Revelation. Do You Even Remember the Gulf War ? - Page 2

Provost Harrison · January 25, 2003, 14:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Hueij

Thanks.

No, I mean the one that opened that small bathroom window, entered, walked down the stairs, disarmed a guard, opened the door and exploded...

I meant the ones they DIDN'T show us on CNN.

That is smart

SlowwHand · January 25, 2003, 14:59

About as smart as you're likely to get.

Gatekeeper · January 25, 2003, 15:11

I was a sophomore in high school. Needless to say, our government class got *really* interesting during that period, and not in a "liberal" or "conservative" way, just plain interesting.

Gatekeeper

cavebear · January 25, 2003, 15:15

Of course I remember that war. Heck, I was demonstrating against the Vietnam War in the late 60's, so I've been through some debates about war.

Saddam needs to be removed from power. The question is "for what reason". No people deserve to have to live under a cruel and totalitarian government, and Saddam should be removed by unanimous agreement by the entire UN for that reason alone. In fact, it depresses me that the 1st world powers cannot agree to do it without any further justification.

The weapons of mass destruction argument has yet to be proven, though. While I certainly suspect the claims are true, I accept legitimate arguments that the claim is not yet demonstrated.

But that will be much easier to "prove" after Saddam and his entire regime is ousted. The basic cruelty of his regime is suffiecient cause to act now.

DRoseDARs · January 25, 2003, 16:17

Ten or eleven or so at the time, but old enough to remember.

SlowwHand · January 25, 2003, 17:06

Listen to his son talk.

Hussein has made it necessary, and his son his pepetuating the scenario in a manner that will make his daddy proud.

Kramerman · January 25, 2003, 17:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Hueij

Thanks.

No, I mean the one that opened that small bathroom window, entered, walked down the stairs, disarmed a guard, opened the door and exploded...

I meant the ones they DIDN'T show us on CNN.

smart weapons are unpopular... oh well, thats fine with me, back to the alternative. I always thought carpet bombing with Napalm was more effective anyway...

Kramerman · January 25, 2003, 17:14

Quote:

Originally posted by cavebear
Of course I remember that war. Heck, I was demonstrating against the Vietnam War in the late 60's, so I've been through some debates about war.

Saddam needs to be removed from power. The question is "for what reason". No people deserve to have to live under a cruel and totalitarian government, and Saddam should be removed by unanimous agreement by the entire UN for that reason alone. In fact, it depresses me that the 1st world powers cannot agree to do it without any further justification.

The weapons of mass destruction argument has yet to be proven, though. While I certainly suspect the claims are true, I accept legitimate arguments that the claim is not yet demonstrated.

But that will be much easier to "prove" after Saddam and his entire regime is ousted. The basic cruelty of his regime is suffiecient cause to act now.

one of the most rational posts on the subject of Iraq/Saddam Ive read in a long time. Kudos cavebear

The Mad Monk · January 25, 2003, 17:19

Remember it? I still have the tapes I recorded from the news broadcasts.

JCG · January 25, 2003, 17:34

I remember a TIME foldout that graphically compared the opposing forces...The days when people feared Saddam's paper strength.

SlowwHand · January 25, 2003, 17:38

I had the first 8 hours on tape, Monk.
The car radio told me it had started, and I called home to get my wife to put in a tape I had ready to record CNN.
Not often does one get the beginning of a war on tape.

She got custody of it, and I think it has soap opera reruns or something on it by now.

Asher · January 25, 2003, 17:39

The Gulf War is also taught in high school (at least here) for those who didn't remember it.

Provost Harrison · January 25, 2003, 17:41

cavebear? Since when have genocidal maniacs ever bothered the US regime unless they were a thorn in their side? Were was the US with Idi Amin or Pol Pot?

Call me cynical, but to go to war there is a deeper motivation than humanitarianism in these cases. And I don't think this is any exception.

SlowwHand · January 25, 2003, 17:48

Christ, Provost. I can see the outcry if the USA attacked Uganda.

Provost Harrison · January 25, 2003, 17:51

But if it was to remove Amin? Not an issue now, but then?

Sava · January 25, 2003, 17:55

I was 11, yes I remember it.

SlowwHand · January 25, 2003, 18:01

Amin was pond scum. But the outcry would still have been much more intense than what people are saying here about Iraq.

I mean, you can gas people quicker, and with more efficiency, than you can eat them.

Gatekeeper · January 25, 2003, 19:13

The simple fact is this: The United States cannot do a damn thing w/o being *screamed* at by some offended party or another. The cacophony gets so intense at times that you just wanna find a quiet corner, plug your ears and ignore the howling ... but it's impossible to do.

It's something every nation that's ever been a "great" power has had to face, but the modern world makes it that much more vicious. I can only imagine what it would've been like had instaneous communication among the masses (and widespread democracy) been available centuries in the past.

Gatekeeper

Hueij · January 25, 2003, 20:07

Quote:

a tape I had ready to record CNN.

