« BACK TO FORUM
 Author |
 Post
|
 |
|
Hoda
Joined: Jun 22, 2003
Posts: 51 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Talkative
User is
Offline
Country: United States
Province/State: West Virginia
City: Princeton
|
Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 3, 2003 - 07:52 AM
|
|
DADDY, WHY DID WE HAVE TO ATTACK IRAQ?
[Robert Winer]
Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
A: Because they had weapons of mass destruction honey.
Q: But the inspectors didn't find any weapons of mass destruction.
A: That's because the Iraqis were hiding them.
Q: And that's why we invaded Iraq?
A: Yep. Invasions always work better than inspections.
Q: But after we invaded them, we STILL didn't find any weapons of mass
destruction, did we?
A: That's because the weapons are so well hidden. Don't worry, we'll find
something, probably right before the 2004 election.
Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To use them in a war, silly.
Q: I'm confused. If they had all those weapons that they planned to use in
a war, then why didn't they use any of those weapons when we went to war
with them?
A: Well, obviously they didn't want anyone to know they had those weapons,
so they chose to die by the thousands rather than defend themselves.
Q: That doesn't make sense Daddy. Why would they choose to die if they had
all those big weapons to fight us back with?
A: It's a different culture. It's not supposed to make sense.
Q: I don't know about you, but I don't think they had any of those weapons
our government said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn't matter whether or not they had those weapons.
We had another good reason to invade them anyway.
Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was
a cruel dictator, which is another good reason to invade another country.
Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to invade his
country?
A: Well, for one thing, he tortured his own people.
Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq. China is a good economic competitor,
where millions of people work for slave wages in sweatshops to make U.S.
corporations richer.
Q: So if a country lets its people be exploited for American corporate
gain, it's a good country, even if that country tortures people?
A: Right.
Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For political crimes, mostly, like criticizing the government. People
who criticized the government in Iraq were sent to prison and tortured.
Q: Isn't that exactly what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different.
Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is
Communist.
Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just Cuban Communists are bad.
Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are
sent to prison and tortured.
Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.
Q: And like in China, too?
A: I told you, China's a good economic competitor. Cuba, on the other hand,
is not.
Q: How come Cuba isn't a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960s, our government passed some laws
that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any business with Cuba
until they stopped being Communists and started being capitalists like us.
Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started
doing business with them, wouldn't that help the Cubans become capitalists?
A: Don't be a smart-ass.
Q: I didn't think I was being one.
A: Well, anyway, they also don't have freedom of religion in Cuba.
Q: Kind of like China and the Falun Gong movement?
A: I told you, stop saying bad things about China. Anyway, Saddam Hussein
came to power through a military coup, so he's not really a legitimate
leader anyway.
Q: What's a military coup?
A: That's when a military general takes over the government of a country by
force, instead of holding free elections like we do in the United States.
Q: Didn't the ruler of Pakistan come to power by a military coup?
A: You mean General Pervez Musharraf? Uh, yeah, he did, but Pakistan is our
friend.
Q: Why is Pakistan our friend if their leader is illegitimate?
A: I never said Pervez Musharraf was illegitimate.
Q: Didn't you just say a military general who comes to power by forcibly
overthrowing the legitimate government of a nation is an illegitimate
leader?
A: Only Saddam Hussein. Pervez Musharraf is our friend, because he helped
us invade Afghanistan.
Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because of what they did to us on September 11th.
Q: What did Afghanistan do to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, nineteen men -- fifteen of them Saudi Arabians
--
hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into buildings, killing over
3,000 Americans.
Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule
of the Taliban.
Q: Aren't the Taliban those bad radical Islamics who chopped off people's
heads and hands?
A: Yes, that's exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people's
heads and hands, but they oppressed women, too.
Q: Didn't the Bush administration give the Taliban 43 million dollars back
in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward because they did such a good job
fighting drugs.
Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium
poppies.
Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people were caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would
have their hands and heads cut off.
Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people's heads and hands for growing
flowers, that was OK, but not if they cut people's heads and hands off for
other reasons?
A: Yes. It's OK with us if radical Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's
hands for growing flowers, but it's cruel if they cut off people's hands
for stealing bread.
