Saddam is purging Kirkuk at this very moment.

[MKSheppard]

Read the fucking article, Shep. They already are a target of Saddam's secret police.

And why is that? Gee, maybe it's because they rose up him in the
past just 12 years ago? If this was really ethnic cleansing, they'd all
have been shot and dumped in mass graves. Yet, they're living
and breathing. I'd like to see proof of those mass graves that we
went to war with Serbia over first, before I believe this crap.

Twice, no less! They'd be safe in their homes

Not if there's CITY fighting, genius...civilians always take it up the ass
whenever armies clash in cities. And don't forget USAF targeting policies:

Blow up sewage treatment plants and the main power grid...you've just
created a giant festering pit of unsanitary conditions.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

And why is that? Gee, maybe it's because they rose up him in the
past just 12 years ago? If this was really ethnic cleansing, they'd all
have been shot and dumped in mass graves.

No, that's called genocide.

Yet, they're living
and breathing. I'd like to see proof of those mass graves that we
went to war with Serbia over first, before I believe this crap.

I bet you'd like to "see proof" that the concentration camps existed, too.

Not if there's CITY fighting, genius...civilians always take it up the ass
whenever armies clash in cities. And don't forget USAF targeting policies:

Blow up sewage treatment plants and the main power grid...you've just
created a giant festering pit of unsanitary conditions.

Surrender before disease sets in. Or realize that it'll probably be over before disease sets in, so we can use our engineers and our support equipment to prevent said from happening.

Besides, city fighting is nothing like the Stalingrad fantasies you have these days - The Israeli incursions into the Palestinian camps are a better example than the Russians in Chechnya, who are bogged down with a rather old doctrine. With a population friendly to us we'll do even better than the Israelis.

[MKSheppard]

No, that's called genocide.

Ethnic Cleansing is just another word for Genocide.

I bet you'd like to "see proof" that the concentration camps existed, too.

The number of reported mass graves in Kosovo kept going down
and down, despite NATO spokesmens' insistence that Serbia was
massacring all of the Kosovars...when it was really a small minor
problem segment of the Kosovar population getting shot, bombed,
and killed by Serbian police forces, namely the scumbags known as
the KLA.

Surrender before disease sets in. Or realize that it'll probably be over before disease sets in, so we can use our engineers and our support equipment to prevent said from happening.

The concept of preparation is totally alien to you.

These people are smart; they're getting out of the area to a
US-protected enclave, rather than waiting for the bombs to start
dropping BEFORE moving. Your house might get blown up or
ransacked while you're gone, but you will be alive.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Ethnic Cleansing is just another word for Genocide.

No, it isn't. It defines the act of cleansing a region of an ethnicity, which is different from genocide.

The number of reported mass graves in Kosovo kept going down
and down, despite NATO spokesmens' insistence that Serbia was
massacring all of the Kosovars...when it was really a small minor
problem segment of the Kosovar population getting shot, bombed,
and killed by Serbian police forces, namely the scumbags known as
the KLA.

Was it, or were the accounts never inflated, but did the covering up rather occur when everyone realized the chosen course of action had failed to prevent ethnic cleansing from occuring?

The concept of preparation is totally alien to you.

No, it isn't.

These people are smart; they're getting out of the area to a
US-protected enclave, rather than waiting for the bombs to start
dropping BEFORE moving. Your house might get blown up or
ransacked while you're gone, but you will be alive.

I just said their chances of being killed are higher on the road than in their homes, fuckwit. Therefore, there is a reason they are leaving their possessions behind for the insecurity of such a flight. That reason is a purge courtesy of Saddam Hussein's instruments of terror. Naturally, since you support such things whole-heartedly, you ignore this.

[MKSheppard]

No, it isn't. It defines the act of cleansing a region of an ethnicity, which is different from genocide.

Whatever

You're starting to sound like the fuckwits who define giving cochlear
implants to deaf kids as 'ethnic cleansing'

I just said their chances of being killed are higher on the road than in their homes, fuckwit. Therefore, there is a reason they are leaving their possessions behind for the insecurity of such a flight. That reason is a purge courtesy of Saddam Hussein's instruments of terror. Naturally, since you support such things whole-heartedly, you ignore this.

Maybe you didn't notice the fact that the Iraqi military is building fortifications
and trenches around the FUCKING CITY. Not exactly the most healthiest
thing to be around when the bombs start dropping. They're getting away
from legimitate military targets *before* the bombs start dropping, rather
than waiting until the last minute.

[MKSheppard]

That reason is a purge courtesy of Saddam Hussein's instruments of terror. Naturally, since you support such things whole-heartedly, you ignore this.[/b]

Actually Marina, make up your FUCKING MIND.

