| Author |
Message |
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
 Mon Dec 04, 2006 12:05 pm Annan: Average Iraqi's life is worse now |
|
| Quote: | The level of violence in Iraq is "much worse" than that of Lebanon's civil war, outgoing U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in an interview aired Monday.
Speaking to the British Broadcasting Corp., Annan agreed that the average Iraqi's life is worse now than it was under Saddam Hussein and called the situation in the country "extremely dangerous." |
Source
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:51 pm |
|
Wonder if Bush read this? Or anything about the war?
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:43 pm |
|
Give me one reason why we should trust a word out of the mouth of Secretary-Corrupt Kofi Annan.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
teya
Commander
Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 423
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:58 pm |
|
^ Because in this case, he's telling the truth.
-------signature-------
Resume your disorder.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 7:14 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | Give me one reason why we should trust a word out of the mouth of Secretary-Corrupt Kofi Annan. |
That's just what I was thinking.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 8:28 pm |
|
Because we really haven't done much good in Iraq.
And Annan is soooo corrupt. He opposed the war in Iraq...so, he has got to be corrupt.
And corrupt or not, he is telling the truth. At least before we invaded, Car Bombs didn't go off everyday.
|
|
|
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 8:35 pm |
|
| WeAz wrote: | Because we really haven't done much good in Iraq.
And Annan is soooo corrupt. He opposed the war in Iraq...so, he has got to be corrupt.
And corrupt or not, he is telling the truth. At least before we invaded, Car Bombs didn't go off everyday. |
1. We haven't done much good in Iraq? Oh, so liberating them from a brutal, murderous dictator and giving them a chance at Democracy, as well as staying there to help them rebuild and improve, isn't much good? 
2. Oil for Food ring a bell? That's just one instance. I'm not talking about his opposition to the Iraq war - though there is evidence of corruption in that disagreement, actually.
3. Car bombs may not have gone off every day, but does that mean that life was better, overall, under Saddam? Heck no! Besides, it's only certain areas that are facing all this violence. The majority of Iraq is relatively calm.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 8:51 pm |
|
| Republican_Man wrote: | | WeAz wrote: | Because we really haven't done much good in Iraq.
And Annan is soooo corrupt. He opposed the war in Iraq...so, he has got to be corrupt.
And corrupt or not, he is telling the truth. At least before we invaded, Car Bombs didn't go off everyday. |
1. We haven't done much good in Iraq? Oh, so liberating them from a brutal, murderous dictator and giving them a chance at Democracy, as well as staying there to help them rebuild and improve, isn't much good?
2. Oil for Food ring a bell? That's just one instance. I'm not talking about his opposition to the Iraq war - though there is evidence of corruption in that disagreement, actually.
3. Car bombs may not have gone off every day, but does that mean that life was better, overall, under Saddam? Heck no! Besides, it's only certain areas that are facing all this violence. The majority of Iraq is relatively calm. |
The Majority of Iraqi's weren't persecuted by Saddam. I'm not calling him a good person, realize that.
Life was better, especially considering that they could walk around without being afraid of a sniper in buildings, or that bombs weren't going off. How about not being afraid of Shiite and Sunni militias? I'd call that better.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 8:52 pm |
|
And, the majority of Iraq is desert. All the violence is happening in certain areas. For example, nearly all major population centers.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:36 pm |
|
And....I think we can say that the Iraq war has entered a new phase. I believe the term rhymes with "Buster - Muck".
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:57 pm |
|
| WeAz wrote: | Because we really haven't done much good in Iraq.
And Annan is soooo corrupt. He opposed the war in Iraq...so, he has got to be corrupt.
And corrupt or not, he is telling the truth. At least before we invaded, Car Bombs didn't go off everyday. |
Yeah, that's it. That's why people call him corrupt. You hit the nail right on the head.
As for this topic, I do think that Kofi does have a point in the sense that Iraq isn't necessarily worse, but it's hard to say that it's better. Yes, Saddam was killing the Kurds, but now they're in danger from the Shia or Sunnis. I don't think Iraq is a complete failure, but things aren't too good over there.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:01 pm |
|
Iraq is in danger of losing whatever tiny piece of order it has now. We need a massive change in strategy, otherwise it will fail.
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:07 pm |
|
| WeAz wrote: | | Iraq is in danger of losing whatever tiny piece of order it has now. We need a massive change in strategy, otherwise it will fail. |
I don't think anyone is arguing that. Even conservatives have turned their heads when it comes to the Iraq war.
Most people, convservative and liberal alike, do not want to "stay the course".
You know, I learned about the 5 ideas for the Iraq war.
