JeSuisKhaled?????? (1 Viewer)

[BlueGas]

iraqi civillians

So Iraqi civilians were killed by other muslims? lol brah, so America was at war with Iraq, killing the Iraqi people there, and apparently from your answer, the people were also getting killed by other muslims, nice.

 

[SylviaB]

america was fighting terrorist groups. It didn't purposely target civillians, and most of the civillian casualties resulted from attacks by the terrorist groups/fighting with these groups.

 

[isildurrrr1]

So Iraqi civilians were killed by other muslims? lol brah, so America was at war with Iraq, killing the Iraqi people there, and apparently from your answer, the people were also getting killed by other muslims, nice.

ummm most of the violence that happened in Iraq was between shia and sunni. You obviously have no idea how the middle east works. Most of the deaths caused by the conflict in Iraq was done by local insurgent groups. very little were actually killed by American troops.

 

[BlueGas]

america was fighting terrorist groups. It didn't purposely target civillians, and most of the civillian casualties resulted from attacks by the terrorist groups/fighting with these groups.

Are you trying to say that it was friendly fire that killed the civilians?

 

[BlueGas]

ummm most of the violence that happened in Iraq was between shia and sunni. You obviously have no idea how the middle east works. Most of the deaths caused by the conflict in Iraq was done by local insurgent groups. very little were actually killed by American troops.

I'm talking about the war the happened in about 2003, there were no Shia and Sunni fighting at this time.

 

[isildurrrr1]

I'm talking about the war the happened in about 2003, there were no Shia and Sunni fighting at this time.

So I guess Saddam Feddeyin troops in red diamond marked Toyota technicals shooting up deserters shouldn't count as "shia and sunni conflict"

https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

Total 8000 civilian deaths during the opening salvo of the invasion. Considering the US was bringing crates of whoop ass and lots of ground troops focusing on taking out anyone with a weapon, it's easy that civilians get caught up. 8000 deaths in 2 months as civilian casualties for a war is practically nothing. US could EASILY flattened cities to protect their troops. Hell they even WARNED iraqi's of upcoming airstrikes and begged people to leave the cities, guess who didn't want people to leave the cities in the first place? Saddam employed same tactics as Hamas in using civilian casualties to depupularize the war.

Yes there were Sunni and Shia fighting during the war. The Baa'th party were the Sunni's and they got their ass whooped by locals in villages when the American's rocked up close enough to town. Most of the uprisings during Saddam's power WERE caused by Shia's and Kurds who were getting oppressed by the Baa'th (Sunni) government. Why do you think a lot of ISIS commanders were former hardcore Saddam loyalists? Immediately after the collapse of the Baa'th government, sectarian infighting began.

 

[BlueGas]

So I guess Saddam Feddeyin troops in red diamond marked Toyota technicals shooting up deserters shouldn't count as "shia and sunni conflict"

https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

Total 8000 civilian deaths during the opening salvo of the invasion. Considering the US was bringing crates of whoop ass and lots of ground troops focusing on taking out anyone with a weapon, it's easy that civilians get caught up. 8000 deaths in 2 months as civilian casualties for a war is practically nothing. US could EASILY flattened cities to protect their troops. Hell they even WARNED iraqi's of upcoming airstrikes and begged people to leave the cities, guess who didn't want people to leave the cities in the first place? Saddam employed same tactics as Hamas in using civilian casualties to depupularize the war.

Yes there were Sunni and Shia fighting during the war. The Baa'th party were the Sunni's and they got their ass whooped by locals in villages when the American's rocked up close enough to town. Most of the uprisings during Saddam's power WERE caused by Shia's and Kurds who were getting oppressed by the Baa'th (Sunni) government. Why do you think a lot of ISIS commanders were former hardcore Saddam loyalists? Immediately after the collapse of the Baa'th government, sectarian infighting began.

Bolded this sentence because I'm gonna get back to it later throughout this reply. First things first, why did America want to send airstrikes towards Iraq? Because Saddam had nuclear weapons? Okay, well guess what, from this article, it has been later confirmed that Saddam didn't have nuclear weapons. http://www.salon.com/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/

So basically all these people that were killed was because Saddam "apparently" had nuclear weapons but later on he didn't. How about South Korea? Isn't it confirmed they have nuclear weapons? Why doesn't American send airstrikes to them? Why did they send to Iraq? Or is it because there's mainly Muslims in Iraq? Mirin' America's logic, mirin.

