Baghdad set for US pullback party

[Praxius]

A massive party is predicted in Baghdad's Zawra Park

BBC NEWS | Middle East | Baghdad set for US pullback party

Iraq is preparing for a giant party in a Baghdad park and a special holiday as US troops approach their deadline to quit cities and towns. American troops are due to withdraw to bases by Tuesday, which has been declared National Sovereignty Day and is a public holiday in Iraq. The party is to begin shortly in Baghdad's Zawra Park, with poets and musicians due to entertain the crowd. All US troops are scheduled to leave the country by the end of 2011. Combat operations across Iraq are expected to end by September 2010. With Iraqi security forces set to secure their own cities and towns from 1 July, police leave has been cancelled and extra troops have been drafted in. Symbolic hand-over Ahead of the withdrawal deadline, US soldiers are conspicuously absent from many of Baghdad's Shia and Sunni districts, correspondents say. Streets have been crowded with cars and pedestrians as music blares from city shops......

So, how do you think the celebrations will go?

Peaceful overall or marred with violence and distruction?

Second question: How will the Iraqi's remember this day when it comes and how will they remember the US?

[Apeman81]

In the end, I believe they will recall that the one thing beyond argument is that the U.S. and the 39 other countries that began the 2003 operations did indeed remove Saddam Hussein from his tyrannical position of oppression of the people of Iraq, allowing them to build an Iraqi government of their choosing.

The celebrations will be marked by violence committed by those whose single desire is remove any hint of democracy from the region, in favor for their brand of religious oppression.

[Praxius]

Quote by: Apeman81 In the end, I believe they will recall that the one thing beyond argument is that the U.S. and the 39 other countries that began the 2003 operations did indeed remove Saddam Hussein from his tyrannical position of oppression of the people of Iraq, allowing them to build an Iraqi government of their choosing.

Their Choosing? The US wasn't going to leave until they started to do things the way the US wanted them to.... they've only been entertaining them until they left.

Nobody officially asked for the US to come and save them from Saddam, nobody asked to be invaded by non-believers, nobody asked for the insurgency that followed.

The whole justification of going into Iraq to remove Saddam is a crock of a piss poor excuse. This isn't a celebration of sadness that the US is leaving, it's a celebration of joy that they'll finally be able to do what they want with their country as they see fit with very little outside influence..... something they haven't been able to do since this invasion.

And the justification of going after Saddam?

How many innocent Iraqi lives have been lost to accomplish this forign objective?

They'll be recovering from this for decades to come.

The celebrations will be marked by violence committed by those whose single desire is remove any hint of democracy from the region, in favor for their brand of religious oppression.

We'll have to see about the violence.... although I imagine it will be minimal if non-existent, as all Iraqi's will be celebrating that outside forigners will be off their lands and things can go back to an internal focus.

Afterall, the main issue of those doing the attacks, or so it was claimed, is they opposed those Iraqis who further enabled the US and other forces to remain longer then they tollerated.....

And if they go back to their religious oppression... that's their right to do so.... it's their country, not the US's.

[barnhardt2010]

Quote by: Praxius Their Choosing? The US wasn't going to leave until they started to do things the way the US wanted them to

WHAT NONSENSE!!! As If the Iraqi people voted for who the US wanted.

[Praxius]

Quote by: barnhardt2010 WHAT NONSENSE!!! As If the Iraqi people voted for who the US wanted.

BLAAAAHHHH!!! I CAN TYPE IN ALL UPPER CASE TOO!!!!!!..... Doesn't make the point anymore valid.

If you think the US had no influence or involvement on who was voted, then you don't know much of how everything has been operating over there.

The simple fact remains that the US went to Iraq with unjustified military force and forced them all to accept democracy, whether they really wanted it or not..... It didn't matter who they voted in, they needed a new leader after the US helped setup that mockery of a trial and execution for Saddam.... thus taking away their leader without even being asked.

And even while this new government was starting up in power and trying to make their own decisions, guess who was in the background, continually meddling and stalling their new government because they didn't agree with some of their practices?

The US.

Yet when it's suspected Iran is doing the same thing, it's a bad thing.... go figure.

The only reason why this government remained in power was by the US forcing it to remain through further military conquest. If Iraqis really wanted all of this, they wouldn't be blowing themselves up over it..... you wouldn't have average Iraqis claiming life was safer and better under Saddam's rule.

