Skip to content or view screen version

Why the international community must stand up to Saddam!

Harlequin | 05.03.2003 13:21

Saddam is an extremely dangerous dictator left alone he will develope and stockpile weapons of mass destruction and will use them to intimidate and threaten his neighbours. If he vis left until he develops nuclear weapons then that will lead to an extremely dangerous situation.

Bush and Blair are right to stand up to Saddam Hussain and call on other countries in the UN to back military action if he refuses to disarm. Saddam has used weapons of mass destruction in the past during the Iran/Iraq war and against the Kurds in Halabja. He has no qualms about using them again. He has invaded two of his neghbours Iran and Kuwait and after the last Gulf War he set fire to all the Kuwaiti oil fields and poured crude oil into the Persian Gulf. So there is no doubt that he is a very dangerous and ruthless dictator.

Saddam has only allowed weapons inspectors into Iraq now because of the massive military build up in the Gulf and the threat to invade his country. Failure to back up UN resolution 1441 with military force will also reduce the authority of the UN reducing it to a talking shop with no guts to use force to enforce its decisions. That would encourage other rogue states to do as they liked with no fear of retaliation and lead to a very dangerous world!

How would the anti-war movement suggest we go about disarming Saddam Hussein without the threat of war! Quite clearly there is no alternative that will get Saddam to disarm other than the threat to use force if he refuses.

Harlequin

Comments

Hide the following 11 comments

do summat more useful

05.03.2003 13:53

please stop spamming the indymedia newswire with parroted corporate bulls*t,
u wrote the same thing a couple of days ago, people answered back...u ignored everything they said and repeated yourself a few times
why not go back to that post, read some of the answers, think about them and then if you reckon they're wrong answer them, otherwise f*ck off, seriously...

hk


this is a newswire

05.03.2003 13:57

Harlequin,
Indymedia was not created so that people like you can post their pityable views and claim they are 'news'. If you want to comment on a news item, do so, but stop clogging up the newswire with your boring rants.

jjf


Times Up

05.03.2003 16:19

Lets not forget that saddam used chemical weapons...on his OWN people in 1988! And that there is now UNDENIABLE PROOF that he is linked (if indeed he is maybe even a card carrying member) of al-qaeda.
In addition iraq invaded a democracy, kuwait, to steal the oil..and many iraqi children get killed by saddam..think of the children! Iraq IS the main sponser of islamic terrorism IN THE WORLD!
the us and uk may have done some accidents in the past but as yet I personally have yet to see ONE rebuttal of The Case For War.

Gorgeous George


Answer the question!

05.03.2003 16:29

Answer the question: How can Saddam Hussein be disarmed without the threat of war? He wont listen to diplomacy, he ignores the UN, he is a ruthless, merciless dictator with no respect for human life. The only language he understands is the threat of war.

If you know how to force Saddam Hussein to get rid of his weapons of mass destruction without the threat of war then please state what it is!

If you have no answer to this then please admit defeat that the anti-war movement is wrong!

Harlequin


half of the story

05.03.2003 16:35

saddam used chemical weapons - hey so have many other countries, more people have died from US chemical warfare (agent orange, depleted urainum etc) than from any other countries weapons. also what makes chemical weapons worse than, say, cluster bombs?

his own people - the kurds are saddams people in the same way as palestinians are ariel sharon's people. sharon happens to be killing many of 'his own' people now, as opposed to saddam 20 years ago. turkish kurds are being ethnically cleansed by turkey. iraqi kurds live relatively freely in an autonomous zone in n.iraq. what does the us do? arms isreal in violation of 60+ SC resolutions, arms turkey, and starts a war on iraq...well at least they're consistent

kuwait, democracy?!? - i dunno where u heard that, Kuwait is run by a US friendly dictator. saddam was willing to withdraw in 91 and install his own puppet but the us refused to negogiate, in their own words, a peaceful settlement was their 'worst fear'

proof of links to al-qaeda - i'm beginning to wonder if you're joking/taking the piss out of harly

iraq main sponsor of islamic terror - uhh, ok, no truth in that, but why let truth get in the way of arab bashing? if we stick to facts. who set up and armed bin laden in the first place? (clue-same country which has armed iraq, iran, isreal, columbia, s,arabia polpot etc)

hk


Wrong! So, so wrong!

05.03.2003 16:46

You are *such* a divvy, Georgey,

There is just NOT "undeniable proof" that Saddam Hussein is anything to al-Qaida other than their arch-enemy.

Osama bin Laden has pronounced a death sentence upon him, declaring him to be a "secular socialist" and an "apostate" and an "infidel".

It is punishable by death to preach Islamic fundamentalism in Iraq 'cos Saddam doesn't want a rival power base springing up.

And after the 1991 Gulf War Osama asked the CIA for permission to go into Baghdad and assassinate Saddam.

These are the only proven links between the pair, shitwit.

And where did you hear that Kuwait is a democracy???

In your dreams big boy; even Britain and the US don't try to claim that.

Kuwait is a hellish feudal despotism with a corrupt royal family possessing total control over their subjects. Women have no rights and Palestinians are used as little more than slave labour. Put that in your hype-believing pipe and smoke it.

"Iraq IS the main sponser of islamic terrorism IN THE WORLD!"

Sorry arsehole but sounding hysterical doesn't make it any more true, or proven. Iraq and Islamic fundamentalists don't get on, for the reasons outlined above.

And you may (may?) not be aware, but Iraq (secular) had a big fuck off war against Iran (Islamic fundamentalist) in the 1980s and was funded, aided and abetted by US and Britain!

And another thing: All those mean ol' chemical weapons which Saddam used on the Kurds were supplied by the US and UK, and most of 'em (including anthrax and VX gas) were sold to him by a certain Donald Rumsfeld!

