An Answer to the Pro War Surrealists

Romair:

``Very few of your comments can be explained by facts and figures. They are merely opinions, while facts point in the opposite direction.``

Nothing in your post was fact. All the ``facts`` were colored opinion.

Let me reitirate:

It is entirely legal as per international law for any country to declare war on any other country, as long as the declaration of war precedes the commencement of hostilities and military action is conducted by uniformed persons.

Being an ex-military person I am sure you are aware of the legality of war.

With regards to what I support, let me be very precise. I as an individual who lives in the United States, support the right of my government to preemptively attack those who wish this country harm. I do not want my government to sit around and wait for a hostile action to be commited where innocent Americans are killed before responding. I believe that the primary responsibility of the President of the United States is to his people, and if preemptive action is required to safeguard the people, so be it.

This is a lesson I learned from September 11. Now, I know that Saddam had nothing to do with Sept 11. That is not the point. The point is that Sept 11 made me aware of the dangers that terrorism can inflict on a large scale and all actions designed to protect the homeland from harm should be implemented.

#21 by tahmed32 on April 10, 2003 7:19am PT

IN any country we may find people like you who would cheer a foregin master.
If Iraq under saddam was as you say what chance that he would admit or let it be known to its slum dwellers that he was backed by CIA?
If for Instance there happened to be a bigger, richer more powerful nation than US Im sure you will cheer the liberation of US at the hands of a more powerful nation even if your family died in that liberation and you lost a couple of limbs.
Im sure we can find a few hundred to thousand people in any city in India or pakistan who would similarly cheer a ``Liberation`` form any country as long it is rich gives the right kind of platitudes.

That you belong to such a clique is now well known.

tahamed32, hamidm2

It is a fact that India was a rich country before it was taken over by the British. In fact it constituted about 1/3 of the worlds GDP.
When british rule ended we were an improvished nation. This fits in nicely with your stand.

Impoverish for the sake of democracy that seems the mantra that the old as well as the Neo-Coloninst and their apologists aspire.
On the other hand check the facetious argument of hamidm2 who says that British left democracy in India. You mean when they were ruling India Democracy was practiced?
I suppose that you are all for the democracy as practiced by the British ie give the natives nominal voice and retain the powers. I suppose this is the democracy that you want for the rest of the world.

Checkthe article below ....

I know that you guys are facetious Im sure you would have read such things before. I suppose that it has no effect on you.
You are too far gone in the slavery of the mind to the US for anything to have any affect on you.

http://www.islamicity.com/articles/Articles.asp?ref=IN0201-391

Those who believe that Islam is anti-democratic need a short lesson in the modern history of constitutional movements in Islam. Muhammad Ali of Egypt appointed his first advisory council in 1824, consisting mostly of elected members. In 1881, the Egyptian nationalist movement succeeded in convening an elected parliament, but this was aborted only a year later by British occupation. Tunisia had promulgated a constitution in 1860, setting up a Supreme Council purporting to limit the powers of the monarchy. But this was suspended in 1864 when the French discovered that it interfered with their ambitions. Turkey elected its first parliament in 1877, though it was dissolved a year later by the Caliph; a second parliament was convened in 1908. Iran`s progress was more dramatic. It started with protests against a British tobacco monopoly in the 1890s, and quickly led to an elected parliament in 1906, with powers to confirm the cabinet. A year later, however, the British and Russians carved up Iran into their spheres of influence, a development that would lead to the dissolution of the parliament in 1910. Nevertheless, the constitutional movement persisted until it was suppressed in 1931 by a new dynasty brought to power by the British.

Compare these developments with the history of constitutional movements elsewhere, not excluding Europe, during the nineteenth century - and the world of Islam does not suffer from the comparison. Incredible as this appears to minds blinded by Euro-centric prejudice, Tunisia, Egypt and Iran were taking the lead in making the transition to constitutional monarchies. The `resistance to democracy` in the Arab world even today does not come from their population. Quite the opposite. It comes from neo-colonial surrogates - brutal military dictatorships and absolutist monarchies - imposed by a United States determined to safeguard oil and Israel.

