When a party's values go AWOL
- Thread starter Avro
- Start date
Hey man it was your gig. Don't blame the US because we didn't come bail your butts out. If you people are so good you should have deployed more troops and taken on the Tutsis. Why do we have to get involved every time? If you remember, the US was fresh out of Somalia and we saw how we were appreciated. Not many Oil Reserves in Somalia are there... nor Yugoslavia for that matter. Why should we go help these countries when they repay us that way? But O'Canada wanted to be the good guy and when they failed miserably they blamed the US and France. Canada should have stood up and deployed thousands of troops immediately. Instead of going to their own people they went whining to the UN looking for the US to put boots on the ground. This Canadian Commander KNEW this was going to happen and Canada did nothing.
The same type of attitude that prompted the Canadian Commander to send OTHER countries troops outside the wire to get killed prevailed.
Nice try. It was on your watch and 800,000 to a MILLION people died on it.
I am quoting this more for Gilberts eyes. In your post I agree to everything that the article says. That pretty much sums it up with our involvment with Iraq. Iran was no freind of America and it was time for a little pay back. They wanted to mess with the bull and they got the horns.
My beef was the garbage that we supplied Iraq Chemical weapons. Where in that article does it say that? The only mention was in the Wash Post article that says we gave them chemical "precursors". So the US haters say we supplied them with chemical weapons. All sorts of everyday household chemicals can be used to create weapons. Chlorine gas... made from chlorine... you know the stuff you use to make your pool water clear is made of the same elements.
So some yahoo gets a list of thousands chemicals that were sold to the Iraqis and cross references them to chemicals that are used in making weapons. Of the thousands of chemicals, lethal and non lethal that were sold to Iraq for a variety of reasons this yahoo says...
"Hey, that chemical can ALSO be used in the making of a bianary weapon... Oh... and that chemical that is common in oil refineries can also be used in making a bianary weapon... THEREFORE the Americans are selling Iraq Chemical Weapons! Hurrrrraaaaaay!"
They were using air strikes against oil rigs and refineries. Well if we wanted the oil why would we bomb the infrastructure? Sounds silly doesn't it. Is there proof that we were bombing refineries? Nothing from The Guardian please.
In the 80 we shelled Iranian Oil Platforms in response to them mining the Persian Gulf.
No labor here.
Canada poisons millions of people everyday in third world countries with ASBESTOS... where is the outrage? THAT is hypocricy.
Not blaming the US. Just pointing out that the US did absolutely nothing , but would have if Rwanda had oil.
That and pointing out that Canadian failures don't excuse USA's screwups.
You're quoting what?
lmao
The dood (Hussein) your country was making googoo eyes with didn't turn out to be someone your country couldn't turn into a puppet like the Shah. That pissed the USA off. That was one of the real reasons for invasion.
Gollygeegosh, mister. You're a nice guy and you say you need some fertilizer and some diesel? Well, we're trying to be friends with you so we'll give you some. Need any chlorine so you can wash clothes? Need any nitrates so you can make food preservatives? :roll:
And all that while Hussein is preparing to invade Kuwait. lmao CIA? Central Intelligence Agency? More like Central Idiot Agency
It's around, you just haven't seen it.
http://www.newsdesk.org/archives/003958.html
http://www.jatam.org/english/index....75&PHPSESSID=f7644f10bb139984f2294145385ce166
http://www.japantoday.com/jp/news/348701
http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/deadly-cn.htm
Last edited:
This sarcasm is a good sign for me. It shows that you have nothing constructive to add except to act like a 13 year old.
In other words... I won the debate.
Thanks for playing and chock another win for Eaglesmack.
roflmao You're making fun of me so that shows I can debate better. roflmao
In yer dreams, child.
You haven't successfully proven anything here. You haven't successfully shown your country's admin to be the virtuous, principled goodygoody it would like everyone to see it as.
In yer dreams, child.
You haven't successfully proven anything here. You haven't successfully shown your country's admin to be the virtuous, principled goodygoody it would like everyone to see it as.
My comment sticks. The USA admin is dishonorable, dishonest, has no integrity, it is invasive, oppressive, aggressive, etc.
Like all the Somali oil? There is oil in Dafur as well... are we there? How much oil did we get out of Yugoslavia? What about Grenada? Panama? The first Gulf War? How much oil are we getting today out of it. Afghanistan oil? How is Aghanistan oil selling these days?
Now do you see the silliness of that argument?
I didn't take you to be a "No War For Oil" type.
