Libya got bombed because they were sponsoring terrorism. Read up on Lockerbie, there is a pretty good case for for Gaddafi being behind it. After he had a 500 pound bomb dropped on the tent he was supposed to be in he started backing off his support of terrorism. He didn't have too bad an economy and Libya was better off than most other African, unfortunately a good part of his assets came from sponsoring terrorism
Politics, Politics, Politics
- Thread starter falcondfw69
- Start date
PwettyPony
Female
Yea I heard about that long ago, but wasnt there the theory that it was made in retaliation for bombing Tripoli and Benghazi? And iirc one of his sons kept saying that the admission of Gaddafi was only to get the sanctions against his countries lifted faster.
Either way, that was like back in 1986 was it not? Im pretty sure the US killed far more innocent people in the meantime, lets not forget the WMD lie by bush or Cambodia in the 60's.
Both countries, a lot of countries have the ******* of innocents on their hands(I used US cause the US is a big player in all this, not cause "the evil US")
And Im actually very skeptical when it comes to western media saying who did what, they(and the US gvt) repeatidly said that Syria did gas attacks on their own people when the UN has confirmed everytime that this was not the case.
Or take Ukraine, big drumroll about Russia apparently invading Ukraine, last January the Super mega great general of the French military said there was never any sign of russian invasion and that infact all the information about that was pipe-fed to the NATO by the US(who also paid a lot of money to the current PM of Ukraine).
Which is what brings me back to Lybia but also to Syria, why would the NATO and the US bomb things that have nothing to do with Military, in Lybia it was the manmade rivers trough the african desert. There is 0 reason to do that.
In Syria the US is bombing oil factories and other things while it is reported that ISIS has barely any members in their group to properly work them.(Excuse me if Im wrong by this, but this was the state of things when the US started bombing ISIS in Syria, (which is still an act of war against Syria btw))
I honestly dont wanna go all conspiracy in here, especially since I dont know why Syria would be a target(see false gas allegations)
But Lybias timing was just too perfect. Gold Dinar being why, the gold dinar would have uplifted africa a lot, and it was Gaddafis Idea and the gold dinar was already done afaik, it just had to get distributed.
However Im more and more starting to believe the idea that the US is doing all that to keep africa on the low and make sure it can be continuously exploited(I think? Wouldnt mind getting proven wrong, I dont know a lot about africa)
Just like Germany was exploited after world war 1.
I actually read that the rapper Akon is trying to build a power facility in Africa to give energy away for free to the african people. I really wanna know how that will pan out.
The alleged WMD lie by Bush seems to be more myth than reality. The only direct reference that I have found was prior to his first term election he was asked what he would do if Saddam had WMD, his reply was that he would "take him out". Possibly he made other references but I haven't found any, if you have any specific dates I would definitely be interested. However there were several resolutions by the United nations between the first and second Gulf war that made reference WMD including chemical, biological, and nuclear. From what I have found all the WMD claims came from the United Nations. If Saddam had complied with the resolutions the second Gulf war would not have happened.
Last edited:
Russia does seem to be occupying Crimea which ia part if the Ukraine. I agree that the media isn't very reliable, which is why I tap into sources like the BBC, Kav Kaz and a few others
PwettyPony
Female
Actually rarer to find than I thought.
"Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks, to build and keep weapons of mass destruction"
Thats from the state of the Union address on the 28th january of 2003
But you were mostly right, it was mostly Rumsfeld and Cheney spreading the lies. But since bush worked with them and didnt correct the things they said(since Cheney was Vice-President and Rumsfeld SoD) and it was also his government, Im refusing to say that it wasnt his fault because after all he was the president and in charge.
"We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad."
-Donald Rumsfeld March 30, 2003
Is a very straight forward allegation too, something Bush should have denied if there was no proof.