ferozk # 25

``I hope the mothers, who lost their children in this war in the market places and those mothers, whose children died from 12 years of medicine denying sanctions, will also applaud your foresights and your eagerness to support mass murder writ large. I am sure that they will agree with you that all their children dying was a worthy price for being liberated; liberated from an oppression legitimized by the would be liberators themselves! ``

and if this is the case, I`M ABSOLUTLEY CONVINCED that the iraqis you saw on TV yesterday dancing in the streets, kissing pictures of bush, smothering US soliders with hugs, kisses, and handshakes would slove to ``salute you`` for turning your back on them and supporting hussein b/c - why? - nothing more then your basic resentment of america (truth hurts, doesn`t it buddy?). that you would let people continue to suffer when a group of nations, at their own risk (not yours), stood ready to free them. i wonder whether you have the courage to utter this nonsense face-to-face to iraqis in bagdhad...

``I have never met a person, who actually rejoiced in war and took a perverse pleasure in the suffering of others and prided himself over the accuracy of his war predications.``

come on feroz, do you really believe that pawqas? i rejoiced at the liberation of an opressed people. the scenes yesterday (on ALL media outlets) of iraqis celebrating were truly moving - i hope it provides some consolation to the familes of soldiers who made the ultimate sacrafice - that it was for something meaningful and good.

yesterday, i was happy for iraq. today, i smile reading posts from ``anti-war`` (read: pro-dictator/anti-american) contributoters such as yourself. so, by all means, please continue with this tripe. i love seeing you guys squirm!

cheers

ferozk # 25

perhaps one more thing you could clarify. you write, ``liberated from an oppression legitimized by the would be liberators themselves! `` lets say you`re right. let`s assume america once propped up saddam. even if thats true, america now says he`s bad and you agree. so why all the outrage when america wants to remove something everyone agrees is bad? i`ve asked it before. doubt you will prove an answer anywhere close to logical, so i`ll fill you in - its something you yourself probably don`t realize - the answer? your irrational hatred of america!

truth hurts, huh? seriously, i would love to see you explain your ideas to iraqis today - tell them how awful the american ``occupying`` forces that they are welcoming really are...

The `punga` has begun
--------------------------
One day after Beghdad was liberated, the Shiites of Najaf and Kerbala lived up to their traditions of resistence, and killed two stooges masquerading as leaders of the community, inside the Imam Ali(as) mosque.
- one was a Saddam loyalist who had been managing the shrines on the Takiriti`s monster`s behalf
- the other was a UK-sponsored mullah vying to be the new Hamid Karzai or something..

Najaf and Kerbala have been any ruler`s nightmares for over a millenium now. Today`s events don`t bode well for the new `liberators` of iraq..

And Ayatollah Baqir Al Hakim has yet to return to his country!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&e=3&u=/ap/20030410/ap_on_re_mi_ea/war_clerics_killed

re: mullah urstruly

{Post war Iraq will not be different than post war Afghanistan. As one part of Kabul was jubilant, with Stockholm Syndrome, as the ``allies`` enetered there, the other part - the part away from the cameras was seeing rapes and murder of women, men and children. I think America has just got their very own Gaza strip. }

...hah...you are really burning up at this...these stories are getting really creative...

re: tahmed32

The United States says that Iraq was liberated on April 10, 2003 and you believe them and you cheer them. Just remember this: before you enter the iron wrought gates of Auschwitz, there is saying carved in steel which arches above the gates and saying says - arbit macht frei. It was also once believed.

I am really glad and happy that your predictions about the duration of the war came true and all naysayers, who doubted you; salute you! I hope the mothers, who lost their children in this war in the market places and those mothers, whose children died from 12 years of medicine denying sanctions, will also applaud your foresights and your eagerness to support mass murder writ large. I am sure that they will agree with you that all their children dying was a worthy price for being liberated; liberated from an oppression legitimized by the would be liberators themselves!

I am sure that you will agree, whole heartily, that it is much better to live on your knees than to die on your feet! I am sure you will agree that when the master orders, ``jump!``, it is not polite to ask ``how high?``, but to ask meekly, ``when can I come down, master?``

I owe you an apology. I thought you were an educated person, but I was mistaken. I have never met a person, who actually rejoiced in war and took a perverse pleasure in the suffering of others and prided himself over the accuracy of his war predications. Thus, you prided yourself, without knowing or realizing how costly and how dearly those predictions were and did not even ask, how much blood was paid in order to secure their accuracy. I am not sure, whether the number ``32`` at the end of your Chowk cyber name is your age or your IQ. I hope it is your age, because it would suggest that you are old enough to be intelligent and to realize the difference between indifference and cruelty.