When it's about Augusto Pinochet "disappearing" hundreds of people as
dictator of Chile, who gives a fuck, as they were all Marxists anyway.

BUT when Serbia tries to put down a violent criminal gang, it becomes
"ethnic cleansing" according to you.

And later, when Saddam sends out his men to lean on an unreliable element
that revolted against him 12 years ago, after another US led war, right
before another US led war, it becomes "ethnic cleansing".

Marina, thy art a hypocrite.

[Axis Kast]

Hypocritical situations abound in the world of geopolitics. Accept it. It was all ethnic cleansing. We just chose to crack down on some and pass by others. But then again, we can do that. Why? We're the United States of America and nobody else can lift a finger to stop that. As I've said before, geopolitics is a different beast for different players.

Marina makes a cogent point. Despite their efforts at "containment" - while ignoring that the man is already in multiple violations of Resolution 1441 -, France and Germany have willingly overlooked: (A) ethnic cleansing – whether or not you raise the point American hypocrisy, the fact that Hussein “leans” on these people is evidence of repression, (B) any connection between Hussein and Hizbollah or HAMAS, (C) any connection between Hussein’s lax or ineffectual security and the freedom of movement for members of al-Qaeda and other organizations, and (D) the potential for other parties to become the beneficiaries of Hussein’s research or resources.

And whether or not we followed United Nations doctrine, our troops would still be deployed to the region – at great cost and great threat, no less. You think they wouldn’t be in al-Qaeda’s sites even if we were there in the true, double-speaking spirit of 1441?

As for morals? There are none on the world stage. The last time we made a major "moral" decision, Robert Mugabe rose to power in Zimbabwe. Why do we whine about ethnic cleansing or the starvation of Iraqis? Some people can be stuffed full of it to the point of supporting a more complex action. You want to talk about the "moral behavior" of Europe? France. With Iraq. In January. With spare parts for interceptor jets of Hussein's air force. Russia. With Iraq. In January. In negotiation with Baghdad for more oil concessions before the ax dropped. Par for the course, ladies and gentlemen.

[Darth Wong]

Ethnic cleansing is different from genocide - It's removing an ethnicity from an area, which can involve either deportations or mass murder.

If we ever lift the board moratorium on Israel/Palestine threads, I shall be sure to remember that you said this, Marina.

[Colonel Olrik]

Sigh, with Vympel sleeping, I suppose it's my turn to deal with our new jingoistic retard..

Hypocritical situations abound in the world of geopolitics. Accept it. It was all ethnic cleansing. We just chose to crack down on some and pass by others. But then again, we can do that. Why? We're the United States of America and nobody else can lift a finger to stop that. As I've said before, geopolitics is a different beast for different players.

Warmongering jingoism at its best. Marina, when she's defending Pinochet, actually tries to make a case about the benefits he brought to the country. Not you. You're above logical reasoning, because the U.S is the U.S and has the God given right to fuck everybody it wants. Thankfully, that kind of retarded mentality is shared only by a few. The bad news is that some of them are in positions of power.

Marina makes a cogent point. Despite their efforts at "containment" - while ignoring that the man is already in multiple violations of Resolution 1441 -, France and Germany have willingly overlooked: (A) ethnic cleansing – whether or not you raise the point of American hypocrisy, the fact that Hussein “leans” on these people is evidence of repression,

The situation raised in the article can hardly be called ethnical cleansing. But that doesn't matter. It's common knowledge that Saddam has commited massacres, in the past. The man clearly deserves to die, like many dictators in the past. However, in a war we won't die alone. Iraq must be invaded if it poses a threat to other countries. If it doesn't, then there's no evident reason [besides oil] not to leave the iraqi population deal with the problem, like in many other countries around the world.

(B) any connection between Hussein and Hizbollah or HAMAS,

I have evidence linking the U.S government with the Israeli military. Both sides are to blame and the Hizbollah is not focused on international terrorism.

(C) any connection between Hussein’s lax or ineffectual security and the freedom of movement for members of al-Qaeda and other organizations,

Idiot, now I'm waiting for you to declare war on the entire middle east, Turkey, Indonesia, the E.U and the U.S itself (knowing your opinion in the banning of model rockets, I realise I won't have to wait long).

and (D) the potential for other parties to become the beneficiaries of Hussein’s research or resources.

See above. Oh, and also invade Russia.

As for morals? There are none on the world stage. The last time we made a major "moral" decision, Robert Mugabe rose to power in Zimbabwe.

WTF are you talking about?