Either way, it was only mentioned to showcase that a lot of civilians died by the US' hands too
One of the things that often gets minimized is the history books is the civilian toll. Another fact that often gets minimized is that the winners write the history books. I know of more than one student when they got to the university discovered a very different history than they learned in grade school and high school.
A lot of the belief that WMD existed came from Saddam himself. Turned out he was bluffing. He did succeed is scaring enough of the powers that be that he ended up swinging at the end of a rope.
One thing a lot of people really don't understand is how easy it is to build a pure fission device. Pure fission devices up to around a megaton are feasible but with the larger fission devices get containment of the material long enough for the chain reaction to carry out gets more difficult. The real hurdle to building an atomic bomb is having enough gas centrifuges to separate the isotopes. Most uranium is an isotopes that doesn't fission well, the fissionable isotope needs to be separated from the non fissionable isotope. That is what enrichment is. Once you have a certain quantity of the correct isotope all you have to do is bring it together to form a critical mass and a nuclear blast happens.
The Hiroshima bomb was very primitive and quite simple. It yielded around 15 kilotons. (There has been some debate on the yield 15KT seems to be the most accepted but I have read as low as 10.4KT) The construction skills required would be in the realm of capability of a good high school level Industrial arts student.
Given the actual skill required to build a workable bomb if I had been President I would have been concerned. If your intended target was reachable by land a bomb could be loaded into a car and driven to target. You wouldn't need bombers or missiles
Everyone needs to remember that Iran currently has a lot of gas centrifuges spinning away enriching fissionable material. Only for peaceful purposes according to them
D
Daphne&D
Guest
So the finding of a multitude of Rockets, artillery, normal drums that were found and documented didn't constitute WMD?. Even when they were filled with Sarin, Mustard gas?????
D
Daphne&D
Guest
''And Im actually very skeptical when it comes to western media saying who did what, they(and the US gvt) repeatidly said that Syria did gas attacks on their own people when the UN has confirmed everytime that this was not the case.''
UN report affirms nerve gas used in Syria, fueling demands for accountability
UN weapons inspectors reported finding 'clear and convincing evidence' that the nerve gas sarin was used in Syria. UN chief Ban Ki-moon and rights groups say those responsible must be punished. published 2013 by the UN.
11:16 AM - 12 Jun 2014 As for the Ukraine. I guess seeing as Ras-putin himself admitted some 3000 to 5000 Russian troops on holiday were and still are in the Ukraine isn't an invasion or the fact the UN stated that Russian troops on holiday is a violation of the UN charter. Russian T-64b tanks were spotted in the Ukraine at 11:16 12th june 2014. Video was uploaded onto youtube. Before you say its Ukrainian...The Ukraine military doesn't use T64b.
Add to that the fact that RT news has shown live on air tanks they claimed were rebel tanks, but they were wearing marking of the the Russian army. Take oct 2014 2 T-72BM's were knocked out by the Ukraine military. Guess what
the T-72BM's is exclusivily used by Russia. It wasnever exported.
Seems you being skeptical isn't based on anything other than mis-information.
UN report affirms nerve gas used in Syria, fueling demands for accountability
UN weapons inspectors reported finding 'clear and convincing evidence' that the nerve gas sarin was used in Syria. UN chief Ban Ki-moon and rights groups say those responsible must be punished. published 2013 by the UN.
11:16 AM - 12 Jun 2014 As for the Ukraine. I guess seeing as Ras-putin himself admitted some 3000 to 5000 Russian troops on holiday were and still are in the Ukraine isn't an invasion or the fact the UN stated that Russian troops on holiday is a violation of the UN charter. Russian T-64b tanks were spotted in the Ukraine at 11:16 12th june 2014. Video was uploaded onto youtube. Before you say its Ukrainian...The Ukraine military doesn't use T64b.
Add to that the fact that RT news has shown live on air tanks they claimed were rebel tanks, but they were wearing marking of the the Russian army. Take oct 2014 2 T-72BM's were knocked out by the Ukraine military. Guess what
the T-72BM's is exclusivily used by Russia. It wasnever exported.
