GetDotted Domains

Viewing Thread:
"I Was - wait for it - Wrong"

The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.

Wed 05/03/03 at 20:39
Regular
Posts: 787
Yup, after reading through a few posts on here and seeing how many people take my stance of staying away from the life forums, I wanted to do this topic.

Yesterday I watched Kofi Annan, on Sky, answer questions about the whole Iraq situation. One thing that stood out more than ever, to me, was that this was a guy who actually did want so see a true United Nations. To quote; "The council acts best when it is united."

It's right, but not the case we are seeing right now. It is, as you all know, divided into pro, anti, and "what do we get if we support you" groups of nations. America is essentially threatening the withdrawal and denial of aid to several nations if they do not get in line with the US stance. To me that is plain wrong because aid is aid, it is something you give to those who need it, and yes, you expect friendship in return maybe, but not an automatic over-ride on a nation's stance on an issue. What happened to political sovereignty ?

To add to this, General Meyes, speaking from the Pentagon, in response to a question about Turkey's refusal to let the US use military bases, said this; "We will open a second front in Northern Iraq with or without Turkey's help."

Excuse me ? What on earth is the point in saying that ? It is simply fuelling the belief that the USA will do whatever it wants and steam roller over everything in its way to do so.

Think back to New Years Eve 1999, the Millennium, the year 2000, a new century, was near. Conflict, on the level we are seeing now, and may well see, was not happening. Iraq was contained, terrorism was a rare occurence outside of the Middle East, Israel and the Palestinians were at a somewhat uneasy halt, there was much talk of alleviating third world debt, in other words the outlook was positive. I, and no doubt many others, thought this was the start of some of the better chapters in history. It wasn't a perfect world by far, but many were giving it a damn good go.

A year and half later it fell apart, around 20 men, and a bunch of guys in a cave, ended the illusion. At the time the response, Operation Enduring Freedom, seemed the right thing to do, in my opinion. Now ? well many Afghani's have a better life for sure, but the root of the problem, the hardcore terrorists and leaders, were long gone. We killed many many fighters who in all realism would never have left Afghanistan. The objective was to get those behind 9/11, and disassemble the infrastructure of Al Queda, and their Taliban supporters, in Afghanistan. To a degree it worked, but many spread around the world.

The USA, UK, and the West in general, have hardened security to counter terrorists, so the terrorists are hitting people outside of those areas. Kenya, Bali, Phillipines, Indonesia - easy targets. We're not really winning, we're displacing.

Originally I believed that George Bush was a good man in the wrong place at the wrong time. But his policies are destroying most hope for any kind of better future for us, the people of Iraq, and anyone else his policies effect. That US ambassador's letter was right, in a way. Everything that America and successive administrations have worked for, the alliances and trusts, is being destroyed overnight.

For what ? The world, and international politics, is ripping itself apart because of a small oil rich nation which has largely been ignored for over ten years. Iraq is, in the face of overwhelming odds, making some slow concessions.

I beleived at one point that concessions like these were always stalling tactics, ploys to spin out time. But, what if this is a case of two different kinds of culture, politics, governments, clashing and not understanding each other ? Do we really want to do this because of misunderstanding ?

The announced strategy today, is another reason for my change of heart. More ordinance than was used in the entire Gulf War, will hit Baghdad in one night on the first day of war. That is, to anyone who knows what kind of weapons will be used, insane. I don't know about shock and awe but it's going to do little to win over Iraqi civilians, even I will admit that that amount of weaponry will kill more innocents than it will targets.

Bush is, I fear, losing sight of the objective - the weapons of mass destruction and Saddam. We know full well that anyone in the Iraqi military who opposes Saddam is dead, along with his family, and anyone else who supports him. We know that the scientists we question cannot give us what we want, and that they endanger themselves and their families if they do. A full on invasion is overkill, because whilst Iraqi soliders are dying, Saddam will be safe, and more than likely flee or hide.

What needs to happen, is for people to back down and admit they are wrong, like I'm doing now. You can carry on saying something for so long that to go back on it seems impossible, a loss of face, but when the stakes are potentially thousands of lives, it has to be done.

Bush needs to back down, and the other countries need to give him the space and support so he can do so and retain some credibility. You may think Bush does not deserve such support, but is is the only way America could back down now. Saddam also needs to back down, give the UN more time and access, and in a perfect world, Saddam would step back, allow free elections - like Iran is suggesting - and let a semblance of democracy begin. Again, America needs to give Iraq space. 250 000 troops is overkill, they'll wipe out the entire Iraqi army but not Saddam. The threat of force has obtained co operation, but it is a a somewhat hard handed way of doing it.

Maybe we don't need war, but neither is containment an option again. It's killing the Iraqi's and doing nothing for the UN's image in the Iraq.

You may have noticed a deviation from my normal tone here, slightly.

Let me make this clear; I believe in America, and the idea of the American dream, and that given the right person America can be an agent of true democracy, freedom and all that entails. In fact given the right people in charge of many countries, and I can offer no idea of who these people would be, except to say they would be "Good" people - however you define them - , this could be a different world.

