Considering the current unrest in the middle east and the recent toppling of the Eygptian gov't by peaceful protest. Do you think that the Iraq gov't would have been replaced without the invading the country?
Wow_FactorLondon, Greater London, England UK3,698 posts
AGreatGuy2: Considering the current unrest in the middle east and the recent toppling of the Eygptian gov't by peaceful protest. Do you think that the Iraq gov't would have been replaced without the invading the country?
No, not at all. They are tough cookies, and their Navy are just off the coast of Egypt right now. A storm be a brewin' - slice the main brace me arties.
AGreatGuy2: Considering the current unrest in the middle east and the recent toppling of the Eygptian gov't by peaceful protest. Do you think that the Iraq gov't would have been replaced without the invading the country?
Perhaps. The power of the people is far stronger than any invading force...
If I've remembered correctly.Haven't they been fighting against themselves from the begining of time?
While Bush was still in office I remember him talking before the news media and stated that the U.S. doesn't tell other countries what to do.If that's true then why did we the U.S.invade Iraq.Some say it was because of oil.some have said it was because Bush said Saddam threatened his father.
I've heard it's about freedom.Well who's freedom are our troops dying and fighting for.
Don't we in the USA have our own problems to solve?
Think about the money that was spent on Iraq and now we have Afghanstan to deal with.
Just yesterday I read/heard on my local news station that a Marine died while in Afghanstan.
How many of our young men and women have to pay with their lives?There's something to ponder.
AGreatGuy2: Considering the current unrest in the middle east and the recent toppling of the Eygptian gov't by peaceful protest. Do you think that the Iraq gov't would have been replaced without the invading the country?
Excellent poll and impeccable timing I might add for we had a thread that touched on this same topic, "Zionist Occupied America" where I proved the Israeli spies that have squirmed into US government "steered" the US into invading Iraq!! It was Israels war and they conned the US into fighting it for them.
Bravo!
PS Be careful of the insults and hand waving "some" posters will use to side-step the truth.
Wow_FactorLondon, Greater London, England UK3,698 posts
SilverBirch: Excellent poll and impeccable timing I might add for we had a thread that touched on this same topic, "Zionist Occupied America" where I proved the Israeli spies that have squirmed into US government "steered" the US into invading Iraq!! It was Israels war and they conned the US into fighting it for them.
Bravo!
PS Be careful of the insults and hand waving "some" posters will use to side-step the truth.
AGreatGuy2: Considering the current unrest in the middle east and the recent toppling of the Eygptian gov't by peaceful protest. Do you think that the Iraq gov't would have been replaced without the invading the country?
Lets presume for a moment that there was no intervention in Iraq
how the heck would that effect the rest of the world???
Wow_Factor: No, not at all. They are tough cookies, and their Navy are just off the coast of Egypt right now. A storm be a brewin' - slice the main brace me arties.
SilverBirch: Excellent poll and impeccable timing I might add for we had a thread that touched on this same topic, "Zionist Occupied America" where I proved the Israeli spies that have squirmed into US government "steered" the US into invading Iraq!! It was Israels war and they conned the US into fighting it for them.
Bravo!
PS Be careful of the insults and hand waving "some" posters will use to side-step the truth.
Peace
WOW, Now if that's not the POT calling the Kettle black, I don't know what is.....
While I fully admit, and am proud of is that I am a Georgian, but that does not make me a clone....I also have a brain and an opinion...<wink> Southern born and Southern bred, educated and do not believe everything my parents told me..
Get off ur laurels and study some of the things u claim to be the truth. Get documentation for what u say, or no one is ever going to take u seriously.
Buffy327: While I fully admit, and am proud of is that I am a Georgian, but that does not make me a clone....I also have a brain and an opinion...<wink> Southern born and Southern bred, educated and do not believe everything my parents told me..
Get off ur laurels and study some of the things u claim to be the truth. Get documentation for what u say, or no one is ever going to take u seriously.
Ms , I have no "laurels" I do know, for a fact, that the US had no business invading Iraq. That was Israels war and their spies that squirmed into influential positions in US government steered MY GOVERNMENT into FIGHTING THEIR WAR. Of this I AM CERTAIN. I have no quest for being taken serious by THEM. I do know that when I prove my position HERE it works THEM in to a frenzy and they start the hand waving and sputtering and all kinds of contortions,..so ,..I'd say "the bullet hit the bone"
venusenvy: Yes Con, I think they could have. And Im sure that had they known the truth in time they would have.
About as much as the Iraqis could have,that is why I introduced that particular example! Couldn't even manage in 1944! Iraq was the same Policestate! Impossible to know whether your best "Friend" would sell you out for a Government Favor,or being extorted to do so!
invinciblemuse: Perhaps. The power of the people is far stronger than any invading force...
