Muammar Gaddafi

ren wrote:

MCSH wrote:

ren wrote: Does the leader of every invading country get executed because of the invasion? Or is it just saddam, because he failed to remove the democratic government of Iran despite all the help he was getting?

Do you know about chemical weapons he used during it's war with Iran?

Do you know who supplied those chemical weapons?
germany, france, UK, US, egypt, india, china, soviet union, others... OH DEAR. It looks like the 5 permanent members of the UN security council were among them. (yet again-- they are the largest weapons traders in the world)

When did he attack? After Khomeini alienated all of former non-democratic Iran's friends.

I don't think attacking other countries, results in being executed... I think it was just an excuse to remove him.

So... if I give you the gun to kill someone, does that decrease your guilt? I think no...

No. But everyone should be judged according to the same rules. Countries are constantly attacking other countries, and their leaders don't get killed for declaring wars. The country I currently live in has been at war with afghanistan for over 10 years, has had 3 different prime ministers during that time, and the prime minister who declared war to begin with is a "peace envoy" (to the middle east!).

Well, the difference is, another country is not monitoring your country (for getting oil, gas, etc). I hope you know what I mean...

About 80-90 years ago, Dr. Mossadegh nationalized oil for Iran, before UK had all of Iran's oil. From that time, sanctions began on Iran (that time still Reza Shah was the shah, and after him Mohammad Reza Shah became the shah, and after that revolution and Ayatollah Khomeini and then Ayatollah Khamenei became leader) and are still going on. You can tell what happened to Dr Mossadegh. The prime minister who was like a hero, in 2 months ended in a situation that couldn't walk in city, and was judged for betraying Iran...

My father is a judge, he studied international law in university and he has Ph.D in that subject. I've seen him saying a thousand times that it all depend on how you look at law. On international scale, you can get someone beheaded for some crime, or you can prove that person in not guilty...

In Iraq's case, US hanged Saddam because he was following them but stopped. Same happened to Gaddafi, or even to Reza Shah. UK found a globe in his room that had signs related to Germans attacks and etc. UK and Russia attacked Iran and got him captured and sent him to South Africa! And he was Shah of Iran. (Shah -> King/Emperor)

I'm saying, if those minister aren't judged, is just because a super power is supporting them... or perhaps they played well or they have some information that can result in having world's super power in danger... you know what I mean... US talks about freedom and how are people are equal. But somehow they and some other countries(do I need to name?) are more equal.

Sometimes it is interesting to see the resentment different people hold toward the US.

The first time I realized that the rest of the world might not like us was when I was younger watching a Robin Williams comedy special.

Warning, content contains objectionable material.


Yet what continues to baffle me is, if so many people and so many other countries dislike the US, why are people still lining up to get in; sneaking in and leaving their homeland behind? Is it really all that bad?

I will say that the post in question did seem argumentative and I read it as if you were insinuating that you were debating with fools. Which would be in violation of article 29 and could be considered as an attack on a person or a personality.

I apologise.




Especially to megamind since I think he is a nutcase

I'm saying, if those minister aren't judged, is just because a super power is supporting them... or perhaps they played well or they have some information that can result in having world's super power in danger... you know what I mean... US talks about freedom and how are people are equal. But somehow they and some other countries(do I need to name?) are more equal.

Which is exactly my point.

Yet what continues to baffle me is, if so many people and so many other countries dislike the US, why are people still lining up to get in; sneaking in and leaving their homeland behind? Is it really all that bad?

It's easy money I think. I see the foreigners here. Some of them work 7 days a week on minimum wage, stay two years, go back to pakistan to live like kings.

Wescli Wardest wrote: Sometimes it is interesting to see the resentment different people hold toward the US.

Don't get me wrong master, I never said United States or United Kingdom or any other country is bad or I hate it or...

I'm just saying in some cases, mostly related to Middle East, US and UK (and some other, but mostly these 2) interference (is it the right word?)

For you it doesn't matter that much. Why should it? But it's really a problem here. I don't want to go off topic, but how is for example our election related to those countries?

There was this program, some guy dressed like a BBC journalist, and asked people questions about the coming election. People told him things like go away spy, it's none of your business, why do you care, even an old man asked him "Why are you working for other countries? if you have problem finding job I can find one for you here, work for your own country..."

In world war I, UK and Soviet Union, had a contract, at which Iran was divided to 2 parts, the southern part was under full control of UK and northern was under control of Soviet Union. Those countries had soldiers all over Iran... you can look it up.

In Bushehr (a city in south of Iran) anything happens, from a robbery to death of a person or breaking of a ship or... anything, I mean it, they blame UK! Tell them "Did you heard about airplane crash?" They will tell you "Ah, those English man... it's all because of them, who knows what they are thinking again." Well, they somehow have the right to... I never saw it, but it is written (both by Persian and English historian) that they (UK and SU) did horrible things in Iran in WWI, and that's while Mohhammad Shah said we are not on any side. And in that situation, Iran had a lot of casualties, even more than some of those countries who were actually in war.

If people come to US, it's because they can work there perhaps, and it's not just US, many people from Turkey go to Greece for work, legal or illegal. Many people from Iraq and Afghanistan come to Iran for work,... It's because they have work, they pay good, and people go there for work....

I think I went a little off topic.

I never said United States or United Kingdom or any other country is bad or I hate it or...

I'm not referring to you in particular. There has been, what seems like more than usual, quite a bit of “anti-US statements made recently. People are free to make up their own mind and form their own opinions… doesn’t hurt or bother me! I just find it interesting.

