Please don't type in all CAPS, it's the equivalent to YELLING, let alone hard to read, thank you.
Hi Kurdo,
Check out this link! It's the report of a UNESCO conference on self-determination. You will find a lot of arguments in favour of your opinion there but you will also find that international law (the ICJ) is making a clear distinction between the right to self-determination and the possibility of secession from a state. As I see it, under Sadam, the Kurds had a strong case in defending separation but now things will be a lot more difficult. If the Kurds want international support for a secession now, they will have to prove that their right to self-determination is not garanteed within the 'new' state. As much as I regret it, I'm afraid your people will no longer be able to use their horrible past experiences as an argument for future secession. Everyone will say "the Kurds will have self-determination within the federal Iraqi state". Grtz
Kristof,
great link.. I enjoyed reading it... well to be honest, Iraq has not changed... there is nothing new in Iraq.. the people who call themsleves "New Iraqis" are the same Iraqis with the same mentalities 20 years ago..
Kurds now have the feelings that Saddam Hussein was better than the New Iraqis (unfortunately).. At least Saddam Hussein was accepting our existence.. the New Iraqis refuse to do so.. How can we be sure these New Iraqis are not worse than Saddam Hussein ?
The New Iraqis (and with the help of the Americans) are now pressurising the Kurdish members to accept a very light autonomy (u can say symbolic) which does not include all Kurdistan.. Now this will create tensions and problems again. The Kurdish people are not just PUK and KDP.
con
Now, no one can prove it that "Kurds will have their rights in a (symobolic autonomy) within Iraq".... Remember that a lot of people said that in 1970 when Saddam signed the "Kurdistan-Autonomy" agreement.. "THey said hey u have autonomy what do u want more".. they were proven when Anfal and Halabja genocides were conducted..
What do u think the guarantees would be that "Kurds will enjoy self-determination-rights inside Iraq ?"
The majority of New Iraqis call for "not mentioning the word (Kurd)when talking about Kurds".. Now this is an indication of denial of existance...later this will develop...
There are no guarantees that Kurds will enjoy self-determination-rights inside Iraq with the current New Iraqis mentality.
Greetings
Hi Kurdo.
I don't want you to believe that I am not sympathetic to your aspirations for a true Kurdish state.You are right not to trust to the promises of Arab nationalists but do Turkomen or Arabs trust Kurdish promises? I think not.
kurds want something and do not want to compromise
Turkomen want something and do not want to compromise.
Arabs want something and do not want to compromise.
Three guesses what the end result of this "WANT WANT WANT" will be,and the first two guesses don't count.
Yet another mid-east ****up with the usual suspects committing the usual crimes against the OTHERS.Just my opinion--- you have to live with the consequences not me.
Ps--- In a previous note you accused me of perhaps being a provacateur in favour of Saddam and against the New Iraq.You could not be more wrong.I am 100% supportive of FREEDOM and LIBERAL-DEMOCRACY in IRAQ.Neo-cons are us !!
Just not in favour of something that will be an irritant in an otherwise unstable situation.
Forgive me Kurdo my ignorance here, but does not "all Kurdistan", in your opinion, include significant portions of territory now dominated and claimed as territory by Turkey, Syria, Iran, maybe even Armenia?
Kurdo
one problem is deciding where kurdistan ends and iraq begins eg do kirkuk and mosul count, what about kurds in turkey and iran etc. Also what about minorities eg arabs, turkomen etc. For now autonomy would be best for kurds
alan
There are always limits to freedom... one person's freedom ends where another's begins. Free speech can't be granted to those who use it to rally mobs and send them to kill their political opponents, for example; doing so would destroy the very system that allowed such freedom in the first place. It's easy to make sweeping statements, but building a social system that meets all the requirements for long-term survival (self-propogating, self-correcting, and NOT self-destructive) while allowing as much freedom as possible is much harder.