If the US went in and took him out and then said, "Ok, the country's your's..... do what you want" ~ You'd see nothing change, and they'd keep the country running as it always was.... you may not like their way of life, the US may not like their way of life, but it doesn't matter your you or the US thinks, it's not your country to begin with.

But regardless, the US went in anyways, with their holier then thou attitude of knowing what's best and screwed everything all up..... yet again.

I wouldn't be suprised if Iraqis use their new found Democracy to democratically vote for everything to go back to the way it was before the very moment the US leaves their country.

And then yet again, like Vietnam.... another US war that was all for nothing except to reduce the population of the world a little more.

*clap clap* Bravo

[Apeman81]

How many Nations supported and or participated in Operation Iraqi Freeddom?

Which U.N. Resolution(s) were preceded and supported the Operation?

Which Nation was invaded by Iraq, leading to a U.N. supported expelling of Iraqi forces from said nation, hostilities which ceased as part of a cease fire between Iraqi and the Coalition forces?

Did Saddam Hussein follow the conditions of said ceasefire?

I don’t want to re-argue the war. I just need to dispel the absurd “the U.S. did it alone with no justification” tripe that is surfacing on this thread

[Praxius]

Quote by: Apeman81 How many Nations supported and or participated in Operation Iraqi Freeddom?

Depends on what list you go by.... I know the list the US had a long list of all sorts of countries, including ones that had no military nor even contributed a flake of skin to the cause.

You could have had the entire world support and/or participate.... it still doesn't make it right, nor excludes the fact that it was an illegal and unjustified invasion.

Which U.N. Resolution(s) were preceded and supported the Operation?

The UN was bent over a barrel on this one since the US holds Veto power and pretty well do whatever they wanted. Since opposing the US to the degree required would have perhaps made the UN crumble with divisions, it was only logical for them to eventually approve the invasion or the UN became disbanded.

Another issue I have with the UN and certain nations holding Veto power..... it corrupts the system for those who hold more power, while the rest of the nations have to suck it up.

Still not a justification, and even the UN, when looking through your resolutions, opposed the invasion for as long as possible.

Also:

Polls find Europeans oppose Iraq war
BBC NEWS | Europe | Polls find Europeans oppose Iraq war

"Europe's leaders may be divided on the Iraq crisis, but the majority of people across the continent are united in their opposition to war, polls suggest.

From Portugal to Russia, opinion surveys suggest that without a further UN resolution, most Europeans are overwhelmingly against war - and even a second resolution would not convince many of them.

In Germany, central to Europe's anti-war bloc, an opinion poll this week makes it look almost as if the Germans now see the US - not Iraq - as the main threat to world peace.

The Forsa poll found 57% of Germans held the opinion that "the United States is a nation of warmongers"....."

^ This back in 2003.

Yet this just goes to show how Democracy truly works.... ie: there is no such thing and there is a clear division of what leaders of a country want and what the people who elected them into power want.

Back to the UN:

Opposition to the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Others did accept a limited right for military intervention in foreign countries, but nevertheless opposed the invasion on the basis that it was conducted without United Nations' approval and was hence a violation of international law.

According to this position, adherence by the United States and the other great powers to the UN Charter and to other international treaties to which they are legally bound is not a choice but a legal obligation; exercising military power in violation of the UN Charter undermines the rule of law and is illegal vigilantism on an international scale. Benjamin B. Ferencz, who served as the U.S.'s Chief Prosecutor of Nazi war crimes at the Nuremberg Trials following World War II, has denounced the Iraq War as an aggressive war (named at Nuremberg as "the supreme international crime") and stated his belief that George W. Bush, as the war's "initiator", should be tried for war crimes."

^ Which just goes to show how useless the UN truly is.

Which Nation was invaded by Iraq, leading to a U.N. supported expelling of Iraqi forces from said nation, hostilities which ceased as part of a cease fire between Iraqi and the Coalition forces? Did Saddam Hussein follow the conditions of said ceasefire? I don’t want to re-argue the war. I just need to dispel the absurd “the U.S. did it alone with no justification” tripe that is surfacing on this thread

There was no justification for war, there never was.... during the time of invasion the Iraqi military machine was not active, there were no weapons of mass distruction, there was no link to 9/11 and the only reason why they were invaded was due to Fearmongering..... from the US.

