FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

Iraq: The Final Judgement

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Panorama starts 9pm on bbc1. Will you also watch it? As the country awaits next week's verdict from the long-delayed Iraq Inquiry into why we went to war and what the lessons should be, Jane Corbin returns to southern Iraq. With her are parents who lost a son, a soldier, there and the general who led British troops into battle. Why did it all go so wrong?

It should be interesting

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury

Where did it go wrong?

British cover in the UN for an illegal war sold on a false prospectus of WMDs to support oil coming down below $100 a barrel.

No-one knows how many Iraqis died (they're not worth counting, it seems), a country has been raped and a region destabilised...

And then the US shale gas bonanza renders the whole thing obsolete.

Something like that?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

On the plus side, the shitstorm that will follow Chilcot means that Brexit will be down the agenda for a few days

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"On the plus side, the shitstorm that will follow Chilcot means that Brexit will be down the agenda for a few days"

A good day to bury bad news?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *verysmileMan
over a year ago

Canterbury

Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster. "

Before sadam was hung....had you heard of Isis, Al Shabaab or Al Qaeda? No?....Sadam doesn't seem so bad now right

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ee VianteWoman
over a year ago

Somewhere in North Norfolk

We should have stayed out of the entire thing.

We've caused far more problems than we solved.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"We should have stayed out of the entire thing.

We've caused far more problems than we solved."

"We"? I don't remember sending bombs and people to fight in Iraq.

It's disgusting what our political masters did to Iraqis. Blair and Bush ought to be done for war crimes but, guess what, the Tribunal in The Hague is only good for arresting people from developing countries

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ee VianteWoman
over a year ago

Somewhere in North Norfolk


"We should have stayed out of the entire thing.

We've caused far more problems than we solved.

"We"? I don't remember sending bombs and people to fight in Iraq.

It's disgusting what our political masters did to Iraqis. Blair and Bush ought to be done for war crimes but, guess what, the Tribunal in The Hague is only good for arresting people from developing countries "

We = this country.

It wasn't done by me or in my name either. Ditto Syria and countless other places.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *funtimes.Man
over a year ago

Preston

Saddam Hussein stopped selling oil in petrodollers, instead opting for euros, at the time euros went up %16ish to the doller, it was a direct attack on USA finance, in return we get told he has WMD so can invade to put back the petrodoller.

what world leader would put an army on a boarder with an attack date and time if they new full well the enemy had WMD.

sure we build troops along russia, but we never told them an invade date.

be interesting if BBC panorama mentions any of this

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"We should have stayed out of the entire thing.

We've caused far more problems than we solved.

"We"? I don't remember sending bombs and people to fight in Iraq.

It's disgusting what our political masters did to Iraqis. Blair and Bush ought to be done for war crimes but, guess what, the Tribunal in The Hague is only good for arresting people from developing countries

We = this country.

It wasn't done by me or in my name either. Ditto Syria and countless other places."

I'm starting to wonder if I'm part of this country

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I really hope we see Blair and Bush at the War Crimes Tribunal at some point. The world desperately needs that to happen.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"I really hope we see Blair and Bush at the War Crimes Tribunal at some point. The world desperately needs that to happen. "

But they won't as the Tribunal only prosecutes brown dictators, not 'international statesmen'.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster. "

This is the sensible post but get ready to be drowned out by the conspiracy theorists...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

This is the sensible post but get ready to be drowned out by the conspiracy theorists... "

Read: Imperial Life In The Emerald City by Rajiv Chandrasekaran for the full, terrifying story

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If you guys really want to know the strategy deployed here look on you tube at John perkins - confessions of an economic hitman. Couple of messages on this thread have touched on it.

When Saddam dared stand up to the west they made him look like the devil which he actually wasn't and all these Islamic extremist groups were born. I think I said before but isis is actually the Israeli Secret Intelligence Service.

Do the research and the maths becomes simple.

I know they are going to kill me soon

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

This is the sensible post but get ready to be drowned out by the conspiracy theorists...

Read: Imperial Life In The Emerald City by Rajiv Chandrasekaran for the full, terrifying story

"

I have, it's an excellent book!!

But what does it really say - it says the war bit itself went relatively well and the problems came in the post-war reconstruction because of political decisions that ignored the military advice.

