Humanitarian aid

Remove this Banner Ad

Originally posted by Frodo
I was wondering about Basra.

Rather than engage the militia in the city why not lay seige to it. If the Basra people want the aid let them boot the militia out first.
Click to expand...

Good Idea! Turn Basra into Sarajevo.
 
Originally posted by Dippers Donuts
Ignore those blinkered tory gits mantis; our hope is they will wake up one day and see the error of their ways. A forlorn hope perhaps.

As for the ayjit referring to the 1 million children who have died of starvation in Iraq; does the word "sanctions" ring a bell?
Click to expand...

It does actually.

Sanctions were imposed by the UN, NOT the US or Great Brittain.

The idea of sanctions was to prevent Saddam and his elitist gang of thugs from having the resources to rebuild a military arsenal with which to threaten neighbouring counties and indeed, the citizens of his own country

To mitigate aginst the IRAQI POPULATION suffering as a result of the sanctions, the "Oil for Aid" programme was implemented, the idea being that the aid would be used by THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT to feed its people.

You don't have to be a genius to work out why Saddam has 48 Presidential Palaces and he and his gang of thugs have continued to live in the lap of luxury, whilst the rest of the population has lived in abject poverty and misery since the end of the first Gulf War.

Gee, I wonder where all that aid money could have gotten to.?

Today, we have the pacifists of the world, egged on by the likes of France, Russia, Germany and the French apologist Belgium, telling us that Saadam and his regime can be "contained" by continuing these immoral sanctions...........and to hell with the rest of the Iraqi population.

While these same 3 countries continue a lucrative trade with Saddam and his "Government" in such export items as munitions, scuds(French built), Kalasnikovs (they're the Russian made guns the Iraqi army uses), and chemical weaponry infrastructure and raw materials(proudly brought to you by German interests).

Containment KILLS.

The theory is "let's just keep up the charade and starve the Iraqi people to death.......slowly. It's better than attacking the problem at it's root cause............Saddam and his henchmen"

Now we have the Basra situation and there are people on this board expressing outrage and horror at the prospect of the city's population being without essential supplies for a few days.

"Gee we can't have that.........how inhumane and nasty"

The people advocating retaining the status quo of letting Saddam monster and repress his own people are the real Tories......not we "warmongers" as you call us.

A little self-education about facts would reveal to a lot of "peace" activits how hypocritical their position really is.

I am one "warmonger" who believes that the only hope for the Iraqi people is for Saddam and his evil , repressive regime to be rooted out once and for all....by whatever it takes.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Originally posted by luthor
It does actually.

Sanctions were imposed by the UN, NOT the US or Great Brittain.

The idea of sanctions was to prevent Saddam and his elitist gang of thugs from having the resources to rebuild a military arsenal with which to threaten neighbouring counties and indeed, the citizens of his own country

To mitigate aginst the IRAQI POPULATION suffering as a result of the sanctions, the "Oil for Aid" programme was implemented, the idea being that the aid would be used by THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT to feed its people.

You don't have to be a genius to work out why Saddam has 48 Presidential Palaces and he and his gang of thugs have continued to live in the lap of luxury, whilst the rest of the population has lived in abject poverty and misery since the end of the first Gulf War.

Gee, I wonder where all that aid money could have gotten to.?

Today, we have the pacifists of the world, egged on by the likes of France, Russia, Germany and the French apologist Belgium, telling us that Saadam and his regime can be "contained" by continuing these immoral sanctions...........and to hell with the rest of the Iraqi population.

Containment KILLS.

The theory is "let's just keep up the charade and starve the Iraqi people to death.......slowly. It's better than attacking the problem at it's root cause............Saddam and his henchmen"

Now we have the Basra situation and there are people on this board expressing outrage and horror at the prospect of the city's population being without essential supplies for a few days.

"Gee we can't have that.........how inhumane and nasty"

The people advocating retaining the status quo of letting Saddam monster and repress his own people are the real Tories......not we "warmongers" as you call us.

A little self-education about facts would reveal to a lot of "peace" activits how hypocritical their position really is.

I am one "warmonger" who believes that the only hope for the Iraqi people is for Saddam and his evil , repressive regime to be rooted out once and for all....by whatever it takes.
Click to expand...

Gee luthor...tell us something we don't know..

Somehow you have missed the point, it is blithely arguable who has persecuted the iraqi people more - saddam; or the sanctions designed to limit his effectiveness; which in essence has killed the iraqi populace far more quickly than saddam could have.

My point being - this war is a farce and a charade; and the tory sympathisers who believe it is about the war on terror, regime change etc etc can expect to see me knocking on their door in the next few days flogging encyclopedias - ie easy sell.

Now, where is my hypocrisy?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top