Seems you being skeptical isn't based on anything other than mis-information.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Daphne&D
Guest
Do you ever do any research at all?????? Why I ask is very simple. There are many cases of WMD being found. AND USED AGAINST US forces.
Do the researh before you post. It just makes you look very silly when facts don't back you up.
D
Daphne&D
Guest
You do realise terrorism by other nations actually kills more than the US right??????
D
Daphne&D
Guest
Look at China or North Korea, they have powerful government and they have a low corruption index in politics because if you're a politician in those countries and you're corrupt you will face horrid time in jail and then death penalty.'
ROLFMAO. I suggest you also research before you say anything.
China:
Corruption in China has be subject to significant media attention since president Xi Jinping announced his Anti-corruption campaign following the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) which was held in November 2012 Despite this high profile anti-graft drive, in 2014 China was ranked No.100 in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, which is 20 places lower than 2013, when it ranked No.80. This puts China on par with Algeria and Suriname, and comparable to Armenia, Colombia, Egypt, Gabon, Liberia, Panama, Bolivia, Mexico, Moldova and black. China ranked less corrupt than neighbours Myanmar, Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nepal but more corrupt than neighbours India, Bhutan, Macau, Hong Kong and Mongolia. Means of corruption include graft, bribery, embezzlement, backdoor deals, nepotism, patronage, and statistical falsification.
North Korea:
Corruption in North Korea is a widespread and growing problem in North Korean society. North Korea is ranked 175 out of 177 countries in Transparency International's 2013 Corruption Perceptions Index (tied with Somalia and Afghanistan). Strict rules and draconian punishments imposed by the regime, for example, against accessing foreign media or for modifying radio or television receivers to access foreign media, are commonly evaded by offering bribes to the police. Informing on colleagues and family members has become less common.
North Korea’s state media admitted widespread corruption in North Korea, when laying out the accusations against Jang Sung-taek after his execution in December 2013. The statement mentions bribery, deviation of materials, selling resources and land, securing funds and squandering money for private use by organizations under his control.
Oopps seems once again your not just wrong but very wrong.
ROLFMAO. I suggest you also research before you say anything.
China:
Corruption in China has be subject to significant media attention since president Xi Jinping announced his Anti-corruption campaign following the 18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) which was held in November 2012 Despite this high profile anti-graft drive, in 2014 China was ranked No.100 in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, which is 20 places lower than 2013, when it ranked No.80. This puts China on par with Algeria and Suriname, and comparable to Armenia, Colombia, Egypt, Gabon, Liberia, Panama, Bolivia, Mexico, Moldova and black. China ranked less corrupt than neighbours Myanmar, Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nepal but more corrupt than neighbours India, Bhutan, Macau, Hong Kong and Mongolia. Means of corruption include graft, bribery, embezzlement, backdoor deals, nepotism, patronage, and statistical falsification.
North Korea:
Corruption in North Korea is a widespread and growing problem in North Korean society. North Korea is ranked 175 out of 177 countries in Transparency International's 2013 Corruption Perceptions Index (tied with Somalia and Afghanistan). Strict rules and draconian punishments imposed by the regime, for example, against accessing foreign media or for modifying radio or television receivers to access foreign media, are commonly evaded by offering bribes to the police. Informing on colleagues and family members has become less common.
North Korea’s state media admitted widespread corruption in North Korea, when laying out the accusations against Jang Sung-taek after his execution in December 2013. The statement mentions bribery, deviation of materials, selling resources and land, securing funds and squandering money for private use by organizations under his control.
Oopps seems once again your not just wrong but very wrong.
PwettyPony
Female
You are cute, I like you, you immeaditly have this aggressive posting style because I say something you dont agree with.
But thats okay, i know a lot of old people that act like that when you shake their beliefs.
Oh and so, like, everybodys saying that bush lied, and rumfeld lied and cheney lied. And, why is that I wonder, if they had found them, they'd have made it big news.
