Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

From liberation to terror - to a new war.

Apr 9, 2004 9:14PM PDT

The cheering got stuck in the throat. In American's as well as Iraqi's.
The evaluation can only be one: Failure!

Cities on fire all over the country. Bunches of corps on both sides and foreigners who are kidnapped.
The one year celebration could have been better.
The question must be asked: Was it worth the price?
The answer may differ depending on who is to answer the question.

The positive parts of it are as follow:
The tyrant Saddam Hussein is gone.
Freedom for the Iraqis to say what they want.
Political prisoners freed.
46 out of 55 suspected war criminals are caught.

The negative parts are:
At least 10,000 dead Iraqis, many of them civilians.
Over 600 American soldiers and soldiers from other countries are dead.
Thousands of people on both sides are marked for life.
There is an occupation by foreign countries.
The cost ? Over $100 billion

How many victims is the removal of a tyrant worth? A thousand? Ten thousands? A hundred thousands?
The answers may be very individual but the facts remain?

What do the parents of the three year old children say about the fact that their sons and daughters got American bullets in their heads during last weekend?s uproar in Sadr City, the suburb of Baghdad? What do the wives and girlfriends of the American guards that were shot and cut up by a crowd out of control say?

To them the war is not about numbers. How do we measure our happiness about the fact that Saddam is long gone, taking into account their grief?
Where the statue of Saddam was torn down a year ago, are pictures of the Shiite priest Muqtada Sadr. No pictures of the ?liberators? Bush and Blair. Neither Iraqis nor Americans thought about replacing Saddam with an Islamic totalitarian system like the one in Iran. Even so, the impression today is that anything may happen. Nobody has control!
The scenes of happiness that we saw a year ago were authentic in one single way; Saddam was gone! But the Iraqi people seemed to fear the future?

The anarchy spread immediately when the Americans looked at the lootings passively.
Since then things have gotten worse. Many Iraqis have changed from ?not willing to cooperate? to ?violent resistance?.
Even so there is a quiet majority who only want calm and security independently of who is in power. And even so, nobody dares showing their sympathy for the USA, if that exist?

The worst part is probably that the war was ?unnecessarily?. Iraq didn?t have any WMD! There weren?t any international terrorists! Not until Bush invited them?
So many serious mistakes. Such a bad research. Such ignorance for human lives.
One year is not much after a dictatorship of 35 years. It usually takes about 10 years to establish normality.
Even so, it must be something wrong about an occupation when the violence and the chaos are worse one year later?

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Re:just one small problem
Apr 9, 2004 9:56PM PDT

iraq has a population of about 25 million and god knows how many armed groups who would just love to be in charge....

remember what happened in lebanon (with a populaton of 3.5 million)? you remember the pictures of armed terrorists driving through residential areas and shooting anything that moved?

i suggest you get used to the idea that US troops ARE in iraq, and CANNOT just walk away because sadaam is no longer in power...

- Collapse -
Re:From liberation to terror - to a new war.
Apr 9, 2004 10:01PM PDT

What's wrong with an occupation is that it is an OCCUPATION. Well meaning or not it is THEIR country. I for one expected this to happen as historically it almost always happens...and not just sometimes!

We are the foreigners in Iraq. They will not lose as they KNOW that Allah is on their side! And yes is is that black and white.

Unfortunately we now have few options. Either get out or
kill,kill,kill! And if I sound redundant...the truth often is!

- Collapse -
Just so we know
Apr 9, 2004 10:34PM PDT

Are these your words or are you quoting some other source?

- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Apr 10, 2004 9:26AM PDT
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Apr 10, 2004 9:36AM PDT
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Apr 10, 2004 9:43AM PDT
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Apr 11, 2004 6:34AM PDT
- Collapse -
(NT) Message has been deleted.
Apr 11, 2004 7:21AM PDT
- Collapse -
Re:Re:Hey Einstein....
Apr 11, 2004 10:49AM PDT

you should

- Collapse -
(NT) Is your name Charlie?
Apr 11, 2004 12:42AM PDT

.

- Collapse -
Re:(NT) Is your name Charlie?
Apr 11, 2004 3:37AM PDT

Dear Evie

Why get so cross when people are on your side, (albeit you make it difficult sometimes)? I was thinking about posting a similar "misunderstanding" post, but was beaten to it.

I've kinda gathered that you might had been given a hard time in the past, but surely that is history unless you perpetuate it. I don't mean any ill-feeling towards you and just wonder why you seem to be your own worst enemy. Some of the views expressed on CNet are fairly outrageous by any standard, therefore there is no reason to me why yours stand out from the crowd or are any less valid in their own right - unless you make them personal.

Just my view, and, like you, I do tend to express my own views. Doesn't stop me from hoping you've had a happy Easter though, especially at home, but also through CNet with the animated cards that have been posted - and thanks to Others for those.

Regards
Mo

- Collapse -
Dear Mo, Butt out!
Apr 11, 2004 4:17AM PDT

I was not cross until now.

There was no confusion. I was clearly addressing Charlie and it was Gearup that chose to go on a personal attack.

Charlie has complained mightily of late that people are attributing AP's words to him. I merely asked to clarify if we could attribute this post to him or if he was quoting some source he neglected to credit.

You have either not been in SE long enough to know the history of things to comment from a position of knowledge, or are here under a new identity. In either case, your input lacks basis for any meaning here.

Have a nice day.

- Collapse -
Re:Dear Mo, Butt out!
Apr 11, 2004 7:39AM PDT

Dear Evie

In my own way, I was trying to acknowledge that I also understood your intention, per your para 2, and just wondered why you were cross with David, since it could well have been me.

It seems it is now me, so I had better keep my opinions to myself in future, as you suggest.

