they looked the other way

And you obviously don't condone it.
So what would you have done to stop it?

Bastage:

You haven't answered. All you've done is bluster and point fingers at the West again. I'm not asking a question about the West or Africa. I'm asking a question about the Arabs.

Let me ask you again:

What was the Arab world doing whilst Saddam was murdering other Arabs?

Let me answer you like a teacher would answer a schoolboy.

Saddam was not only murdering arabs saddam during that time was also fighting a war with the persian muslims (Iran).

The arab word leaders are afraid of the Big brother US.

Big brother US was supplying guns, chemical weapons and maps to Saddam to enable him kill more persian muslims in Iran.

The other Arab leaders did not have a strong army neither could they fight Saddam has he had built a very strong army with the help of US.

The muslims world hated Saddam and they hated his Tyrannical rule.

Bastage No one here on this thread has for 1 min praised Saddam on condoned his actions.

Now do you understand?

Now you tell me since the US is the moral super power and not afraid of anyone what were they doing when Saddam was killing the arabs and persians??

At least the arabs leaders were afraid of saddams army. What was d US doing?? Can u answer

@ bastage

the same thing you have done to stop mugabe, congolese rebels, yardua, waziri, obasanjo etc

like so many people, you are just a noisemaker , an empty vessel, who equates spouting crap on internet forums with making a difference. i doubt f you've ever even marched against anything - you just sit infront of a pc and bitch, demanding from people - what have you done?

oyb:

@ bastage

the same thing you have done to stop mugabe, congolese rebels, yardua, waziri, obasanjo etc

like so many people, you are just a noisemaker , an empty vessel, who equates spouting crap on internet forums with making a difference. i doubt f you've ever even marched against anything - you just sit infront of a pc and bitch, demanding from people - what have you done?

True talk!! as for me I practise what i I preach as I actively campaigned and protested against the war like I demonstrated in my earlier posts.

Bastage if you really feel strong in support of the war why not enlist in the US army and volunteer to go to Iraq rather than pay lip service here! Put your money where your mouth is.

Bastage:

The fact is that I am at risk of being murdered by Islamic extremism. The fact that you find my saying that to be "combative" doesn't make that threat any less real or any less unjustified

This is a quote from Bastage in another thread. He his shit scared of getting killed. People!! Remember Bastage said 38 innocent civilians lives killed everyday for 4 years in iraq is a collateral damage amidst a bigger objective.

Bastage perhaps you could volunteer to go be a collateral damage amidst a bigger objective in Iraq.

If this is not hypocricy I don’t know what the word means

gaskiya the guy na hypocrite

Neither of you likes giving a straight answer do you? Even when the question is plain and simple, all you can do is attack the West or attack the questioner.

The fact is that the Arabs and the Muslims sat on their fat asses whilst Saddam committed genocide.

You can blame the West all you want. You can say Saddam was a creation of the West all you want. You can bring up all the smokescreens you want to divert the real question. You can point the finger anywhere but where the blame actually lies because you just can't stand to look the truth in the face.

That truth is that an Arab killed a million other Arabs whilst their brothers just sat on their asses and watched.
The truth is that a Muslim killed a million other Muslims whilst their brothers just sat on their asses and watched.

Then, when someone tried to do something about it, you moan like whiny little bitches.
When Saddam could have been easily removed during the first Gulf War it was the Arabs who stopped that from happening. They actually blocked his removal when the UN had full support from the whole world!!! Operation Desert Storm could have removed him in a couple of days and a United Nations force could have gone in to sort things out. But no. Your Arab brothers halted that plan.

I'm no fan of Bush or the US contrary to what you may think or claim. I've pointed out many times on this forum what an incompetent buffoon both he and his administration were. But I also see you pointing fingers and totally absolving yourself of the blame. I see you whining whilst you were quite happy to watch Saddam commit genocide.

The fact is that you have as much blood on your hands as anyone else.

in that case, i guess you have the blood and hands and forearms of your fellow africans on your hands -

you certainly havent done anything about the thousands of african dying right now from war , and famine


the US did not go into Iraq becuase of Saddams Crimes- it has been pointed out that the world is full of despots the US has not seen fit to topple - of course, most of those despots don't have huge oil reserves. if anything, the Us and the west, throughout the cold war shored up or ignored all sots of tyrannies for the 'greater good'

it was only after the cold war that chile got round to prosecuting pinoche(when he had no western support), it was only after the cold war that aparthied in SA came to an end, it was only after the cold war that seseko was ousted. . . i could go on and on. .