The right to self-determination is one of the more difficult rights to define. In America, a number of states attempted to secede when the federal government decided that slavery should be illegal. One would think that the brutality of slavery was self-evidently wrong, but the majority of the people in the seceding states were raised to believe that slaves truly were subhuman and would indulge in an orgy of rape and violence if they were ever allowed their own self-determination. (There is still a small but very vocal minority there that continues to believe this.)
The issue ultimately came down to the usual "might makes right" resolution, and fortunately, the anti-slavery forces proved mightier than the pro-slavery forces. It is very likely the issue of Kurdish independence will end up being settled on the same level between Kurds and non-Kurds, and despite the advances made by the Kurds, it would be a mistake to assume that Kurdish victory is inevitable. The pro-slavery forces in America had stronger and better-trained armies, and won nearly all their initial battles against the anti-slavery forces, but the anti-slavery forces proved that numbers and production capacity were more important than military strength.
You talk of Iraqi's as they are not victims of the same rule of Saddam as you. Most of Iraqi's understand the Kurds, if i'm not mistaken. Saddam was against Shias and killed them the same as Kurds, I might not have one event I can point to, but he killed with the same regard. No one can promise the future will be this or that, because the future is an ever changing event, now we can promise how we will now react to any event that resembles the past. Iraq doesn't have the right to self determination in that they want their current land? Who's Self Determination is correct?
I believe there is no way in the next 20 years the U.S.A. can or will allow the changing of the borders of Iraq, I'm not sure if its fair to Kurds or not but its fact. I believe fighting this would create a bleaker future for Kurds, then trying to work with this reality towards a better situation for themselves, then maybe down the road if they still want the same end result, I believe they can persue it. I wish the best for you Kurdo.
Why are you guys (Kurds) so eager for a certain blood-bath? There is a chance that peace will ultimately work, with the Kurds living under a federal Iraq. Why not give it a try at least? I can almost guarantee that the US won't help the Kurds nearly as much (and not enough to defend them from their enemies) if they are an independent nation seperate from Iraq. However, as part of Iraq, the US will certainly try to help for the foreseeable future. While the Kurds are allies with the US, Turkey is a much bigger ally and the US would have a difficult time helping the Kurds if Turkey decided to attack them (if the Kurds were seperate from the rest of Iraq, that is).
Turkey is on thin ice in my book for human rights'. I'm tired of the U.S.A.'s alliance to Turkey. The winds of change is comming if they choose to keep acting in the manner they have the last 50 years toward minority groups and interest of their countrymen. I don't think its improved, I was willing to wait for improvement from them, but just seems they sweep it under the carpet for as long as they can till they have to act as they did before.
And what are the interests of a Kurdish state in regard to Kirkuk? Are you ready to go to war over it? Kiss that 13 years of peace, development and democracy goodbye after that.
G
Interesting, Kurdo. Just what is the proposition here? I was under the impression that a "federal" Iraq, with a Kurdish State being one of the Iraqi States was an acceptable idea to you? Now it sounds as if you would like to be totally independent of Iraq. Is that what I'm hearing from you? If Kurdistan Iraq wants independence, do you have plans set up for elections (or have they already occurred?), defence, constitution, etc.? Please let us know. Thanks!
Kurdo
was Anfal and Halabja a crime?? there was bigger crimes done by some people who were assisting the Iranis, and even guiding them to the weak points in the Iraqi defenses to attack and others attacking the supply lines and even executing in cold blood un armed soldiers when they travel to there homes in leaves.
lets forget about Saddam and Iraq and lets think about any other country for example lets think about England in WWII, and lets think that some British citizens were proven to assist the enemy of the country and even attacking army bases and supply lines and killing soldiers (WHAT WILL BE THERE FATE?)With some collateral damage caused by them through hiding in civilian arias
the answer is death death death
being a Kurd myself, I hardly trust the Iraqis. They have betrayed us several times (same goes to the Americans)..
There is now this feeling that we don't trust the Americans or the Iraqis...We want to decide our future by ourselves (not the Iraqis or Americans decide for us)...
We have had enough of sick Iraq..you see IRAQI justfying genocide because he says Kurds were traitors..
