Don’t be silly Ted. They brought democracy to Iraq and secured the oil fields.

But the people are “free” and have “democracy”

The IBC is by far the most conservative death count… The Lancet Magazine used the method to count how many Jews were killed by Hitler and they get a figure of 1million+….

So lets talk real figures or say only a fraction of the 6 million Jews died in WWII….

The IBC claims it needs two verifiable sources to claim a death… In a lot of cases there was none… We are talking about a culture which buries there death within 24 hours…

Murderers

Kill em all and let god sort them out!!

I heard the russians are putting the figure at 1.6 million!

Obviously, Hussein bragging to everyone that would listen, along with satellite and other reconnaissance photography of possible WMD manufacturing sites isn’t proof positive, but…. That’s why there was supposition about W’sMD in Iraq. Like I originally stated, the United States going in to secure oil or poppy fields AND taking out Hussein who in a ten year period killed (approx.) twice as many civilians was a good thing. True, it would have been better if less civilians died, but the United States put themselves in a bad spot. If they wouldn’t have taken out Hussein, everyone would be complaining. They take out Hussein and everyone’s complaining. Should have just left him alone to subjugate and kill his own people. I bet those Iraqis would have been happy…(sarcasm)

I don’t remember voting for Sunnis to blow up Shi’ites in a market. Did you vote for that?

People blame Bush and Blair for the war. But they acted on the info they were given at the time. We know now that the Intel was completely wrong but it was their advisors that fed them the bogey Intel. They knew that Saddam had used chemical weapons previously and that he had tried to get his hands on nuclear material. And that he had started two wars with is neighbours (Iran and Kuwait). So it wouldn’t have taken a great leap of faith to believe that he had stockpiles of either.

I don’t disagree with that, Mick, but there was at the very least a determined effort to over egg the pudding. Makes you wonder if they really believed that there were WMD.

Emily when the battle was over and they were shown that there was no WMD they politically couldn’t go “Oops sorry about that”. The deed was done and they had to stand over their decisions.

They over egged it before a shot was fired. That dossier with the 45 minute attack claim? No one believed that, least of all the supposed authors.

Drone strikes ??? Under which international law does this operate ? Ok Usa said they are at war with thier former friends (Bin Laden) and mujadin. Now supposing Magie Thatcher who was also at war with Irish freedom fighters decided to attack certain areas in north Dublin or south Dundalk taking into consideration the obvios deathts of countles civilians (Your and my children) with the argument: this is a tragedy ‘ but it may????? save the lives of some people in London and Birmingham (sometime)

War in iraq was wrong mick because im old enough to remember hans blix pleadinh for more time ssying tgey eere given full access and found nothing.

Those who made that bogey Intel. Ebere are they? Who are they?

I agree saddam was evil so were his sons. But there was a degree of order. Now if the USA and UK wanna twke the moral high ground as reason for war wwll the people of North korea suffer worse. Parts of Africa suffer more why are tgey not liberating there? Id be all for that but no oil

Padraic you seem very knowledgable about heroin smuggling routes. Some we should know umm?

And the people of Libya fought so hard against “the Foreign Invaders” because they loved Gaddafi so much!!!
B.Lowe you can stop flogging that horse now. It’s. Well and truly dead at this stage. Saddam was hated by his own people as was Gaddafi and so are the Assad’s and the Mullahs in Iran.

The invasion of Iraq was necessary for the liberation of the Iraqi people, who had lived under the rule of Saddam Hussein for so many years. If the U.S. and U.K. had not intervened the people would continue to be oppressed.

Saddam Hussein was one of the most evil men in modern times, in 1988 Saddam started the Anfal campaign against the Kurdish people, boys from 13 to 18 and any man aged up to 70 were executed and the remaining men, women and children where sent to relocation camps and lived in the most horrid of conditions. His chemical weapons caused devastation to the village of Halabja where 5000 innocent people suffered terrible afflictions and eventually died from the effects of nerve agents and mustard gas, people who live today from these areas are blind, have birth defects and cancer among other problems.

As his troops were ran out of Kuwait they were ordered to open the oil pipelines which caused a huge environmental disaster. His attack on the Marsh Arabs also brought more terror to those he opposed, in 2002 satellite images showed that only 7 to 10 percent of the Marshlands were left due to Saddam’s campaign to exterminate the people of this area. The attack on these lands is one of the worst acts of environmental terrorism in history.