Saddam was just one more proxy in the Us quest for hegemony who outlived his usefulnes when he foolishly invaded kuwait in 1990. if he hadn't done that, heck he'd still be running things in the 'middle easts only home grown democracy'

in that case, i guess you have the blood and hands and forearms of your fellow africans on your hands -
you certainly havent done anything about the thousands of african dying right now from war , and famine

There you go again. Yet another smokescreen.

This thread has nothing to do with Africa. It is about Iraq.

But then it's what one can only expect of you. Show you the truth and you try to hide it by casting accusations at others. Like I said, anyone is to blame but you guys. One day, maybe, you will accept your responsibilities but until then, you're like the immature child who denies stealing the chocolate even when anyone can see that it is smeared all around their mouth.

the US did not go into Iraq becuase of Saddams Crimes- it has been pointed out that the world is full of despots the US has not seen fit to topple - of course, most of those despots don't have huge oil reserves

Again, more smokescreen. It doesn't matter what the US went in for (even though your oil claim has been proven to be bullshit). The fact is that the Yanks went in and removed Saddam whilst the Arabs sat on their asses. The fact is that the US wanted to remove Saddam a decade before but were stopped by the Arabs. Was that for oil too?

So what are you going to do now? Accuse me of being guilty of carrying out the Crusades?
Anything to divert attention away from the truth.

But I'll ask you again. You guys admit that the Arabs sat on their asses and you disagree with the US invasion. You also agree that Saddam was committing genocide. So what would you have done?

@Bastage

Funny how mad Dog Ghadaffi is now a friend of the west!! Condo rice visited Tripoli even Blair shook hands with Mad dog ghadaffi

i'd have waited for you to do something

you seem to know what to do - when you can see through the smokescreen you kep blathering about

Bastage:

There you go again. Yet another smokescreen.

This thread has nothing to do with Africa. It is about Iraq.

But then it's what one can only expect of you. Show you the truth and you try to hide it by casting accusations at others. Like I said, anyone is to blame but you guys. One day, maybe, you will accept your responsibilities but until then, you're like the immature child who denies stealing the chocolate even when anyone can see that it is smeared all around their mouth.

Again, more smokescreen. It doesn't matter what the US went in for (even though your oil claim has been proven to be bullshit). The fact is that the Yanks went in and removed Saddam whilst the Arabs sat on their asses. The fact is that the US wanted to remove Saddam a decade before but were stopped by the Arabs. Was that for oil too?

So what are you going to do now? Accuse me of being guilty of carrying out the Crusades?
Anything to divert attention away from the truth.

But I'll ask you again. You guys admit that the Arabs sat on their asses and you disagree with the US invasion. You also agree that Saddam was committing genocide. So what would you have done?

this is getting tiring

do you always repeat yourself like this?

you must be a very boring person in real life -  

Lagosboy:

@Bastage

Funny how mad Dog Ghadaffi is now a friend of the west!! Condo rice visited Tripoli even Blair shook hands with Mad dog ghadaffi

you know what they say - no permanent enemies, only permamnet interests . 50 to 100 years from now, no one will remeber what all the fuss was about

Now let me ask you who the arba are your referring to. Is it Saudi that had no army then or Kuwait that  of 2 million people or Qatar of 1.2 million people or King Hussein of Jordan then that was friends with Saddam and an American wife or Oman of abt 4 million people. Saddam for your information had 1 million soldiers under arm!! It is only a lunatic among them that would wage a war against saddam at that time. Also remember they were all friends with the Big brother US as well.

Bastage understand!!!

@Bastage

Ahhh, Yawning!!

do you always repeat yourself like this?

I only repeat myself when addressing morons who can't answer a simple question.

@Lagosboy.

You keep burbling on about this million strong army of Saddam's as if it were some invincible force. You also totally overlook the fact that Saudi Arabia is one of the richest nations in the world and has some of the highest tech weaponry available. To say that it had no army prior to Saddam's removal is absolute bullshit. You then ignore the fact that a US army of 250,000 men was able to totally rout the Iraqi army in a couple of weeks. You go on to take no notice of the fact that the US had to fight a battle halfway around the world from their own country.

Yet with all that, the Arab armies were powerless and unable to do anything?

And as already pointed out, the US wanted to remove Saddam in the first Gulf War but the Arabs stopped them. So you're doubly screwed. If they were friends of the US then why stop the US from getting him out?

1) At least one Arab nation was powerful enough to put any sort of pressure on Saddam. They didn't.
2) They quite simply let him get away with murder when they had the chance to let the US remove him a decade earlier.

