind things down there.

Regrdless of the extensive suffering that has befallen Iraq since the toppling of Saddam, Iraq nonetheless does have a better future without him and his criminal clique.

As I have said many times before, using the example of the Kurds' 'state' in the north, it would have been far better for all involved had the US strategy been to allow Iraq, post-Saddam, to reinvent itself in the form of its logical constituencies, along geographic lines, rather that try to keep Humpty-Dumpty together by sheer willpower, massive expenditures, massive loss of live and great suffering .... all for what?

Anyway, what's done is done and, if nothing else, it has allowed the US to see plainly who its real freinds and enemies truly are.

71. Conan, Moffat

I was not in favor of that in the beginning. I figured the Iranians would take over control of the Shi'a portion almost immediatly.

Hindsight being what it is, I can see now it may have been a better course and may be adopted someday by the Iraqis themselves.

Either way it will be up to them what they will make of their country.

heres a piece of enlightenment for you....

you dont have the will to read the US constitution, or declaration of independence...
really its written in your mother tongue... you wouldnt have to worry about translation errors...

you dont have the inclination to read one of the quintessential documents of humanity?

but you are willing to sit in gloriously ignorant judegement of those who are willing to act?

I've taken the time to read over translations of your Magna Carte... because IT TOO is one of those quintessential documents... as well as "Hammurabi's Code"...

these are the basis of the very concepts what we know today as humanity needs to survive... but you dont have time... wow... THAT is rich

"What is the rent you are willing to pay on the space you occupy?" in this case "the space" is freedom, freedom not just for yourself, or any one singular individual... but humanity as a whole... and "the rent" is sacrifice....

so

What sacrifice are you willing to make for the freedoms you enjoy?

or does freedom come to your doorstep to wither and die?

man up bill.... man up!!!!

# 71 Conan, Moffat

Well said.

60. Wini

"I repeat, if you care about these deaths why did you not support the war to remove Saddam, and make an example of him ?"

Because the war was illegal.

61. Stefan

The only reason I became involved with the US military law discussion is because I wanted to show that US troops were obliged to refuse any order that contravened international law. I did this.

I am not anti-American as has been claimed; I am anti-Bush and his gangsters.

62. Brute

By stopping killing, wounding and exiling millions of people in the Middle East, I didn't just mean Iraq but Afghanistan and withdrawing support for the Israeli persecution of Palestinians.

The mess should be taken over by the UN, when the perpetrators withdraw.

75. mike - across the pond

"you dont have the will to read the US constitution, or declaration of independence..."

I didn't say I hadn't, I said I didn't have to.

"What sacrifice are you willing to make for the freedoms you enjoy?"

Vigilance is the price of freedom, that is why I attack those who are trying to destroy it. Bushco is destroying the freedom of those who live in the Middle East.

54. Djookers is an Idiot, Edinburgh

At least you admit it, too bad "bill2" won't.

49 - so the invasion was about altruism and not oil ?
Aye right !

83 - and what a fine mess Bambi and Dubya left

72 - who mourns Dr David Kelly ?

83. Wini, Scots in England

Well said Wini !!!!!!!!

It's a shame complainers like bill2 are more vocal on these threads.

#55 Ok Wini the Ndebele massacre occured during the early days of his regime in 1983, long before any of the actions in the Gulf! Why wasn’t anything done then?

Saudi Arabia is one of a number of countries where courts continue to impose corporal punishment, including amputations of hands and feet for robbery, and lashings for lesser crimes.

Saudi also engages in capital punishment, including public executions by beheading and stoning. While some are also executed in private by firing squad, many executions are popular public attractions, bring along your knitting and your sweeties, freedom of speech and the press are restricted to forbid criticism of the government or endorsement of "un-Islamic" values.

Why is all this tolerated? Saudi Arabia has an oil-based economy with strong government controls over major economic activities. It possesses 25% of the world's proven petroleum reserves, ranks as the largest exporter of petroleum, and plays a leading role in OPEC.

87. PJ

The USA supported the disgusting regimes in Iraq and Saudi at this time in many ways, and Saddam was their man.

Read the whole sorry indictment of the USA here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._support_for_Iraq_during...