Now returning back to the bolded sentence, let's say that the civilians did end up leaving the cities, where were they gonna go? Did you want them to end up homeless? Or living in refugee camps? Because refugee camps is like living in a luxurious apartment right? Haha.

#Rekt.

 

[Amundies]

You lose all credibility when you yourself need to write in "#Rekt"

 

[BlueGas]

You lose all credibility when you yourself need to write in "#Rekt"

No one cares.

















#Rekt.

 

[BlueGas]

So I guess Saddam Feddeyin troops in red diamond marked Toyota technicals shooting up deserters shouldn't count as "shia and sunni conflict"

https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/

Total 8000 civilian deaths during the opening salvo of the invasion. Considering the US was bringing crates of whoop ass and lots of ground troops focusing on taking out anyone with a weapon, it's easy that civilians get caught up. 8000 deaths in 2 months as civilian casualties for a war is practically nothing. US could EASILY flattened cities to protect their troops. Hell they even WARNED iraqi's of upcoming airstrikes and begged people to leave the cities, guess who didn't want people to leave the cities in the first place? Saddam employed same tactics as Hamas in using civilian casualties to depupularize the war.

Yes there were Sunni and Shia fighting during the war. The Baa'th party were the Sunni's and they got their ass whooped by locals in villages when the American's rocked up close enough to town. Most of the uprisings during Saddam's power WERE caused by Shia's and Kurds who were getting oppressed by the Baa'th (Sunni) government. Why do you think a lot of ISIS commanders were former hardcore Saddam loyalists? Immediately after the collapse of the Baa'th government, sectarian infighting began.

So do you have an answer to my reply?

 

[isildurrrr1]

Bolded this sentence because I'm gonna get back to it later throughout this reply. First things first, why did America want to send airstrikes towards Iraq? Because Saddam had nuclear weapons? Okay, well guess what, from this article, it has been later confirmed that Saddam didn't have nuclear weapons. http://www.salon.com/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/

So basically all these people that were killed was because Saddam "apparently" had nuclear weapons but later on he didn't. How about South Korea? Isn't it confirmed they have nuclear weapons? Why doesn't American send airstrikes to them? Why did they send to Iraq? Or is it because there's mainly Muslims in Iraq? Mirin' America's logic, mirin.

Now returning back to the bolded sentence, let's say that the civilians did end up leaving the cities, where were they gonna go? Did you want them to end up homeless? Or living in refugee camps? Because refugee camps is like living in a luxurious apartment right? Haha.

#Rekt.

They never claimed Saddam had nukes. They said WMD's which encompasses biological and chemical. South Korea doesn't have nukes buddy, you're thinking of the North and I guess you'd have to look at "Just War" theories to why we haven't had a full on invasion of NK yet.

Did you not forget that almost ALL of the nations in the ME are sucking America's cock? Why would the US ever be interested in fighting a religious war?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/07/w...osure-in-iraq-pentagon-acknowledges.html?_r=0

Gee I guess those troops were full of shit when they found chemical weapons.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/11/veterans-iraq-war-untold-story/382558/

I'm using very left wing sources so you can't ever bitch about bias.

“I never heard about guys who got hit by mustard and sarin.”

Yeah I think Mustard and Sarin gas could be considered "WMDs."

On Airstrikes: Americans even gave local iraqi chem trail markers to light up saddam targets. Some targets were legit, some could've been people they hated. They gave civilian populations a chance to leave before they have an all out assault. Same during the Battle of Fallujah and Ramadi, everyone staying in the city after a certain date is declared hostile. Of course people head out to refugee camps, it's fucking war. Only 8000 civilian casualties in the first two months which is NOTHING compared to previous wars. How many people died in Dresden and the firebombings of Japanese cities? You can bet your ass they didn't get a warning.

UN Resolution 1441 effectively gave any Security Council member to take military action against Iraq. Everyone on that council (including Syria who are Baathist) voted in FAVOUR. Iraq violated a ton of shit that was placed on them. It was then time when you have to make will and words into action.

 

[BlueGas]

They never claimed Saddam had nukes. They said WMD's which encompasses biological and chemical. South Korea doesn't have nukes buddy, you're thinking of the North and I guess you'd have to look at "Just War" theories to why we haven't had a full on invasion of NK yet.

Did you not forget that almost ALL of the nations in the ME are sucking America's cock? Why would the US ever be interested in fighting a religious war?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/07/w...osure-in-iraq-pentagon-acknowledges.html?_r=0

Gee I guess those troops were full of shit when they found chemical weapons.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/11/veterans-iraq-war-untold-story/382558/

I'm using very left wing sources so you can't ever bitch about bias.



