Guest neo Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 I have no idea what Saddam Hussein's overall strategy is, but if you were a leader facing an overwhelming force invading your country, what would you do? If it were me, I would tell some of my troops to put up token resistance, while getting the majority of the people loyal to me to melt away into the general populace. The invading force will initially overrun the country, but be unable to secure it. They will face endless years of guerrilla warfare if they stay, and evermore resistance from the public at home and internationally as the casualties continue. I'm told there's a assault rifle and an RPG for every man woman and child in Iraq. It's my sad prediction that once the U.S. takes over Iraq, their problems are just beginning. neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Apparently Wal-Mart has decided to end gun and ammunition sales in the US in certain stores. Go rent "Bowling for Columbine" at Blockbuster. And you think Iraq has problems!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicoChico Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 You are the master of sad predictions aren't you? After you run for president you can sort it all out...geez! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest leftbase Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 "BFC", absolutely shocking, recommend to anyone wanting some insight to US gun control issues... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 When you look at the weaponry in that country, and the new eveidence of how the Hussein regime has tortured and murdered his own people it makes me feel extremely grateful to the Yanks, the Brits and the Aussies that they have taken this action now, rather than waiting for someone else to deal with it in the future. Greg Robinson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest floatrr Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Imagine living in a country with a vicious dictator as leader. At least every man woman and child has some defence against their government. Ha , I wonder how much a gun registry there (Iraq) would diminish violent crimes. All they have to do is look to Canada for that answer. Statistically most violent crimes are committed with a knife in Canada. A knife registry? What a great idea for the feds to run with next. If I were a criminal I would make sure I registered my weapon before I committed any violent act with it. (tongue firmly in cheek). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 "Imagine living in a country with a vicious dictator as leader." CANADA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Neo Saddam is a historical footnote at this time. Anyone loyal to him will get the Musselini(sp) treatment at the hand of the previously oppressed "general populace". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Just opening up a topic for debate, Rick. Feel free to ignore my posts if they make you unhappy. Richard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChicoChico Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Likewise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 In a simple, cause and effect world I'm sure you'd have a point. But for better or worse, the world is neither simple nor are consequences easy to predict. Saddam has many people who are loyal to him and his regime. If they lay down their weapons now and pretend to be subdued for the time being, what is the U.S. going to do? Let the rest of the Iraqi's massacre them, even assuming they would? Not exactly getting off to a good start on the road to a democracy, is it? I suggest that you cannot impose democracy on a people. It's futile. Democracy is a cultural and social attainment, not something you pull off a shelf and give to someone. Events in Africa have proven that maxim time and again. As western colonial nations pulled out they left fledgling democracies in their wakes. How many of them still exist? South Africa is the corollary to this truism: the people there fought for democracy internally. They didn't have it imposed by an outside force. The U.S. and its allies in Iraq will indeed get a regime change. In fact, that's precisely what they're likely to get: a new regime. The chances of a persistent democracy being created in Iraq seem very small to me. neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest regional for life Posted April 6, 2003 Share Posted April 6, 2003 If that's the case than it's only the beginning for the Iraqi citizens aswell. A pro-longed battle will leave the Iraqi citizens with no infrastructure because the US will not start re-building it until it's safe to do so. They obviously have the oil reserves to benefit the citizens. However, these citizens won't see any benefits while these cowards hide in bushes preventing coalition forces from restroring government and order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted April 6, 2003 Share Posted April 6, 2003 You may be right Neo but freedom is precious and it is at least important to try. Besides that, anything that they get will be better than what they have now, and less of a threat to world security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted April 6, 2003 Share Posted April 6, 2003 Hi Greg, It's my most fervent wish that the people of Iraq are indeed better off in the future. As it is, I find the reports of casualties among the civilians and combatants alike to be almost unbearable. If I couldn't hope that better things were coming for them, the despair would be too much. The counter-balance to that hope is the realization that deposing an entrenched dictatorship, and imposing democracy on a non-western society that's never had it before, is not exactly a proven way to go. On the contrary, based on the historical record, there's every reason to think that there will be enormous obstacles to overcome, the kind that requires generations of commitment from those who are trying to bring about the change. Is that the kind of commitment the U.S, Britain, and Australia are prepared to provide? Or will it be the usual, quick and dirty overthrowing of the despot they don't like, and then abandoning the Iraqi people to their fate at the hands of whichever despot arises in his place. We shall see. neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest GDR Posted April 6, 2003 Share Posted April 6, 2003 There is no doubt in my mind, that the number of Iraqi civilians killed during this war will be a far less than the number that would have died at the hands of Hussein and his henchman in any given year had that regime been allowed to continue. There is also no doubt in my mind that Hussein would have, and has been, aiding and abetting the terrorists that would put thousands of western lives at risk. IMHO we owe a great debt to the Americans and Brits that have sacrificed their own on the behalf of people like you and me. Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest regional for life Posted April 6, 2003 Share Posted April 6, 2003 The US hasn't left Afganistan yet. Sure they're still hunting bin laden but they've overthrown the Taliban and have stuck around. I'm more optimistic neo than you are that the coalition effort will lead to better things for the Iraqi people. Like it or not oil is liquid gold and if this resource is managed properly, the Iraqi's will prosper without having to look over their shoulder for fear of Saddam's henchmen. It's a cost/benefit operation and the benefits far out weigh the costs IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEFCON Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 What is democracy? Is our system fairly demonstrative of the concept? Is the american republic a better example? Democracy is amongst other things an expression of the freedom of the people. Sadly as is evidenced in voter turn out we have taken an apathetic approach to our own freedom. Consequently we now produce our own thugish dictators and government bodies in which corruption runs deep. A benevolent dictator leading the new Iraq with some sort of elected gov below may be the better answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest soarcerer Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 Greg, like you, I feel that it is a necessary evil, but we must support the removal of this regime by whatever means. Incredibly, the rate of killing in Iraq has already been reduced since the war began some 2 weeks ago. On average, Saddam killed 2,167 people per day since he took power! No one in the world has killed more Arabs and Islamic people than Saddam Hussein. M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 Saddam Hussein is a war-mongering despot, and has been in power for about 28 years. 28years x 365 days/year x 2,167 people = 22,146,740 people. According to the 2002 Microsoft Online Encyclopedia, "The population of Iraq (2002 estimate) is 24,001,816." There's no doubt that Saddam Hussein has many deaths to answer for, just as do many leaders of a good many other countries. Just the same, the figure you mention doesn't seem plausible. Would you like to tell us where you're getting that information from? neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest soarcerer Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 I should have done the math myself. Obviously there is a slipped decimal point in there. I went back to check my source (our regional newspaper) and there it is as I quoted. Let me send the editor an email and I'll post a correction as soon as I hear back from him. I will query his sources. (P.S. I should not post anything after I return from a long o'seas pairing. I guess that's why we have duty days. ....duh!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neo Posted April 7, 2003 Share Posted April 7, 2003 No problem, soarcerer. You quoted the source accurately, it's the newspaper that flubbed the statistic. I've heard (but don't know the 'official' toll) that the Iran-Iraq war had a million casualties. I wouldn't be at all surprised if that figure is inaccurate, nor would I be surprised if some of the other statistics around Mr. Hussein are inaccurate. There's no doubt he's a war-mongering despot and responsible for a large numer of lives, but I notice a strong inclination on the part of the government and media to make our enemies seem as bad as possible, perhaps to make what we do seem as justifiable as possible. Possibly the statistic you quoted was an example of that. Best wishes, neo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.