NO "Not clean" war - BUT CLASS WAR

[PatelsCornerShop]

Johnny,

You're absolutely right.

When that awful goddamn dictator Saddam, who the US did NOT fund and did not TRAIN against the Kurds and Iranians, went ahead and invaded the democratic State of Kuwait (not run by a family like that awful Saudi Arabia), the US went in their to defend freedom and democracy for those poor Arabs.

Not because of oil or anything like that.

And yes, all Iraqis are basically the same as Saddam Hussain. Nay, all Arabs, if not all Muslims. So you might as well tar everyone with the same brush.

[ 15 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]

 

[harry's afro hut]

PCS yes the US funded Saddam in the 70's/80's but does that mean they should have let Kuwait (and lets face it Saudi as well soon afterwards) happen? Yes it was about oil and (relative) freedom for millions of Arabs was just a handy by-product (but one that never merits your attention) but who is saying otherwise.
You are trying to have the best of both worlds here by blaming the US for starting Saddams military growth (which he then expotentially increased himself rather than spend the money on his own people whose standard of living was already on the way down before the Gulf War) and then again blaming the US for stopping him taking over the entire Arabian Penninsula.
Assuming you wouldnt like this (can I assume this?) then please for once try to offer solutions rather than just spew bile.
Characterising North Americans as dumb as well ill becomes you rather like the few of them who characterise Arabs as terrorists. Ignorant maybe in the large but dumb I think not.

 

[PatelsCornerShop]

Harry.

If you read my posts properly (please do so right now) then you'll see that I prefixed 'dumb Americans' or 'dumb Yanks' with the word 'some'. I didn't generalise.

I don't generalise about these things, even though I know that a lot of Americans are being really dumb about this issue, whether through ignorance, hysteria, or otherwise.

The thing is, people like Johnny-boy here (who IS acting real dumb) tend to see any criticism of America as support for people like Saddam Hussain. Not only that, he generalises and puts all Arabs in the same category. Whereas in fact, Arabs always make a distinction between ordinary people and governments, the so-called civilised people of the West do not.

Tragic, no?

[ 15 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]

 

[kissthecat]

Kuwait was a part Iraq before the Brits redesigned the map. He even had tacit approval to invade until the White house got some calls about the oils wells many of them involving American capital. Then the shit hit the fan.

What about those babies that were thrown out of incubators?

Or the thousands of conscripted youth buried alive?

The 1,500,000 dead people due to sanctions?

What about the millions of Americans without insurance cover or decent living accommodation or work? Is it because the American elite are hoarding all their money to build palaces?

 

[snooch]

yep

 

[johnwisehammer]

"and lets face it Saudi as well soon afterwards) happen? Yes it was about oil and (relative) freedom for millions of Arabs was just a handy by-product (but one that never merits your attention"

There's a great article that I have got at home (I'll dig it out) that has a transcript of the US Ambassador to Iraq meeting Saddam in about July 1991 and basically giving him the nod.

There is no question that Saudi Arabia would have been next - it was never on the cards because it was too big, too heavily militarised and not defensible to other regional powers (as Saddam believed Kuwait was - pretty accurately).

"relative freedom for millions of Arabs"

Bugger. There are 800,000 Kuwaiti citizens and 1.2 million foreign workers there, of whom the vast majority are indentured labourers (slaves really) from Palestine, Pakistan, Yemen and Egypt who worked (and work) entirely without any sort of health, safety and labour protection.

One thing you rarely hear is how after the Iraqis invaded, many of the indentured foreign labourers aided the Iraqi occupiers in rounding up Kuwaiti men for internment, especially the Palestinians who were only too pleased that the Kuwaiti state (which they regarded as hypocritical on Palestine and was happy to have them as right-less labourers for 30 years) was overthrown. When Kuwait was 'liberated' (returned to authoritarian monarchical rule), Kuwaiti youths drove around shooting foreign labourers on sight. None has ever been prosecuted for this. Strange how you never hear about the slaves' right to freedom, isn't it?

There was more freedom taken away than returned by the Allied re-invasion of Kuwait, which is not a demonstration of how good Iraq is, but how pisspoor Kuwait is.

 

[PatelsCornerShop]

There is something (which I haven't looked into properly) which said that the States in fact gave the nod to allow Iraq to invade Kuwait. For some reason, after a number of months, Daddy Bush suddenly changed his mind and gave Saddam an ultimatum. Probably started to realise what a great mistake he was making.

I'll post some links once I get round to it.

In the meantime, look at this site: http://www.mideastfacts.com

In particular, the bit where it says 'Was Iraq set up?' under: http://www.mideastfacts.com/index_iraq.html

[ 15 October 2001: Message edited by: PatelsCornerShop ]

 

[harry's afro hut]

sorry PCS but whereas I read you putting 'some' in one post above in re-reading I also notice:-

Plus, Johnny-boy. Check your facts before you mouth off (in the typical dumb North American manner) about something you are completely clueless about.

so I stick with my point here about stereotyping and how we are ALL guilty.

I would also ask you to answer the bloody questions rather than pick holes in the small print but I now want to check out the links involved about the U.S. condoning Saddams invasion as I have never heard this before and if I'm going to look like a c@$t then I want to be an informed one at least!