Yeah I think Mustard and Sarin gas could be considered "WMDs."

On Airstrikes: Americans even gave local iraqi chem trail markers to light up saddam targets. Some targets were legit, some could've been people they hated. They gave civilian populations a chance to leave before they have an all out assault. Same during the Battle of Fallujah and Ramadi, everyone staying in the city after a certain date is declared hostile. Of course people head out to refugee camps, it's fucking war. Only 8000 civilian casualties in the first two months which is NOTHING compared to previous wars. How many people died in Dresden and the firebombings of Japanese cities? You can bet your ass they didn't get a warning.

UN Resolution 1441 effectively gave any Security Council member to take military action against Iraq. Everyone on that council (including Syria who are Baathist) voted in FAVOUR. Iraq violated a ton of shit that was placed on them. It was then time when you have to make will and words into action.

If Iraq didn't have nukes then why did America attack Iraq? America wasn't being attacked by Iraq unless you wanna say that 9/11 was caused by terrorist groups in Iraq, they were actually caused by Al Qaeda. Now I could say that 9/11 was an inside job, and you wouldn't agree because the truth hurts. So why did America attack Iraq?

 

[isildurrrr1]

If Iraq didn't have nukes then why did America attack Iraq? America wasn't being attacked by Iraq unless you wanna say that 9/11 was caused by terrorist groups in Iraq, they were actually caused by Al Qaeda. Now I could say that 9/11 was an inside job, and you wouldn't agree because the truth hurts. So why did America attack Iraq?

Because Iraq broke UN resolutions allowing weapons inspectors into the country? How do you not know your history.

 

[BlueGas]

Because Iraq broke UN resolutions allowing weapons inspectors into the country? How do you not know your history.

So America was basically trying to fix Iraq, America should fix their own country before it fixes others.

 

[isildurrrr1]

So America was basically trying to fix Iraq, America should fix their own country before it fixes others.

Yeah because Iraq was totally a non-threatening country. Gee I guess you never heard of the Iraq-Iran war nor their straight up invasion of Kuwait. Yeah guess you really need to go learn your history.

 

[BlueGas]

Yeah because Iraq was totally a non-threatening country. Gee I guess you never heard of the Iraq-Iran war nor their straight up invasion of Kuwait. Yeah guess you really need to go learn your history.

What has America go to do with the Iraq-Iran war? America wasn't part of the war so why doesn't it mind it's own business? Did Iraq have any sort of plan on attacking America? How about the Syrian war? Wasn't there a a chemical bomb dropped? Oh wait, America can attack a country whenever it wants so it decided to not attack Syria but attack Iraq because it was a threatening country.

 

[SylviaB]

So America was basically trying to fix Iraq, America should fix their own country before it fixes others.

it wasnt about 'fixing' iraq for iraq's sake, it was ensuring that iraq would not be a threat to america and others

 

[isildurrrr1]

What has America go to do with the Iraq-Iran war? America wasn't part of the war so why doesn't it mind it's own business? Did Iraq have any sort of plan on attacking America? How about the Syrian war? Wasn't there a a chemical bomb dropped? Oh wait, America can attack a country whenever it wants so it decided to not attack Syria but attack Iraq because it was a threatening country.

America had nothing to do with that war? Jesus christ you need to learn your history. World War Two wasn't America's business, guess they should've just stayed out of the sideline right? You have a very narrow view on how the world works.

America did try to intervene with Syria. The Russians essentially stopped them from doing anything. Same with how Iran having nuclear capabilities haven't warranted a full invasion yet.

You really need to read theories on Just Wars to understand why things are happening.

 

[BlueGas]

America had nothing to do with that war? Jesus christ you need to learn your history. World War Two wasn't America's business, guess they should've just stayed out of the sideline right? You have a very narrow view on how the world works.

America did try to intervene with Syria. The Russians essentially stopped them from doing anything. Same with how Iran having nuclear capabilities haven't warranted a full invasion yet.

You really need to read theories on Just Wars to understand why things are happening.

Where did I mention in my post World War II? I was speaking about the Iraq-Iran war, both wars where in to completely different time periods, lol, you need to learn how to read.

 

[isildurrrr1]

Where did I mention in my post World War II? I was speaking about the Iraq-Iran war, both wars where in to completely different time periods, lol, you need to learn how to read.

It was a reply to your whole spiel on "why doesn't america mind its own business."

you need some reading comprehension.