Q: Don't they also cut off people's hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: That's different. Afghanistan was ruled by a tyrannical patriarchy that
oppressed women and forced them to wear burqas whenever they were in
public, with death by stoning as the penalty for women who did not comply.
Q: Don't Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: No, Saudi women merely wear a traditional Islamic body covering.
Q: What's the difference?
A: The traditional Islamic covering worn by Saudi women is a modest yet
fashionable garment that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes
and fingers. The burqa, on the other hand, is an evil tool of patriarchal
oppression that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes and
fingers.
Q: It sounds like the same thing with a different name.
A: Now, don't go comparing Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are our
friends.
Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were
from Saudi Arabia.
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan.
Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.
Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, no, he was from Saudi Arabia too. But he was a bad man, a very bad
man.
Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Only when we helped him and the mujahadeen repel the Soviet invasion of
Afghanistan back in the 1980s.
Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the Evil Communist Empire Ronald Reagan
talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or
thereabouts, and now they have elections and capitalism like us. We call
them Russians now.
Q: So the Soviets ? I mean, the Russians ? are now our friends?
A: Well, not really. You see, they were our friends for many years after
they stopped being Soviets, but then they decided not to support our
invasion of Iraq, so we're mad at them now. We're also mad at the French
and the Germans because they didn't help us invade Iraq either.
Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to rename French fries
and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast.
Q: Do we always rename foods whenever another country doesn't do what we
want them to do?
A: No, we just do that to our friends. Our enemies, we invade.
Q: But wasn't Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s?
A: Well, yeah. For a while.
Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, but at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our
friend, temporarily.
Q: Why did that make him our friend?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.
Q: Isn't that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yeah, but since he was fighting against Iran at the time, we looked the
other way, to show him we were his friend.
Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes
our friend?
A: Most of the time, yes.
Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an
enemy?
A: Sometimes that's true, too. However, if American corporations can profit
by selling weapons to both sides at the same time, all the better.
Q: Why?
A: Because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for
America.
Also, since God is on America's side, anyone who opposes war is a godless
unAmerican Communist. Do you understand now why we attacked Iraq?
Q: I think so. We attacked them because God wanted us to, right?
A: Yes.
Q: But how did we know God wanted us to attack Iraq?
A: Well, you see, God personally speaks to George W. Bush and tells him
what to do.
Q: So basically, what you're saying is that we attacked Iraq because George
W. Bush hears voices in his head?
A. Yes! You finally understand how the world works. Now close your eyes,
make yourself comfortable, and go to sleep. Good night.
Q: Good night, Daddy.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Luke Cholerton
Joined: Jul 19, 2003
Posts: 7 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 27
Country: Portugal
|
Brilliant!
August 3, 2003 - 08:05 AM
|
|
I liked that a lot. Although it did take a while to read it.
Thanks.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
vivek
Joined: Dec 19, 2001
Posts: 148 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 31
Country: India
Province/State: Maharashtra
City: Pune
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 4, 2003 - 02:31 AM
|
|
terrific post.
Few more points, (got the bad habit of adding Indian perspective to anything)
Why did we attack Afghanistan?
Because they did sept 11th to us.
But didn’t Pakistani militants hijack an Air India plane, land it in Pakistan and since it was not politically safe, fill it in Pakistan and then land in Afghanistan, demanding the release of a terrorist (maulana Masood Azhar). Again, didn’t some Pakistani militants attack the Indian parliament on 13th December? Haven’t Pakistani militants killed more Indian army personnel and civilians in various serial bomb blasts like in 1993, than those killed sept 11th? Isint this a reason enough for India to attack Pakistan?
First thing, these are all small issues. No American citizen were killed. Indian civilians and army people die everyday. Nothing new or so provocative. These issues are so small, they were not even reported on CNN. And the activities in Kashmir, we cant say they are terrorist activities or not.
How can you say that afghan taleiban were terrorists?
Because of their oppressive regime in Afghanistan. They used to violate all human rights (chopping peoples hands off) and women in afghan had a life worse than that in hell. Besides they were a threat to civilized society in America.
Is this not exactly what the freedom fighters in Kashmir are doing?