(but go on give the questions a go for once - you're not an MP!)

 

[PatelsCornerShop]

Fair enough. I won't argue, save to say that it wasn't meant the way you think it was. Go and check out the links.

As regards solutions, that has already been discussed on other threads. I'd advise you to regularly read these boards, otherwise it doesn't look as if we're pointing out the stupidity of people who we've already offered alternatives to. Please do read some of the alternatives, including my remarks in this thread and beyond.

 

[rasrave]

Interesting link, Patel, and one that I have no problem agreeing with plenty of the contents. The US gvmt. is no choir boy, but sadly neither are all the other countries described, and that web site does not rush to point this out...I am sure that there are more than a few sites that would point out all the shortcomings of the other gvmts of the world...in particular the "victims" as described in these threads (read Sudan, Malaysia,Syria, etc...)
No gvmts are to be trusted really due to the corruption that power brings with it. I struggle to think of any country whose citizens are truly happy with the behavior of their gvmt...depressing maybe but true...
I have been reading over all the past posts in here, lots of good thoughts on all sides, but no real answers. Giving into (and that would be the perception in the West, as you well know) any terrorist demands is not feasible, for the politicians or the man on the street who elects him/her. Bombing the shit out of countries is not PC either. So where is the balance?
JWH, let me get this straight. According to you, the Palestinians (who don't like the Kuwaitis, even though they are ok with living there) help the Iraqis round up Kuwaitis, then are surprised when the Kuwaitis get even? Oh, hang on, I get it...only SOME of the Palestinians helped the invaders, but ALL of the Palestinians took shit for it after the Iraqi army was gone. Yes, that is unfair, cannot argue with that, but where is the accountability? At what point do the Palestinian leaders in Kuwait at the time say the their people "look, don't help the invaders, because if the winds change, you are going to cause grief for all of us?". More to the point, why wouldn't the leaders at least be decent enough to say "we don't care for the Kuwaitis much, but they have let us live here for the last 30 years, the least we can do is to not help the Iraqis"
Everything is a two-way street, and all of us could do well to remember this as we spout our rhetoric. It is all worth it in the long run as we may all have something to learn from each other in the long run...hell, I didn't know there was such a thing as a "twazzcock" until I was called one

 

[nutritional_value]

Just looked at PCS's website. Big site, I guess much of it is true, even if many articles have a twist to make the stories worse than they really are. Just have 2 comments:

1. Many are articles that appeared in Israeli newspapers. That says a lot about the ultimate strength of Israeli democracy and freedom of speech. Where are these in Arab/Muslim countries?

2. Where are some comments/articles about problems in the Arab/Muslim world? Are these countries all perfect? Are all the problems caused by Israel?

NV

[ 16 October 2001: Message edited by: nutritional_value ]

 

[PatelsCornerShop]

The media needs to be freed up in the Arab countries. It's a slow process but hopefully something will get done, like what is happening in Syria right now. Al Jazeera is another good thing and I hope that it'll be an example for others to follow.

I suppose their take on problems on the Arab-Muslim world will largely reflect what many Arabs and Muslims here in the West think. Yes, they have a lot of problems - social, economic and political. A lot are internal, but a lot are also from external forces. But, as Gandhi once quipped to a British dignitary, when asked how on Earth they would cope once the British left - 'We will have problems. But they will be OUR problems. Not yours.'

Which I suppose sums things up.

 

[nutritional_value]

I am stunned by your powers of understatement (how British!):

The media needs to be freed up in the Arab countries. It's a slow process...

 

[lowloader]

How eloquent PatelCornerShop. I hope the 'Americans' are listening. 'Americans' because I know so many ordinary US citizens who share this dream. The 'Americans' are those who believe that being a superpower grants the US a license to abuse, bully and bomb the shit out of all others who don't agree with them. You know why Iraq is still suffering? They made a fool out of the US during the first few days of the war. They put up cardboards that were bombed wasting millions of dollars. What cheek. Iraq must pay for that. Please America leave everyone alone and the world will be a better place to live in. There is no third world country that hasn't been touched by this gaint. If there are the yellow peril, evil red (or what was it they called the USSR?) then now American should be given it own epitheth.

Stop poking your fingers in every pie. Oh but I'm dreaming. Why would they when they have set up bases all over the world for the sole purpose of protecting American interests. The rest of us don't matter.

 

[lowloader]

>There is something (which I haven't looked >into properly) which said that the States in fact gave the nod to allow Iraq to invade Kuwait. For some reason, after a number of months, Daddy Bush suddenly changed his mind and gave Saddam an ultimatum.

This is true. At the time the American ambassador made a statement that said they knew Iraq had a problem with Kuwati regarding borders and that America was not going to interfer.

The real reason was not an about face i think. It was a trap set for Saddam Hussein. America needed an excuse to attack Iraq because it was becoming too powerful for their comfort. They did not want Iraq to disturb the balance of power in the area - with Israel as the king.

 

[johnwisehammer]

Lowloader: I think you have got the wrong end of the stick, mate.