Yes for independence ...No to Iraq
why all these comments insisting that Kurds should live inside Iraq ?
I'd say let them decide what they want. We shouldn't intervene too much in others affairs.
ciao
They have betrayed us several times (same goes to the Americans)..
There is now this feeling that we don't trust the Americans
Seems the Kurds will be at least as good a friends for America as the French.
I noticed an article lately in the New York Times that mentioned that the al-Qaeda affiliate group Ansar al-Islam was primarily a Kurdish organization, and was dedicated to expanding conflict with Iraq to include attacks on America and American interests. Anti-U.S. Kurdish Militants Rebounding
I wonder what the Kurds think the U.S. has done that amounts to "betrayal"?
was Anfal and Halabja a crime??
Yes, "IRAQI" it was, and the guys responsible for it are gonna get hung for it too, at least the ones we caught. We're going to give them back to a new Iraqi government, and that'll be the end of them. We can only hope that a New Iraq will be the end of the dominance of your type of thinking over the rest of the Iraqi as well. But, at this point, we gotta have hope.
Lee C.
You must look at all sides of the story. I never said they were not a crime but what caused them was another crime and even bigger crime. Think about American citizens helping Alqaida attacking America what will be your personal stand for them
was Anfal and Halabja a crime??
Yes IRAQI these were horrible crimes against humanity. To attack a whole region like Halabcha with women, children and old people living in it with chemical weapons is a crime in any dictionary. Just put yourself and your family in the victims places and then see how you would answer your own question.
No one should justify mass killing of people just because of their ethnic or religous affiliation... No one!
More importantly than whether I support the death penalty or not, my "personal stand" will NOT be to intentionally and indiscriminately gas the women and children of their native towns, and then claim that the terrorists are worse than I am.
Lee C.
Just answer the q. please!!
what will be your personal stand for American citizens helping Alqaida attacking America??
Mountaineer, Chicago
and I am not trying to justify any thing and if those who gas those people will be prosecuted the other who lead the Iranians and guid them to attack Iraqi Troopes and attacking supply lines and causing the death of thousands of Iraqi troops must be prosecuted too
-- " There is now this feeling that we don't trust the Americans or the Iraqis...We want to decide our future by ourselves (not the Iraqis or Americans decide for us)..."
Fine.No-one can really stop lemmings from going over the cliffs BUT---
Who in the whole wide world do you expect to come to your aid ( as a SMALL power)when all your enemies(Turks,Iranians,Iraqis,etc.etc.etc.)decide to pay you a visit in the future.Look around carefully before you run off doing something simply because it is POSSIBLE.
This is a perfect illustration of --
" Be careful what you wish for;you just might get it".
PLEASE BE WISE & PATIENT
IRAQI,
Those who caused the death of thousands of Iraqi troops are the same people that gased Halabcha! Saddam sent Iraqi troops to useless wars to die. Your comparison is not accurate. You view that war as Iraq vs. an outsider enemy when in reality it was Saddam's war to protect his throne and become the leader of the Arab world. So, why would the Iraqis die for this cause? Why would the Kurds side with Saddam when they have seen nothing but cruelty from him? Your simplistic comparison of Al-Qaeda vs. America is totally misleading. Once Iraq is governed by a LIGITIMATE government that treats all Iraqis including the Kurds equally and with dignity, then every one, including the Kurds will defend this government against foreign enemies.
I think we've got a couple guys doing 2-5 year sentences already. I'm presuming, under the circumstances of their cases, that's an appropriate punishment. Sorta depends on who did precisely what don't ya think?
The Kurds, like the Taliban before them, will find that maintaining a government without American support is much, much more difficult than maintaining one with American support, especially since there are still foreign forces actively seeking the destruction of Kurdistan. That is the unfortunate reality of the Kurdish situation, and attempts to bring up the crimes committed against the Kurds is nothing more than an attempt to end all rational discourse and turn the comments section into a shouting match.
