Muslim extremists chant as soldiers march in Luton

[Sam Slater]

[quote]We in the UK aren't really told what our army have really been doing in Iraq, but we were never invited and we've been occupying the place since 2003,[/quote]

Sorry, Keith, but we were invited on numerous occasions and to our discredit we let them down ? more than once. I am of course talking about the Kurds.

Well done on this thread, btw, for trying to drive home, to some idiots on here, the importance of free speech. The tabloids -if they wanted to send a powerful message to the Islamo-fascist world- should have highlighted how we in the west allow free speech, no matter how critical and unpopular, rather than attacking them.

And so, to be consistent in your stance regarding free speech, or representation, I'm sure you're now in agreement that we have given another minority that gift by releasing the Kurds from the oppression they lived under so long.

It's come at a price, of course, -freedom always does- so you cannot really point to that 150K casualty figure as some sort of argument against the war. It was either just or it was unjust. It's a tragedy that it took so many deaths to rid Iraq of their despotic leader but who can put a figure on the death toll if he was still in power? It's not like Iraq's media had the freedom to reveal the truth is it? I think it's conjecture to assume that those 150K killed would still be alive and well if it wasn't for the war. We all know that a good percentage of those killed were Muslims killing Muslims. The power vacuum killed more than US/UK bullets and bombs.

Talking of the power vacuum, Saddam wasn't going to live forever. I wonder what the outcome would have been upon his death? He'd have left two 'mad' sons, who are both notorious for cruelty, to decide who takes control. Saddam's favourite was the youngest son, Qusay, who ordered the death of thousands of Marsh Arabs, Shi'ites, and Kurds while in charge of the Republican Guard. Just because he was daddy's favourite wouldn't stop the elder attempting a grasp on power, would it? The eldest son, in the Muslim tradition, is usually the natural successor to anything and I doubt he'd have been happy taking orders from his baby bro. I mean, he might not be the power hungry type. Maybe I'm doing Uday a disservice ? hold on though, even Saddam thought he was too mental for power! Known for killing his father's servants and raping numerous women, hell, even torturing athletes who didn't perform to his satisfaction (he was coach of the Iraqi football team), surely he'd have been happy letting his brother be Mr big....then again, maybe not.

So what's the likelyhood of two mental siblings getting it on in post-Saddam Iraq, with everyone wondering who the fuck's going to come out of the mess with their heads still attached? My guess is that it would have destabilised the country whereby the army would have split in three. Two sides siding with one brother or another and the other portion would have been backed by any number of other factions. Would they side with the Kurds, the Shiites or the Sunni? Or maybe just Al-queda so they could move from the mountains of Afghanistan? And would the Iranians sit back and watch the Sunni get an upper hand? Likewise Saudi Arabia. Would they let Sunnis be slaughtered by Shiites moving in from the East? While this is going on, maybe the Kurds would at least have the opportunity of forging their own nation and becoming independent......no, wait, half of Kurdistan is inside modern Turkey and so the Turks would never allow any independent Kurdistan on which the Kurds would have a station on which to target places in Turkey from over the border. Never in a month of Sundays.

So, my conclusion is that Iraq would have been invaded from the north, by the Turks, to suppress the Kurds, from the East by Shiites and from the south by the Saudis. Forgive me if I'm a little sceptical about these mentalists sitting down around a table and fighting it out by playing scissors, paper or stone. No, I think the whole lot would have gone for a burton (see how I got in the Jewish connection?) and there would have been millions killed. MILLIONS.

Oh, and before I forget, can I just remind you of another positive of the Iraqi war? Libya.

Yes. Once Gaddafi realised we meant business he suddenly admitted his weapons of mass destruction programme and invited inspectors in over night. He realised it just wasn't worth the hassle as he knew he might be next. Once the inspectors arrived they found more chemical weapons plants, and more chemicals than we even imagined......along with a budding nuclear power programme that he's kept quiet about. If that wasn't enough, he's promised that his country will stop harbouring terrorists from now on. I wonder how many lives these actions have saved?

Anyway, enough from me! I went on a bit didn't I?



[Edited by moderator]