For you it doesn't matter that much. Why should it? But it's really a problem here. I don't want to go off topic, but how is for example our election related to those countries?

For me, it doesn’t really matter, as in I do not make plans around what is happening somewhere else. Sure, I have friends all around the world and what is happening in their homes is of some interest… I do care about all of you and your well being. And it is nice to know who the next political leader of a country is going to be as this is a global society we live in. But other than that… not really.

Regarding the video, I guess I can understand how people find it funny. all countries have their clichés. I find the WW2 jokes kind of tasteless coming from people who joined the fight years later. Incidentally my grandfather was fighting in north africa and occupied libya (part of italy) long before american soldiers showed up in europe. And personally I was proud when chirac told bush to f off regarding Iraq, and still am to this day. No regrets there, there was a bit of a tantrum on the US side but it would seem it's forgotten now.

Both my Grandfathers fought in WWII. One was a P52 pilot in the Army Air Corp and the other was a Chaplin in the Army Airborne and both operated in the ETO.

The point of the video was not particularly for its comedic value. But, I to show when it was I had the realization. Sure, many people found Robin Williams funny… I think he swears a bit much but I guess he’s funny. And I guess it’s why I remembered about the Rainbow Warrior/ Greenpeace thing.

America’s involvement in WWII was not because we wanted to be there. After WWI popular American philosophy was that war was bad and we didn’t want to get involved in a war on another continent that didn’t involve us. And if Pearl Harbor wouldn’t have happened, we might have never entered the way. Some people say that Pearl Harbor was a set-up designed to get us in the war, but that is theory.

Since then America has been involved in several conflicts which were not “popular” here or abroad. And depending on whom you ask, the reason for involvement varies greatly. What id taught, or better put what I learned, was our involvement was to help others and stop the spread of evil/communism.

Every male in my family was or is in the Armed services. How people view our government’s political reasons for “poking their noses” in others business is their opinion; but, the reason we joined and volunteered was to defend our homes, freedoms and secure a prosperous future for our country. Because it is our duty as young American men to serve our country. I imagine that the same thing is true for most people that joint their countries militaries; no matter what country that happens to be.

ren wrote:

Freedom fighters operate against military target's which are otherwise oppressing them.

Can you prove to me that people are less oppressed now that they have been "freedom fighted"?

Nope, just like you cannot do the likewise - there are too many variables, it's a pointless question intended to take advantage of chaos to simplify causality for an emotional response. All any non-colonial foreign power can do is conduct operations to create a temporary state of security to allow local forces to achieve self control of their own country. What happens after that is up to them. Again, perhaps you see exploitation and I see opportunity, such as post-WW2 Japan and post-Korean War South Korea.

ren wrote:

Terrorists deliberately operate against soft non-military targets to induce terror.

Clearly people have no fear when foreign powers meddle in their country's affairs.

Meddle? Have you ever heard of the Cold War, do you know why the USA and Soviet Union were all over those places shipping in weapons and building bases!!? I know its convieniant to selectively exclude the reality of the past and carry forward tasty 'sound bytes' which twist the truth into agenda's, but its not healthy.

ren wrote: And in "freedom" wars, it's military targets that suffer the most, the fact that 10 times more civilians die than military personnel is unrelated to the war. It's the damn kids, they steal the grenades and play football with them, right?

It was worse in the past, but get's better and better as technology, training, transperancy and tactics improve. The vast majority of the deaths in Iraq were from sectarian violence which is basically internal terrorism, foreign Muslim's versus local Muslim's fuelling a Sunni v Shia civil war. Thousands of religious extremists flooded into Iraq to have a swing at the popular enemy (brainwashed into them in the aftermath of the Cold War) and quickly found it easier to kill each other instead. If it wasn't for them and the initial decision for the Iraqi Clan's to side with the foreign terrorists, Iraq would have been very much different. It was not until the Iraqi Clan's realized they had sided with the wrong people, and switched allegiance to the occupying US forces that violence was able to be controlled, thus allowing a drawdown and eventual withdrawel of US forces. It is only recently with the violence in Syria that it has spilled over again into Iraq and flared up.

ren wrote: If you believe what you say, why don't you ask iraqis if they feel more terrorized now, or before the war? Only Brits and americans think it is. Iraqis? Their country has been opened up to al-qaeda, which now carries regular terrorist attacks there. The one thing saddam did and did very well was keep the conflict between sects down. Now? it's an all-out war, and the current government seems to mostly come from one same side.

Your only taking the worst results from one side and comparing them to the best results from the other. It seems a biased and misleading position to argue. You saying the only thing Saddam did was to keep sectarian conflict down, well that might be the only thing he did that is relevant to a biased position about him... your missing all the rest, and as mentioned using the chaos of that part of the world to frame emotion against the only people who've actually tried to help them in what is a very difficult situation.

ren wrote: And war is worse than terrorism. We've all been brainwashed into thinking it's the opposite.

Your simplifying the terms again. There is a spectrum of military operations, and western military forces try to follow rules which most the other's do not. It's the very reason why they don't follow those same rules that should highlite why their is conflict in the first place, as I mentioned in my previous post.

Wescli Wardest wrote: Yet what continues to baffle me is, if so many people and so many other countries dislike the US, why are people still lining up to get in; sneaking in and leaving their homeland behind? Is it really all that bad?

Because although it might be bad, some places are still worse. Those who are sneaking in are probably for focused on the potential opportunity to feed their family and build a better life than the one they know. If your motivation is survival, would you care what the countries foreign policy or politics looks like?

Its certainly the case in South Africa. The place is a mess, and yet people still stream in through the borders from surrounding nations, because its the lesser of the two evils.