Prince Myshkin Posted July 12, 2010 Author Share Posted July 12, 2010 Greg you're so wrong. What he did empowered peace in South Africa, you can't always be peaceful to achieve peace. i keep saying i agree with what he fought for, just don't know why he is seen as a symbol for peace and this side of his life rarely spoken about. he's wheeled out to every major event and all the western world glorifies him in a form of positive racism. it's not as though south africa's peaceful now anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aniskywalker Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 hes underrated :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Myshkin Posted July 12, 2010 Author Share Posted July 12, 2010 ^ impossible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aniskywalker Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardo Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 The kind that before the war they had a murderous dictatorship, now they have a government. How is that "fucked up"? And they used to have oil as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher Martin Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 And they used to have oil as well. No Sadam and the terrorists did, they people recieved nothing. Sadam spent all that wealth on palaces and developing weapons, thats a fact, you can find the information anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher Martin Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 ^ impossible lol i agree with this, he couldnt become anymore respected, he would become a living god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher Martin Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 Yeah.. cause their government is so good and functioning perfectly now. And sooo little people died there and still dying.. yeah.. And why won't they leave if they have a government and all now? Your missing the point, I conceded there was a tragic human cost but if you come back in 20 years you will see an entirely new country that will have benefited beyond measure from the removal of Sadam. To simply answer you second point, There are people that want to take Iraq backwards into corruptness, the war isnt over yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Myshkin Posted July 12, 2010 Author Share Posted July 12, 2010 i don't think there is any way we can predict what things will be like in twenty years time in such turbulent places like iraq so many things can happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher Martin Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 i don't think there is any way we can predict what things will be like in twenty years time in such turbulent places like iraq so many things can happen We cannot accurately predict no, but by looking around the world we can see that the removal of dictatorship and the implementation of democracy leads to a more stable, prosperous environment. perhaps twenty years is a bit soon, but I am convinced that Iraq will benefit from the liberation, I think alot of people have heard so much about the failures of the war that they no longer realise that the removal of Sadam was a great event, and that he had held a tight grip over the wealth, health and lives of the Iraqi people. He defied international law many times, he probably was developing WOMD despite the independant findings, (One of Iraqs chief scientists was killed after he made claims that there were WOMD). They were just good at hiding the evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotdensestate Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 i keep saying i agree with what he fought for, just don't know why he is seen as a symbol for peace and this side of his life rarely spoken about. he's wheeled out to every major event and all the western world glorifies him in a form of positive racism. it's not as though south africa's peaceful now anyway. He's seen as a symbol of peace because he integrated an entire hate-filled country, ergo, causing peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Myshkin Posted July 12, 2010 Author Share Posted July 12, 2010 He's seen as a symbol of peace because he integrated an entire hate-filled country, ergo, causing peace. there was never really peace though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macintosh Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 Its funny for one reason. Here in Ukraine we've had WC diary at the national channel where the whole studio was stylized by colorful portraits of Mandela Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Josh42 Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 What kind of fucked up liberation is that you see in Iraq..? Yeah.. cause their government is so good and functioning perfectly now. And sooo little people died there and still dying.. yeah.. And why won't they leave if they have a government and all now? No Sadam and the terrorists did, they people recieved nothing. Sadam spent all that wealth on palaces and developing weapons, thats a fact, you can find the information anywhere. Fun fact: There weren't "terrorists" in Iraq until the US overtook it. We fucked up their country worse than it was before. While I agree with you that their situation needed help, and Sadam was a terrible leader, the US solution just made things worse. Arm the citizens, educate them, train them, whatever. They could have taken down the B'ath Party themselves, and things would be a lot better over there right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher Martin Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 Fun fact: There weren't "terrorists" in Iraq until the US overtook it. We fucked up their country worse than it was before. While I agree with you that their situation needed help, and Sadam was a terrible leader, the US solution just made things worse. Arm the citizens, educate them, train them, whatever. They could have taken down the B'ath Party themselves, and things would be a lot better over there right now. It was a breeding ground for Al Qaeda way before the US & UK liberated it. How could the US & UK arm the citizens without overthrowing Sadam though? is that what you are saying? Or are you saying otherthrow Sadam, then get out of there and give the citizens help on how to do it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indanomati Posted July 12, 2010 Share Posted July 12, 2010 Your missing the point, I conceded there was a tragic human cost but if you come back in 20 years you will see an entirely new country that will have benefited beyond measure from the removal of Sadam. To simply answer you second point, There are people that want to take Iraq backwards into corruptness, the war isnt over yet. And it will never will. Until all of the oil there is slurped up. I know what Saddam did. I've heard and seen plenty of footage to know. And whatever he did it cannot be even compared to what's happening there now. And there is no actual excuse for it no matter what the media is trying to tell you. The whole country is broken into tiny little pieces and it will take a lot more than just 20 years to fix it up. And to your surprise there are plenty of Iraqi refugees who dream of the days when Iraq was under the rule of Saddam than to what's happening now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher Martin Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 And it will never will. Until all of the oil there is slurped up. I know what Saddam did. I've heard and seen plenty of footage to know. And whatever he did it cannot be even compared to what's happening there now. And there is no actual excuse for it no matter what the media is trying to tell you. The whole country is broken into tiny little pieces and it will take a lot more than just 20 years to fix it up. And to your surprise there are plenty of Iraqi refugees who dream of the days when Iraq was under the rule of Saddam than to what's happening now. Ok, I can believe that, I think its a tradegy that one country can go through so much. I dont know what the solution is in that case. Hopefully they can get some sort of quality of life in the distant future. The one thing i would say is that the UK & USA had no selfish intentions, i really do not believe it was for oil, I think the people that spread that are the same type of people that think 9/11 was an inside job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardo Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 No Sadam and the terrorists did, they people recieved nothing. Sadam spent all that wealth on palaces and developing weapons, thats a fact, you can find the information anywhere. LMFAO terrorits. And lol what's the difference between Sadam keeping the oil and the americans? In addition, did Iraq ever asked for help to the americans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher Martin Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 LMFAO terrorits. And lol what's the difference between Sadam keeping the oil and the americans? In addition, did Iraq ever asked for help to the americans? Al qaeda were in Iraq, that is fact. They are a terrorist organisation. The Americans are using the money from the oil to rebuild Iraq, thats the major difference, no more lavish palaces while people starve and die. Why would a dictatorship ask for help? come on man, you need better arguments that that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher Martin Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 Lol this thread has been totally hijacked! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Myshkin Posted July 13, 2010 Author Share Posted July 13, 2010 Al qaeda were in Iraq, that is fact. They are a terrorist organisation. The Americans are using the money from the oil to rebuild Iraq, thats the major difference, no more lavish palaces while people starve and die. Why would a dictatorship ask for help? come on man, you need better arguments that that! you are naive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardo Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 you are naive First time I concur with you in this thread, Greg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
christopher Martin Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 you are naive LOL maybe, I dont think all the money is going to the Iraqis, I think a portion is funding the war, a portion is funding the rebuilding, and yeh maybe the americans are making profit. I should have elaborated. Its not black and white though thats for sure, the americans arent just taking all the wealth, to think that you must be living in cuckoo land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricardo Posted July 13, 2010 Share Posted July 13, 2010 They are just wrecking havoc there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Myshkin Posted July 13, 2010 Author Share Posted July 13, 2010 you should go to wikileaks more if you back the cause so much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.28f6dfef0fe08bf9d6e4caa55d014e7d.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now