Doing so is Kurdo's right, as he is the owner of the blog. But, as with everything, there is a price to be paid for it.
Mountaineer, Chicago
The legitimacy of the war stops at the point that the other side will get into your territory with the help of some of your citizens so it is your patriotic duty to protect the land that you live in even if you don't agree with the leadership that draw your country into that war. And if everybody used your logic then the liberals and democratic will help the enemy attacking America because they don't agree with Bush!!!
And it is Saddam fault that the Kurd guide the Iranians to attack the Iraqi troops from behind and it is his fault they attack the supply lines and it is his fault they stopped buses carrying soldiers on there way to there families on leaves and shot everybody in cold blood.
Give me a break people
Lee C.
2-5 years that is the time they spend in prison so far with no offecial charge.
Lee C.
you said
"I'm presuming, under the circumstances of their cases, that's an appropriate punishment. Sorta depends on who did precisely what don't ya think?"
so lets talk about somebody who did kill and helped the enemy killing thousands of soldiers. who you talked about are some dudes who went to fight with the Taliban against the northen coalletion not somebody did any thing against America
Nope, maybe it's 5-10, but that's after a conviction for joining up with al-Qaeda and whatever else specific it was they got a conviction on. So far no Americans have been convicted on charges outta 09/11/01, or any of the prior successful attacks, although a few of the foreign terrorists have been killed or captured. That's what they got mostly just for joining up.
I just remembered, there was that John Walker Lind fella caught fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan. He got 20 years; he'll do about 18 of it even with time off for good behavior in prison. Works for me.
Blood! More Blood! Allah is thirsty!
Okay IRAQI, talk 'bout 'em; let's see ya convince me that intentional and indiscriminate gassing of their women, children, and old men was the proper punishment for these bad guys to whom you're referring.
Oh, and the guys got the lighter sentences; they didn't fight for nobody; went to Afghanistan and got some training, and came back to upstate New York--hadn't done nothing yet that I know of 'cept join up and go through the boot camp, which is itself considered sorta illegal given that al-Qaeda is on the bad guys list.
Lee C.
Still you didn't get the point. the ex regime was brutal and barbaric no question asked about it and I can't argue with anybody with that but what happened there was not like the Iraqi Army did that for intention of killing as much they could from the Kurd. it was done to eliminate an enemy that the ex regime felt that was doing great damage to Iraq and the use of gas in at least halabja was done with great effect at the Iranians who were in the area with the help of Kurdish militia (beshmerga)sniking them behind Iraqi lines with no defense in there way till Sulimania and even surrounding a big Iraqi units from all sides
I am accusing them with a lot.
Let’s see if our Kurdish brothers can deny any of these accusation!!!!
You're telling me the slaughters in the towns was an accidental event, and the gas was aimed at Iranian and Peshmurga and they just missed and hit the innocent? This where you're going with that? So, the chemical weapons were okay to use in your opinion, just an unfortunate mistake that they killed all those civilians?
I'm sorry but I don't no much about the soliders who died because of what the Kurds did in the north, but the Kurds were terrorized by troops of Iraq who were sent by Saddam, how do you expect the Kurds to act? I could be wrong in assuming what I am about the situation, but I don't think an Iraqi army was ever a pleasent site when they entered the land of where the Kurds lived. Saddam created evil acts by certain people in Iraq, I believe its time to not blame to much, because someone tried to undermind the army of Saddam, that its time to heal this ugly mess Saddam brought.
iraqi-
if you want self-government, you are going to have to control your blind and unreasonable hatred of all things kurdish. you need to realize that if it wasn't for them, there would have been a LOT more Iraqi civlian deaths in Kirkuk and Tikrit when the US liberated your country from Sadaam. Not only do you
A) owe kurdo an apology
B) owe any self-respecting Iraqi an apology for desecrating the title of your nationality
C) need to think ahead, rather than think in the 12th cent. mindset
but you also need to
D) think long and hard: do you really want another war? do you really want MORE killing of Iraqis BY Iraqis
I'll leave that one up to you, because you sure as hell have a lot of thinking to do
cont.
