What will you be playing to celebrate?

Now that mass-murder Saddam Hussein has been captured, what will you be playing on your system to celebrate? Quite a few tunes come to mind, but I think I'll start with Tesla's "Modern Day Cowboy."
How do you tell a 5 year old boy about what an animal this quy was. We can only thank GOD he was stopped before he tried to invade another country.

How about "Stars and Stripes Forever"
Celebration by Kool and the Gang..
Considering how he was "livin' large" we could use James Taylor's "Down in a Hole".
"You Got Another Thing Coming" by Judas Priest.

before he tried to invade another country. Who is going to stop yours from invading another country? Theme song from "Hillbilies" would be more apropriate. Just an opposing view.
Sting's "They Dance Alone" comes to mind....
"Another One Bites The Dust" by Queen
Nobody is going to stop the US.
We liberate,not enslave.
65% of all aid money in the entire world comes from us bad guys.
"Monster" By Steppenwolf "Now we are fighting at war over there, know matter who's the winner we can't pay the cost..."
Something tells me that this thread will not have a long life.

I will offer this for you to consider, Kkursula. One difference between "Our" country (as you put it) and the country once ruled by Saddam is that you'd have the right to express "just an opposing view" here, WITHOUT being tortured or shot. You can't say the same for Saddam's Iraq.

Good day.

As far as the song goes, I am shocked and disappointed that the song did not turn out to be "Shot Through the Heart" (Jennifer Warnes). With any luck it will now by "Songbird", but I doubt it. Scum like that will never see what they've done as wrong.
Who cares? It's not like he was a weapon of mass destruction. That's what we're looking for, not deposed, meaningless former leaders.
Alice Cooper: "One down, one to go, just another bullet in the chamber..."

Bin Laden is still a free man and has created havoc all over the world. Hey GW Bush, check out some Van Halen "C'mon baby, finish what you started...."
Yeah, I'm glad that Hussein has been finally captured, but I ain't gonna whip out "Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead" yet.

Have we forgotten? Bin Laden is really the guy we were after in the first place.

In my opinion, this has been one gigantic cluster fuck.
Carla Bley's version of Star Spangled Banner(European tour 1977).
It is a fitting end for such a monster. While I am happy they found him in a pit...it does seem appropriate....I still kinda wish they got him at an airport in Vienna. Then it would be off to Belgium and The World Court where many of the World's Leaders who used him from time to time might squirm a bit too.

Still, GW is getting a good day and I am glad for him, even though I don't think the cost to us is anything worth it.
There are many other "monster leaders" in this world,but this one has the second largest oil reserve in the world.He was trained and funded by the CIA during the Iran/Iraq war,Osama Bin Laden was trained by the CIA to fight against the Russian during the Afgan war.Whats there to celebrate?...watch what happens in a few months,there be a power struggle between the "insurgents",there is 35 different tribes in Iraq,ask ANY middle eastern historians and they will tell you its impossible to have central rule goverment by one committee.There is two songs that comes to mind "welcome to the Jungle" and "what a wonderful world ".....Blood for oil....1 billion dollar a week for this war....UN estimate over 400,000 children died because of USA sanctions since the Iraq ONE conflict.See the movie "Bowling for Columbine" by Micheal Moore,you understand..USA is not as "Korsher" as you may think,or what the media want you to think....There are two sets of rules for this planet.. one for the UN and one for the USA..some choice......
Music to justify incursions into underdeveloped countries by. How charming. Anything by Toby Keith comes to mind.
Go back to France the lot of you. And while you're at it build another maginot line to protect you from the U.S.A.
Blood+oil= $$$$$$$$$.Pink Floyd song "money" really is a good title for this war...Halliburton ,Richard Cheney(Dick to the college crowd)ex company was "awarded" a untedered 2.9 US Billion contract to "rebuild Iraq"..hmm conflict of interest here?...damn right........so whos next on the US hitlist?...Syria..Iran...Egypt?...
65% of all aid money in the entire world comes from us bad guys.
They also said we would fail in Japan after WW2. The culture was too different. Japan is doing quite well I would say. I no way can Saddam be defended. How about the human meat grinders? How about the gassing of the Kurds?
Please tell me where the USA has gone and left without making it a better place?
With a few exceptions, it appears that many have accepted the lie that the U.S. is in Iraq to liberate it's people. It's really about the oil.
Flemke's reference to post WW2 Japan is interesting. If it really is analogous to the current situation in Iraq, then in the year 2053 there still will be U.S. troops in Iraq. But then again, maybe the oil will have run out by then.
"He was trained and funded by the CIA during the Iran/Iraq war..." Bmwhaus, do you realize that we did that because the United States sovereign territory was invaded by Iranians and our Embassy staff was held hostage?