You are quite right that I don't have enough experience of the Forum (and I'm only me and not someone else) and that can make it difficult many times wondering whether to post or not. Clearly on this occasion, I made an error of judgment.

Thank you for wishing me a nice day - as we did have one here and I hope you did also. As tomorrow is also a public holiday, it is good to think that we can catch a bit more R&R before getting back to the grindstone.

Regards
Mo

- Collapse -
(NT) Who in the hell is "David"? I don't see any "Davids" in name tags above.
Apr 11, 2004 8:00AM PDT

.

- Collapse -
(NT) I was trying to echo David Evans' post that Evie was not talking to Gearup. Regards Mo
Apr 11, 2004 8:13AM PDT

.

- Collapse -
PS I've just seen ...
Apr 11, 2004 8:39AM PDT

The vertical hyphens on my screen made it look as though Evie's response was attached to David's post, which is why I did not understand Evie's response. I see now that the "hyphens" bypass and go directly to Gearup, which I why what I said seems to have been turned on its head.

Oh dear. I'm going to be in trouble also now for referring to Other's posts in the third party.

I think I've managed to hijack the conversation, unintentionally, cos Evie's original question was the source - maybe best get back on track and ask for the source of the original post again.

Regards
Mo

- Collapse -
Then next time ...
Apr 11, 2004 11:02PM PDT

... ask for clarification rather than launching into an attack on me. It would also have helped if you had actually told me what you were confused about specifically. Your cryptic diatribe regarding my forum participation was counterproductive.

- Collapse -
Re:Then next time ...
Apr 12, 2004 2:14AM PDT

Dear Evie

I read your earlier post in a mistaken connection with another post and my comments were accordingly invalid as you saw them (understandably) but were not intended to be offensive. You will know already that I have my own style of writing - it is not intended to be cryptic.

You make fair comments in the circumstances - (meaning that I take your comments on board, thank you for replying and offering the option to ask questions about matters I don't understand, which I appreciate very much from SE members, and reprimand also accepted cos I got it wrong - fair enough.)

Regards
Mo

- Collapse -
Re: Is your name Charlie? I don't think so, Evie.
Apr 11, 2004 11:47AM PDT

I have e-mail addresses for both Gearup and Charlie, and they're not the same -- not his the same as anyone else you'd recognize. More than that I can't say due to our privacy policy.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

- Collapse -
Hmmmm...
Apr 11, 2004 11:08PM PDT

... was just a rhetorical question of Gearup given that the question was addressed to Charlie Happy

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
Subthread deleted (NT)
Apr 11, 2004 11:44AM PDT

.

- Collapse -
You could have deleted Evie's post too...
Apr 11, 2004 1:17PM PDT

since her only intention was to divert people?s focus on to something else than my post, which is the tactics that this person uses a lot. That is BTW the reason I haven't replied to it.

Let's see if she asks anybody else if they have quoted somebody or not... I guess she won't!

I will certainly start questioning her posts from now on if it turns out to be ok to ask it of course...

- Collapse -
You are unbelievable Charlie
Apr 11, 2004 3:55PM PDT

There is nothing wrong with Evie's post, and because you didn't answer her question all that trouble started. She wanted to know where you got the post from, but let me guess, some socialist web site.
Considering the worth of your first post I think it would be no loss to this forum if the whole thing was deleted.

- Collapse -
I know...
Apr 11, 2004 6:03PM PDT

First off, this thread isn't about me at all, but about what's going on in Iraq. Second, I don't HAVE to answer to any questions by anybody. I choose to answer or not to. Why would she ask me if they were my words or if I had copied it in the first place?

- Collapse -
Re:how do i answer this nicely.......
Apr 11, 2004 6:12PM PDT

# Why would she ask me if they were my words or if I had copied it in the first place?#

i guess she was trying to ask nicely if the mistakes in syntax and grammar were yours or belonged to some Iraqi ***** who works for AP/Common Dreams?

*just trying to help here folks*

- Collapse -
"how do i answer this nicely......."
Apr 11, 2004 10:37PM PDT

You can't ...

- Collapse -
Re: ''you can't''
Apr 12, 2004 12:20AM PDT

in that case, the truth always helps.....

"whoever" wrote it should know, the grammar and syntax suck big time,,,

- Collapse -
The basic goal, Steve...
Apr 12, 2004 12:28AM PDT

Steve, the basic goal in to foment trouble and attack those who respond. Notice the standard tactic of asking a question rather than posting a view? Also, notice the upset when the response is about his words, that subject is not the sought after direction.

- Collapse -
Oh hogwash Charlie
Apr 11, 2004 11:06PM PDT

Your post appeared to be a compilation from some source. Given your bellyaching over DaveK's supposed slight of you for putting AP's words in your mouth, I politely asked for clarification -- to be sure -- if these were your words up for discussion, or those of others. If you choose not to respond, that is your choice. But, at some later date when someone refers to something in this thread that you said, don't come back with some lame excuse that they weren't your words.

- Collapse -
When I quote...
Apr 12, 2004 12:13AM PDT

I show that pretty clearly by using italics and bold letters. Another thing that should make it clear to you is that I never post an entire article as you should be aware of by now, but only excerpts from it. I also use quotation marks when quoting. You seem to recall most of what I have posted in the past, but have a hard time THIS specific time to tell if this is my way of quoting or not...

"Your post appeared to be a compilation from some source." - Evie

Why? What in the post made you think that?


"... at some later date when someone refers to something in this thread that you said, don't come back with some lame excuse that they weren't your words." - Evie

Unless I clearly quote a source and post a link to it, of course not. I have never done that before either, so I don't see why that should happen now. But as I have said many times before, this is not about me. You tried and to a certain extent succeeded too, to turn it into a personal issue instead of focusing on the initial post and its content.

End of discussion regarding me!