You are, judging by your posts glorfying war, like a little child who delights in burning ants with fire, or maybe you are like a dog that urinates on the fire hyderant. The child buring the ants or the dog urinating on the fire hydrant do not do it intentionally, but because they do not know any better. I hope that you rejoice in war not, because you mean it intentionally, but because you do not know any better. If that is the case, then you are truly an object of pity and I pity you!

Ciao

There are some points posed in the replies that I would like to address:

The British Colonialism: People have been chanting about how great are the few things that british have left us. Parliamentary Democracy, From a Pakistani perspective , the Feudal Control over any form of Democracy with the Military casting the final vote of acceptance, has rendered democracy a trivial place in any past governments. In India although the BJP has come into power only recently , its main supporters the RSS, have been slowly growing ever since the Kashmir issue took off in 1947. As they say the stone was set, and the ball had started rolling.

The Aids Virus: tahmed32 has presented a very amusing reply of how aids works. I believe the article was talking about the current situation whereby although requested by NGOs and Aid Agencies all over the world. The American Corporate world has rendered profit over humanity. I guess in tahmad32 opinion, children who are born with Aids virus should only hold there parents accountable. The rest of the world should not even try and help or do anything because aids was there own fault. Sir, it might be a dream but having a sense of responsibility towards those Aids victims is a better dream then your sense of absolute abomination for aids. Humour is something people like us can afford, but indeed the issue remains, people die and we live in our own concocted worlds of Right and Wrong. I hope it never happens but if someone you cared for would have Aids virus, will you tear them apart and leave them or support them in dealing with it???? Please dont make your replies personal, it cheapens the argument.

and last of all, to those british colonialists, let me give a chapter out of history, that maybe all of you will find useless, but here it goes anyways.
Its WW2, the japanese are attacking the british raj in india and especially to the border of bihar, the Raj is worried that the people in case of a japanese invasion might join the japanese against the British. What they is do is that they burn the entire wheat and rice vegetation of the region and lock ones already in government godown. India suffers one of the worst famines in Bihars history. The japanese never make it, the british continue and hundreds of thousand people die in this game of war and strategy. I know we are ruled my imbeciles, but will be engender this form of bias and absolute disregard for our own people???

Robert Fisk: A day that began with shellfire ended with a once-oppressed people walking like giants
10 April 2003


The Americans ``liberated`` Baghdad yesterday, destroyed the centre of Saddam Hussein`s quarter-century of brutal dictatorial power but brought behind them an army of looters who unleashed upon the ancient city a reign of pillage and anarchy. It was a day that began with shellfire and air strikes and blood-bloated hospitals and ended with the ritual destruction of the dictator`s statues. The mobs shrieked their delight. Men who, for 25 years, had grovellingly obeyed Saddam`s most humble secret policeman turned into giants, bellowing their hatred of the Iraqi leader as his vast and monstrous statues thundered to the ground.

``It is the beginning of our new freedom,`` an Iraqi shopkeeper shouted at me. Then he paused, and asked: ``What do the Americans want from us now?` The great Lebanese poet Kalil Gibran once wrote that he pitied the nation that welcomed its tyrants with trumpetings and dismissed them with hootings of derision. And the people of Baghdad performed this same deadly ritual yesterday, forgetting that they – or their parents – had behaved in identical fashion when the Arab Socialist Baath Party destroyed the previous dictatorship of Iraq`s generals and princes. Forgetting, too, that the ``liberators`` were a new and alien and all-powerful occupying force with neither culture nor language nor race nor religion to unite them with Iraq.

As tens of thousands of Shia Muslim poor from the vast slums of Saddam City poured into the centre of Baghdad to smash their way into shops, offices and government ministries – an epic version of the same orgy of theft and mass destruction that the British did so little to prevent in Basra – US Marines watched from only a few hundred yards away as looters made off with cars, rugs, hoards of money, computers, desks, sofas, even door-frames.