1)Rapid Withdrawal
Pull troops out in months, not years
Logic: American public no longer supports US involvement
Poll: roughly half of Americans favor getting out of Iraq �as soon as possible�
Advocate: Rep. John Murtha
Drawback: (probable) Iraq as failed state
2)Phased Withdrawal
Start reducing troops levels soon, pullout over several years
Logic: ongoing occupation is fueling terrorism and anti-Americanism; military is stretched
Advocate: Sen. Carl Levin
Problem: Strategic error to announce troops reductions while fighting
3)Partitioning
Divide Iraq into three autonomous regions, perhaps united by weak central government in Baghdad
Logic: Iraq�s borders were illogical to begin with; Kurds, Shia, and Sunni cannot coexist
Advocate: Sen. Joe Biden
Problem: Accelerated ethnic cleansing as minority groups forced to move
4)Add Troops & Stay
Add something like 60,000 troops
Logic: by the book counterinsurgency � provide security and economic stability along with campaign to win hearts & minds
Advocate: Sen. John McCain
Problem: Military needs more people; recruiting, training would take too long to help in Iraq
5)Benchmarks for Iraqis
Establish goals that would allow American troops to begin leaving the country
Logic: similar to phased withdrawal, but deadlines are based on events, not dates
Advocate: Pres. Bush
Problem: Incredible promises, perfect foresight
6)And of course, the status quo
"Stay the course"
Those are essentially our options.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:09 pm |
|
Number 4 is really the only one that will stabilize the country, but I don't see the population supporting that.
|
|
|
Founder
Dominion Leader
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 12755
Location: Gamma Quadrant
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:13 pm |
|
| WeAz wrote: | | Number 4 is really the only one that will stabilize the country, but I don't see the population supporting that. |
Yeah, true.
At this point, I support rapid withdrawal. Not because I think the war is wrong, but that I see no good coming in the future. Perhaps Annan is talking about that. How things will just continue to deteriorate.
|
|
|
Lord Borg
Fleet Admiral
Joined: 27 May 2003
Posts: 11214
Location: Vulcan Capital City, Vulcan
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:18 pm |
|
Weaz, you are right, number four looks good, but people will not support it. I find it amazing that people agree Saddam needed to be taken care of, but the only course of action they wanted was talking...right.
Number one is what people want, it's quite clear its what people want, but that wouldn't really work as Iraq just goes to hell and we're right back in there.
Number two looks decent, but the announcment of a phased withdrawl will cause problems as the focus on the lesser occupied areas will be fighting...more troops hurt.
three? I dont know, it just looks like trouble to, although if it divided up the warring factions. However, what if somoene decides they want to expand?
Five looks good to, because this can make sure certain things can get done (Just as training and the like) where it can be turned over to the Iraqies, and still be taken care of in a...wierd manner...
six? No, I agree that this was the only way to get Saddam, but staying the course will tear this country apart (Though lets face it, its not just iraq people are fighting over atm)
I think I'd go for number five if I had to choose RIGHT NOW. However, the phased withdrawl looks like it could work if done right. Number one is just asking for trouble, so is four and six.
-------signature-------
When you cried I'd wipe away all of your tears
When you'd scream I'd fight away all of your fears
And I held your hand through all of these years
But you still have
All of me
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 10:25 pm |
|
I think people are too caught up with what we are going to accomplish, and not how we do it.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:41 pm |
|
I don't think anyone knows how to accomplish it, at least not without abandoning the hope of setting up a democratic government. I think we could accomplish alot more by being more forceful and authoritarian...but that's part of what we went end there to end.
As for me, I am for setting certain dates, and beginning phased withdrawal.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:50 pm |
|
But what happens if we don't meet those dates. Which I think is very likely.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Mon Dec 04, 2006 11:54 pm |
|
| WeAz wrote: | | But what happens if we don't meet those dates. Which I think is very likely. |
I mean set dates that say, "By X Day, we will have Y amount of troops out, regardless of what the situation is. All troops must be out in 2 years."
That is more of what I meant. 
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:06 am |
|
Ok, that works. But, we will get people saying thats a less radical way of 'cut and run'.
But those people are all the stay the course people anyway.
|
|
|
Puck
The Texan
Joined: 05 Jan 2004
Posts: 5596
|
| Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:08 am |
|
I would have said stay the course a year or two ago, but it seems increasingly clear that staying is very unlikely to help. A part of me still thinks we should stay until they become stable, but unfortunately that doesn't seem very realistic anymore.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:52 am |
|
I agree with you on both parts. When we first went in, and found no WMD's, my thinking was, "Oh well, we're already here, lets help them out". But now, that seems unrealistic.
|
|
|
webtaz99
Commodore
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 1229
Location: The Other Side
|
| Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:06 am |
|
The crucial difference we have made in Iraq is that now the Iraqi people have a chance to choose their own destiny. That's a thing called freedom, and they haven't had it in decades, until we gave it to them.
Allowing their country to slip into sectarian violence shows that they don't value this gift. If they had stepped up and taken responsibility for security in their own country, we could have the infrastructure repaired and the economy restored by now.
-------signature-------
"History is made at night! Character is who you are in the dark." (Lord John Whorfin)
|
|
|
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