Also, Im actually thinking that youre mixing things up they found chemical weapons, yes, but those dont count as WMD's.
But thanks for partaking in this thread.
You said it yourself
NationS together maaybe.
https://www.iraqbodycount.org/
Thats just Iraq.
Can you name me another country that has killed that many? I am eager to hear your reply.
Actually dont bother, Ill just slam in another link to what happened in Cambodia in the 60's.
And what am I supposed to see here?
I dont know if your english is so fragile or if youre so emotionally into this that you cant read properly.
Okay so what does that what you quoted actually say?
It says the UN affirms? You mean confirms right?
It says that the UN confirms the usage of Sarin Gas in Syria, it does not say that Syrias Government used it.
Jeezus
Would you look at that:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/...4409z-20130505_1_chemical-weapons-sarin-syria
Apparently the UN thinks that youre talking *******.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/04/14/fren-a14.html
http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/14/cr-cdef/14-15/c1415049.asp
Apparently even the french Director of Military Intelligence, General Christophe Gomart thinks youre talking *******, at least Im taking his side on this matter seeing as hes actually involved in it.
Seems like you talking ******* isnt based on anything other than mis-information,
PS. the easter bunny really does not exist.
1) Chemical weapons do fall under the WMD umbrella.
2) Because those weapons weren't found doesn't mean they didn't exist. There was art looted during WWII that has never been recovered, does that mean it didn't exist. Furthermore, if the Syrian rebels used chemical weapons, as the Chicago Tribune article suggests, where do you think they got it from? It very well could be that they have scientists on their payroll, but it's just as likely that they acquired those weapons from Syrian government stockpiles or from stockpiles smuggled in from Iraq.
3) That body count website counts all casualties in Iraq, regardless of who inflicted them; your statements have been made in a way that suggests that ALL of these casualties have been caused by the US, which is intellectually dishonest at best.
When you say "name another country that has killed that many", are you talking right now as we speak or are you talking historically, because if it's the latter, we could be here all day. And while we're talking Cambodia/Kampuchea, why don't you look up the body count from the Pol Pot regime and the resulting invasion by Vietnam in the late 1970's.
4) And if you look closely at your Chicago Tribune article, there is an article dated one day after your article where the UN backpedals from the assertions made in that article.
5) If you're going to buttress your argument with news articles, the World Socialist Web Site isn't what any rational person would call a neutral source, especially when it refers to NATO as "western imperialists". I thought I was reading Lenin or Stalin era Soviet propaganda, and lest anybody thinks that it isn't, the link to the Leon Trotsky document on the right side of the page is confirmation.
The casualties in Iraq may not be directly inflicted by our soldiers. But they are caused by the instability that we created when we deposed Saddam and destroyed the entire Iraqi government without any clue of what to replace it with. And they are being caused by our weapons, many of which are now in the hands of ISIS, another organization unwittingly created by Bush and the Neocons.
Yes the gas used in Syria was likely sourced from the Syrian Army. But in 2010, Syria was incredibly stable with a booming economy. In 2011 it suddenly found itself embroiled in a civil war, the victim of a sectarian proxy war between Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Iran. Sadly, America and NATO joined the Wahabbists as they did in Afghanistan 30 years prior. The Syrian Army didn't have the ability to relocate all of its chemical weapons to areas safely under government control. Before the war, all of Syria was safely under government control, and they placed the weapons to achieve strategic depth against Israel, not to keep it out of the hands of ISIS. Chemical weapons did fall into the hands of the Al Qaeda "rebels" and "activists." But the Assad government didn't exactly give them away willingly.
BTW, why don't we have a problem using chemical weapons ourselves? Do you have any idea how many Serbs, Bosnians, Albanians, and Iraqis have cancer because of our liberal use of depleted uranium shells? We criticize the Assad government for using barrel bombs (as an ersatz replacement for the regular bombs it no longer has), yet we use cluster munitions and white phosphor bombs with impunity. The hypocrisy is astounding!