Throughout his rule Iraq was a concentration camp above ground and a mass grave beneath ground, people suffered constantly and by not invading they would certainly continued to have done so as his two sons where just as maniacal as he was, so yes the invasion was the right thing to do, there is no other valid alternative that could have been chosen to help the people of Iraq, I am no fan of George W. Bush or Tony Blair, yet this was the most effective ways of getting rid of one of the worlds worst tyrants.

So when we hear people moan and complain about supposed war crimes by the invading forces, they don’t have a damn clue what they are talking about, if the people who were against the invasion lived in Iraq prior to the war, I’m sure that their opinion would be different.

Fair enough, I’m just saying that’s a lot of dead civilians.

Please read info from other media outside of fox news etc. My comments from a few weeks ago
Is that your real name or are you hiding?
• Padraic O’Dwyer 10 hours ago #
Report this comment 27 13
Truth is and remains that the USA invaded Irak illigaly.Fact, Sadam Husein a long time freind of USA with billions of dollars support to make him the man (maniac) he became They even gave him the ingredients for Chemical weapons and gave him satilite pictures of civilian targets to attack in Iran (all to read in wikipedea).untill he nationalized his oil and gas reserves and then made the biggest mistake in his life ,to try to rally some oil producing countries behind him to trade his and their oil and gas on the world market in EUR. This woud have been very good for the EUR bec every barrell of oil that is sold on the world market at the moment, a big percentage goes automaticly back into the USA exchequer, This was the reason that Germany and France did not partake in this War . It would have been very good for europe, Result : USA used an old colonial trick of GB “devide and rule” which provicated a civil war between sunnits and Shihits.Result by latest UN statisticts :at least 300,000 civilian deathts, and a country totaly KAPUT. So Who is to blame ?
Wikepedia:From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Iraqgate” redirects here. For other uses, see Iraqgate (disambiguation).
Saddam Hussein donated large sums to various institutions in his campaign to curry favour with the United States. He was made an honorary citizen of Detroit in 1980.[1][2]United States support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War, against post-revolutionary Iran, included several billion dollars worth of economic aid, the sale of dual-use technology, non-U.S. origin weaponry, military intelligence, Special Operations training, and direct involvement in warfare against Iran.[3][4]
Support from the U.S. for Iraq was not a secret and was frequently discussed in open session of the Senate and House of Representatives. On June 9, 1992, Ted Koppel reported on ABC’s Nightline, “It is becoming increasingly clear that George Bush, operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980s, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam’s Iraq into the power it became”,[5] and “Reagan/Bush administrations permitted—and frequently encouraged—the flow of money, agricultural credits, dual-use technology, chemicals, and weapons to Iraq.”[6]
As Iraq-Kuwait relations rapidly deteriorated, Saddam was receiving conflicting information about how the U.S. would respond to the prospects of an invasion. For one, Washington had been taking measures to cultivate a constructive relationship with Iraq for roughly a decade. The Reagan administration gave Saddam roughly $40 billion in aid in the 1980s to fight Iran, nearly all of it on credit. The U.S. also gave Saddam billions of dollars to keep him from forming a strong alliance with the Soviets.[63] Saddam’s Iraq became “the third-largest recipient of U.S. assistance”.[64]
U.S. ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie met with Saddam in an emergency meeting on 25 July 1990, where the Iraqi leader stated his intention to give negotiations only… one more brief chance before forcing Iraq’s claims on Kuwait.[65] U.S. officials attempted to maintain a conciliatory line with Iraq, indicating that while George H. W. Bush and James Baker did not want force used, they would not take any position on the Iraq–Kuwait boundary dispute and did not want to become involved.[66] Whatever Glaspie did or did not say in her interview with Saddam, the Iraqis assumed that the United States had invested too much in building relations with Iraq over the 1980s to sacrifice them for Kuwait.[67]