Yes, but we don’t have the right to interfere or judge other religions. They are simply following the Koran.
But dad, how come most of these freedom fighters are not even kashmiris? 80% are either from Pakistan or Afghanistan.
Pakistan is a nice country helping them in their freedom struggle.
Wasn’t Pakistan the birth place of taleiban?
Yes taleiban was jointly created by CIA and ISI (paki intelligence) to fight against soviet invasion in Afghanistan.
So until now, taleiban have Pakistani allies in Kashmir struggle?
Yes but as soon as we declared taleiban to be terrorists, Pakistanis moved away from them. That shows their resolve to stop terrorism.
…. I could just go on you know.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Me
Joined: Jun 9, 2003
Posts: 156 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 25
Country: United States
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 4, 2003 - 02:53 AM
|
|
^^^^^
I like hearing another country's perspective, so thanks for sharing.
As for Kashmir, isn't the violence pretty much on both sides? Pakistani Muslims versus Indian Hindus? The articles I've read on the area seem to indicate that the region is unstable, so a relatively small action can be perceived as a slight against an entire country/relgion and violence ensues.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Santansuperman
Joined: Nov 13, 2001
Posts: 6 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 27
Country: United Kingdom
Province/State: Stockton-on-Tees
City: Stockton-on-Tees
|
.......
August 4, 2003 - 05:30 AM
|
|
wow. man...that sounds so real to the point that it makes one queasy....
eish.
missA2001
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Muhammad Hussein Sabaa
Joined: Jun 23, 2003
Posts: 6 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 30
Country: Egypt
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 4, 2003 - 06:09 AM
|
|
its realy very great conversation , i enjoyed it alot ,but theres something i wanna say .
the USA never attaks another country until she knw everything about this country's army and its its ability to face the us army and marins .
I TINK THE USA ATTAKS IRAQ CAUSE THE OIL FIRST , AND SECOND cause IRAQ DON'T HAVE A BIG STRONG ARMY TO FACE THE US , SO THE USA CAN MAKE HER OWN SHOW TO TERROR THE WHOLE WORLD .
thats it .
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Vivek
Joined: Mar 31, 2003
Posts: 86 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 31
Country: India
Province/State: Karnataka
City: Bangalore
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 5, 2003 - 01:09 AM
|
|
Originally posted by erratic-enigma
I understand that India is a secular country. But the dominant religion by far is Hinduism. Religious violence has been a problem not only between Hindus and Muslims - conflict between Hindus and Muslims was fatal for many until a peace pact was signed late last year.
Yes, we have been having communal tensions in our country... but I believe that the administration in India is very capable of preventing such instances of violence.
By and large, in most parts of the country people of all religions live peacefully!
One question though... what has terrorism in the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, got to do with the religious violence in India!?
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Me
Joined: Jun 9, 2003
Posts: 156 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 25
Country: United States
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 5, 2003 - 01:49 AM
|
|
To be honest, I'm not sure exactly where I was going with that. I guess I just wanted to point out that there is a lot of religious conflict, which somewhat clouds both Pakistani and Indian perceptions. Resulting in further misunderstandings.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
vivek
Joined: Dec 19, 2001
Posts: 148 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 31
Country: India
Province/State: Maharashtra
City: Pune
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 5, 2003 - 02:32 AM
|
|
Enigma…
Saying that Kashmir is a war between Indian hindus and Pakistani muslims would be very wrong and a great insult to all our citizens, civilians and army personnel, who have laid their life for the cause of Kashmir and belong to other communities, especially muslims.
It is just about religious fanaticism (militant islam) and the effort of our democracy to stop it from spreading. And mind you, this menace of militant islam was not ‘created’ or ‘born’ in India. It is an imported ‘problem’ from Pakistan.
No offences meant. Whenever I use the term ‘Militant Islam’, its not like I am against islam or anything. Its because I know that majority of muslims are not such fanatics only some are and that Islamic society needs some reforms, not that they are bad.
And as far as the gujrath issue is concerned, i think you are putting only half the story. I dont want to put the entire story, otherwise it will be like i am doing muslim bashing.