So much so that even Tony Blair got suckered into the whole thing, due to trusting the US...... he has since of course, admitted his mistakes and has at least shown regret.

All the while Bush being led by his Dick, Cheney..... kept it up as thinking it was totally justified and he was doing the right thing...... all the while he kepts using religious crap to help justify his out-right lies.

At least Canada's PM of the time didn't fall for this crap. He publically stated:

Chrétien restates opposition to Iraq war
Chrétien restates opposition to Iraq war

Prime Minister Jean Chrétien has revealed more reasons behind Canada's decision not to join the U.S. in a war against Iraq...... ..... "The diplomatic process was bringing positive results. That was the view of the Canadian government. It was not, obviously, the view of the American government. We can have a disagreement there. I still feel given a few more weeks disarmament would have been achieved," he said. Chrétien also said that forcing a regime change is not desirable. Many leaders in the world are not his friends, but, he adds, only the local people have the right to change government. "If we change every government we don't like in the world where do we start? Who is next?"

Also, one thing I specifically remember at the time was that he also claimed that the confidential information the US had to prove justification of an invasion wasn't solid and lacked concrete proof to justify a war.

It was probably one of his smartest decisions as Prime Minister.

--------

The bottom line is that you can try and dig for whatever empty justifications you can think of to make yourself sleep better at night.... none of them matter to the Iraqi people or many around the world.... the Iraq Invasion is exactly that.... an invasion..... sure as hell no "Liberation"

It was an invasion based around lies, deceit, ignorance, greed..... nothing good..... and the many innocent lives losts over all of this disqualify whatever dismal justifications anybody can think of.

It was a mistake that should never happen again..... although, history will always repeat until we learn from our past mistakes.

Clearly some have yet to learn.

[L00zer]

I have a bad feeling that Iraqis are going to remember and are going to be taught that the period of occupation in Iraq was a terrible, war stricken time. And maybe it was. But I feel a lot of anti-Americanism will emerge in Iraq. I don't think that the country will turn into more radical Islamist, however.

[Praxius]

Quote by: L00zer I have a bad feeling that Iraqis are going to remember and are going to be taught that the period of occupation in Iraq was a terrible, war stricken time. And maybe it was. But I feel a lot of anti-Americanism will emerge in Iraq. I don't think that the country will turn into more radical Islamist, however.

I think the most optimistic outcome will be that indeed the US will be looked apon badly by the Iraqis, they will shift back to a more Islamic government, but retain some democratic and western traits.

But those democratic and western traits could have been brought about in a better fashion then turning the whole place into a death trap for amost a decade.

[barnhardt2010]

Quote by: Praxius BLAAAAHHHH!!! I CAN TYPE IN ALL UPPER CASE TOO!!!!!!..... Doesn't make the point anymore valid. If you think the US had no influence or involvement on who was voted, then you don't know much of how everything has been operating over there.

You dont have a clue. We bankrolled and threw our support behind the Iraqi National Accord, The List Coalition and Allawi. He lost and they only managed 40 out of 275 seats. Maliki's United Iraqi Alliance won 128.

[The Black Ghost]

Sooner or later they will come to appreciate what has been done for them, as many have already. Remember, it was the violence that ensued on the part of religious extremists and Al-Queda is what turned public opinion (on both sides) against the US presence. Had we left after "mission accomplished" they would have build statues in our honor, but as it turns out, things didnt happen that way.

Hopefully the Iraqi Army can keep the violence down.

[Praxius]

Quote by: The Black Ghost Sooner or later they will come to appreciate what has been done for them, as many have already. Remember, it was the violence that ensued on the part of religious extremists and Al-Queda is what turned public opinion (on both sides) against the US presence. Had we left after "mission accomplished" they would have build statues in our honor, but as it turns out, things didnt happen that way. Hopefully the Iraqi Army can keep the violence down.

And if the US didn't invade in the first place, those groups wouldn't have been able to set foot there in the first place..... they wern't there before because Saddam ruled the country.... then the US came along, screwed up the security and then allowed for such groups to sweep in.

I don't think I'd expect them to see it so lightly...... The Scotts arn't all that fond with their history of British oppression and the graces they bestowed apon them through the centuries.

[barnhardt2010]

Quote by: The Black Ghost Sooner or later they will come to appreciate what has been done for them, as many have already. Remember, it was the violence that ensued on the part of religious extremists and Al-Queda is what turned public opinion (on both sides) against the US presence. Had we left after "mission accomplished" they would have build statues in our honor, but as it turns out, things didnt happen that way. .