because if you do think your blindness can lead to anything else, you need to realize that throughout history, world leaders who have prompted genocides were only figureheads, NOT controllers. Hitler, Stalin, Sadaam, Bin Laden, and Umar could not have done what they have done without the people who supported them.
it's interesting to note that Al-Halabja was a civilian town. and if the Iranians were sneaking through, fight the Iranians, don't senselessly kill men women and children. Although sha'ria doesn't look kindly upon women, they are people too, and whether you like it or not, they will have the same rights before the eyes of whichever "god" you pray to.
Chris
gassing the area was a military decision based on calculation that they had tens of thousands of Iraqi troops surrounded and the road to one of the biggest Iraqi towns open to the Iranians so they did what they had to do and some time military decisions are very difficult decisions in difficult times.
It wasn’t like the Iraqi commanders said “O look it is a Kurdish city lets gas it”
and I believe that you are the blind ones not to understand the point.
just try to put yourself in an Iraqi stand and judge the whole situation.
the Iraqi troops in the area were defending the borders not oppressing anybody at that time.
And again I am not defending anybody I just want the world to know the truth. Gassing the area was not in revenge or intentional or oppressing but just a military decision in a situation the Kurdish themself created by bringing the Iranian troops to the area.
just a military decision in a situation the Kurdish themself created by bringing the Iranian troops to the area.
??? Them Pershmurga were tough enough to go out and fetch Iranian troops and make 'em go where they wanted 'em were they?
Just to be direct here. I'm having a hard time figuring out how gassing Kurdish civilians compromises or limits military action by Iranian troops.
You trust an army lead by Saddam that says it was a military decsion? Who knows maybe the Shia of Iran was trying to end the Sunni dictatorship in good will or they were just trying to end a regime of a Lose Cannon who lived on their door step. I don't think the past should be forgotten, all those who paid the price of their life to be remembered and cherished, but I believe we need to heal the past and not let what Saddam did ruin what Iraqi's can do present day, and make a land free of the likes of Saddam.
I thought the "dump and dumper" movie makers where talking about alians not American people but I see I was wrong
Iraqi, I can see your point of view, sort of. If you are right, then the gasssing was not directly aimed at the Kurdish citizens of the town in question. That much is good. However, and I may be wrong because I am not a soldier, and never have been. But I would like to think I would let the emeny through and stand and fight rather than gas innocent civilians. Would they have dropped the gass if it had been Tikrit? Just a thought.
And ditto Rich from the USA. I know it's got to be hard the past is gone. Work together for a stronger future.
steve
Good Idea, lets stop talking about the past and it's dark days and lets talk about the future (stop talking about ex regime crimes) and lets start a new country free of all the past dark memories
Good point Iraqi. The door swings both ways. As far as the past regime goes, those who are accused of commiting crimes such as SH, should be tried in an Iraqi court of law, as would anyone accused of commiting such crimes.
...lets stop talking about the past and it's dark days and lets talk about the future...
Works for me; there comes a time when it's just time to turn the page; may never agree on how to read the past, and already got enough problems just getting together on how to live together today and tomorrow; yesterday's dead.
Now, if we can just get Kurdo on board with this idea….
I see your point, iraqi. You could argue that the ex-regime's army gassed those Kurdish cities for reasons similar to why the US used the ultimate weapon of mass destruction against the Japanese in WW2. However, the ex-regime was filled from top to bottom with liars, so it really comes down to who you believe. If you believe that these towns were filled with people aiding the Iranians and even voluntarily quartering them, then you could conceivably argue it was a "difficult military decision" although I still wouldn't buy it in this case. Considering that the guy who gave the order (Chemical Ali) was (is?) a very brutal, heartless man, I'm not inclined to give him the benefit of doubt.
Actually, the gassing of the Kurdish villages was a test of the effectiveness of the gas delivery system. There was a great deal of documentation the Baathist regime kept on the gassing of Kurdish cities, in their al-Anfal campaign. Human Rights Watch has an exhaustively researched and documented report.