"Osama Bin Laden was trained by the CIA to fight against the Russians during the Afgan war..." Bmwhaus, do you realize that if the Soviet Union would have succeeded the Berlin wall likely wouldn't have come down?

"There are two sets of rules for this planet..." Bmwhaus, the vast majority of member countries in the UN have governments that actively work against their citizens basic human rights. Do you really wonder why the US doesn't allow them to control what we do? Left to the UN we would all be living under Iraqi type rule.

Jeffloistarca, Saddam was found in a 6x6x8 foot hole in a country we occupy. Think about it. We did find the needle in the haystack. Bin Laden is likely in an area outside of our control. That makes finding the needle in a haystack just a little more difficult. Besides, it's obvious that Bin Laden is smart whereas Saddam was just a successful thug.

To those that think the UN is the answer to all our problems, think Rawanda.

I want to make myself perfectly clear on a few issues that I would likely get tagged wrong on. First, GWB isn't my hero. World bankers control world events, not world leaders. My heart goes out to fundamentalist Muslims. The very voices here in this thread that oppose rejoicing at the capture of Saddam also desire an anything goes approach to what we see, hear and do in the United States. This liberal approach to removing wholesome values is the root of the problem. Think about it. The liberals want any language, any act, any piece of art, or whatever, that the vast majority in this country finds replusive to be allowed for "freedoms" sake. With satellite television and internet accessability the Middle East is being exposed/bombarded to that which the fundamentalists find to be "of the Great Satan". The fundamentalists are losing control as the Middle Eastern population slowly embraces unwholesome values. I don't find it surprising that Muslim extremists are committing terrible acts out of desparation to save their very way of life. No, I don't condone terrorism and hope the world has the resolve to continue fighting it. When you want to see anything, hear anything or do anything please stop and think of the reprecussions of your desires. The entire glode is now your stage and a lot of it doesn't care for the play. Liberalism is the problem, not the solution.
What makes everyone so sure that it really IS Saddam we've got? He has over 40 body doubles. I would call into question those who say "dna match". Why is it that they can do a dna test in Iraq within 8 hours, but it takes weeks, even months to have one done and confirmed here? Further, what are you gonna do with him now that you've got him? Where will you try him, under whose laws? I'm not trying to debate the whole Iraq situation here, it's just that I find the circumstances and timing rather specious, given the heat the White House is taking over Halliburton and other rebuilding contracts.
As usual a topic such as this becomes a nest of false bifurcations.

The Middle East views the US with suspicion for good reason.

In the early 1950's when Iranian Premier Mussadegh was seen as a threat to our oil interests, we aided a coup to bring a US friendly ruler to power. The Shah.

After the fall of the Shah and rise of radical Muslim clerics [read anti-US] in Iran in the late 1970's. We supplied arms and chemical agents to Saddam Hussein during his eight year war with Iran. When it was in our interests we supported Mr. Saddam.

When the USSR invaded Afghanistan we came to the aid of people like Osama Bin Laden. It has been openly admitted by the head of operations in Afghanistan, that the role of the US and CIA in Afghanistan was to put the guns in the hands of the shooter and let God sort it out. Our only goal was to give the Soviets "their Vietnam".

When we rightly invaded Iraq in 1991 we stopped dead at the gates to Bagdhad, and exhorted the oppressed minority Shia and Kurdish people to rise up and overthrow Hussein WITH OUR help. When the uprising began, we abandoned these people and allowed Huusein's troops to use military means to crush the revolt which WE started.

The UN and the rest of the world has long considered Israel's incursion into the four "occupied Palestinian territories" as a breach on international law and highly illegal. The Fourth Geneva Convention, to which Israel is a signatory states that "the Occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies". Up until the Reagan administration the US was in agreement. Since then, we haven't made such claims.