We didn't screw up at all in Rawanda. We weren't there. Canadians thump their chest at being the UN's goto boys and when they get to command their first mission... well 800,000 people are slaughtered.
lol... Thanks for coming guys!
Canada's Army was well equipped to handle the Rawandan/Tutsi army/militia. The bottom line in Canada was this... Not our boys... Not here.
If I was a poor African refugee on the road with all I could carry and I heard "US Troops are on their way!" I would breathe a sigh of relief and maybe even set my load down. Now if I heard someone say "Canadian troops are on their way" I would tell everyone to pick up the pace.
Look... Gollygee Mister... googoo eyes...dood... Don't you think that is sophmoric?
Again... thanks for playing. You did good for awhile though, I'll give you that. Then the wheels just came off with that post. It happens though. Learn from it.
Then we can say that the Canadian Govt. is weak, hypocritcal, greedy, spineless, afraid, lacks fortitude, is a follower, and has no ability to lead.
Yeah, things do tend to backfire, screw up, and go awry for your gov't a lot, don't they? Not to worry, I'm sure the US will still keep trying to control what it wants at the expense of people.
I'm not. It just kinda slipped out.
Yep. I'm not impressed with it. Canadian troops could have ignored the UN order not to interfere, but they didn't. It's a genuine Canadian oooops. But, that still doesn't excuse the US for all it's ooooopses over the years.
Not me. If I was a poor African refuge, I'd head coastways and see if I could hitch a ride to somewhere else.
You could say that. But, it's only weak because the Cons only have a minority gov't. Everyone is a hypocrite sometime, politicians are lots of times. Well, Harper doesn't seem to be that greedy: greed is more a Liberal value. Spineless and afraid and lacks fortitude? Maybe occasionally, but Canada's still in Afghanistan. It's easier to be a follower. Can't lead? Seems to me that Canada is in front of the USA when it comes to less crime per capita, more foreign aid per capita, and so on.
Anyway, this thread is about US political parties having no values.
Perhaps they do normally, but when they get their mitts on the Oval office, good values fly out the window.
Perhaps they do normally, but when they get their mitts on the Oval office, good values fly out the window.
You could say that. But, it's only weak because the Cons only have a minority gov't. Everyone is a hypocrite sometime, politicians are lots of times. Well, Harper doesn't seem to be that greedy: greed is more a Liberal value. Spineless and afraid and lacks fortitude? Maybe occasionally, but Canada's still in Afghanistan. It's easier to be a follower. Can't lead? Seems to me that Canada is in front of the USA when it comes to less crime per capita, more foreign aid per capita, and so on.
Yes Canada is still in Afghanistan. Does that bother you?
It's easier to be a follower... no doubt and I admire your honesty on that one.
Less crime... agreed.
Foreign Aid... highly disagree. That debate was had on here once before and it was shown as another myth. I think it was ITN that had the break down of foreign aid and why Canada has at times claimed that it gives more foreign aid.
Actually... I am starting to remember. What was not included was the sea lift and air lift capability of moving tons and tons of supplies to stricken areas that the US provides and Canada does not. Also the use of funds in emergencies, private funds, are not included. I am just brushing at the edges of this because I am going off memory from a debate here awhile ago. Basically the US Govt picks up the tab and it does not go towards the money that they give for foreign aid per capita. We eat the cost and get no credit.
In conclusion... the US gives more and that is inclusive of the scale of our economies and population.
That is also like saying "The US OWES the UN money" That is a big joke because we give a sickening amount and it is the UN that determines what the US owes in dues. It is an organized shake down by the UN (other countries) to squeeze as much as possible from the USA.
Not particularly. I'd like people over there to have as much freedom as we enjoy in NorthAm under whatever type of gov't they choose.
Thank you. I'm not disagreeable all the time. And I do agree with you about some things.
Per capita. We have more reported rapes than the US does, though. That bothers me.
Per capita?
[URL="http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/dis_tsu_tot_aid_pac_perca-total-aid-package-per-capita"]link
link
[URL="http://[SIZE=2"][URL]http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/eco_eco_aid_don-economy-economic-aid-donor[/URL][/URL][/URL]
I have no idea about that stuff.
A response to the per capita. That fact has been thrown out as another way for Canadians to say
"We're better than you."
But not all of the money given out in foreign aid is counted "per capita". I wish "I Think Not" was reading this thread because I believe it was he who had the stats on ACTUAL money given out by the US but is not counted in the "per capita" column. Just like the US sea lift and air lift capabilities that are used extensively in the distribution of food stuffs and supplies to striken nations. Those costs are simply absorbed by the US and does not count as foreign aid per capita. That is just one example and that capability costs MILLIONS.