Bush lied about the WMDs, plain and simple. He warned us that if we didn't agree to his war, that we would soon see "the mushroom cloud." Iran and North Korea had what it took to create a mushroom cloud, yet we invaded Iraq. And we diverted resources from Afghanistan and Pakistan, where the terrorism was really coming from. Our foreign policy is completely schizophrenic.
Well now North Korea I'm not so sure, lol! I think that the South is doing a bit better these days. But in the early days, both Singapore and South Korea had their foundations built by the strongmen Lee Kuan Yew and Syngman Rhee. China has moved full speed ahead of India because it's not constrained by the chaos of democracy. China has developed a 100 year blueprint while America is crumbling with its inability to pass a budget. With the Koch brothers and all of the lobbying and campaign donations, we have one of the worst democracies money can buy. Authoritarianism isn't always bad. And in Islamic countries, a secular dictator is always far better than allowing theocracy to creep in through the ballot box. Iraq, Libya, and Syria under Saddam, Gadhaffi, and Assad respectively as compared to after illustrate the point perfectly.
But Democracy has its merits. In small countries, especially monoethnic and educated ones like Finland, democracy can bring transparency, good governance, and a pursuit of the country's true national interests. And in countries like China, where there are no checks and balances, massive environmental disasters (like the Three Gorges Dam)can be repeatedly ****** onto the people with impunity.
Winston Churchill once said that the best argument for democracy was that it was the worst form of government, except for all of the others. He also added that the best argument against democracy was a ten minute conversation with the average voter. I think that there is much wisdom in this.
A good point that gets overlooked. There wasn't evidence of nuclear capability but we did destroy literally tons of chemical munitions. Saddam did use these munitions against his own people primarily the Kurds. In the first Gulf War we had units from Poland that specialized in dealing with chemical warfare. There was concerns that Saddam would use them
I remember in my youth more than one argument ended with "Walter Cronkite says so". Maybe we were naive but I grew up believing he told the truth. Now most media sources have a significant political slant one way or another. Websites like the World Socialist Web Site aren't really in the news business, they are in the the recruitment business. If a person really wants to understand what is going on in the world a single source can not be relied upon. I always looked outside the United States for some input. I am on BBC's site daily and usually try to get on Kavkazcenter every few days but they have been down for awhile. If you really want a handle on what was going on you need to subscribe to an intelligence service. There are several out there. Their vested interest is to provide accurate information to their paid subscribers.
The rest of your posting requires no additions, nicely done. Quite succinct and accurate.
Nearly all the comments about WMD came from the United Nations not George Bush. The second Gulf War happened because Saddam Hussein refused to comply with a number of UN resolutions. Head UN inspector Hans Blix made it abundantly clear that compliance was required and failure to comply could get real ugly. Up until about a week before the second Gulf War started if Saddam had complied with the UN resolutions and allowed unfettered inspection the war wouldn't have happened.
D
Daphne&D
Guest
ROFLMAO. Ohh dear me. Seems you reply really all hurt and allow your self rightous ego to balloon up. My style has nothing to do with you. But your ego assumes it does. But it's ok, I know alot of insecure and i'll informed people who do that when you shake their beliefs.
Now lets take your paper clipping evidence apart step by step.
Also, Im actually thinking that youre mixing things up they found chemical weapons, yes, but those count as WMD's.
But thanks for partaking in this thread as once again you haven't a clue to what your gibbering on about.
1. " http://www.nbcnews.com/id/4997808/n...ddeadly-sarin-gas-explodes-iraq/#.VZjfLPkTqhQ".....Sarin Gas attack on US forces...Sarin=WMD!!!!!!!!
http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/new/documents/technical_documents/s-2006-701-munitions.pdf... UN report on WMD found in Iraq.