Why do we whine about ethnic cleansing or the starvation of Iraqis? Some people can be stuffed full of it to the point of supporting a more complex action. You want to talk about the "moral behavior" of Europe? France. With Iraq. In January. With spare parts for interceptor jets of Hussein's air force. Russia. With Iraq. In January. In negotiation with Baghdad for more oil concessions before the ax dropped. Par for the course, ladies and gentlemen.

Of course, Europe's behaviour equals the behaviour of France and Russia (which, accidentally, is more Asian than European).

[Axis Kast]

Warmongering jingoism at its best. Marina, when she's defending Pinochet, actually tries to make a case about the benefits he brought to the country. Not you. You're above logical reasoning, because the U.S is the U.S and has the God given right to fuck everybody it wants. Thankfully, that kind of retarded mentality is shared only by a few. The bad news is that some of them are in positions of power.

In my opinion, Pinochet did do some good for Chile. But that’s besides the point.

I’m not arguing that we should do whatever we want all the time – merely that our ability to support Pinochet was a result of our insurmountable hyperpower.

I didn’t say we’ve got “the God-given right to fuck everybody we want,” but it is important to recognize that our ability to act unilaterally is a huge force behind our foreign policy.

The situation raised in the article can hardly be called ethnical cleansing. But that doesn't matter. It's common knowledge that Saddam has commited massacres, in the past. The man clearly deserves to die, like many dictators in the past. However, in a war we won't die alone. Iraq must be invaded if it poses a threat to other countries. If it doesn't, then there's no evident reason [besides oil] not to leave the iraqi population deal with the problem, like in many other countries around the world.

By Marina’s definition, it’s moving one group of people out from one area and into another. That’s clearly being accomplished.

I’m not arguing that we should enter Iraq only to save the Kurds. It’s an added benefit of reducing the threat posed by Hussein to the United States and our allies. There’s a problem however when France and Germany approach this situation only in terms of by-the-moment disarmament yet ignore all of the other factors behind the man responsible. Any good compromise solution should at least cater to controlled régime-change.

I have evidence linking the U.S government with the Israeli military. Both sides are to blame and the Hizbollah is not focused on international terrorism.

I agree that both sides are to blame. But Hizbollah is responsible for the deaths of American citizens. Many Palestinian terrorists now advocate Holy War against the United States of America. Worse, their ranks are being scoured by al-Qaeda recruiters. I fear what might result if information and resources leak from Iraq – as I suspect they already are – into the hands of young men recruited by al-Qaeda from HAMAS and the Islamic Jihad or other organizations such as Hizbollah.

Idiot, now I'm waiting for you to declare war on the entire middle east, Turkey, Indonesia, the E.U and the U.S itself (knowing your opinion in the banning of model rockets, I realise I won't have to wait long).

This is a poor argument. Iraq is the military target because Iraq poses a threat on multiple levels, some of which can only be addressed by forced régime-change. And Hussein is the only threat best dealt with militarily. Syria, Indonesia, and other threats are better left to economic action or direct negotiation.

See above. Oh, and also invade Russia.

We can’t stop Russia. We can stop Hussein. Why don’t we? Again – an added benefit of stamping out his WMD programs via régime-change.

WTF are you talking about?

In September of 1980, Rhodesia was on the cusp of handing power from Ian Smith to Robert Mugabe. Salisbury placed a series of inquiries with the South Africans, seeking support for a campaign to eliminate Mugabe and his rebel forces, blame it on an election night coup by ZAPU/ZANU, and put into power instead a “compromise candidate” in the form of Abel Muzrownea. The request was passed on by Pretoria to the United States and Great Britain. Both the South Africans and Rhodesians were fearful of Western condemnation and possible interference. London and Washington declined, worried over the response of other African nations and squeamish over opposing a popularly-elected Mugabe. Today, Mugabe is starving seven million people and Abel Muzrowena is a recipient of foreign aid. We’re attempting to put him in power. We’re failing. All because of a moral decision that went horribly wrong.

Of course, Europe's behaviour equals the behaviour of France and Russia (which, accidentally, is more Asian than European).

Most of Europe – once you throw Belgium, Germany, and others into the mix. I admit that it’s a sweeping – and unfair – generalization.

[Vympel]

There is evidence of ethnic cleansing in the article - I just stated what ethnic cleansing is, and anyone can read the article to see how there is

Counting on noone reading it? I posted numerous extracts from the article that show why the Kurds are leaving, and it certainly isn't a concentrated campaign of ethnic cleansing.

and, furthermore, it is not an inevitable consequence of wars. Many have been accomplished without the dispersal of the populace.