George Bush is not one of these good men, neither is Saddam, neither is Yassir Arafat, neither is Ariel Sharon. Between them, these four men are destroying any hope of a finer world for all of us, and not just for us - as in the West - but for everyone. War isn't going to make that world because the peace it creates is just an absence of war, not true peace.

Apologies to all who I have belittled, and argued with, but it was what I believed then. I still believe in America - whatever you think that is - but not Bush. In many ways he is changing what America is and stands for, and I am thinking that the UN is now the only organisation, along with people in the US administration, who can stop this before it is too late.

More and more I think that if we attack Iraq, in this way, at this time, we wave goodbye to peace for our, and our childrens, lifetimes, and maybe beyond.

If you read this far, thanks for reading.
Thu 06/03/03 at 09:29
Regular
"Brownium Motion"
Posts: 4,100
Fair enough Belldandy. It takes a lot of courage to say that you were mistaken. At least you can see both sides of the arguments and come around or change your beliefs.

Sadly, it seems thast the world's leaders cannot and Bush's adamant claims that the "US will go on alone, if need be" only exacerbates an already precipitous situation.
Thu 06/03/03 at 08:45
Regular
"Wanking Mong"
Posts: 4,884
Graciously done. Of course, that's made my day somewhat surreal...
Thu 06/03/03 at 01:49
"High polygon count"
Posts: 15,624
Star Fury wrote:
> The announced strategy today, is another reason for my change of
> heart. More ordinance than was used in the entire Gulf War, will hit
> Baghdad in one night on the first day of war.

Christ, if you're going to drop that much high explosive, you may as well forget it and pop in a tactical nuke, surely?

(Here's hoping Bush doesn't read these forums...!)

As the American Ambassador who resigned said, GWB has lost sight of the main cause for Enduring Freedom. I feel he's just using any tenuous link to finish of daddy's work.

If we could get Blair's lips surgically removed from GWB's butt, do you think the loss of the "number 1 ally" would have any effect on preventing war?
Thu 06/03/03 at 01:13
Regular
Posts: 8,220
Got to give credit to you Belldandy, it must have taken some character to change direction, given the stength of your previous beliefs.

Good for you :^)
Wed 05/03/03 at 23:10
Regular
"gsybe you!"
Posts: 18,825
For once I agree.

:)

*reads about amount of ordanance dropped on Baghdad (or will be)*

Ridiculous.

THAT will get rid of Saddham and his WMDs, won't it.

Utter overkill, considering the amount that will be used.
Wed 05/03/03 at 21:58
Regular
"Gamertag Star Fury"
Posts: 2,710
Blank wrote:
> Headline: Belldandy Was Wrong! Nation laughs smugly.

And this is why we are about two weeks from war on Iraq. I realise now it is not about being right, wrong, or smug. It's about a situation which has been made worse by people believing they are right when the real solution lies not with one group of people but with all of them. This whole thing will not be solved by a "smug" group ignoring the other, it's that which has let the Israeli/Palestinian conflict drag on so long.

>It's interesting that your views change after
> watching TV rather than actually listening to people on here though.

Because when you listen to someones words they are not framed by opinions, they are simple statements read by two men and anyone who sees them say what they did today and yesterday can form their own opinions of it.
Wed 05/03/03 at 21:19
Regular
"twothousandandtits"
Posts: 11,024
Headline: Belldandy Was Wrong! Nation laughs smugly.


Well, I did read your post all the way to the end, but I don't really have muc to say to it. It's interesting that your views change after watching TV rather than actually listening to people on here though.
Wed 05/03/03 at 20:39
Regular
"Gamertag Star Fury"
Posts: 2,710
Yup, after reading through a few posts on here and seeing how many people take my stance of staying away from the life forums, I wanted to do this topic.

Yesterday I watched Kofi Annan, on Sky, answer questions about the whole Iraq situation. One thing that stood out more than ever, to me, was that this was a guy who actually did want so see a true United Nations. To quote; "The council acts best when it is united."

It's right, but not the case we are seeing right now. It is, as you all know, divided into pro, anti, and "what do we get if we support you" groups of nations. America is essentially threatening the withdrawal and denial of aid to several nations if they do not get in line with the US stance. To me that is plain wrong because aid is aid, it is something you give to those who need it, and yes, you expect friendship in return maybe, but not an automatic over-ride on a nation's stance on an issue. What happened to political sovereignty ?

To add to this, General Meyes, speaking from the Pentagon, in response to a question about Turkey's refusal to let the US use military bases, said this; "We will open a second front in Northern Iraq with or without Turkey's help."

Excuse me ? What on earth is the point in saying that ? It is simply fuelling the belief that the USA will do whatever it wants and steam roller over everything in its way to do so.