@Bastage

Volunteer for collateral damage !!! then i would take u serious or better still make this 250000 soldier 250001 by enlisting in the army then we would take u serious!!!

Your just a joke

Bastage:

Neither of you likes giving a straight answer do you? Even when the question is plain and simple, all you can do is attack the West or attack the questioner.

its not a new thing . . .

Someone the other day told me that Israel and those false palestinians were the reason for Al Qaeda's attack on the twin towers.

Keep on with your smokescreen.

You: The Arabs couldn't take out Iraq because they were too weak.
Fact: They had the chance and didn't take it.

You: 911 was nothing to do with Iraq.
Fact: Bin Laden stated that 9/11 was because the US had army bases on Saudi soil.
They were there to protect the Saudis from an Iraqi invasion. You've said yourself that the Saudis were too weak to resist Saddam and he'd already proven he liked invading his neighbours.

Read back through your words. You've admitted it yourself with your argument.
According to you, 9/11 had everything to do with Iraq.

davidylan:

its not a new thing . . .  

Did you read the question he asked and the responses before you posted this?

All hail The Legend!  

Lagosboy:

Did you read the question he asked and the responses before you posted this?

I'ver read his comments, questions and your ridiculouos attempts at avoiding directly answering them.

Again i ask, what's new?

Bastage:

Keep on with your smokescreen.
You: 911 was nothing to do with Iraq.
Fact: Bin Laden stated that 9/11 was because the US had army bases on Saudi soil.
They were there to protect the Saudis from an Iraqi invasion. You've said yourself that the Saudis were too weak to resist Saddam and he'd already proven he liked invading his neighbours.

Read back through your words. You've admitted it yourself with your argument.
According to you, 9/11 had everything to do with Iraq.

Kai the more you talk the more i feel embarassed honestly as i cant see the sense or correlation in what you have just posted. pls could you elaborate.

What has US soldiers on saudi soil got to do with invasion of iraq? If this is how you understand words then your intelligence is pitiful.   Even Davidylan did not use this arguement?

Go read my post again and see what i was inferring to. I was stating the hatred btw Bin laden and Saddam

Lagosboy:

Kai the more you talk the more i feel embarassed honestly as i can't see the sense or correlation in what you have just posted. please could you elaborate.

What has US soldiers on saudi soil got to do with invasion of iraq? If this is how you understand words then your intelligence is pitiful. Even Davidylan did not use this arguement?

Go read my post again and see what i was inferring to. I was stating the hatred between Bin laden and Saddam

no no no no . . . it is either you are deliberately trying to obfuscate issues or you genuinely do not understand the issues you are talking about.
The 1st gulf war was waged to dislodge an Iraqi army bent on annexing Kuwait . . . like Bastage asks - where were you whining muslims?

Saddam's army was a VERY REAL THREAT to a weak Saudi security apparatus hence the presence of US millitary on Saudi soil - the primary excuse Osama gave for attacking the WTC.

The invasion of Iraq was simply to dislodge Saddam and weaken his ability to threaten other middle eastern countries including Iran. The war was over in less than 6 weeks . . . the collapse of Iraq was PRIMARILY due to muslim-on-muslim terrorism.

As usual muslims kept quiet UNTIL America went to remove Saddam.

davidylan:

no no no no . . . it is either you are deliberately trying to obfuscate issues or you genuinely do not understand the issues you are talking about.
The 1st gulf war was waged to dislodge an Iraqi army bent on annexing Kuwait . . . like Bastage asks - where were you whining muslims?

Saddam's army was a VERY REAL THREAT to a weak Saudi security apparatus hence the presence of US millitary on Saudi soil - the primary excuse Osama gave for attacking the WTC.

The invasion of Iraq was simply to dislodge Saddam and weaken his ability to threaten other middle eastern countries including Iran. The war was over in less than 6 weeks . . . the collapse of Iraq was PRIMARILY due to muslim-on-muslim terrorism.

I still dont understand what this has got to do with 9/11? Are you saying the US invaded Saddam so the US soldiers can leave the mid east and not need to protect the arab govt since saddam has been removed? Hence Osama would not have an excuse for another 9/11?