2. "It says the UN affirms? You mean confirms right?
It says that the UN confirms the usage of Sarin Gas in Syria, it does not say that Syrias Government used it.
Jeezus.
I take it English isn't your first language as you seem unable to see the difference between what is written, and what you want it to say.. Affirm was written and coffirm wasn't. Jesus!!!!!
3. "You said it yourself NationS together maaybe.
"Can you name me another country that has killed that many? I am eager to hear your reply.
Actually dont bother, Ill just slam in another link to what happened in Cambodia in the 60's."
Ohh dear are you that nieve and silly.???? Did you not pay attention to your history lessons? Were you sleeping at the back or playing curly hair with your giggly friends instead of learing the facts of history????? Course you were. Your remarks prove that point.
So here is your history lesson
1. Stalin: Notorious 1937 order No. 00447 that called for the mass execution and exile of "socially harmful elements" as "enemies of the people" – was, in fact, genocide. Victims 40 million.
2. Mao Zedong. China's so called 'Great Helmsman' was in fact the greatest mass muderer in history. Mostof his victims were his fellow Chinese, murdered as 'landlords' after the communist takeover, strved in his misnamed 'Great Leap Forward' of 158-61 or killed and tortured in labour camps in the Cultural Revolution of the Sixties. Mao’s rule, with its economic mismanagement and continual political upheavals, also spelled poverty for most of China’s untold millions. The country embraced capitalism long after his death. Victims 60 million
3. Adolf Hitler The horror of Adolf Hitler’s dictatorship lies in the uniqueness of his most notorious crime, the Holocaust, which stands alone in the annals of inhuman cruelty. It was carried out under the cover of World War II, a conflict Hitler pursued with the goal of obtaining ‘Lebensraum’. The war ended up costing millions of lives, leaving Europe devastated and his Third Reich in ruins. Victims 30 million.
The rest: Mugabe Victims 15,000, Castro Victims 30,000 , Alassad Victims 30,000 ( noticed you bypassed that nugget of information when trying to use Syria as a point). Habre Victims 40,000, Pol Pot victims 1.7 Million, Ilsung victims 1.6 Million, Tojo Victims 5 Million.
So as for your ill informed response "again" Not Nations together but single nations under a single leader. It is very noticable how you continualy attack the US and ignore the rest of the troubles around the world both past and present. Sking Barbie occupying most of your time??????
4. I read theChicago Tribune article, the UN retracts its statements the day after.. Ooops seems your attempt at supplying proof actualy goes on to say NOTHING of the kind. Nice try though HUGE FAIL on your part. Also the news papers you use as proof as as reliable as a wet tissue in a storm. Did you think using leftie and socialist websites as proof has any weight in evidence????
You truelly are that nieve it seems. So try these news sites
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...mits-that-it-has-moved-troops-in-Ukraine.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/26/russia-admits-soldiers-in-ukraine
http://rt.com/news/crimea-defense-russian-soldiers-108/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/30/apparent-russian-base-found-in-ukraine.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/23/us-ukraine-crisis-tanks-exclusive-idUSKCN0IC1GE20141023
Alo the UN stated that the Russian invasion of the Crimea was Illegal, so ANY troop or tanks in the Crimea were in the UKRAINE were ILLEGAL also. Ergo an invasian of a soveriegn country.
http://www.un.org/press/en/2014/ga11493.doc.htm
Iraqibodycount web site:
3.3 Inclusions and exclusions
The range given in the IBC count refers to civilian deaths. Use of the term “civilian” by definition involves making a distinction between some people and others. We determine this distinction on a case-by-case basis through careful and systematic scrutiny of the data sources we consult.
The boundary between civilians and others is not always clear-cut. Analysis and adjudication of this boundary can raise deep legal, moral, and philosophical issues which are far from fully resolved. The distinctions which follow are those we routinely apply for the purposes of the IBC project.