Bush and Republican "values" again take another downfall as it is proven that they have been supporting the terrorist group MEK:
[SIZE=+2]Iraq Intensifies Efforts to Expel Iranian Group[/SIZE]
Though Labeled Terrorist, MEK Has Updated U.S. on Tehran's Nuclear Program
[SIZE=-1]By Ernesto Londoño and Saad al-Izzi
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, March 14, 2007; A10
[/SIZE]
BAGHDAD -- For three years, thousands of members of a militant group dedicated to overthrowing Iran's theocracy have lived in a sprawling compound north of Baghdad under the protection of the U.S. military.
American soldiers chauffeur top leaders of the group, known as the Mujaheddin-e Khalq, or MEK, to and from their compound, where they have hosted dozens of visitors in an energetic campaign to persuade the State Department to stop designating the group as a terrorist organization.
Now the Iraqi government is intensifying its efforts to evict the 3,800 or so members of the group who live in Iraq, although U.S. officials say they are in no hurry to change their policy toward the MEK, which has been a prime source of information about Iran's nuclear program.
The Iraqi government announced this week that roughly 100 members would face prosecution for human rights violations, a move MEK officials contend comes at the request of the Iranian government.
"We have documents, witnesses," Jaafar al-Moussawi, a top Iraqi prosecutor, said Monday, alleging that the MEK aided President Saddam Hussein's campaign to crush Shiite and Kurdish opposition movements at the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Moussawi said the criminal complaint would implicate MEK members in "killing, torture, [wrongful] imprisonment and displacement."
The group denied involvement in Hussein's reprisals.
"These allegations are preposterous and lies made by the Iranian mullahs and repeated by their agents," it said in a statement issued this week.
The case highlights the occasional discord between the U.S. and Iraqi governments on matters related to Iran. While the U.S. government has accused Iran of supplying Iraqi Shiite militias with sophisticated weapons that it says have been used to kill American troops, Iraq's Shiite-led government has expanded commercial and diplomatic ties with its majority-Shiite neighbor.
"This organization has always destabilized the security situation" in Iraq, said Mariam Rayis, a top foreign affairs adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, adding that the MEK's continued presence "could lead to deteriorating the relationship with neighboring countries."
MEK leaders dispute the prosecutor's allegations. They contend that Iran has infiltrated Iraq's political leadership while also supporting militant groups in an effort to keep the United States in a quagmire in Iraq. They also say the Iranian government wants to forestall a U.S. attack on Iran.
"The Iranian regime wants very much to prevent the winds of change," Behzad Saffari, a spokesman for the group, said in a recent interview at a Baghdad hotel. "Instead of fighting the Americans in Iran, [the Iranian government] is fighting them in Iraq. If we have to leave Iraq, it means the Americans are defeated. It means Iran has prevailed."
Maliki told officials from neighboring countries during a meeting in Baghdad on Saturday that Iraq should not become a battleground where other nations attempt to settle their disputes.
The Iranian Embassy in Baghdad did not reply to questions about the MEK.
The MEK, also known as the People's Mujaheddin of Iran, was founded by students at Tehran University in 1965 as an opposition movement to Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the country's U.S.-backed dictator. The group clashed with that government and later with the Islamic Republic established by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979.
In 1986, the MEK moved its headquarters to Iraq, where Hussein welcomed the organization. MEK fighters have been widely accused of backing Hussein's suppression of the Shiite and Kurdish uprisings, but MEK officials say Kurdish leaders have absolved them of playing a role in the crackdown on Kurds.
In 1997, during a period of warmer relations between Washington and Tehran under the Clinton administration, the State Department added the MEK to its list of foreign terrorist organizations.
The group's leader, Maryam Rajavi, lives in Paris. She has a cultlike following among members, some of whom set themselves on fire to protest her brief arrest in 2003 after French officials raided the group's offices. Rajavi has led efforts to have the group's terror label removed in the United States and Europe. In December, a European court overturned an E.U. order freezing the group's assets. The European Union has not removed the group from its terrorist list.
The MEK says it has several thousand members in Iran, but the extent of its support base is unclear. Most exiled members live in the camp at Ashraf, north of Baghdad.
After Hussein was toppled, the MEK agreed to turn over its weapons to U.S. military officials. In 2004, the U.S. military granted its members the status of "protected persons" under the Geneva Conventions and has since provided security for the camp.