Pls is this what ou mean? Let me understand so i would be able to respond well

Lagosboy:

I still don't understand what this has got to do with 9/11? Are you saying the US invaded Saddam so the US soldiers can leave the mid east and not need to protect the arab govt since saddam has been removed? Hence Osama would not have an excuse for another 9/11?

please is this what ou mean? Let me understand so i would be able to respond well

Lets say it in ABC language:

1. Saddam a threat to Saudi Arabia

2. US millitary in Saudi Arabia to counter any possible Iraqi invasion similar to that of Kuwait

3. Osama attacks WTC siting presence of "infidels" on holy land.

4. America decides to remove Saddam

Understood now?

The 1st gulf war was waged to dislodge an Iraqi army bent on annexing Kuwait . . . like Bastage asks - where were you whining muslims?  Shocked

Saddam's army was a VERY REAL THREAT to a weak Saudi security apparatus hence the presence of US millitary on Saudi soil - the primary excuse Osama gave for attacking the WTC.

The invasion of Iraq was simply to dislodge Saddam and weaken his ability to threaten other middle eastern countries including Iran. The war was over in less than 6 weeks . . . the collapse of Iraq was PRIMARILY due to muslim-on-muslim terrorism.

Exactly!!!

And the thing is, Lagosboy has virtually admitted to this scenario in his argument.

Without any help from me, he's pointed out that the Saudis and the rest of the Arabs were powerless against Saddam and at risk from invasion by him if they so much as farted in his direction.

Are you saying the US invaded Saddam so the US soldiers can leave the mid east and not need to protect the arab govt since saddam has been removed? Hence Osama would not have an excuse for another 9/11?

Now you're seeing the light.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0LIY/is_3_91/ai_110734279

The only remaining U.S. Air Force unit departed Saudi Arabia Aug. 26, 2003, ending more than a decade of military operations there. The 363rd Air Expeditionary Wing was deactivated at Prince Sultan Air Base, but dozens of U.S. military advisers will remain in the kingdom, according to the Pentagon. "The end of the Iraq War and Saddam Hussein's government mean the American military mission here is over," said Air Force Maj. Gen. Robert J. Elder, Jr., at the deactivation ceremony.

You lots seem to know better than Collin Powell . there is no need for me repeating my self go read my response to your earlier posts again.

The offical reason for iraqi invasion is WMD any other reason your are trying to concot would forever remain a speculation!! WMD was never found. The war is unjustified

and like Davidylan said the war hasnt made the world safer and Bush is a slowpoke and like Bastage said he his a Buffon.

So what are we debating about?? Anything else we intend to discuss is just an ego saving mechanism.

To me Zaidi is a hero

To some he isnt

Case closed.

To me 9/11 is condemned and iraq war is also condemned

To some 9/11 is condemed and iraq war is justified - This is what i call hypocricy.

I rest my case !!

Bastage:

Exactly!!!

And the thing is, Lagosboy has virtually admitted to this scenario in his argument.

Without any help from me, he's pointed out that the Saudis and the rest of the Arabs were powerless against Saddam and at risk from invasion by him if they so much as farted in his direction.


Now you're seeing the light.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0LIY/is_3_91/ai_110734279

Your link is ridiculous honestly!!!

Even Bush would be stupid to use such an arguement or excuse to invade Iraq. What a foolish link!!

Pentagon would be dumb to use such a link.

the link we are talking abt is Did Saddam have an input to 9/11 period?

Did saddam fund the hiajackers?

Did Saddam have connection to Bin Laden?

T[i]he US invaded Iraq so they could leave Saudi and not give osama an excuse.[/i] What a foolish arguement !!!


Davidylan you are more intelligent than this Bastage i wouldnt even expect you to use this same arguement. At least u still tried to link saddam to the hiajackers (by saying there was a financial link) which is more intelligent.

Lagosboy:

You lots seem to know better than Collin Powell . there is no need for me repeating my self go read my response to your earlier posts again.

The offical reason for iraqi invasion is WMD any other reason your are trying to concot would forever remain a speculation!! WMD was never found. The war is unjustified

That was the reason the US had to give to at least persuade the UN to allow it militarily remove Saddam. If it were all about WMDs then the US would have attacked Iran, North Korea and Pakistan. As long as your WMDs are not a potent threat to your neighbours and other innocent countries then you have no fear of western attacks.

Lagosboy:

and like Davidylan said the war hasnt made the world safer and Bush is a slowpoke and like Bastage said he his a Buffon.

Isnt it interesting that Americans are loudest at condemning their leaders when they fumble . . . we're waiting to see arabs and muslims condemn Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Ahmedinejad and co . . .

Lagosboy:

To me Zaidi is a hero

just like the 19 9-11 terrorists are martyrs and heros to millions around the world. Tell me about moderate islam again.