In Al-Fardus (Paradise) Square, US Marines helped a crowd of youths pull down the gaunt and massive statue of Saddam by roping it to an armoured personnel carrier. It toppled menacingly forward from its plinth to hang lengthways above the ground, right arm still raised in fraternal greetings to the Iraqi people.

It was a symbolic moment in more ways than one. I stood behind the first man to seize a hatchet and smash at the imposing grey marble plinth. But within seconds, the marble had fallen away to reveal a foundation of cheap bricks and badly cracked cement. That`s what the Americans always guessed Saddam`s regime was made of, although they did their best – in the late Seventies and early Eighties – to arm him and service his economy and offer him political support, to turn him into the very dictator he became.

In one sense, therefore, America – occupying the capital of an Arab nation for the first time in its history – was helping to destroy what it had spent so much time and money creating. Saddam was ``our`` man and yesterday, metaphorically at least, we annihilated him. Hence the importance of all those statue- bashing mobs, of all that looting and theft.

But of the real and somewhat less imposing Saddam, there was no trace.

Neither he nor his sons, Uday and Qusay, could be found. Had they fled north to their homeland fortress of Tikrit? Or has he – the most popular rumour this – taken refuge in the Russian embassy in Baghdad. Were they hiding out in the cobweb of underground tunnels and bunkers beneath the presidential palaces? True, their rule was effectively over. The torture chambers and the prisons should now be turned into memorials, the true story of Iraq`s use of gas warfare revealed at last. But history suggests otherwise. Prisons usually pass over to new management, torture cells too, and who would want the world to know how easy it is to make weapons of mass destruction.

There will be mass graves that will have to be opened – though in the Middle East, these disinterments are usually performed in order to allow more blood to be poured onto the graves.

Not that the nightmare is entirely over. For though the Americans will mark yesterday as their first day of occupation – they, of course, will call it liberation – vast areas of Baghdad remained outside the control of the United States last night. And at dusk, just before darkness curled over the land, I crossed through the American lines, back to the little bit of Saddam`s regime that remained intact within the vast, flat city of Baghdad. Down grey, carless streets, I drove to the great bridges over the Tigris which the Americans had still not crossed from the west. And there, on the corner of Bab al-Moazzam Street, were a small group of mujahedin fighters, firing Kalashnikov rifles at the American tanks on the other side of the waterway. It was brave and utterly pathetic and painfully instructive.

For the men turned out to be Arabs from Algeria, Morocco, Syria, Jordan, Palestine. Not an Iraqi was among them. The Baathist militiamen, the Republican Guard, the greasy Iraqi intelligence men, the so-called Saddam Fedayeen had all left their posts and crept home. Only the foreign Arabs, like the Frenchmen of the Nazi Charlemagne Division in 1945 Berlin, fought on. At the end, many Iraqis had shunned these men and a group of them had turned up to sit outside the lobby of the Palestine Hotel, pleading to journalists for help in returning home.

``We left our wives and children and came here to die for these people and then they told us to go,`` one of them said. But at the end of the Bab al-Moazzam Bridge they fought on last night and when I left them I could hear the American jets flying in from the west. Hurtling back through those empty streets, I could hear, too, the American tank fire as it smashed into their building.

But tanks come in two forms: the dangerous, deadly kind and the ``liberating`` kind from which smart young soldiers with tanned faces look down with smiles at Iraqis who are obliging enough to wave at them, tanks with cute names stencilled on their gun barrels, names like ``Kitten Rescue`` and ``Nightmare Witness`` (this with a human skull painted underneath) and ``Pearl``. And there has to be a first soldier – of the occupying or liberating kind – who stands at the very front of the first column of every vast and powerful army.

So I walked up to Corporal David Breeze of the 3rd Battalion, 4th Marine Regiment, from Michigan. He hadn`t spoken to his parents for two months so I called his mother on my satellite phone and from the other side of the world, Mrs Breeze came on the line and I handed the phone to her son.

And so this is what the very first soldier to enter the centre of Baghdad told his family yesterday evening. ``Hi you guys. I`m in Baghdad.

