Quoting AEnigma III:

Quoting elham: Quoting AEnigma III: The US were quite happy with Saddam's killings for years - in fact they PUT HIM THERE! How many innocent people have been killed since the US and UK went to Iraq? Do you know? And, strangely enough, I seem to remember that Bush's reason for being in Iraq was originally because of their "weapons of mass distruction" NOT because of Saddam's killings! Incidently, whatever DID happen to those weapons? Did they suddenly just disappear into a puff of smoke? AEnigma, i think only you , who understand it well

Quoting AEnigma III:

Quoting AEnigma III:

Population of UK: 60,776 million - Foreign Aid: 12,607 million
Population of US: 301,139 million - Foreign Aid: 22,739 million

You do the maths!

Quoting teaschip1:

Quoting teaschip1:

In 2006 alone 200 Iraqi civilians were killed by American bombs and weapons. In 2006, 16,000 Iraqi civilians were killed by Islamic terrorists. Where is the problem, I ask?
Even this statistic is highly exaggerated, since the enemy there is not known to fight in uniform. In all probability, the immense effort of coalition forces to avoid civilian casualties was quite successful and the true number is between 2,000 and 3,000, perhaps lower.

The ridiculous figure of 650,000 was published by the same people who lumped victims of terror together with casualties of war to come up with the claim that 100,000 had been killed.

George W. Bush never claimed to have been to Iraq. Rather, both he and Tony Blair deferred to intelligence reports and, at the same time, complained that their sources were limited by the fact that Saddam would not allow inspections under the agreements that ended the Gulf War; nor would he respect numerous UN mandates to allow unrestricted monitoring.

Though rare, there are some in the world who allege that Bush knew the reports were wrong (in some mysterious fashion), but went to war under false pretenses anyway. This would certainly qualify as a lie, but it also defies common sense and probably speaks to the ignorance, delusion, or dishonesty of the person making such an assertion.

For obvious reasons, first-term American Presidents do not send troops into combat with a primary justification that they know will be proven false before the next election. Neither do second-term Presidents for that matter, since the fallout would have devastating consequences for their political party, to say nothing of personal conscience.

Ironically, those most critical of America over the relative absence of WMDs also happen to have been the most sympathetic toward Saddam?s manipulative shell games that made the war necessary in the first place. Their shallow and unbalanced moralizing gave the dictator confidence that the American President would never follow through with his threats to hold his government accountable under the WMD inspections agreements that it signed. Saddam never believed that he would wind up in a spider hole or in a hangman's noose.

Had the world united against Saddam Hussein and required that he honor international law, then the war would never have happened and the good people of Iraq would still be living under his sublime and gentle hand.

Anti-war activists often pretend that the killing in Iraq began the moment American bombs started falling, and will end the minute coalition troops leave the country, but mass graves uncovered from the Saddam era, and present-day terror attacks against ordinary Iraqis are clear indicators of the odd mixture of insincerity and ignorance that characterizes the peace movement.

In fact, true sympathy for the Iraqi people would have to run pretty thin among those pressing for the premature removal of peacekeeping forces. Leaving innocent people exposed and vulnerable to the forces of terror or a bloody civil war hardly qualifies as a humane gesture. Neither did these activists appear visibly moved by the plight of more than 300,000 - 600,000 missing and murdered Iraqis under the Baathist regime.

Quoting Serdar07:

Is it a lovely day or Love day?
if it's a love day , so according to which calender, today is not February 14th!!

Quoting AEnigma III:

Quoting Serdar07:

Quoting AEnigma III: Quoting Serdar07: Is it a lovely day or Love day? if it's a love day , so according to which calender, today is not February 14th!! Ermmmm you want to wait until February 14th for me to NOT argue?

Quoting mylo:

Please give us some!our health service is being privatised as we speak,we are taxed to the hilt,all public services have been privatised from the Thatcher years,all industry is now in third world countries(jobs gone)we produce nothing!We have a major issue with education,in that 3 out of 5 kids leaving primary school can't even read,the people who built this country are also being rammed by this country,the rich poor divide is similar to that of the Grand Canyon,and we have entered an illegal war on the order of a thicket in America,anyway at least we have the weather..... oh no we don't even have that either.....give me a min i'll find something to celebrate