Think back to New Years Eve 1999, the Millennium, the year 2000, a new century, was near. Conflict, on the level we are seeing now, and may well see, was not happening. Iraq was contained, terrorism was a rare occurence outside of the Middle East, Israel and the Palestinians were at a somewhat uneasy halt, there was much talk of alleviating third world debt, in other words the outlook was positive. I, and no doubt many others, thought this was the start of some of the better chapters in history. It wasn't a perfect world by far, but many were giving it a damn good go.

A year and half later it fell apart, around 20 men, and a bunch of guys in a cave, ended the illusion. At the time the response, Operation Enduring Freedom, seemed the right thing to do, in my opinion. Now ? well many Afghani's have a better life for sure, but the root of the problem, the hardcore terrorists and leaders, were long gone. We killed many many fighters who in all realism would never have left Afghanistan. The objective was to get those behind 9/11, and disassemble the infrastructure of Al Queda, and their Taliban supporters, in Afghanistan. To a degree it worked, but many spread around the world.

The USA, UK, and the West in general, have hardened security to counter terrorists, so the terrorists are hitting people outside of those areas. Kenya, Bali, Phillipines, Indonesia - easy targets. We're not really winning, we're displacing.

Originally I believed that George Bush was a good man in the wrong place at the wrong time. But his policies are destroying most hope for any kind of better future for us, the people of Iraq, and anyone else his policies effect. That US ambassador's letter was right, in a way. Everything that America and successive administrations have worked for, the alliances and trusts, is being destroyed overnight.

For what ? The world, and international politics, is ripping itself apart because of a small oil rich nation which has largely been ignored for over ten years. Iraq is, in the face of overwhelming odds, making some slow concessions.

I beleived at one point that concessions like these were always stalling tactics, ploys to spin out time. But, what if this is a case of two different kinds of culture, politics, governments, clashing and not understanding each other ? Do we really want to do this because of misunderstanding ?

The announced strategy today, is another reason for my change of heart. More ordinance than was used in the entire Gulf War, will hit Baghdad in one night on the first day of war. That is, to anyone who knows what kind of weapons will be used, insane. I don't know about shock and awe but it's going to do little to win over Iraqi civilians, even I will admit that that amount of weaponry will kill more innocents than it will targets.

Bush is, I fear, losing sight of the objective - the weapons of mass destruction and Saddam. We know full well that anyone in the Iraqi military who opposes Saddam is dead, along with his family, and anyone else who supports him. We know that the scientists we question cannot give us what we want, and that they endanger themselves and their families if they do. A full on invasion is overkill, because whilst Iraqi soliders are dying, Saddam will be safe, and more than likely flee or hide.

What needs to happen, is for people to back down and admit they are wrong, like I'm doing now. You can carry on saying something for so long that to go back on it seems impossible, a loss of face, but when the stakes are potentially thousands of lives, it has to be done.

Bush needs to back down, and the other countries need to give him the space and support so he can do so and retain some credibility. You may think Bush does not deserve such support, but is is the only way America could back down now. Saddam also needs to back down, give the UN more time and access, and in a perfect world, Saddam would step back, allow free elections - like Iran is suggesting - and let a semblance of democracy begin. Again, America needs to give Iraq space. 250 000 troops is overkill, they'll wipe out the entire Iraqi army but not Saddam. The threat of force has obtained co operation, but it is a a somewhat hard handed way of doing it.

Maybe we don't need war, but neither is containment an option again. It's killing the Iraqi's and doing nothing for the UN's image in the Iraq.

You may have noticed a deviation from my normal tone here, slightly.

Let me make this clear; I believe in America, and the idea of the American dream, and that given the right person America can be an agent of true democracy, freedom and all that entails. In fact given the right people in charge of many countries, and I can offer no idea of who these people would be, except to say they would be "Good" people - however you define them - , this could be a different world.

George Bush is not one of these good men, neither is Saddam, neither is Yassir Arafat, neither is Ariel Sharon. Between them, these four men are destroying any hope of a finer world for all of us, and not just for us - as in the West - but for everyone. War isn't going to make that world because the peace it creates is just an absence of war, not true peace.

Apologies to all who I have belittled, and argued with, but it was what I believed then. I still believe in America - whatever you think that is - but not Bush. In many ways he is changing what America is and stands for, and I am thinking that the UN is now the only organisation, along with people in the US administration, who can stop this before it is too late.

More and more I think that if we attack Iraq, in this way, at this time, we wave goodbye to peace for our, and our childrens, lifetimes, and maybe beyond.

If you read this far, thanks for reading.

Freeola & GetDotted are rated 5 Stars

Check out some of our customer reviews below:

First Class!
I feel that your service on this occasion was absolutely first class - a model of excellence. After this, I hope to stay with Freeola for a long time!
Many thanks!!
Registered my website with Freeola Sites on Tuesday. Now have full and comprehensive Google coverage for my site. Great stuff!!
John Shepherd

View More Reviews

Need some help? Give us a call on 01376 55 60 60

Go to Support Centre
Feedback Close Feedback

It appears you are using an old browser, as such, some parts of the Freeola and Getdotted site will not work as intended. Using the latest version of your browser, or another browser such as Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox, or Opera will provide a better, safer browsing experience for you.