Worst thing yet to happen in Baghdad

1234689

Comments

  • Reply 101 of 172
    fellowshipfellowship Posts: 5,038member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah

    ADMIT SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LAWLESSNESS IN BAGHDAD!



    Damn.




    Hassan you need to move on. I personally take the view PM Tony Blair said to the issue of lawlessness in Iraq. Tony Blair made it clear the problem with lawlessness was far worse a problem where there are no US forces rather than where there are coalition forces present. Sure this would have never happened if there were never a war. Keep in mind in Iraq a country of some 24 million people only 2.5 million are employeed. I think it is fine as we have seen initially for them to take some wealth into their own hands.



    In a country with 90% unemployment I do not have a great issue with this initial lawlessness. It will be brought under control.



    Fellowship
  • Reply 102 of 172
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah

    ADMIT SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LAWLESSNESS IN BAGHDAD!



    Damn.




    Well, not you personally, of course. But you know what I mean.
  • Reply 103 of 172
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    reaching





    reaching







    I neeeeeeed something!
  • Reply 104 of 172
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    reaching





    reaching







    I neeeeeeed something!




    A dump?



    A gin and tonic?



    A holiday!



    Love and understanding.



    Me too.
  • Reply 105 of 172
    Apparently Iraq shouldn't worry unduly about losing its looted treasures. Says who?



    The American Council for Cultural Policy. Iraq's laws are "retentionist" (great coinage!) apparently, and in post-war Iraq export laws should be relaxed for dealers who will do a better job of looking after these things than the Iraqis. They're lobbying the US State Department.



    I'm not making this up.



    Honest.



    I hope the State Department tells them to piss off. What do you think?
  • Reply 106 of 172
    newnew Posts: 3,244member
    I think Apple should buy Iraq and not Universal Music. They are both crap, but iraq seems to come with better stuff...
  • Reply 107 of 172
    powerdocpowerdoc Posts: 8,123member
    My advice , that changing the law concerning exportation of art can only be decided by the Iraqi people them-self. During the transition The coalition temporary admin, will have more urgent things to do than to change this law.



    I expect that the temporary admin, will piss these "art" lobby, who is more interested by the possible profits that they can make, than a truly generous help.
  • Reply 108 of 172
    Quote:

    Originally posted by New

    I think Apple should by Iraq and not Universal Music. They are both crap, but iraq seems to come with better stuff...



    And it comes cheaper I guess (as long as US gets to keep its military bases)



    You´ll avoid all the democracy mumbo jumbo. Let a CEO rule!
  • Reply 109 of 172
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook

    Tony Blair made it clear the problem with lawlessness was far worse a problem where there are no US forces rather than where there are coalition forces present.



    That's why it's inexcusable that the coalition forces would send thousands of troops to guard oil fields and the Ministry of Oil building in Baghdad, but not put a few troops at other locations of importance.
  • Reply 110 of 172
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by groverat

    reaching





    reaching







    I neeeeeeed something!



    Preparation H?
  • Reply 111 of 172




  • Reply 112 of 172
    alcimedesalcimedes Posts: 5,486member
    Quote:

    That's why it's inexcusable that the coalition forces would send thousands of troops to guard oil fields and the Ministry of Oil building in Baghdad, but not put a few troops at other locations of importance.



    well, if you want to look at it pragmaticly, no one is going to eat because of clay tablets or artwork. people will be able to eat and build infrastructure due to oil sales. they're guarding the future of Iraq, instead of the past.
  • Reply 113 of 172
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by alcimedes

    well, if you want to look at it pragmaticly, no one is going to eat because of clay tablets or artwork. people will be able to eat and build infrastructure due to oil sales. they're guarding the future of Iraq, instead of the past.



    Well, the dollars from tourism would be substantial. As much as oil? Nothing is as much as oil obviously but the ROI on troops at the museum would have been 'good enough'. A dozen Marines probably could have guarded the entrances.



    And is the Ministry of Oil building really more important than the Ministry of Education?
  • Reply 114 of 172
    jcjc Posts: 342member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah

    Scott.



    You are the only man on the whole planet who apparently believes that the arrival of tanks in Baghdad and the looting of Baghdad musuem are completely unconnected.





    So, are you saying that the US is responsible for the allowing the looting?



    Should we have spread armies so thin as to police Irac even though we are still fighting. Do you know how big Irac is.



    Should we have sent in Seal teams to protect all of the museaums and temples and holy artifacts and then maintain a guard their. Do you know that thousands of buildings are holy places with valuable relics of one sort or another in Irac.



    Are you aware that removing a dictator from power is not a simple thing. People have a tendacy to assume Saddam was a pushover because it went our way.



    we are witness to an amazing show of military intellegence.



    k
  • Reply 115 of 172
    jcjc Posts: 342member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pscates

    ...



    Suddenly, "looting" is just appearing on the radar to some of you as a bad thing? Interesting. [/B]



    Yes, Because the war went very well. and all of the major predictions from the anti-war crowd about how bad the war was going to go have failed to come to pass. so they are grasping at straws to try and demonstrate how evil and bad the war is, to distract us from the fact that they are wrong about everything.



    Pre war anti war predictions whoch i have heard



    hundreds of thousands of americans will die

    the world will rise up against us

    millions of innocent people will die

    a thousand oil wells will burn damaging the world economy

    we will not be able to throw out saddamm

    Irac will attack US soil



    and manny many more



    I expect critism

    so please feal free to dispute the list or add to it.



  • Reply 116 of 172
    jcjc Posts: 342member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah

    ADMIT SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE LAWLESSNESS IN BAGHDAD!



    Damn.




    Let me ask you



    Do you think it was better to live during the Saddam rule or during the looting?



    you can not have it both ways



    we have a limited number of troops and 5 million people live in bagdad. I would like to here how it could of been possible to stop the looting the oil well burning and the imperial stormtroopers
  • Reply 117 of 172
    jcjc Posts: 342member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bunge

    That's why it's inexcusable that the coalition forces would send thousands of troops to guard oil fields and the Ministry of Oil building in Baghdad, but not put a few troops at other locations of importance.



    there are more religious landmarks in Iraq than oil fields. a lot more. How few do you think we should have dispursed and for how long? And further more having burned all of the oil fields would have caused an ecological disaster, Iraq has 1500 oil fields



    before the war many people critisized the US by saying that if we attack we will cause the burning og thousands of oil fields causing a wouldwide oil shortage. now your mad at us for proctecting them.



    How many of you warned the US about make sure you guard the museams or it will cause decent and disorder and be oh so bad, before the war.



    ARgh
  • Reply 118 of 172
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JC



    before the war many people critisized the US by saying that if we attack we will cause the burning og thousands of oil fields causing a wouldwide oil shortage.




    That's the biggest bunch of crap I've read all day.
  • Reply 119 of 172
    jcjc Posts: 342member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bunge

    That's the biggest bunch of crap I've read all day.



    Thats what I thought too



    it was argued that SaDAM burnt 700 oil well fires in 1991 and that he would do it again. Actually as it turns out, it seems like he tried. Navy seals found alot of oil wells rigged to blow
  • Reply 120 of 172
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JC

    Thats what I thought too



    it was argued that SaDAM burnt 700 oil well fires in 1991 and that he would do it again. Actually as it turns out, it seems like he tried. Navy seals found alot of oil wells rigged to blow




    It's just saving all of the oil wells kept the military from doing a good job in other more important areas. More important being subjective of course.
Sign In or Register to comment.