Iraq quickly found itself bogged down in one of the longest and most destructive wars of attrition of the 20th century. During the war, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranian forces fighting on the southern front and Kurdish separatists who were attempting to open up a northern front in Iraq with the help of Iran. These chemical weapons were developed by Iraq from materials and technology supplied primarily by West German companies as well as [56] the Reagan administration of the United States which also supplied Iraq with “satellite photos showing Iranian deployments”[57] and advised Hussein to bomb civilian targets in Tehran and other Iranian cities.[58] In a US bid to open full diplomatic relations with Iraq, the country was removed from the US list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. Ostensibly, this was because of improvement in the regime’s record, although former United States Assistant Secretary of Defense Noel Koch later stated, “No one had any doubts about [the Iraqis'] continued involvement in terrorism… The real reason was to help them succeed in the war against Iran.”[59] France sold 25 billion dollars worth arms to Saddam.[49]
Wikepedia:From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
“Iraqgate” redirects here. For other uses, see Iraqgate (disambiguation).
Saddam Hussein donated large sums to various institutions in his campaign to curry favour with the United States. He was made an honorary citizen of Detroit in 1980.[1][2]United States support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq War, against post-revolutionary Iran, included several billion dollars worth of economic aid, the sale of dual-use technology, non-U.S. origin weaponry, military intelligence, Special Operations training, and direct involvement in warfare against Iran.[3][4]
Support from the U.S. for Iraq was not a secret and was frequently discussed in open session of the Senate and House of Representatives. On June 9, 1992, Ted Koppel reported on ABC’s Nightline, “It is becoming increasingly clear that George Bush, operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980s, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam’s Iraq into the power it became”,[5] and “Reagan/Bush administrations permitted—and frequently encouraged—the flow of money, agricultural credits, dual-use technology, chemicals, and weapons to Iraq.”[6]
As Iraq-Kuwait relations rapidly deteriorated, Saddam was receiving conflicting information about how the U.S. would respond to the prospects of an invasion. For one, Washington had been taking measures to cultivate a constructive relationship with Iraq for roughly a decade. The Reagan administration gave Saddam roughly $40 billion in aid in the 1980s to fight Iran, nearly all of it on credit. The U.S. also gave Saddam billions of dollars to keep him from forming a strong alliance with the Soviets.[63] Saddam’s Iraq became “the third-largest recipient of U.S. assistance”.[64]
U.S. ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie met with Saddam in an emergency meeting on 25 July 1990, where the Iraqi leader stated his intention to give negotiations only… one more brief chance before forcing Iraq’s claims on Kuwait.[65] U.S. officials attempted to maintain a conciliatory line with Iraq, indicating that while George H. W. Bush and James Baker did not want force used, they would not take any position on the Iraq–Kuwait boundary dispute and did not want to become involved.[66] Whatever Glaspie did or did not say in her interview with Saddam, the Iraqis assumed that the United States had invested too much in building relations with Iraq over the 1980s to sacrifice them for Kuwait.[67]
Iraq quickly found itself bogged down in one of the longest and most destructive wars of attrition of the 20th century. During the war, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iranian forces fighting on the southern front and Kurdish separatists who were attempting to open up a northern front in Iraq with the help of Iran. These chemical weapons were developed by Iraq from materials and technology supplied primarily by West German companies as well as [56] the Reagan administration of the United States which also supplied Iraq with “satellite photos showing Iranian deployments”[57] and advised Hussein to bomb civilian targets in Tehran and other Iranian cities.[58] In a US bid to open full diplomatic relations with Iraq, the country was removed from the US list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. Ostensibly, this was because of improvement in the regime’s record, although former United States Assistant Secretary of Defense Noel Koch later stated, “No one had any doubts about [the Iraqis'] continued involvement in terrorism… The real reason was to help them succeed in the war against Iran.”[59] France sold 25 billion dollars worth arms to Saddam.[49]