In reality, Pakistani ISI has been fanning a lot of Islamic fanaticism not just in India but world over, saying "islam khatre mein hai" (islam is in danger). Pakistan is the epicentre of global terrorism. But mind you, CNN and BBC pose a very beautiful picture of Pakistan coz Pakistan unconditionally and without asking do any bidding for the US and in return get a lot of debt relief and aid. And besides, America needs a muslim allie on its side. otherwise it will be like America is against islam.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Vivek
Joined: Mar 31, 2003
Posts: 86 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 31
Country: India
Province/State: Karnataka
City: Bangalore
|
Correction... :)
August 5, 2003 - 02:58 AM
|
|
Originally posted by erratic-enigma
^^^^^
As for Kashmir, isn't the violence pretty much on both sides? Pakistani Muslims versus Indian Hindus? The articles I've read on the area seem to indicate that the region is unstable, so a relatively small action can be perceived as a slight against an entire country/relgion and violence ensues.
Firstly... India is not a Hindu country... we are a secular state, meaning that people belonging to all faiths live here... and our constitution respects their religious freedom!
So... the problem in Kashmir is NOT Pakistani Muslims fighting against Indian "Hindus"!!!
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Hugh Switzer
Joined: Jul 29, 2002
Posts: 721 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Blabbermouth
User is
Offline
Country: Canada
Province/State: Ontario
City: Toronto
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 5, 2003 - 12:52 PM
|
|
Well... that was funny and scary all at the same time. It was really real, yet if you gave that to many americans, they would be like "wha?? We don't do things like that!" It's funny how true that was.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Me
Joined: Jun 9, 2003
Posts: 156 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Female, 25
Country: United States
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 6, 2003 - 06:34 AM
|
|
No insult intended on my part. Sorry. 
Pakistan/Saudi Arabai have most definitely been exporting militant Islam, but doesn't lot of the current conflict goes back to the bad feelings created by partition?
Pakistan did make a smooth move to protect itself by helping the US, however it is not entirely removed from scrutiny. It's hardly being praised by the media as best as I can tell.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
vivek
Joined: Dec 19, 2001
Posts: 148 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Chatterbox
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 31
Country: India
Province/State: Maharashtra
City: Pune
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 8, 2003 - 07:40 AM
|
|
Pakistan is praised in the media and the media refuses to highlight the real problem which is of terrorism originating from pakistan.
The main problem are those madrassas where they teach only religious hatered and misinterpret koran and brainwash small kids.
now i dont think they highlight enough the issue of pakistan importing its nuclear technology from china or pakistan exporting its nuclear technology to North Korea.
On the controry bush seems to be always praising pakistan for its role on war ni afghanistan and all those aids being sent to pakisatn.
pakistan doest make so much out of trate or commerce as much from tributes from the US.
As far as kashmir is concerned, it was not that way earlier (hindu muslim war) but pakistan wants to portray it that way and by agruing over it that way, you are only helping their propaganda.
pakistan is going to convert kashmir into another afghanistan.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Sof
Joined: Aug 9, 2003
Posts: 3 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Tongue-tied
User is
Offline
Country: United States
Province/State: Maryland
City: Annapolis
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 17, 2003 - 05:00 AM
|
|
haha that was so great! You know, in an bitter 'Bush is a bastard' kind of way
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
Kai
Joined: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 11 (view all)
Poster Rank:
Soft-spoken
User is
Offline
Gender & Age: Male, 22
Country: Australia
Province/State: New South Wales
|
Re: Daddy, Why Did we Have to attack Iraq?
August 18, 2003 - 01:09 AM
|
|
That was awesome!!! i do however disagree when you made such a comparison between China and Iraq. They are quite different in facts and china has made many headways to try and fix its international image. It now plays an important part in the North Korea:South Korea conflict at the moment. It has even done so much as to become the centre point for the olypic games in 2008. Iraq on the other hand has done nothing to try and better its image over the many years since the gulf war ended. Or rather I would say, Saddam Hussain has done nothing to better its image. If you were given a choice, and i'd like some replies to this, would you rather live in Iraq or in China 1 year ago? Personally, I would live in China.
|
|
back to top |
link to this post
|
|
|
Display posts from:
|
|