I think the more likely outcome would have been for Saddam and the Baathist to regain control, probably through brutal oppression.

[Praxius]

Related News:


Iraqi Army soldiers march during a handover ceremony of the Iraqi Defense Ministry in Baghdad, Iraq, Monday, June 29, 2009.

CTV.ca | Iraq celebrates major pullback of U.S. military

Four U.S. soldiers were killed in combat shortly before the American military completed a withdrawal from Iraq's cities, and the prime minister assured Iraqis that government forces taking control of urban areas on Tuesday were more than capable of protecting the country. Nouri al-Maliki said in a televised address that "those who think that Iraqis are not able to protect their country and that the withdrawal of foreign forces will create a security vacuum are committing a big mistake." The streets of Baghdad were relatively quiet, as the Iraqi government named June 30 National Sovereignty Day and declared it a public holiday. In the walled-off Green Zone in central Baghdad, al-Maliki and other Iraqi leaders appeared at a military parade to mark the day. Iraqi infantry soldiers wearing khaki uniforms and policemen in blue uniforms marched in formation near the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier while Iraqi helicopters flew overhead. U.S.- and Russian-made tanks also drove by along with blue-and-white Iraqi Humvees. The withdrawal that was completed on Monday was part of a U.S.-Iraqi security pact and marks the first major step toward withdrawing all American forces from the country by Dec. 31, 2011. President Barack Obama has said all combat troops will be gone by the end of August 2010......

[Deadeye]

Quote by: Praxius BLAAAAHHHH!!! I CAN TYPE IN ALL UPPER CASE TOO!!!!!!..... Doesn't make the point anymore valid.

In his case it does. In your case it doesn't.

I guess you can believe that Iraqis want slavery over freedom, but that's pretty rare. Most people prefer freedom. Secretly I'll bet you do too.

[The Black Ghost]

Quote by: Praxius And if the US didn't invade in the first place, those groups wouldn't have been able to set foot there in the first place..... they wern't there before because Saddam ruled the country.... then the US came along, screwed up the security and then allowed for such groups to sweep in. I don't think I'd expect them to see it so lightly...... The Scotts arn't all that fond with their history of British oppression and the graces they bestowed apon them through the centuries.

Well, I suppose it comes down to this: order with a tyrannical murderer as dictator, or temporary problems with democracy and personal freedoms?

[barnhardt2010]

Quote by: The Black Ghost Well, I suppose it comes down to this: order with a tyrannical murderer as dictator, or temporary problems with democracy and personal freedoms?

I think praxius was enamored with Saddams socialism.

[RickSp]

The blindness of the right is either funny or scary. They seem to believe their own lies.

Of course the Iraqi are celebrating when the infidel invader, who trashed their country, killed tens of thousand and uprooted millions, finally starts to leave.

Yes, it is a good thing that Saddam is gone. It is still unclear how much better his replacement will be. It is also unclear whether the price paid by Iraqis imposed by the US invasion will be worth it.

[Zeebadee]

In the long run, the Iraqi's are going to appreciate the U.S. invasion about as much as Iranians appreciate the U.S. installation of the Shah in their country.

U.S. taxpayers are going to be paying for this insanity for many years.

[The Black Ghost]

Quote by: RickSp The blindness of the right is either funny or scary. They seem to believe their own lies. Of course the Iraqi are celebrating when the infidel invader, who trashed their country, killed tens of thousand and uprooted millions, finally starts to leave.

Tens of thousands of fedayeen and terrorists, may i remind you. Civilian deaths are entirely the fault of terrorists and extremists, minus the few incidents where there was collateral damage.

Most Iraqis saw the Americans as liberators when they took the country. They, like us, did not forsee how the rogue paramilitaries and terrorists would begin killing indiscriminately afterwards.

Yes, it is a good thing that Saddam is gone. It is still unclear how much better his replacement will be. It is also unclear whether the price paid by Iraqis imposed by the US invasion will be worth it.

The government now is fairly stable, and at least its a free one without undercover killings and political murder.

There is a fairly good justice system now, and the extremists are being beaten back.


The middle east was isolated, a breeding ground for ancient and inhuman traditions and culture, with religious zealots, terrorists, and murderers everywhere. Iraq was just another crack in the eggshell.