MovieChat Forums > Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War (2004) Discussion > freeing iraqi's? How?

freeing iraqi's? How?

posted 20 years ago by gmnosey
19 replies | jump to latest

the whole idea beyond the fact that Americans were mislead by the you know who administration is obvious. however the reasoning that we are "freeing iraqi's" of course is another lie.you just cannot solve violent dictators like saddam hussein by using violent force against other innocent Iraqi's against them.and again why is America not 'freeing" the opressed people under the taliban in Afghanistan under Osama Bin Laden? why is the ---- administration still beating around the Bush about that? of course none of you people are seeing the full picture because the ---- administration has left so little money to fund schools to get so many people to learn how to use their useless brains into actually realizing how it's administration is screwing everyone over. hello people!

[–] jayibaugh 20 years ago

Am I crazy or did the United States of America use force to solve violent dictators durring World War II with violent force? And it seems to me that reconstruction in Iraq is moving along alot faster then it did in Germany and Japan. For those of you who forget history General Douglas McAurthur was in control of Japan right after the War. And the Unitied States government is just NOW taking troops out of Germany and Japan. So lets think about this, violent force was used to free people before in history, and violent force made them learn that they can have better. The Iraqi's have never been able to better themselves before, they will soon see that they can and that their governement is not stopping them from doing so anymore.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] only_myschly 17 years ago

1. The reason the USA went into Europe during WWII was not out of good will for our "European brethren", there were plans drawn out for how the USA would continue once Hitler had conquered Europe. They weren't planning on attacking to liberate, until the Japanese went to Pearl Harbor.

2. Machinery is much more efficient nowadays? Besides, America prepared an invasion in Iraq, they had more time than in WWII to prepare plans for the rebuilding.
All of Europe was torn to shreds after WWII, one of the few countries that could stand on their feet after the war was over was Norway, and that's because many people had fled into Sweden, were the Swedish government had trained Norwegians to policemen, drawn up plans for post-war governing etc.
There were many Europeans who opposed the American help. In France they had riots against the help from the US, that could have something to do with the slow rebuilding?

3. We cannot look back at history when it comes to the Iraq war, except maybe the Vietnam war. The thing is, the USA screwed this invasion up. They did not make any efforts to win the affection of the Iraqi people. They did not focus on community services such as securing a nuclear energy plant, which led to people breaking in, dumping nuclear waste on the ground, to use the barrels as waterbarrels, creating a mess that the Red Cross had to go down and sort out (with no assistance of the US government).

[–] Maltesefalcon64 20 years ago

Iraqi's are in the Olympics without the fear of torture upon their return home. There's the answer to your freedom question, and as for the pot shot you made at Bush for education. Bush wants to spend less money on failing schools that do not produce educated students, and put that money (and the students in the failing schools) into better schools. Your the one who is not getting the full picture.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] EricCox 20 years ago

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec98/clinton_12-16.html

Clinton's words, NOT Bush's.

Talk about "Orwellian nightmare horseshit revisionist history". You liberals just swallow whatever you're given. Whatever the Democrat party tells you to put down the memory hole, you automatically do, just like mind-numbed robots.

At the begining of the "5 minutes of hate" session, they flash up a picture of George W. Bush, and you guys wipe the drool from your mouths, and begin to scream like rabid monkeys. Except real monkeys might question why they are hating.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] square_enixUSA 20 years ago

" Iraqi's are in the Olympics without the fear of torture upon their return home. There's the answer to your freedom question, and as for the pot shot you made at Bush for education. Bush wants to spend less money on failing schools that do not produce educated students, and put that money (and the students in the failing schools) into better schools. Your the one who is not getting the full picture. "

So now bush is using Iraq for his political gain? Also Wasn't it Bush that passed the " no child behind bill"? It is the fact that he doesn't spend more money on schools that are failing, that their grades are so low. You do know that the schools that have failing grades are the ones with 30 year old books, and old desks, less tools and supplies. Why? Because Bush doesn't think they are worth it.

ken9952788 you said everything I came on here to say. Finally someone that truly sees the real picture.

Bush has divided our country in everyway possible.

[–] anyOneHomeMcFly 17 years ago

have u seen the movie for which this thread is on? Newsflash Einstein Bashen Clinton doesnt absolve Bush. Im Conservative, and think Clinton was A snake oil salesman that somehow "charmed" the dumbasses for 2 terms. He made a mess of waco, was allowing Cocaine to be flown in.