Shortly after the camp was set up, FBI and State Department officials screened residents and found no evidence that would lead them to charge anyone with a crime.
A Washington Post special correspondent toured Camp Ashraf in January. It is a largely self-sufficient compound, and the majority of members haven't left in years. It has shops, a swimming pool, an ice cream store, a bakery and a soda factory that makes a cola- and orange-flavored drink locals call Ashraf Cola.
Last summer, Maliki gave the group six months to leave Iraq. Although the deadline has elapsed, Iraqi officials say they intend to expel the group after getting parliamentary approval.
MEK officers argue that their expulsion would be a violation of international law and have obtained a legal opinion to that effect from the U.N. refugee agency. They say they should be treated as refugees, not terrorists.
Lou Fintor, the spokesman at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, said there has been no change in the government's position toward the MEK. A U.S. military spokesman in Iraq did not respond to questions about the MEK.
A senior U.S. military official who spoke on condition of anonymity said protecting the MEK was "not a big drain on our resources," adding, "This is a political problem between Iraq, Iran and the MEK."
If the group is expelled, it is unclear where Ashraf residents would go or what other country might take them. MEK leaders refuse to speak about such a scenario, reiterating that their expulsion would be illegal.
The leaders say they are a main source of intelligence on Iran and question why the United States keeps the group on its terrorist list.
"All the important things that are talked about are things revealed by us," said Mohammad Mohaddessin chairman of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the MEK's political arm, referring to information about Iran's nuclear ambitions and, more recently, the roadside bombs the United States says Iran has made available to insurgents in Iraq.
Moussawi, the Iraqi prosecutor, said the human rights case is not politically motivated. The issue of expulsion, which is not directly related to the pending criminal charges, is expected to come before the Iraqi parliament in coming weeks.
Some lawmakers have criticized Maliki for making the issue a priority at a time when Iraq is besieged by more serious problems.
"If you take it from a humanitarian side, I don't think they should leave until the situation can be resolved," Saleh al-Mutlak, a Sunni lawmaker, said in an interview. "It is surprising that the government of Iraq is giving such an order. This will only show that the Maliki government will obey Iran's orders."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/13/AR2007031301782_pf.html
As for MEK's alleged 'updates' on Iran's weapons upgrading, that has about as much credibility as Iraqi defectors who updated Bush on Saddam's WMD that never even existed.
[SIZE=+2]Iraq Intensifies Efforts to Expel Iranian Group[/SIZE]
Though Labeled Terrorist, MEK Has Updated U.S. on Tehran's Nuclear Program
[SIZE=-1]By Ernesto Londoño and Saad al-Izzi
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, March 14, 2007; A10
[/SIZE]
BAGHDAD -- For three years, thousands of members of a militant group dedicated to overthrowing Iran's theocracy have lived in a sprawling compound north of Baghdad under the protection of the U.S. military.
American soldiers chauffeur top leaders of the group, known as the Mujaheddin-e Khalq, or MEK, to and from their compound, where they have hosted dozens of visitors in an energetic campaign to persuade the State Department to stop designating the group as a terrorist organization.
Now the Iraqi government is intensifying its efforts to evict the 3,800 or so members of the group who live in Iraq, although U.S. officials say they are in no hurry to change their policy toward the MEK, which has been a prime source of information about Iran's nuclear program.
The Iraqi government announced this week that roughly 100 members would face prosecution for human rights violations, a move MEK officials contend comes at the request of the Iranian government.
"We have documents, witnesses," Jaafar al-Moussawi, a top Iraqi prosecutor, said Monday, alleging that the MEK aided President Saddam Hussein's campaign to crush Shiite and Kurdish opposition movements at the end of the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Moussawi said the criminal complaint would implicate MEK members in "killing, torture, [wrongful] imprisonment and displacement."
The group denied involvement in Hussein's reprisals.
"These allegations are preposterous and lies made by the Iranian mullahs and repeated by their agents," it said in a statement issued this week.
The case highlights the occasional discord between the U.S. and Iraqi governments on matters related to Iran. While the U.S. government has accused Iran of supplying Iraqi Shiite militias with sophisticated weapons that it says have been used to kill American troops, Iraq's Shiite-led government has expanded commercial and diplomatic ties with its majority-Shiite neighbor.
"This organization has always destabilized the security situation" in Iraq, said Mariam Rayis, a top foreign affairs adviser to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, adding that the MEK's continued presence "could lead to deteriorating the relationship with neighboring countries."