Excluded from IBC are those aged 18 and over who, at the point of death, were reported as initiating deadly violence or being active members of a military or paramilitary organisation. We also exclude overseas ‘contractors’ providing security and other private services related to the occupation of Iraq.
Included are all others killed violently, including regular local police forces.
As every society, at war or at peace, has police forces who live and work among the civilian population, we consider such police forces to be a customary part of civil society, and therefore include them in our civilian count. However we do not include police ‘commando’ units who work under the Interior Ministry and are best described as paramilitary.
Under one special circumstance we also include members of Iraqi military or paramilitary/militia forces in our database, namely when they are killed — i.e. summarily executed — after capture. Under those conditions even military personnel automatically acquire ‘protected person’ (effectively, POW) status under International Humanitarian Law, and this distinction is respected by IBC.
So it would also seem your attempt to back yourself up with IBC fails instantly as they have no real way of quantifing the actual nation who caused the injuries or deaths. And your very lame attempt at placing the sole blame on the US tells me your a airbrained giggly who really hasn't a clue as to what the grown ups discuss.
"Apparently even the french Director of Military Intelligence, General Christophe Gomart thinks youre talking *******, at least Im taking his side on this matter seeing as hes actually involved in it."
LOLOL that statement died the moment I posted the UN proof..
Seems you really do like talking ******* that isnt based on anything other than mis-information,
History lesson ends..
PS. the easter bunny really does not exist.
Now lets take your paper clipping evidence apart step by step.
Also, Im actually thinking that youre mixing things up they found chemical weapons, yes, but those count as WMD's.
But thanks for partaking in this thread as once again you haven't a clue to what your gibbering on about.
1. " http://www.nbcnews.com/id/4997808/n...ddeadly-sarin-gas-explodes-iraq/#.VZjfLPkTqhQ".....Sarin Gas attack on US forces...Sarin=WMD!!!!!!!!
http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/new/documents/technical_documents/s-2006-701-munitions.pdf... UN report on WMD found in Iraq.
2. "It says the UN affirms? You mean confirms right?
It says that the UN confirms the usage of Sarin Gas in Syria, it does not say that Syrias Government used it.
Jeezus.
I take it English isn't your first language as you seem unable to see the difference between what is written, and what you want it to say.. Affirm was written and coffirm wasn't. Jesus!!!!!
3. "You said it yourself NationS together maaybe.
"Can you name me another country that has killed that many? I am eager to hear your reply.
Actually dont bother, Ill just slam in another link to what happened in Cambodia in the 60's."
Ohh dear are you that nieve and silly.???? Did you not pay attention to your history lessons? Were you sleeping at the back or playing curly hair with your giggly friends instead of learing the facts of history????? Course you were. Your remarks prove that point.
So here is your history lesson
1. Stalin: Notorious 1937 order No. 00447 that called for the mass execution and exile of "socially harmful elements" as "enemies of the people" – was, in fact, genocide. Victims 40 million.
2. Mao Zedong. China's so called 'Great Helmsman' was in fact the greatest mass muderer in history. Mostof his victims were his fellow Chinese, murdered as 'landlords' after the communist takeover, strved in his misnamed 'Great Leap Forward' of 158-61 or killed and tortured in labour camps in the Cultural Revolution of the Sixties. Mao’s rule, with its economic mismanagement and continual political upheavals, also spelled poverty for most of China’s untold millions. The country embraced capitalism long after his death. Victims 60 million
3. Adolf Hitler The horror of Adolf Hitler’s dictatorship lies in the uniqueness of his most notorious crime, the Holocaust, which stands alone in the annals of inhuman cruelty. It was carried out under the cover of World War II, a conflict Hitler pursued with the goal of obtaining ‘Lebensraum’. The war ended up costing millions of lives, leaving Europe devastated and his Third Reich in ruins. Victims 30 million.