I mean I thought everyone knew that by now, but obviously not.

Gorgeous George? George W Bush, more like!

Stop the War!

MM

There is so little evidence for any of this, unless you think that "because The Sun told me" is sufficient. In which case you are probably a danger to yourself and need help.

Mad Monk


what about 'wmd' of other countries

05.03.2003 16:49

OK, well harly dear, 95% of said weapons were destroyed in the previous weapons inspections. then the inspectors were told to withdraw so that the US could bomb.
Iraqi defectors have since confirmed to the CIA that all other weapons were destroyed as Iraq says.
So Harly, what 'weapons of mass destruction'? there is 0 evidence that that any exist...if you have any evidence can u point me to it? otherwise give up...
Other countries have 'WMD' and have used them, most notably the US, in fact the US position is 'we reckon saddam might have some WMD so therefore we will use WMD against the people of Iraq'
THE ONLY COUNTRY THREATENING TO USE WMD IS THE USA!!!
HOW CAN YOU NOT SEE THIS???
THE US IGNORES THE UN!!!
THE US HAS NO RESPECT FOR HUMAN LIFE!!
their plan is to cause 'a kind of hiroshima effect in baghdad'
did u get that? hiroshima, y'know when an atom bomb was dropped on civilians (by guess who!) that is what the US wants to do...

....


Wrong! So, so wrong!

05.03.2003 16:50

You are *such* a divvy, Georgey,

There is just NOT "undeniable proof" that Saddam Hussein is anything to al-Qaida other than their arch-enemy.

Osama bin Laden has pronounced a death sentence upon him, declaring him to be a "secular socialist" and an "apostate" and an "infidel".

It is punishable by death to preach Islamic fundamentalism in Iraq 'cos Saddam doesn't want a rival power base springing up.

And after the 1991 Gulf War Osama asked the CIA for permission to go into Baghdad and assassinate Saddam.

These are the only proven links between the pair, shitwit.

And where did you hear that Kuwait is a democracy???

In your dreams big boy; even Britain and the US don't try to claim that.

Kuwait is a hellish feudal despotism with a corrupt royal family possessing total control over their subjects. Women have no rights and Palestinians are used as little more than slave labour. Put that in your hype-believing pipe and smoke it.

"Iraq IS the main sponser of islamic terrorism IN THE WORLD!"

Sorry arsehole but sounding hysterical doesn't make it any more true, or proven. Iraq and Islamic fundamentalists don't get on, for the reasons outlined above.

And you may (may?) not be aware, but Iraq (secular) had a big fuck off war against Iran (Islamic fundamentalist) in the 1980s and was funded, aided and abetted by US and Britain!

And another thing: All those mean ol' chemical weapons which Saddam used on the Kurds were supplied by the US and UK, and most of 'em (including anthrax and VX gas) were sold to him by a certain Donald Rumsfeld!

I mean I thought everyone knew that by now, but obviously not.

Gorgeous George? George W Bush, more like!

Stop the War!

MM

There is so little evidence for any of this, unless you think that "because The Sun told me" is sufficient. In which case you are probably a danger to yourself and need help.

Mister Ron


Oi, Harlequim; NO!

05.03.2003 16:51

No, mate; YOU answer the question. Is this news? If not, why post it on a NEWSwire? Muppet.

j


Other countries crimes dont justify Iraqs'

05.03.2003 16:53

Other countrys crimes dont justify Iraqs crimes. Iraq is the worlds biggest rogue state as well. It has imprisoned, tortured and executed hundreds of thousands of its own people. It has forced over 4 million of its own people to flee their own country. It has invaded Iran and Kuwait and used chemical weapons including nerve gas and mustard gas. Left alone Iraq will develope weapons of mass destruction, it will invade its neighbours, it will use weapons of mass destruction against them and any countries which come to their aid.

Israel is not half as bad as Iraq for a start it is a democracy and is only defending itself from hostile arab neighbours and fighting back against terrorist groups that use suicide bombings against innocent civilians. Neither is America. America is a democracy. It does not threaten other countries with weapons of mass destruction, it does not invade other countries, it does not break UN resolutions, it does not have links with terrorist groups.

There is simply no comparision between Israel, America and Iraq.

Harlequin


What I meant to write

05.03.2003 16:54

Let us not forget that saddam used chemical weapons which we and the Americans provided him with on his own people in 1988, following on the noble tradition of Winston Churchill who gassed the Kurds in his time. (unless of course it was the Iranians in 88?

And that there is now NO proof whatsoever that he is linked (if indeed even a card carrying member) of al-qaeda. (does al quaeda have party cards, maybe with Osama's face on them). No wait a minute, he and the fundies hate each other ...

In addition iraq invaded a feudal autocracy called Kuwait, which the British had stolen from Iraqi territory in order to control the oil, with the encouragement of April Glaspie in 1991to steal the oil

..and a million iraqi children have died as a result of the West's policy.think of the children!

Israel IS the main sponser of islamic terrorism IN THE WORLD!

the us and uk may have made such a mess of the middle east, ever since the days of Sykes-Picot, that we better stay at home. And that crew in Washington can't be trusted, after the mess they have made of Afghanistan

I personally have yet to see ONE decent argument for putting the Case For War (and I am a government spy, so I read everything ..)

Answer the question: How can Ariel Sharon be disarmed without the threat of war? He wont listen to diplomacy, he ignores the UN, he is a ruthless, merciless dictator with no respect for human life. The only language he understands is the threat of war.

If you know how to force Ariel Sharon to get rid of his weapons of mass destruction without the threat of war then please state what it is!

Harlequin