MEK leaders dispute the prosecutor's allegations. They contend that Iran has infiltrated Iraq's political leadership while also supporting militant groups in an effort to keep the United States in a quagmire in Iraq. They also say the Iranian government wants to forestall a U.S. attack on Iran.
"The Iranian regime wants very much to prevent the winds of change," Behzad Saffari, a spokesman for the group, said in a recent interview at a Baghdad hotel. "Instead of fighting the Americans in Iran, [the Iranian government] is fighting them in Iraq. If we have to leave Iraq, it means the Americans are defeated. It means Iran has prevailed."
Maliki told officials from neighboring countries during a meeting in Baghdad on Saturday that Iraq should not become a battleground where other nations attempt to settle their disputes.
The Iranian Embassy in Baghdad did not reply to questions about the MEK.
The MEK, also known as the People's Mujaheddin of Iran, was founded by students at Tehran University in 1965 as an opposition movement to Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the country's U.S.-backed dictator. The group clashed with that government and later with the Islamic Republic established by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in 1979.
In 1986, the MEK moved its headquarters to Iraq, where Hussein welcomed the organization. MEK fighters have been widely accused of backing Hussein's suppression of the Shiite and Kurdish uprisings, but MEK officials say Kurdish leaders have absolved them of playing a role in the crackdown on Kurds.
In 1997, during a period of warmer relations between Washington and Tehran under the Clinton administration, the State Department added the MEK to its list of foreign terrorist organizations.
The group's leader, Maryam Rajavi, lives in Paris. She has a cultlike following among members, some of whom set themselves on fire to protest her brief arrest in 2003 after French officials raided the group's offices. Rajavi has led efforts to have the group's terror label removed in the United States and Europe. In December, a European court overturned an E.U. order freezing the group's assets. The European Union has not removed the group from its terrorist list.
The MEK says it has several thousand members in Iran, but the extent of its support base is unclear. Most exiled members live in the camp at Ashraf, north of Baghdad.
After Hussein was toppled, the MEK agreed to turn over its weapons to U.S. military officials. In 2004, the U.S. military granted its members the status of "protected persons" under the Geneva Conventions and has since provided security for the camp.
Shortly after the camp was set up, FBI and State Department officials screened residents and found no evidence that would lead them to charge anyone with a crime.
A Washington Post special correspondent toured Camp Ashraf in January. It is a largely self-sufficient compound, and the majority of members haven't left in years. It has shops, a swimming pool, an ice cream store, a bakery and a soda factory that makes a cola- and orange-flavored drink locals call Ashraf Cola.
Last summer, Maliki gave the group six months to leave Iraq. Although the deadline has elapsed, Iraqi officials say they intend to expel the group after getting parliamentary approval.
MEK officers argue that their expulsion would be a violation of international law and have obtained a legal opinion to that effect from the U.N. refugee agency. They say they should be treated as refugees, not terrorists.
Lou Fintor, the spokesman at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, said there has been no change in the government's position toward the MEK. A U.S. military spokesman in Iraq did not respond to questions about the MEK.
A senior U.S. military official who spoke on condition of anonymity said protecting the MEK was "not a big drain on our resources," adding, "This is a political problem between Iraq, Iran and the MEK."
If the group is expelled, it is unclear where Ashraf residents would go or what other country might take them. MEK leaders refuse to speak about such a scenario, reiterating that their expulsion would be illegal.
The leaders say they are a main source of intelligence on Iran and question why the United States keeps the group on its terrorist list.
"All the important things that are talked about are things revealed by us," said Mohammad Mohaddessin chairman of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, the MEK's political arm, referring to information about Iran's nuclear ambitions and, more recently, the roadside bombs the United States says Iran has made available to insurgents in Iraq.
Moussawi, the Iraqi prosecutor, said the human rights case is not politically motivated. The issue of expulsion, which is not directly related to the pending criminal charges, is expected to come before the Iraqi parliament in coming weeks.
Some lawmakers have criticized Maliki for making the issue a priority at a time when Iraq is besieged by more serious problems.
"If you take it from a humanitarian side, I don't think they should leave until the situation can be resolved," Saleh al-Mutlak, a Sunni lawmaker, said in an interview. "It is surprising that the government of Iraq is giving such an order. This will only show that the Maliki government will obey Iran's orders."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/13/AR2007031301782_pf.html
As for MEK's alleged 'updates' on Iran's weapons upgrading, that has about as much credibility as Iraqi defectors who updated Bush on Saddam's WMD that never even existed.