Lagosboy:

To me 9/11 is condemned and iraq war is also condemned

To some 9/11 is condemed and iraq war is justified - This is what i call hypocricy.

9-11 is only "condemned" by you because you're forced to say it. privately you dont give a damn.

This is hypocrisy - when the US removed Saddam in 2003, it did so with NO single loss of US forces, very few losses to innocent Iraqi citizens.
It wasnt until Iran-made IEDs, suicide bombers and arab militias started killing themselves that Iraq finally fell apart.

To blame Iraq entirely on Bush is HYPOCRISY. full stop.

Your case is that the war shouldn't have happened.

But you offer no explanation as to what the alternative was.
The fact is, there was no alternative. The US had it's hands tied.

Stay to safeguard the rest of the Arab world and it fuelled extremism and risked more attacks.
Go into Iraq and it had the chance to remove the threat, put in a stable government and get out again.

The only thing it didn't bank on was how much Muslims hate each other.
That's why Iraq is such a shithole. No other reason.

Even Bush would be stupid to use such an arguement or excuse to invade Iraq. What a foolish link!!

*sigh*. That's why they used the WMD excuse. Because if they pointed out the truth - that they were going in to protect the Arabs from themselves, the American people would have hung them up by the balls. You guys always go on about oil yet you always think the war was about Iraqi oil. No. It was about safeguarding Saudi oil. The Yanks simply couldn't take the risk that Saddam could take over control of Saudi oil.

The US invaded Iraq so they could leave Saudi and not give osama an excuse. What a foolish arguement !!!

Foolish my ass. Every extremist in the Islamic world was foaming at the mouth because US soldiers were sitting in the birthplace of Islam. Even you should know that.

Bastage:

[size=14pt]The only thing it didn't bank on was how much Muslims hate each other.
That's why Iraq is such a shithole. No other reason.[/size]

Right on point.

To those I have wrong , I sincerely appologise , To those I have helped , I wish I can do more , To those that have helped me , May God almighty abundantly reward you , Amen. Merry xmas 'N' Happy nu Year in advance


peace

tharma:

The invasion of Iraq was premeditated, it is not about 9-11, it is more than that. If it was about 9-11, these guys would have bombed and reduce Afganistan to ashes first before going to the next culprits or accomplice - Pakistan. As the time of 9-11 only Pakistan, UAE and Saudi Arabia recognise the Taliban government. Iran nearly went to war with the Taliban in late 90s but was stopped by international communities, especially USA. They were warned not to meddle into another countries affair. So instead for the US to fight the main culprits for the 9-11 the outsource the war to Pakistan, the real force behind Taliban. Isnt that funny? People should at anytime reason with discussing international affairs. Takin side doesnt help matters, because we are not decision makers in US. What is the US saying about the Turkish Army pounding the Northern Iraq in the name of fighting rebels?

This is the most silly propaganda I've read in my life. You need to request for your school fees back from your pol science teacher.

oyb:

you are the numbnits who perpetually tires to turn every humanitarian crisis in a muslim nation to another avenue for your rants against islam - I cannot count how many times you have tried to turn intertribal genocide in darfur to a muslim issue. if everyone was as retarded as you - we would have been asking why christains did nothing in rwanda, liberia, sierra leone etal.
i wonder if you remeber that in rwanda a catholic priest was one of the major villains - if it had been the other way round, we would not have heard the end of it

as to the deafening silene on your so called threads on african conflicts - thats the nairaland you helped create - one in which you and your clones are concerned with Islam, and nothing else.

toby and his little tobys running amok 

Let me get this straight. A condemnation of genocide in Darfur is anti-Islam.

Not only have I got you to agree with me that your prophet's sexual peccadilloes is akin to a pedophile's, you now seem to agree that Islam is a synonym for Arab. That is the only rational explanation for why you seem to think that any mention of Halabja or Darfur is ipso facto anti-Islamic.

As for references to Liberia and Rwanda. I don't see why a mutt like you seems to think there is any logical connection with the topic. The topic is about Iraq, the question is why your sense of outrage is ''time-constrained''. Only events after 2003 make you angry, events prior to 2003 only seem to inspire inane rants about Hiroshima/Nagasaki and Sierra Leone(apparently, S. Leone doesn't have a sizable Muslim population).

I started by asking you why the terms - Halabja, Anfal campaign - have never been seen in your posts. Before one could say ''Arab mental slave'', you went off on a rant about Indian reservations and the 2nd World War. What will it take to get this collection of brain washed abds to condemn Arab atrocities without whining about ''anti-Islam''?