Ah, I see, like I asked you before (and which you didn't answer, surprise surprise- you have a nasty habit of pontificating at noone in particular and not directly responding to questions) you'd prefer that these people stay in this potential battlezone and GET KILLED.

Finally, the war has not started yet, so it is clearly not a consequence of the war regardless.

Lol! The Kurds see which way the wind is obviously going to blow, and you pretend that it's not a consequence of the coming war, when it says so itself in the article, explicitly and REPEATEDLY!

Lastly, what I'm accusing France and Germany of doing is allowing this to happen by turning the innocents in Iraq into pawns.

And you're still fucking wrong. They are not the ones about to invade the damn country.

They're pawns for their game of supporting their industrial interests in Iraq, nothing more, and even if Saddam were gassing Kirkuk they wouldn't budge on their positions.

Like I give a shit about France and Germany's 'morality'. They're the same as the United States, and your wanking off to Shrubby doesn't change that.

The USA, on the other hand, at least intends to create a democratic government in Iraq - we haven't given any other intention at any rate, and every signal that we will - so whatever interests of our's might be met, we're going in with some care for the populace in mind as well.

Yes, expecting the Kurds to stay put while a battle rolls into them is 'care for the populace' I also don't care much for the 'freedom and democracy' rhetoric oozing out of Bush's orifices, because the US doens't have a great post-WW2 history in that regard.

France and Germany simply have none. They're letting this happen - massed flight, deportations, massed arrests and torture (inevitable the way the Iraqi "police" system works), the seizure of property to support military works without due recompense - without a murmur.

I repeat: this is a direct consequence of increasing 'we're going to war' rhetoric on the part of the US. Your pathetic attempt to shift the blame on the parties who refuse to go to war is transparent, and most amusing considering your previous claim that this 'wouldn't be happening' if we hadn't gone to the UN, which is obvious bullshit- it would've happened sooner, rather than later- your ignorance of basic facts of an invasion (like ... fortifying your positions! *gasp!*) is not my problem. But oh look, there's another point you didn't bother addressing in your pontification.

Those two countries are the biggest and most depraved hypocrisies in the world and you are their lavish supporter, endlessly spinning away the brutal facts while you ignore the humans who are suffering on the ground and take a supposed moral high ground

Shut the fuck up you jingoist. France and Germany can go to hell for all I care- I base my position on my own fucking morals, and don't tie my moral compass to any nation-state, not least of all the fucking hypocritical superpower who you lick the ass of.

A moral high ground supported by the offal of Saddam's mangled victims, killed by French and German weapons!

French and German weapons? Which ones are they? I guess the biological agents the US shipped to Iraq in the 1980s don't come into it?

People like you deserve to be held in only the lowest contempt, and for all time!

Go to hell, you jingoist bitch- you are the most contemptible hypocrite on this board- pontificating at length about how Pinochet was good for Chile and then you have the nerve to turn around and call ME contemptible for deconstructing your bullshit blame-shifting. The fucking nerve ... you call a legacy of murder and repression in Chile 'interesting', don't make a peep about what deprivations the Turks inflict on the Kurds (who are the Turks strongest ally again?), and then you have the fucking audacity to call ME an apologist for two countries I don't give a shit about, let alone rely on for my moral viewpoint. You make me ill.

You don't even have the fucking courage to answer my questions and address my previous rebuttals, instead preferring to go off on your own tangent and pretend you're still fucking arguing with me.

[Stuart Mackey]

Shep, the avatar, isn't this going a bit too far?

Whats wrong with Rommel?

[Vympel]

This was most amusing:

Besides, city fighting is nothing like the Stalingrad fantasies you have these days - The Israeli incursions into the Palestinian camps are a better example than the Russians in Chechnya, who are bogged down with a rather old doctrine. With a population friendly to us we'll do even better than the Israelis.

Not only have you made the ridiculous analogy of the IDF versus a bunch of poorly armed militants as proof of 'new doctrine' in urban warfare against a fully mobilized defending mechanized national army, but you expect the Kurds and Iraqis to be aware of this new doctrine(I can imagine it now- Iraqi soldiers stopping Kurds from leaving by saying "no, stay in your homes, we've looked at israeli incursions into palestinian areas and have decided that you're safer here!), and to top it all off you treat the poorly armed Palestinains with no experience and even less training as equivalent with Chechen former Red Army soldiers equipped with ATGMs, RPGs and MANPADS!

[Crown]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... g_kirkuk_1

- Ethnic cleansing courtesy of the Chirac - Schroeder concept of having our troops intimidate Saddam into letting the Inspectors work. Naturally, Saddam wants to fortify his borders with an army sitting next to them like that, and the result is this.