Thanks for the info, but I was already up to speed on Saddam’s rise to power came which CIA backing, proof in the saying you get what you pay for!

I have also read Dr. Stephen Pelletiere’s book Losing Iraq: Insurgency and Politics also his other book “Iraq and the International Oil System: Why America Went to War in the Persian Gulf” which I found very interesting, also read his article which appeared in the NY times which appeared Jan 1st 2003 entitled A War Crime Or an Act of War.

If you get a chance, give them a read!

89. PJ

Waiting to get my hand on "America's Oil Wars' which should be a good read as well.

From one of the reviews:

"Pelletiere explores the context of events that produced the attacks of September 11, 2001, the pretext for the United States' military move into the region. He debunks the Bush Administration's claim that the United States was beset by Islamic terrorists bent on destroying western civilization and set the stage for an examination of other possible motives. Next, he details the history of U.S. involvement in the region, beginning with the discovery of oil and the pioneering efforts of American and British companies to open the region to exploration. After the OPEC Revolution, he argues, the United States would allow itself to be drawn into an arms-supplying relationship with the Shah of Iran and the military-industrial complex would become hooked on subsidies from the Gulf monarchs. Finally, after discussing the First Gulf War and recent events in Afghanistan, Pelletiere contends that these conflicts and the current war in Iraq are really part of a greater struggle between North and South, a struggle that will have significant consequences for the future of the United States."

"Vigilance is the price of freedom, that is why I attack those who are trying to destroy it. Bushco is destroying the freedom of those who live in the Middle East."

you've lived in too protected a society for far far too long...

you act as if this is some kind of kindergarten playground, and if you watch the "bully"... he wont bully those who just want to go down the slide...

its a GREAT concept... unfortunately it doesnt work

Hitler....
Japan...
Milosevic...
Rwanda...
Castro
Stalin...
Hussein...
Pol Pot...
Mugabe...
Idie Amin...
need we go on?

its like saying if you watch for them vermin will not invade your home...

I think your problem is you are looking at the middleeast in the micro... individual by individual day to day... yes, you can find individuals TODAY who are not better off... but if you look at the whole, MOST of those who are in Iraq today who were in Iraq when all this started, ARE better off... they have the prospect of MORE liberties and freedoms than they ever could have hoped for under Hussein... which IS what WE are fighting for... if we just walk away, it will NOT be better for the majority, the Bolsheviks proved that a well organized fanatical minority CAN control the masses and it may take 2-3 generations of horriffic oppression to shirk that coil....

Site Saudi Arabia... as regimes go, we have ended the 2 worst in the middle east... are there others with problems... yes there are... HOW do you fix the problems you in the UK set up in the first half of the last century? just sit back and watch them.... like some ghoulish reality show in the Tele....?

it has been proposed and set into motion by Blair & Bush to try their best to get true non-secular democracies in place... we wont know for 20 or more years if this has worked... but it IS worth the sacrifices today to at least make the attempt to make

91. mike - across the pond

"MOST of those who are in Iraq today who were in Iraq when all this started, ARE better off... they have the prospect of MORE liberties and freedoms than they ever could have hoped for under Hussein"

Hold it right there; there are about a million dead, millions more disabled or in exile, and millions more who would get out if they could.

I would imagine that the average Iraqi is less interested in liberty and freedom than just getting through the day in one piece and having somewhere to live and something to eat. They are much worse off materially than they ever were under Saddam.

Whoever came up with the idea that everyone wants to live in a US-style democracy? That style of life suits those who have it, but that's no reason to go round trying to convert the rest of the world.

While I'm on the subject, I think that we in the UK are post-democratic; things went wrong when we ditched the commonwealth and threw our lot in with the EU.

#41 PJ..The house pased the bill, the Senate probably will, but the bill will be vetoed- and not overturned.
This is just another Democratic political play because they have to play to their bases and the cannot admit that things have gotten better in Iraq.
The money will go to our troops without the attachment of withdrawal...although some troops are already scheduled to leave.

bill2..the first thing the Bush Administration said after the Saddam regime was toppled...is that what is a democracy to them, may not be a democracy to us. They have their idea of how they want to live..a theocracy will creep into this. No one expects an American democracy in Iraq.. it would not work. It means bypassing too many religious ideas. The whole point is for all their relgions to work together to build a nation that will benefit all of them...not just the select few.
Please get your facts straight..these wild statements of yours are just that...wild.