So people can argue about the rights and wrongs of the invasion itself, but it's irrelevant. Even if it has been a Nobel cause with UN backing, it was the reconstruction that f-ed it up.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondjoeMan
over a year ago

Glastonbury


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

This is the sensible post but get ready to be drowned out by the conspiracy theorists...

Read: Imperial Life In The Emerald City by Rajiv Chandrasekaran for the full, terrifying story

I have, it's an excellent book!!

But what does it really say - it says the war bit itself went relatively well and the problems came in the post-war reconstruction because of political decisions that ignored the military advice.

So people can argue about the rights and wrongs of the invasion itself, but it's irrelevant. Even if it has been a Nobel cause with UN backing, it was the reconstruction that f-ed it up."

Exactly - everyone criticises the US for not having a post-invasion plan. Turns out the State Dept did have a well-worked out one but it didn't fit with the Dept. of Defense's so they filed it in the bin.

Ooops.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

This is the sensible post but get ready to be drowned out by the conspiracy theorists...

Read: Imperial Life In The Emerald City by Rajiv Chandrasekaran for the full, terrifying story

I have, it's an excellent book!!

But what does it really say - it says the war bit itself went relatively well and the problems came in the post-war reconstruction because of political decisions that ignored the military advice.

So people can argue about the rights and wrongs of the invasion itself, but it's irrelevant. Even if it has been a Nobel cause with UN backing, it was the reconstruction that f-ed it up.

Exactly - everyone criticises the US for not having a post-invasion plan. Turns out the State Dept did have a well-worked out one but it didn't fit with the Dept. of Defense's so they filed it in the bin.

Ooops.

"

Get outta here.

The post plan was effectively using their assets and Capitalism-esque construction companies to rebuild what they destroyed in the first place.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

This is sailing very close to being a political thread.

We'd better rein it in, or the heavies will be here to move us on

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

This is the sensible post but get ready to be drowned out by the conspiracy theorists...

Read: Imperial Life In The Emerald City by Rajiv Chandrasekaran for the full, terrifying story

I have, it's an excellent book!!

But what does it really say - it says the war bit itself went relatively well and the problems came in the post-war reconstruction because of political decisions that ignored the military advice.

So people can argue about the rights and wrongs of the invasion itself, but it's irrelevant. Even if it has been a Nobel cause with UN backing, it was the reconstruction that f-ed it up.

Exactly - everyone criticises the US for not having a post-invasion plan. Turns out the State Dept did have a well-worked out one but it didn't fit with the Dept. of Defense's so they filed it in the bin.

Ooops.

"

The people blaming Blair show what cretins they are by their willful ignorance of this fact. Had the post-war construction gone well then he would have been a hero. Blair had no power to influence the decisions that actually screwed up the country.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Calling people cretins is hardly the way to get your point over.

The fact is that the whole exercise was a massive fuck up sold on a lie. It has served as tinder to ignite radical Islam into a much greater problem than it was. It has lead to huge irreparable distrust of the West in the Muslim world.

On that basis, Blair (without whom Bush would not have been able to move so quickly) has much to answer for.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Calling people cretins is hardly the way to get your point over.

The fact is that the whole exercise was a massive fuck up sold on a lie. It has served as tinder to ignite radical Islam into a much greater problem than it was. It has lead to huge irreparable distrust of the West in the Muslim world.

On that basis, Blair (without whom Bush would not have been able to move so quickly) has much to answer for.

"

The fighting itself was incredibly successful from a military standpoint. A swift and comprehensive victory over the world's 4th largest army. That's the bit Blair supported.

The post-war reconstruction was about as bad as it could have possibly been and went against all the advice of the military on the ground.

Whether or not it was legal, moral or done for good or bad reasons doesn't change either of those facts.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

It started, it is interesting.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It started, it is interesting."

Have they discussed the policy of debaathification yet?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *thwalescplCouple
over a year ago

brecon


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster. "

Are you fucking mad?

He used chemical weapons against Iranian soldiers during the war between Iraq and Iran.

He used them against the Kurdish tribes, in one noteable documented case wiping out an entire village.

And then theres this...