And when the Turks capture the city, and they will when the decide to get involved in the war, should we then thank Bush?

[Hamel]

I'm about to gouge my eyes out over this crap

People will attempt to justify the worst shit ever.

[Vympel]

Whats wrong with Rommel?

At the time of the question, it was a KKK guy with a burning cross above him. It was a test case for a new avatar for racist donkey-fuckers.

[MKSheppard]

Whats wrong with Rommel?

Actually, I was modelling this avatar, that I had given to Mike as a suggestion
for Racist fuckers:



Some people got a bit upset, so I changed it back to Erwin.

Despite the flameage, I still think that avatar is pretty cool-looking. Gotta
hand it to Steve Jackson, he knows some very good graphics artists..

(Image is from SJ's game ILLUMINATI)

[Vympel]

And when the Turks capture the city, and they will when the decide to get involved in the war, should we then thank Bush?

Shhh Crown! The Turks are the ultimate moral power on the globe, remember! Anything they do is automatically justified and in no way resembles Iraqi policies- even when they halt the no-fly zones to go perform 'special missions' against the Kurds in Northern Iraq. You should be held in "contempt for all time!" (to quote Duchess) for heaping scorn on the perfection of the Turks.

[Darth Wong]

Whats wrong with Rommel?

Actually, I was modelling this avatar, that I had given to Mike as a suggestion
for Racist fuckers:



Some people got a bit upset, so I changed it back to Erwin.

Despite the flameage, I still think that avatar is pretty cool-looking. Gotta
hand it to Steve Jackson, he knows some very good graphics artists..

(Image is from SJ's game ILLUMINATI)

The problem with that avatar is that the average donkey-fucker would probably be proud of it.

[Axis Kast]

Considering the relative training, unit cohesion, strong logistical backing, and real-time battlefield support (as well as close air-cover and armored protection) our troops can rely upon, it's not a large jump to suggest that the urban warfare of the Second Gulf War will be all that terrible.

We've the surgical capability to destroy most large concentraitions of troops and material from afar. Any Iraqi defenses will be peppered beforehand by any number of air-, sea-, or land-based missiles, rockets, and guided bombs. Those troops will be fighting while cut off from any appreciable infrastructure. They are ill-fed, ill-supported (ie, not at all), ill-trained, ill-equipped, and ill-motivated. Even the best of the Special Republican Guard is nowhere near the level of an average American or British regular.

There will be shedding of blood on both sides. But hardly on a level that will startle analysts or defy early speculation. Hundreds of casualties - not thousands or tens of thousands.

[MKSheppard]

The problem with that avatar is that the average donkey-fucker would probably be proud of it.

Oh well, one plan axed. Next time Mike, at least give me a reply via PM,
OK?

[Vympel]

Considering the relative training, unit cohesion, strong logistical backing, and real-time battlefield support (as well as close air-cover and armored protection) our troops can rely upon, it's not a large jump to suggest that the urban warfare of the Second Gulf War will be all that terrible.

We've the surgical capability to destroy most large concentraitions of troops and material from afar. Any Iraqi defenses will be peppered beforehand by any number of air-, sea-, or land-based missiles, rockets, and guided bombs. Those troops will be fighting while cut off from any appreciable infrastructure. They are ill-fed, ill-supported (ie, not at all), ill-trained, ill-equipped, and ill-motivated. Even the best of the Special Republican Guard is nowhere near the level of an average American or British regular.

There will be shedding of blood on both sides. But hardly on a level that will startle analysts or defy early speculation. Hundreds of casualties - not thousands or tens of thousands.

Besides the point- the average civilian does not know this.

[Stuart Mackey]

Whats wrong with Rommel?

Actually, I was modelling this avatar, that I had given to Mike as a suggestion
for Racist fuckers:

snip[/img]

Some people got a bit upset, so I changed it back to Erwin.

Despite the flameage, I still think that avatar is pretty cool-looking. Gotta
hand it to Steve Jackson, he knows some very good graphics artists..

(Image is from SJ's game ILLUMINATI)

Ahh, well, save it for the KKK next time they vist?

[Axis Kast]

Besides the point- the average civilian does not know this.

But planners do. My post was in support of Marina's earlier assertion that this "will be no Stalingrad."

[Darth Wong]

The problem with that avatar is that the average donkey-fucker would probably be proud of it.

Oh well, one plan axed. Next time Mike, at least give me a reply via PM,
OK?

Sorry. I've always been unreliable about answering PM's and E-mails, as many people will probably attest.