Hehe, you have Bernard Shaw's live report from underneath a table in a hotelroom in downtown Bagdad? That's pure gold

I was lucky to see that live on CNN because we just got back from the pub and decided to have one last beer before going to bed.

But seriously, about PH's Idi Amin argument. This is exactly why many people (myself included) are against the US going alone against Saddam. In the not so very distant part the US set up and/or supported several dictators of the same caliber of Saddam and even now they have very friendly relations with some nasty thugs. It all seems kind of hypocritical to us.

The fact that the US is acting pure selfish on certain things that the rest of the world finds pretty important like Kyoto, the ICC and that anti-personel mine thingy doesn't help either.

Ramo · January 25, 2003, 20:51

I was 5, my parents are rather apolitical, and I didn't have any personal ties to the war, so I only vaguely remember it...

cavebear · January 25, 2003, 21:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Kramerman

one of the most rational posts on the subject of Iraq/Saddam Ive read in a long time. Kudos cavebear

Thank you, Kramerman. There can be humane reasons for war and there can be be inhumane reasons. The rational reasons are for a greater good for people denied freedom.

cavebear · January 25, 2003, 21:57

Quote:

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
cavebear? Since when have genocidal maniacs ever bothered the US regime unless they were a thorn in their side? Were was the US with Idi Amin or Pol Pot?

Call me cynical, but to go to war there is a deeper motivation than humanitarianism in these cases. And I don't think this is any exception.

The US has labored under the negative experience of the Vietnam War for a long time. It was important to us that we experienced the strictly military victory over Iraq in the first first war and also the moral victory of Afghanistan.

IF it becomes necessary to invade Iraq and cause a governmental change for the benefit of both the Iraqi citizens and the whole region, the US now understands both what it *can* and *should* do.

The *reasons* for war can be argued, but I am certain it is not about "oil" and it is not about "colonialism". We will get all the oil we need whether Iraq provides any or not, and we don't have any interests of controlling remote geographical areas a la British gunboat methods.

What I do hope for is that the UN, with some industrially advanced nations to back it up, will go on a general world-wide campaign of removing local tyrants to encourage freedom whereever possible.

Could we make China free? No. But what if 25 years from now they were the only totalitarian government left? Wouldn't that be a pressure on them? Wouldn't that be a good thing to have achieved so much.

Eventually, all the totalitarian governments will fall. But it takes a start at some place at some time by some people to start the process. If it is the US now, that's fine with me. If someone else soon, that's OK too.

Tyrannies don't collapse on their own easily or quickly; if it takes some outside pressure, I'm for it.

cavebear · January 25, 2003, 21:59

The US position is modelled after the epigram of Davy Crockett; "Be sure you're right, then go ahead".

Hueij · January 25, 2003, 22:04

Quote:

What I do hope for is that the UN, with some industrially advanced nations to back it up, will go on a general world- wide campaign of removing local tyrants to encourage freedom whereever possible.

And that is exactly why I am sceptical about America's motive behind this whole Iraq business. On the one hand it was and still is supporting right-wing dictators and on the other hand it tries to make us believe it is on a crusade to enforce Democracy across the globe. It tastes like double standards to me...

Imran Siddiqui · January 25, 2003, 23:41

Which Gulf War?

Iraq-Iran was the first Gulf War

.

DinoDoc · January 25, 2003, 23:46

Quote:

What I do hope for is that the UN, with some industrially advanced nations to back it up, will go on a general world-wide campaign of removing local tyrants to encourage freedom whereever possible.

Ahh, the foolish naivete of youth.

Kontiki · January 26, 2003, 00:06

Most definitely remember it. One of my most vivid memories was when I first saw the reports of Israel getting hit by the Scuds and thinking "uh oh, the sh1t just hit the fan". In retrospect, though, their restraint (while certainly admirable) seems obvious to me - it really didn't cause that much damage, there were no chemical weapons, and Iraq was already in the process of getting its ass kicked, not to mention the fact that getting involved probably would have shaken up the coalition.

Bereta_Eder · January 26, 2003, 00:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Hueij

Quote:

What I do hope for is that the UN, with some industrially advanced nations to back it up, will go on a general world- wide campaign of removing local tyrants to encourage freedom whereever possible.

And that is exactly why I am sceptical about America's motive behind this whole Iraq business. On the one hand it was and still is supporting right-wing dictators and on the other hand it tries to make us believe it is on a crusade to enforce Democracy across the globe. It tastes like double standards to me...

Well said

And the answer is included, I think.

Edan · January 26, 2003, 00:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Which Gulf War?

Iraq-Iran was the first Gulf War

.

What, there weren't any wars in the gulf area in the thousands of years before the 1980s? Think big!

notyoueither · January 26, 2003, 00:31

I was in University (I went late). I remember there was much wailing and knashing of teeth among the people I knew there.

Saddam had the 4th or 5th largest army. It would cost too much to do anything about Kuwait.

The war was about oil.

We (the West) had no right to intrude in regional affairs.

The war was all about American Imperialism (as well as oil).

Not many things change as time goes by.