Arent u *beep* tired of this dog and pony show between rich dems at the top and rich rpubs at the top?

Jesus christ man heres a novel thought, how about whats best for America and Americans taht are paying for this unneccesaary war. I assume that u , like myself have children involved in the war effort. My boys enlisted out of a profound sense of duty, specifically fostered by these Chicken hawks and their contention that Mushroom clouds were imminent.

Why dont we , the people ever learn from the history of lies? Vietnam was 1 lie after another. Commusism must be stopped, yet we borrow from teh commie chinese? What the *beep* is goin on.

"If u had 3 wishes, what would they be. Would u change yourself or would u try and change me"

[–] jcm028 20 years ago

nothing irritates me more than someone who talks about something as if they know all about it, when in reality they know nothing about it, this person is one of them. Coalition troops did not murder more than three times the iraqi civilians than the deaths on 9-11. First of all, an innocent iraqi killed by the hand of u.s. or coalition soldiers is never ordered and is always an accident, with being in caught in the cross-fire. The American military for example conducts combat with strictly enforced "rules of engagement" we train hundreds of times practicing these rules. And the truth by statistics is that nearly 87% of all iraqi civilians were killed by insurgents and terrorist, mostly by IED's (road side bombs) or terrorist attacks such as car bombs. And even with that, more civilians were killed by saddam annually than any one today.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bonogun 20 years ago

Your thread reads as if it has a perspective with experience in combat. So, I'll give the benefit of the doubt and reply as such. Everything you've stated regarding the "Civis", I'd like to imagine them more as fellow human beings, is an argument proving this kind of combat does not work in this situation.
One has to wonder when the line for labotomies formed for everyone reponsible for our position in Iraq. Everyone old enough that is, to have remembered anything about Vietnam. Now that a REAL terorist state has been CREATED in Iraq (the "prime ministers" words stating the borders are NOT secure and terrorist groups pour in daily)The only way to effectively overcome the growing vaccum, is to pull out. And then move back in with smaller, native, respected forces who can work hand in hand with the citizens to weed out and uncover cells. Not with the "bull in the china shop" type tactics our forces conduct today. Unless fueling the growing distaste for our troops and policy is the goal.

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 20 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ckitapci 18 years ago

Perfect. Still some can think that this invasion of Iraq brought people living in there peace, led them have better condition comparing to past?
Probably your media is not mentioning to the loss of 50 people each day in Iraq now, but we are getting the news in Turkey, being their border neighboor, and guess how great majority of Turks thinking about these unfair, unmerciful things happening to the millions of innocents, and what they thing about US... Today there is no stability in the country, still. Terrorist actions are occuring each day between different ethnic groups in the country. Guess who are responsible of these situations that occur in Iraq now. The ones who claimed 'we'll bring democracy' are not stating the same big words anymore. Because it got out of control, things do not go the way they expect. It was not so easy to bring the 'democracy' to a region, which is culturally and politically very complicated. Of course they knew it, and they knew that there was not any 'nuclear' thing, and they knew about the petrol reserves of Iraq...

[–] only_myschly 17 years ago

People from the Soviet Union got to compete in the Olympics, that did not mean that people in the Soviet Union had freedom.
If you think that people in Iraq have freedom, I do not understand your view of freedom. University students are afraid to go visit their families, because they feel that it is unsafe outside the University grounds. Is that freedom?

If you take away money from failing schools, you give the administrators of the school less opportunities to improve the students interest in achieving higher grades, leading to less students getting decent grades, leading to less money for the administrators.
What happens is that people who go to public schools in poor areas receive a lesser education, and their children will grow up in a poor area filled with uneducated people.
Statistically, if you're born white in the USA, you'll have a better chance of growing up in a nice neighbourhood than if you're african-american. This means that white people will receive a better education than african-american, which is what's been going on in America for as long as history can recall. The results of which, according to history, will be racism (and all the consequences of racism).

Let's take an example:
Class A get an average of B+ grades. Class B get an average of C grades.
If you had a special teacher at your disposal, who could give more private tutoring for students in need, which class would you give it to? Class A so they may raise their average to A-, or Class B so they could raise their average to maybe B-?