Green thumbs for the longest ever comment

Most of it is copy paste

@Padraic

I tried to print your comment off but ran outta paper!

I can , and do understand a lot of red thumbs. Truth is sometimes shocking.

Padraic, I gave you a red thumb for spelling mistakes. Wish I could give you more.

you dont have any idea what horrers exist in Iraq today after the old British tradition of devide and rule Black water gave both sides Guns

Liam, how niave you are. You should look at the history of Iraq in the 80′s. America armed Saddam to the teeth in return for oil. He was the darling of Washington in those days. Also, look up the Contra Scandal… But you probably won’t. Keep watching Fox News !! Xx

They are not fighting for anyone’s freedom. Do you think America would have invaded Iraq if their main export was broccoli?

Iraq is up there as one of the largest exporters of broccoli in the world, epic fail for you!!

And America is the largest exporter of terror in the world. If they want to fight for freedom, why don’t they invade Syria where hundreds are being murdered by their own government? Better yet, why don’t they invade North Korea who is bigger treat to the western world that all of the other countries put together?

You really are clueless John, you’ve obviously started the Paddys day celebrations early!!

Ah, sarcasim – the lowest form of wit !

Obviously Mr Broccoli.

John – if they wanted the oil why didn’t they invade Iraq after the first gulf war?
Genuine question.

The US probably wouldn’t have gone in for broccoli, but, that isn’t the point. Who gives a shit if oil WAS the main motivator, Hussein needed to go. Period.

These soldiers ( They are not at fault) are guarding poppy fields that are killing thousands of american and european citizens
The Golden Crescent Drug Trade
America’s covert war, namely its support to the Mujahideen “Freedom fighters” (aka Al Qaeda) was also geared towards the development of the Golden Crescent trade in opiates, which was used by US intelligence to fund the insurgency directed against the Soviets.1
Instated at the outset of the Soviet-Afghan war and protected by the CIA, the drug trade developed over the years into a highly lucrative multibillion undertaking. It was the cornerstone of America’s covert war in the 1980s. Today, under US-NATO military occupation, the drug trade generates cash earnings in Western markets in excess of $200 billion dollars a year. (See Michel Chossudovsky, America’s War on Terrorism, Global Research, Montreal, 2005, see also Michel Chossudovsky, Heroin is “Good for Your Health”: Occupation Forces support Afghan Narcotics Trade, Global Research, April 29, 2007)

Some people really buy into the whole Michael Moore documentaries

Because , John, If they did people like you would castigate them for being ‘imperialists’.

That is a good point, padraic. There Is a difference, though, between the people dying from heroin and the people who died at the hands of Hussein… Choice. Heroin users choose to kill themselves.

John, if the US did invade North Korea or Syria don’t you think that civilians would die as well. May I add that you would still be critical of the US and telling us that the US should have invaded someplace else.

@ Declan noonan I feel really sorry for these soldiers in Afghanistan that die to protect USA intrests there.(Mafia)
Sorry for my spelling. I speak 6 languages fluently, and sometimes mix them up

The opium wars back up padraic from a historical perspective – just commenting – make up your own minds !

No oil in Syria or N Korea, but Iraq and Libya are swimming in the stuff. And they wonder why the Iranians are trying to build a nuke.

@the person called Jay
With respect, your argument (which you’re probably repeating after hearing someone else say it) is bollox – Syria’s oil production is give or take the same as Libya’s.

Syria oil reserves is no where near that of Libya actually, I think your the one that’s talking bollox and needs to check his facts. And don’t assume that just because someone disagrees with u they are only repeating what they heard from somewhere else and therefore must be wrong.

Because they did not need to. Donald met Saddam and made a deal. Saddam was Bush seniors new buddy and was doing as he was told in turn for weapons. Saddam got to big for his boots and was more of a problem than worth to the US. Its as simple as.

Not a war. An invasion

Grow up and be honest ? UN statistics 300.000 civilian dead Women and children ? If that was your child ??? Your mother ??? Today a total kaput country Fact. and only for the american and BP oil companies . Just imagine for one minute that your children were being killed for this oil ???

As I asked above Padraic, if the Americans were really only in it for the oil why did they stop at the Iraqi border in the first gulf war instead of invading then?

Re Mattoid.
Possibly they wanted a scenario to try out new weapons.
Saddams Guard were wiped out in a single night at Baghdad Airport. It is speculated the Americans used a new type of nuclear weapon on these elite soldiers who were all killed in their trenches in an instant from beams being targeted on them.
Now is that way out there or what!

Padraic, are you aware that the Kurds have control over their oil?

Padraig have you been to Iraq? This country has a lot more than it did before. I agree the civilian numbers you quoted are more accurate. The violence however was mainly muslim on muslim violence. Muslims blowing up mosques because it was the wrong type of Islam. The US was also guilty of not handling the aftermath of the war properly but if you stay away from mainstream media sorces you will see progress being made there. Its far from easy to solve the issues of Iraq but at least a start has been made. We now know the al queda was in Iraq before the US lead invasion. I do feel the wmd story was a mess but saddam is gone & he was a danger in the region.

Mjhint, that is bollocks.

@BLowe
1) “it is speculated…”
By who? You and your mates? An anonymous blogger? Or a bona fide source? (in which case please share it).

2) The obvious question remains, after they had wiped out Saddams guards with their top secret ‘nuclear cosmic ray gun’ thingy, why didn’t the Americans invade Iraq if their only intention was to take the oil?

@ Declan noonan I am very aware of this, which is leading to a much greater regional conflict. Asperations for Kurdish people who live in Iran, Syria Turkey etc to form thier own state.

Satan? Seriously, WTF?