No purpose is served by pretending Halabja was just an accident, or a victim of Iraqi-Iranian crossfire. It was part of a long campaign to destroy the Kurds, waged by the Baathist party.
OK people just never mind, I think I can't make a point here
Lee c.
I am sorry if I used any unpleasant word against you and I agree with you in your last post.
and for "ex-regime's army" you can't find any Iraqi over 20 years old that didn't put years of his life serving in it (they didn't had the choise of cource)
Kurdo
I am sorry if I open any un pleasant matters with you and I wish you and all Iraqis to find a way to live together in peace
No problems. I don't think we're likely to agree on how to read the past here; but Saddam and Al-Majid are in the lockup, and are no doubt going to tried before too long and hung eventually. If we who are still alive can figure out how to live in peace in the future, it may not be so very necessary, that we agree on how to read the past.
Iraqi
Keep in touch. Whether everyone agrees or not, the idea is to keep the lines of communication open. That way people can at least hear divergent points of view and make more informed choices.
I'll work towards keeping my mind open as I assume you will.
I get the impression that there is some confusion here, Kurdo, between self-determination as it applies to a large homogeneous group, and self-determination as it applies to individuals. IMHO you should be thinking more about the rights of the individual to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" rather than the right of a large homogeneous group to self-determination.
Allowing "individual rights" in a homogeneous society is relatively easy--same culture, same heritage, same language, same religion--everybody's singing the same song. It gets a little more complicated when a nation's people come from multiple cultural backgrounds and religions, and a large minority speak a different language. But in spite of the conclusions of the U.N. studies you mentioned, it IS possible to have a successful heterogeneous (multi-cultural) society that not only permits, but protects, individual rights.
This is why in my own small town in the U.S., there are churches, synagogues, a mosque and a Buddhist temple. There are European-, African-, Hispanic- and Asian-Americans. There are Republicans, Democrats, Independents and Libertarians. Our children go to school together, we go to work together, and we relax together. We are able to do this without killing each other en masse because we know that our individual rights are protected under the constitution, even if we belong to a minority group. Admittedly, it has taken a very long time to get to this point, and things are still a long way from perfect. But the point is that it IS possible to have both cultural diversity and individual rights, as long as the laws of the land are very clear in that regard and are supported and upheld by the judicial system and law enforcement
On the surface, independence from Iraq seems logical, but what you'd be doing is separating out your somewhat homogeneous group and isolating yourselves. In the long-run this will lead to weakness, not strength; you will be wary of your neighbors and they will be wary of you. Even if you manage economic success in the short term, it won't last because your neighbors will eventually attack out of envy. And because your relatively homogeneous culture is different from theirs, and because you will have chosen to isolate yourselves, they will continue to convince themselves that Kurds are less human than they are, making it easy to justify aggression against you.
As difficult as it may be, your best hope for the future is to become a cooperative part of the larger whole. Rather than expend your energy and talent struggling for independence, fight instead for a strong constitution and legal system that protect your own individual rights as well as the rights of others. I am an Episcopalian-Democrat-of-mainly-English-descent, but I don't feel that I have to live among only others like myself in the Independent State of Episcopalian-Democrats-of-Mainly-English-Descent in order to maintain my identity while enjoying individual rights. The best way to protect Kurds from future harm and persecution is to actively engage in discussion and debate with other cultural groups within Iraq and insist now that your group, along with all others, be afforded equal protection under a new constitution.
Interesting post on www.juancole.com about what's going on.
... Okay, so now "IRAQI," confronted with a report from a reputable organization about the reality of the gassing of Halabja, decides now he's going to stop pushing his lies and try to make nice.
I don't think so.
The war we in the USA are fighting isn't just a war against terror, it's a war against lies and propaganda used to recruit people to commit acts of terror.
WE CANNOT LET THESE PEOPLE KEEP LYING. Their lies are the number one reason the third world is suffering, and the unwillingness to confront liars is the main reason the truth keeps getting trampled under the feet of fanatical mobs.