"In 2015 it was learned that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction had not been fully accounted for by UN inspections.[11] Ten years after, Operation Avarice was declassified and it was learned that there were stockpiles of warheads and rockets containing degraded chemical agents similar to those used in the Iran-Iraq War. From 2005 through 2006 military intelligence discovered that the weapons—many in poor condition, some empty or containing nonlethal liquid, but others containing sarin with unexpectedly high purity—were in the possession of one Iraqi individual who remained anonymous. Operation Avarice, headed by army intelligence and the CIA, involved the discreet purchase of the weapons from the unidentified individual to keep them off the black market.[11]"

Sarin is a highly lethal nerve agent, one droplet the size of a pinhead onto exposed skin would kill an adult.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *thwalescplCouple
over a year ago

brecon

Oh, and, FYI, if they found warheads with "degraded chemical agents" in, that means that those were, at one time, actually loaded with chemical weapons... i.e. ready to use!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"It started, it is interesting.

Have they discussed the policy of debaathification yet? "
It finished and no they didn't talk about that, mostly that they didn't find weapons of mass destructions as iraq destroyed them 20 years earlier.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It started, it is interesting.

Have they discussed the policy of debaathification yet? It finished and no they didn't talk about that, mostly that they didn't find weapons of mass destructions as iraq destroyed them 20 years earlier."

Right so they forgot to mention that some bright spark decided to make the world's 4th largest army redundant in one of the poorest parts of the world. Hmmm I wonder what a million or so unemployed trained killers are gonna do when they have a choice between watching their family starve to death or fight for ISIS?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago

upton wirral

Should be in new political thread I think

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *obbytupperMan
over a year ago

Menston near Ilkley


"It started, it is interesting.

Have they discussed the policy of debaathification yet? It finished and no they didn't talk about that, mostly that they didn't find weapons of mass destructions as iraq destroyed them 20 years earlier."

Yes they did Shag. That was the bit which left them without any structure I.E. Hospitals without Doctors, no police force, no teachers as all were Baathist.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"It started, it is interesting.

Have they discussed the policy of debaathification yet? It finished and no they didn't talk about that, mostly that they didn't find weapons of mass destructions as iraq destroyed them 20 years earlier.

Yes they did Shag. That was the bit which left them without any structure I.E. Hospitals without Doctors, no police force, no teachers as all were Baathist. "

Not to mention a recruitment gift for ISIS

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *uited staffs guyMan
over a year ago

staffordshire


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

Before sadam was hung....had you heard of Isis, Al Shabaab or Al Qaeda? No?....Sadam doesn't seem so bad now right "

You may have heard of something Al Qaeda did in New York with some aeroplanes a long time before Saddam was hung?

It's easy to say Saddam wasn't too bad when it's not your relatives he's using chemical weapons on, not your daughters his sons were raping and not your land he was deliberately contaminating to wipe out an ethnic group

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

Before sadam was hung....had you heard of Isis, Al Shabaab or Al Qaeda? No?....Sadam doesn't seem so bad now right

You may have heard of something Al Qaeda did in New York with some aeroplanes a long time before Saddam was hung?

It's easy to say Saddam wasn't too bad when it's not your relatives he's using chemical weapons on, not your daughters his sons were raping and not your land he was deliberately contaminating to wipe out an ethnic group

"

Yeah, but he wasn't doing it here. Better the despot you know than the despot you don't.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

Before sadam was hung....had you heard of Isis, Al Shabaab or Al Qaeda? No?....Sadam doesn't seem so bad now right

You may have heard of something Al Qaeda did in New York with some aeroplanes a long time before Saddam was hung?

It's easy to say Saddam wasn't too bad when it's not your relatives he's using chemical weapons on, not your daughters his sons were raping and not your land he was deliberately contaminating to wipe out an ethnic group

Yeah, but he wasn't doing it here. Better the despot you know than the despot you don't."

As a result of the anarchy of the post-war clusterfuck - they are doing it here now

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

Before sadam was hung....had you heard of Isis, Al Shabaab or Al Qaeda? No?....Sadam doesn't seem so bad now right

You may have heard of something Al Qaeda did in New York with some aeroplanes a long time before Saddam was hung?