``I`m ringing to say `Hi! I love you. I`m doing fine. I love you guys. The war will be over in a few days. I`ll see you all soon.``

Yes, they all say the war will be over soon. There will be a homecoming no doubt for Corporal Breeze and I suppose I admired his innocence despite the deadly realities that await America in this dangerous, cruel land. For even as the marine tanks thrashed and ground down the highway, there were men and women who saw them and stood, the women scarved, the men observing the soldiers with the most acute attention, who spoke of their fear for the future, who talked of how Iraq could never be ruled by foreigners.

``You`ll see the celebrations and we will be happy Saddam has gone,`` one of them said to me. ``But we will then want to rid ourselves of the Americans and we will want to keep our oil and there will be resistance and then they will call us ``terrorists``. Nor did the Americans look happy ``liberators``. They pointed their rifles at the pavements and screamed at motorists to stop – one who did not, an old man in an old car, was shot in the head in front of two French journalists.

Of course, the Americans knew they would get a good press by ``liberating`` the foreign journalists at the Palestine Hotel. They lay in the long grass of the nearest square and pretended to aim their rifles at the rooftops as cameras hissed at them, and they flew a huge American flag from one of their tanks and grinned at the journalists, not one of whom reminded them that just 24 hours earlier, their army had killed two Western journalists with tank fire in that same hotel and then lied about it.

But it was the looters who marked the day as something sinister rather than joyful. In Saddam City, they had welcomed the Americans with ``V`` signs and cries of ``Up America`` and the usual trumpetings, but then they had set off downtown for a more important appointment. At the Ministry of Economy, they stole the entire records of Iraq`s exports and imports on computer discs, with desk-top computers, with armchairs and fridges and paintings. When I tried to enter the building, the looters swore at me. A French reporter had his money and camera seized by the mob.

At the Olympic sports offices, run by Uday Hussein, they did the same, one old man staggering from the building with a massive portrait of Saddam which he proceeded to attack with his fists, another tottering out of the building bearing a vast ornamental Chinese pot.

True, these were regime targets. But many of the crowds went for shops, smashing their way into furniture stores and professional offices. They came with trucks and pick-ups and trailers pulled by scruffy, underfed donkeys to carry their loot away. I saw a boy making off with an X-ray machine, a woman with a dentist`s chair.

At the Ministry of Oil, the minister`s black Mercedes limousine was discovered by the looters. Unable to find the keys, they tore the car apart, ripping off its doors, tyres and seats, leaving just the carcass and chassis in front of the huge front entrance.

At the Palestine Hotel, they smashed Saddam`s portrait on the lobby floor and set light to the hoarding of the same wretched man over the front door. They cried ``Allahuakbar`` meaning God is Greater. And there was a message there, too, for the watching Marines if they had understood it.

And so last night, as the explosion of tank shells still crashed over the city, Baghdad lay at the feet of a new master. They have come and gone in the city`s history, Abbasids and Ummayads and Mongols and Turks and British and now the Americans. The United States embassy reopened yesterday and soon, no doubt, when the Iraqis have learned to whom they must now be obedient friends, President Bush will come here and there will be new ``friends`` of America to open a new relationship with the world, new economic fortunes for those who ``liberated`` them, and – equally no doubt – relations with Israel and a real Israeli embassy in Baghdad.

But winning a war is one thing. Succeeding in the ideological and economic project that lies behind this whole war is quite another. The ``real`` story for America`s mastery over the Arab world starts now.

harish_hyd#19,
u r ill informed,no non kashmiri had been alloated plots here in azad kashmir.state subject is must.

ali87 #57 The Iraqi people know all of what you wrote. AND they obviously know some things you dont. And that is why they are happy.

#13 by Romair on April 9, 2003 8:17pm PT

Here we go again. May I ask if Stuka and Vajpayee are your personal friends for you to so confidently make that statement?

Let`s talk about Kashmir first. I`ll return to the rest of your post sometime later.

Did you know that the UN resolutions clearly stated that it was Pakistan’s responsibility to first create conditions under which a fair plebiscite could be held? Which meant the onus was on Pakistan to withdraw the hordes of “tribal” invaders (most of whom were Pak. Army personnel granted leave specifically for the purpose) it had pushed across into Jammu & Kashmir when it became clear that Maharja Hari Singh had made up his mind to accede to India. And when these “tribals” invaded Kashmir ostensibly to “liberate” Kashmir, they indulged in large-scale rape and plunder at Baramulla where they halted for what was laughably termed as “rest and recreation”. Over the years, Pakistan has resettled lakhs of Pathans and Punjabis in “Azad” Kashmir and completely altered the demographic character of that part of Kashmir to the extent that Kashmiris are actually a minority there. In contrast, Kashmir’s interests in India are protected by Article 370, according to which no non-Kashmiri can acquire land in the state of J&K. This has greatly helped preserve the Kashmiri language and culture. But when Pakistan did not fulfill its part of the deal, why expect India alone to keep up its portion?