There IS one truth, and it IS possible to determine it, through research and rational thought. People who struggle to hide the truth, for whatever reason, no matter how noble or how ignoble it may be, ARE THE ENEMY of all civilization.
They do not need to be welcomed as equals in the arena of enlightened debate. They need to be excised from it, or they will destroy the entire system of scientific thought and rational discourse that philosophers all over the world labored for centuries to build.
IRAQI-
i am sorry to have judged you, and i was wrong to do so. sometimes i forget that none of us know everything about a certain situation, and I am equally to blame for being ignorant.
i see that you ARE willing to be constructive in the future, and i commend you for being a brave soul in determining the future of your country.
all i ask of you now is forgiveness for my harsh words and tone
I recall, going into this war, how a turkish woman exhorted me about the evils of kurds, saying, "how can you trust them!" when they had commited so many terrorist acts in Turkey in the name of their race. Just to say, kurds are far from clean in all this mess.
They pretend well though. Ha.
Tatterdemalian
the future will show who was lying and history some time is written as some people want not as the events happened and I don't want to argue more about that right now.
It appears that the interim Constitution has been finished. Signed, sealed, delivered, according to Al Jazerra.
Let the games begin!
They need to be excised from it, or they will destroy the entire system of scientific thought and rational discourse
Yeah, right, throw 'em back into the dark places to fester, that's a good plan…. Actually, we let everybody vote over here, even if we don't like the way they think or their views of history; in actual practice I like that plan better.
I was once asked by a French man "Why you don't want to live with Iraqis?" I said because Iraqis attack us, and kill us barbarically with no mercy over and over again.. He laughed and said "ok ask for your divorce"..
That was in 1991... I can see that the same thing is happening over and over again.. Iraqis still deny their genocide operations against Kurds....Some justify it under the name of "Iraq's national security" or " Kurds were aiding Iran"..
Even if Kurds were aiding Iran, what kind of religion, human laws, etc justfiy using chemical weapons to kill innocent 1 month old babies ? Yet we see Iraqis trying to justify it..
Yes again I do not want my children to go through what we older generations went through of terror and rape, and chemical weapon tests...
Yes..even if we were married to Iraqis..we can ask for our divorce now...
"Actually, we let everybody vote over here, even if we don't like the way they think or their views of history; in actual practice I like that plan better."
And your point is? That because people vote, we are required to believe anything they say, no matter how ridiculous?
You really have no point, you just feel a need to attack someone who has just shouted that your emperor has no clothes on.
That one pretty much brings up a WTF is he talking 'bout now? How did we get to….
Then I decided I didn't care. I'm pretty sure you know what it is you're tryin' to say with that, and as passionate as you appear to be 'bout it, I'm also fairly sure you're proud of your opinion and will buff and polish it up and show it off for me if I encourage you just a little.
So, I won't.
Opinion? You have no clue what an opinion is, so it's no surprise you treat everything as if it were just somebody's opinion.
"I think Kurds are victims" is an opinion.
"I think Kurds are lying thieves" is an opinion.
"Saddam never actually committed any crimes against the Kurds" is NOT an opinion. It is a factual claim, and a fraudulent one. It is, in short, a LIE, and people lose their jobs and can be sent to jail (yes, here in America!) for spreading them.
Opinion? You have no clue what an opinion is...
You always get this pissy when somebody disagrees with you?
I'll give ya my point a little clearer this time. I don't, didn't, probably never will, agree with the history as IRAQI tried to tell it. However, I damn well DID read what he said. He DID NOT say the gassing of the Kurds didn't happen! Nor did he say it was an accident. (I tempted him with that and he didn't bite.) Neither did he actually say he condoned it. What he said was that it was a valid military decision (a position I disagree with, although I do note that "valid" does not mean "correct" or even "justified"). And, just in case you can't figure it out, that (that it was a valid military decision) was an opinion not a fact. ‘Round here we let people express their opinions, even vote for 'em although we might disagree with 'em. We don't take it as the end of the age of reason just that somebody reasons incorr
...incorrectly.