The rest: Mugabe Victims 15,000, Castro Victims 30,000 , Alassad Victims 30,000 ( noticed you bypassed that nugget of information when trying to use Syria as a point). Habre Victims 40,000, Pol Pot victims 1.7 Million, Ilsung victims 1.6 Million, Tojo Victims 5 Million.
So as for your ill informed response "again" Not Nations together but single nations under a single leader. It is very noticable how you continualy attack the US and ignore the rest of the troubles around the world both past and present. Sking Barbie occupying most of your time??????
4. I read theChicago Tribune article, the UN retracts its statements the day after.. Ooops seems your attempt at supplying proof actualy goes on to say NOTHING of the kind. Nice try though HUGE FAIL on your part. Also the news papers you use as proof as as reliable as a wet tissue in a storm. Did you think using leftie and socialist websites as proof has any weight in evidence????
You truelly are that nieve it seems. So try these news sites
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...mits-that-it-has-moved-troops-in-Ukraine.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/aug/26/russia-admits-soldiers-in-ukraine
http://rt.com/news/crimea-defense-russian-soldiers-108/
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/30/apparent-russian-base-found-in-ukraine.html
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/10/23/us-ukraine-crisis-tanks-exclusive-idUSKCN0IC1GE20141023
Alo the UN stated that the Russian invasion of the Crimea was Illegal, so ANY troop or tanks in the Crimea were in the UKRAINE were ILLEGAL also. Ergo an invasian of a soveriegn country.
http://www.un.org/press/en/2014/ga11493.doc.htm
Iraqibodycount web site:
3.3 Inclusions and exclusions
The range given in the IBC count refers to civilian deaths. Use of the term “civilian” by definition involves making a distinction between some people and others. We determine this distinction on a case-by-case basis through careful and systematic scrutiny of the data sources we consult.
The boundary between civilians and others is not always clear-cut. Analysis and adjudication of this boundary can raise deep legal, moral, and philosophical issues which are far from fully resolved. The distinctions which follow are those we routinely apply for the purposes of the IBC project.
Excluded from IBC are those aged 18 and over who, at the point of death, were reported as initiating deadly violence or being active members of a military or paramilitary organisation. We also exclude overseas ‘contractors’ providing security and other private services related to the occupation of Iraq.
Included are all others killed violently, including regular local police forces.
As every society, at war or at peace, has police forces who live and work among the civilian population, we consider such police forces to be a customary part of civil society, and therefore include them in our civilian count. However we do not include police ‘commando’ units who work under the Interior Ministry and are best described as paramilitary.
Under one special circumstance we also include members of Iraqi military or paramilitary/militia forces in our database, namely when they are killed — i.e. summarily executed — after capture. Under those conditions even military personnel automatically acquire ‘protected person’ (effectively, POW) status under International Humanitarian Law, and this distinction is respected by IBC.
So it would also seem your attempt to back yourself up with IBC fails instantly as they have no real way of quantifing the actual nation who caused the injuries or deaths. And your very lame attempt at placing the sole blame on the US tells me your a airbrained giggly who really hasn't a clue as to what the grown ups discuss.
"Apparently even the french Director of Military Intelligence, General Christophe Gomart thinks youre talking *******, at least Im taking his side on this matter seeing as hes actually involved in it."
LOLOL that statement died the moment I posted the UN proof..
Seems you really do like talking ******* that isnt based on anything other than mis-information,
History lesson ends..
PS. the easter bunny really does not exist.
Last edited by a moderator:
History is fascinating because it is often so murky. The victors get to write the history books and naturally paint themselves in a good light. A lot of minutia happens behind scenes often with profound wide spread effects and often these things are lost in history. Sometimes there is even conflict by eyewitnesses on the same side over what happened at a given time and place. Politics comes into play way too often and politicians seem to have little or no problem twisting the facts to suit their needs. I think Churchill made a comment something to the effect, "In wartime, the truth is so precious that she must always be attended by a bodyguard of lies". This has always be true but the bodyguard of lies does make it hard to find the truth.