It's easy to say Saddam wasn't too bad when it's not your relatives he's using chemical weapons on, not your daughters his sons were raping and not your land he was deliberately contaminating to wipe out an ethnic group

Yeah, but he wasn't doing it here. Better the despot you know than the despot you don't.

As a result of the anarchy of the post-war clusterfuck - they are doing it here now "

Which was my point. Blair and Bush have a lot of blood on their hands but will never be accountable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

Before sadam was hung....had you heard of Isis, Al Shabaab or Al Qaeda? No?....Sadam doesn't seem so bad now right

You may have heard of something Al Qaeda did in New York with some aeroplanes a long time before Saddam was hung?

It's easy to say Saddam wasn't too bad when it's not your relatives he's using chemical weapons on, not your daughters his sons were raping and not your land he was deliberately contaminating to wipe out an ethnic group

Yeah, but he wasn't doing it here. Better the despot you know than the despot you don't.

As a result of the anarchy of the post-war clusterfuck - they are doing it here now

Which was my point. Blair and Bush have a lot of blood on their hands but will never be accountable."

For goodness sake read the thread! Blair didn't oversee the reconstruction did he? There was no need for the debaathification policy, without it the reconstruction could have been a success. The blood is on the hands of those who enforced that idiotic policy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago


"It started, it is interesting.

Have they discussed the policy of debaathification yet? It finished and no they didn't talk about that, mostly that they didn't find weapons of mass destructions as iraq destroyed them 20 years earlier.

Right so they forgot to mention that some bright spark decided to make the world's 4th largest army redundant in one of the poorest parts of the world. Hmmm I wonder what a million or so unemployed trained killers are gonna do when they have a choice between watching their family starve to death or fight for ISIS? "
That is right, they didn't mentioned that either and yeah those killers have no choice than to join ISIS, but then if they do that, how can they repair the country and advance? Maibe they should somehow start to think of that as otherwise Iraq will be like this for decades to come. I think other countries should come together and help them out.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *eMontresMan
over a year ago

Halesowen

If they never mentioned Operation Avarice, then they clearly had an agenda, or were just plain sloppy.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"If they never mentioned Operation Avarice, then they clearly had an agenda, or were just plain sloppy."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

Before sadam was hung....had you heard of Isis, Al Shabaab or Al Qaeda? No?....Sadam doesn't seem so bad now right

You may have heard of something Al Qaeda did in New York with some aeroplanes a long time before Saddam was hung?

It's easy to say Saddam wasn't too bad when it's not your relatives he's using chemical weapons on, not your daughters his sons were raping and not your land he was deliberately contaminating to wipe out an ethnic group

Yeah, but he wasn't doing it here. Better the despot you know than the despot you don't.

As a result of the anarchy of the post-war clusterfuck - they are doing it here now

Which was my point. Blair and Bush have a lot of blood on their hands but will never be accountable.

For goodness sake read the thread! Blair didn't oversee the reconstruction did he? There was no need for the debaathification policy, without it the reconstruction could have been a success. The blood is on the hands of those who enforced that idiotic policy. "

I think you will find the the pair of them authorised a war on a whim. That was the catalyst for all that followed.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Saddam was evil and there was no credible intelligence or evidence of WMD's. However the real crime was getting rid of him without considering an exit plan after installing a stable regime.....no stability and no exit plan was always a recipe for disaster.

Before sadam was hung....had you heard of Isis, Al Shabaab or Al Qaeda? No?....Sadam doesn't seem so bad now right

You may have heard of something Al Qaeda did in New York with some aeroplanes a long time before Saddam was hung?

It's easy to say Saddam wasn't too bad when it's not your relatives he's using chemical weapons on, not your daughters his sons were raping and not your land he was deliberately contaminating to wipe out an ethnic group

Yeah, but he wasn't doing it here. Better the despot you know than the despot you don't.

As a result of the anarchy of the post-war clusterfuck - they are doing it here now

Which was my point. Blair and Bush have a lot of blood on their hands but will never be accountable.

For goodness sake read the thread! Blair didn't oversee the reconstruction did he? There was no need for the debaathification policy, without it the reconstruction could have been a success. The blood is on the hands of those who enforced that idiotic policy.

I think you will find the the pair of them authorised a war on a whim. That was the catalyst for all that followed."

Not at all. The war went remarkably well. The reconstruction was the disaster.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top