(And at some point it's probably going to occur to me what the hell point you were trying to make with that reference to the fairy tale of the Emperor's New Clothes, although, it's gonna havta to just come to me, ‘cause I sure ain't interested enough to ponder on it much.)
"Gassing the area was not in revenge or intentional or oppressing but just a military decision in a situation the Kurdish themself created by bringing the Iranian troops to the area."
Those are IRAQI's own words, from his post above.
You have just lied, as close to directly to my face as it's possible over the internet, about something that could be checked as easily as clicking on the scroll bar.
I can only hope that you pay a fatal price for your belief that there are no facts, only opinions... and that you don't manage to trick anyone else into paying that price for you.
Actually, I just read that different; his English is notably not perfect. In context I figure he'd meant that the gassing wasn't intentional oppression; gassing “the area” was obviously intentional by his theorem, because that's where the Iranians were.
You give no weight the part about gassing "the area", in order to convert the reference to something you can interpret as a claim that the gassing itself was an accident (clearly not what he meant, and a strained interpretation for a couple of reasons if I were to parse all his writings on the subject for you). I'm figuring you're stretching for this interpretation because the answer to my original question was affirmative. You do get this pissy just about any time anybody disagrees with you. (I'll just pass by your fervent wish for a fatality on my behalf for the sin of disagreeing with you with briefest of comments, and the observation that you just don't seem to be a very tolerant person.)
Tatterdemalian, Lee c.
To understand what it was like when the gassing happened lets imagine that the US and Canada where at war and American and Canadian troops fighting at the borders.
then there was some American citizens attacking American supply lines to the troops at the borders and even killing American soldiers when they travel on leaves to there families and in top on all that these people went to the Canadian and helped them snick through the American lines and then attacking the American troops from behind. Then the American commanders had this situation “tens of American soldiers surrounded by the Canadians with no food or ammunition and the Canadian troops advancing to Seattle with no American troops opposing them and the threat on the whole American west coast falling in hand of the Canadian" then the American commanders thought they could stop
the Canadian Advance by using some kind of deadly weapon till the reinforcement arrive but the place they must attack to stop the Canadian is around the American city of Bellingham, now did you think they will do it or no? then did the American commanders had anything against the people of Bellingham?
Let me give you a real story of American justice once there was a police car chasing a suspect car and through that chase the police car hit a passing car and a woman in that car was killed so after the arrest of that suspect, he was charged with manslaughter of that woman!! it is a real story
IRAQI,
I already figured out your position. I do not read the history the way you tell it here. I do not accept this as true. I thought we agreed to put this down? Carry on the argument with Tatterdemalian if you wish, but if you wish to continue the argument with me, know that I am not bound by his position (hell he's hoping I die because I don't agree with him), and I can be convinced to continue arguing this anyway.
IRAQI..
are you trying to find a justification for using chemical weapons against one year old babies ?
As far as I'm concerned, both Lee C. and IRAQI are liars, just for different reasone. IRAQI is lying in the hope that he can convince people that the Kurds have no legitimate grievances, and therefore war crimes against them shouldn't be punished; Lee is telling lies in an effort to convince Kurdo that the Kurds should join a federalist Iraq, even if it is one led by genocide-excusing people like IRAQI.
IRAQI is acting like Hermann Goering, Lee is acting like Neville Chamberlain. I'm happy to play the part of Winston Churchill against them both.
Now that was a particularly devasting retort. You have become as great as Churchill (he could understand what he read by the way, but that's neither here nor there), and you have flayed the dissenters with your mighty opinion.
I shall now slink away, properly chastised, oh yes.
And surrender the floor to the mighty Churchillian.
calculate calculate car car loan loan search search search calculate calculate car car loan loan search search search calculate calculate car car loan loan search search search. federal government loan student federal government loan student federal government loan student.
Commenting by HaloScan