No way would the government of Iraq have been toppled by the people. The Egyptian army and police would not fire on the people of Egypt. People who even hinted at rebellion in Iraq simply disappeared. Remember we're talking about the guy who had his army gas an entire village of his own people. We're talking about a guy with a "Republican Guard" that was ready and willing to do his bidding and a guy that, as far as his subjects went, felt shooting first and asking questions later was always the right call.
gardenhackle: No way would the government of Iraq have been toppled by the people. The Egyptian army and police would not fire on the people of Egypt. People who even hinted at rebellion in Iraq simply disappeared. Remember we're talking about the guy who had his army gas an entire village of his own people. We're talking about a guy with a "Republican Guard" that was ready and willing to do his bidding and a guy that, as far as his subjects went, felt shooting first and asking questions later was always the right call.
The Egytian gov't was known for its willing to accept dissent either.
AGreatGuy2: The Egytian gov't was known for its willing to accept dissent either.
What the Egyptian government wasn't known for doesn't tell us much. What Saddam's government WAS known for, on the other hand, tells us everything we need to know about how a public protest would have gone in Iraq. Remember, the protest group that eventually caused the downfall of the government started out with protests that couldn't rally a hundred people. It would have been over before it started in Iraq. You can't organize a protest and post on facebook from dungeons and graves.
ActractorguyTims Ford Lake, Tennessee USA2,089 posts
I don't know how you determine peaceful but I don't think it was a peaceful as one would like. I would call it a failure at being peaceful.
Around 365 dead in Egypt protests: health ministry
CAIRO - AROUND 365 people were killed and about 5,500 wounded in protests across Egypt that led to the overthrow of strongman Hosni Mubarak, the health ministry said on Wednesday.
'The total number of deaths in the events witnessed by Egypt is around 365 ... and 5,500 were treated for injuries,' Health Minister Sameh Farid said in statement carried by the official Mena new agency.
Mr Farid said the ministry was still awaiting reports from several hospitals and health offices. Demonstrations erupted on January 25 demanding Mr Mubarak's immediate resignation and calling for political and economic reforms.
The protests saw fierce clashes between demonstrators and security forces, and later between supporters and foes of the 82-year old Mr Mubarak. On his departure on February 11, Mr Mubarak handed power to a military council, which vowed to pave the way for democratic reforms.
But hundreds are still missing after the protests, rights groups said.
Gamal Eid, a lawyer who heads the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, said: 'There are hundreds of detained, but information on their numbers is still not complete ... The army was holding detainees.' -- AFP
Actractorguy: I don't know how you determine peaceful but I don't think it was a peaceful as one would like. I would call it a failure at being peaceful. Around 365 dead in Egypt protests: health ministry
CAIRO - AROUND 365 people were killed and about 5,500 wounded in protests across Egypt that led to the overthrow of strongman Hosni Mubarak, the health ministry said on Wednesday.
'The total number of deaths in the events witnessed by Egypt is around 365 ... and 5,500 were treated for injuries,' Health Minister Sameh Farid said in statement carried by the official Mena new agency.
Mr Farid said the ministry was still awaiting reports from several hospitals and health offices. Demonstrations erupted on January 25 demanding Mr Mubarak's immediate resignation and calling for political and economic reforms.
The protests saw fierce clashes between demonstrators and security forces, and later between supporters and foes of the 82-year old Mr Mubarak. On his departure on February 11, Mr Mubarak handed power to a military council, which vowed to pave the way for democratic reforms.
But hundreds are still missing after the protests, rights groups said.
Gamal Eid, a lawyer who heads the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, said: 'There are hundreds of detained, but information on their numbers is still not complete ... The army was holding detainees.' -- AFP
Hypothetical question so no one can be certain. It's likely that Iraqis would protest their hardest against Saddam, given that their country would have deteriorated big time during his rein and most of them would be very poor/unemployed, i.e. with nothing left to lose. It seems to me they'd have a better chance at a decent government of their choice, and less casualties that way.
Ron_de_Jeremy: Hypothetical question so no one can be certain. It's likely that Iraqis would protest their hardest against Saddam, given that their country would have deteriorated big time during his rein and most of them would be very poor/unemployed, i.e. with nothing left to lose. It seems to me they'd have a better chance at a decent government of their choice, and less casualties that way.
Ron_de_Jeremy: Hypothetical question so no one can be certain. It's likely that Iraqis would protest their hardest against Saddam, given that their country would have deteriorated big time during his rein and most of them would be very poor/unemployed, i.e. with nothing left to lose. It seems to me they'd have a better chance at a decent government of their choice, and less casualties that way.
Something like the Protests in the USSR under Stalin! Iraq under Saddam Hussein was set up just like it! Protest when you can't trust anyone,and the Pay for Protesting is a Bullet in the Back of your Head!
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
Here is one to ponder.(Vote Below)