Also, did you know that a few years ago, the chief of the pro-independence JKLF Amanullah Khan and other leaders were prevented from contesting local elections in “Azad” Kashmir because they refused to sign a declaration in the nomination form that explicitly stated that they wholeheartedly supported Kashmir’s integration into Pakistan? Also, the very fact that pro-peace or pro-independence activists have either been completely sidelined or assassinated proves that for Pakistan, the Kashmir issue is merely a fight for a piece of real estate and not a fight for Kashmiris’ aspirations, as it would have the world believe.

#10 by tahmed32 on April 9, 2003 2:42pm PT

Lets see what actually happened in Iraq. Iraq was liberated of the dictator who was put in place by CIA and whose regime was suppourted and financed by US for a long time.

What would have been the route taken by Iraq if CIA had not put its weight behind Saddam?

Of course the Apologists of US do not have memories of such things. The democracy that they talk of is the democracy of thuggery.

Of threatening small countries in suppourting them. Of killing journalists. How much a co-incidence it can be that Al_Jazeeras headquaters in Afghanistan as well as Bagdadh is bombed by a accurate missile. Not a random happening. No other targets were near by.

How is it the land of free press asks the Emir of Qatar to reign in Al-Jazeera? This is the freedom of press. Shamelessly firing on a balcony of journalists is of course defence of freedom. The freedom to do what they want without having anyone looking their shoulders.

How is it that in Australia a democracy in which the prime minister is suppossed to take the approval of the parliment to wage war(or suppourt war in other means) that the prime minister rides rough shod over this legality. The opposition cowers and all the while the polls show overwhelming oppostion to war. So where do the people go when the thugs in washington are able to coerce not only the ruling parties but also the opposition parties into silence.
Is this the democracy that is awaiting Iraq?

#8 by hamidm2 on April 9, 2003 1:45pm PT

Oh shut up about what the British gave India. If people are sovergin they can buy what they want if they can afford it. We certainly could afford it. Under the Maharaja of Mysore, Mysore was the first city in the world to use Electricty to light up its streets. My old realtives tell me that in the erestwhile Hyderabad state (even under patrial sovergenity) the Nizams ensured that there were Public toilets in major cities. They also ensured that they were cleaned every two hours and used to smell of the Jasmine scented Phenyl.

Licking fingers is better than licking private parts, kissing dogs which seems to be a accepted practice in your civilised world.

Runnining around undressed like Gandhi is better than running around undressed on city pavements at noon for no rhyme or reason.

You belive that you were stupid and changed. Belive that and spare us the homilies.

this was, in a nutshell, a good old fashion ass kicking (in the mold of 1967) by people who are stronger and smarter and richer than us. and the reason for this disparity? simply the fact that these people treat their animals better than we treat our own people. and if you think i am lying, then you must not have read about the twelve year old boy in karachi who was sodomized by four police officers and who then committed suicide after the local thana would not register an f.i.r. and ironically, while the police officers were doing their thing, our khaki and our civilian leadership was busy planning the downfall of jamil yousuf, the creater of cplc, an institution that tries to gain a modicum of control over the monsters who have been inducted in our police force.

so what explains the outbreak of concern our opinion mongers feel for the poor people of iraq? really dont know the answer. maybe the concern arises out of the instinct of self-preservation which tells them that the party that has been going on for centuries can be over at the push of a button. personally, i would not be complaining too much if a few tomahawks would go off course and land on top of people who send the sons of poor people to fight hopeless wars in afghanistan and kashmir while sending their own sons to colleges in america. and while i am at it, i would not be too upset either if missile would land on people who build million dollar palaces while their serf survive on one meal a day. ditto if missiles would land on people who lead a life of domestic bliss in london while their foot soldiers commit all sorts of unspeakable mayhem upon members of their own community.