As far as being better off under Saddam...you're nuts. People are now moving back to Baghdad, children are getting an education, girls are going to school without the worry of those 2 pedefile sons choosing to spend the day with them, then killing them. Businesses are reopening. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!!

94. Lynne

Just answer one question.

Why do you think we should interfere with the lives of people in the Middle East?

Something to do with getting their land and oil perhaps?

All your talk about democracy and freedom is rubbish. If you really believed in it, you wouldn't interfere with their governments or invade their countries.

"Whoever came up with the idea that everyone wants to live in a US-style democracy? That style of life suits those who have it, but that's no reason to go round trying to convert the rest of the world."

I couldnt agree more with you... and your statement affirms what I said yesterday... you lack the fortitude to make the very sacrifices required to bring "That style of life (to) those who (dont) have it". and THAT is why I wanted you to READ the preamble to the US constitution... so you might have SOME understanding of what the US is there for... it isnt oil... in the long run, NOBODY cares about oil...

YOU claim you are willing to make sacrifices then turn around ans say those sacrifices are limited to a "sit and watch".... gee I think you should pry your dead @55 off of the british isles... go to Dachau, Buchenwald, Auswitz... see what happens when the world sits and wags its finger at those who would deprive others of freedoms & liberties....

as far as your million iraqis... I've heard that number bandied about... I've also heard the number 3 million iraqis killed by that purveyor of iraqi liberties... Saddam Hussein.... I refute the assertation that you can with any degree of honesty put a million Iraqis at the feet of US forces... but you certainly CAN put the 3 million number under the picture of one of the worst despots of the 20th century... Saddam Hussein

96. mike - across the pond

"I refute the assertation that you can with any degree of honesty put a million Iraqis at the feet of US forces... but you certainly CAN put the 3 million number under the picture of one of the worst despots of the 20th century... Saddam Hussein"

The one million figure is those who have died who wouldn't have died without the invasion, certainly not all due to US forces. I would remind you that until the invasion of Kuwait, Saddam had been working with the support of the USA for thirty years.
There is also the matter of those who died ause of the sanctions

Many millions in all, simply because we interfered.

I think we can both agree that the EU is fundamentally flawed....

way back in the middle ages Europe was controlled by kings, lords, etc... in reality most were little more than slave masters... simply put, you may not have progressed to democracy... who picks your EU leaders? what powers does that leader have? what limitations does that leader have? who is that leader accountable to? and if that leader decides to rob you blind (kofi anan) what are you going to do?

correct me if I am wrong but with the EU you have a governing body that supercedes the local governments... this is backwards from how it MUST be...

unless of course you WISH to live in some "nanny state" where the "all knowing government" dictates every action in your life... (and he knows best because he is froench (or whatever))...

your commitment to "international law" is similarly flawed... are you aware that in the US, murder is not a federal crime? every state in the union has that covered... it is a STATES RIGHTS ISSUE...

I've tried (and will continue) to educate you to the concept of "states rights"... I suggest you talk to a few GIs... it will take you a little while to find one who can even tell you what the term "states rights" means... but in the end, it will be worth the search... you will find it more enlightening than you think.... you will find this person to be fiercely independent....

we dont WANT any government running our lives...

98. mike - across the pond

I am totally opposed to the EU, a disaster and we'd be much better off out of it.

As for stes rights, I know a little about the subject but will learn more. Very interesting, thanks for your suggestion.

states

Although I tend to agree with most that Iraq is, in part, about oil, I am convinced that the U.S. and it's allies view that country also as being an almost ideal strategic geopolitical location, whereas the "West" can readily garner a great deal of influence - there and throughout the rest of the Middle East. In addition, it (Iraq) provides our military with a ready made base of operations where, they can quickly and appropriately respond, as "necessary, to any conflict occuring or about to occur in that part of the world. That and the fact that, by our military being there, Iran would be hard pressed to otherwise initiate something that might inflict significant harm to it's neighbors. Lets all be honest enough in our evaluations and , in some cases, comdemnation of the West, in regards to what is truely going on in Iraq - from a more practical point of view.