The citizens of Iraq and the entire Arab World view US policies as self-serving. And when to comes to the Palestinian issue, only to the benefit of Israel. If you only watched US news you'd think Palestinian terrorists were mindless fanatics. Did you ever stop to think what might compel people in mass to resort to such means?

In the early 80's professor Talmon of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem wrote an open leter to then Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin. "The combination of subjection, national oppression and social inferiority is a time bomb" for the future of Israel. Let us not compel the Arabs to feel that they have been humiliated until they believe that hope is gone and they must die for Palestine." Those are some pretty damn scary words written some twenty years ago.

Earlier this year when we finally marched into Bagdhad and their own people were tearing down statues of Saddam Hussein, we had a chance to show the world that we were there to help. We made promises that an Iraqi infrastructure with Iraqi citizens would be put in place and that all public necessities such as water, power and sanitation would be restored.

Eight months later, there are still many places without water and power. I watched on CNN during those early days when high ranking military personal and civilian experts inspecting a main power plant said all that needed to be done was some minor repair and full power could be restored because even during the shutdown it was being maintained by a skeleton crew. What happened?

We made promises that upon entering Bagdhad government offices, palaces and important places such as the Iraq National Museum would be protected from looters. Remember, all those ancient priceless artficacts that were looted, destroyed and left strewn all over a sacked museum? Why didn't we keep our promise? Incredible treasures have been lost forever.

I was absolutely in favor of the invasion of Afghanistan and the removal of the Taliban and the capture of Al Qaida operatives, especially Osama Bin Laden. But even if all those goals are achieved, we still have the responsibility of leaving Afghanistan a peaceful, self-sufficient country. We don't have the right to invade countries on a whim and leave them destroyed and ripe for the taking by who knows who. That's how the Taliban came to power in the first place.

Afghanistan may be on the road in that direction, but Bin Laden is still at large and throughout the outskirts of the country regional chieftans [warlords] have staked out their territory and have made life increasingly dangerous for ordinary Afghani citizens. And a product of our invasion there is that the opium industry is now booming. We still have a lot left to do there.

So when GW Bush made the announcement that we were going into Iraq to get Saddam and his weapons of mass-destruction, I thought this guy had fallen off his rocker. Where was the evidence for these weapons? Didn't his dad just write in his own autobiography that an Invasion of Iraq was a very ban idea?

It seems the White House's only basis of sending troops to war is based on Iraqi exile and friend to the State Department Ahmed Chalabi word that Saddam has nukes and chemical weapons? This is a guy who's wanted by the Jordanian government for bank fraud, and now he's head of the Iraqi National Congress which we installed. Then when former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson stated that he found no evidence that Hussein was trying to obtain yellowcake Uranium in Africa, his wife Vallerie Plame was outed as a spook. Are there some vindictive people on Capital Hill?

60 Minutes reported a couple weeks ago that many of the heads of local government and some chief of police are actually ex-Saddam Hussein Baath. The US has installed the very guys that were the oppressors!

Don't get me wrong, I love the US, and I wouldn't live anywhere else. But it doesn't mean I should turn a blind eye when things go askew. When it was announced we would be invading Iraq and the plans were starting to be laid out on CNN's "War" coverage it was clear that once again the US didn't have an exit plan. No mention of rebuilding was made until the war was well under way. All I saw were diagrams of the armament an A10 Thunderbolt or the Stratego type war maps on the CCN news floor.

I saw a program earlier this year where a woman who's part of the think tank that advises the Bush administration on the Middle East replied when asked if it was worth all the risks going into Iraq, her reply was, "Well, isn't just getting Hussein out of power enough?" What??!!!!!!! It's absolutely frightening that a group of people advising the President of the United States could be so shortsighted! That kind of thinking is why the US is hated by many in the Arab world and viewed with fear by many of our own allies.

Our history in the Middle East is of doing things only for our benefit and when seemingly for altruistic reasons only half way. It amazes me that so many Iraqi citizens are still friendly to the US troops, but that may very well be a measure of their hatred for Hussein. We may be the lesser of two evils in their eyes.

Since the capture of Saddam, there's a chance the resistance forces which have been inflicting damage on US troops may lose some resolve and that the people that were still afraid to openly criticize Hussein may emerge. This is our second chance to ride the wave of good feelings among Iraqi citizens and make positive gains.

Do I think we should have gone to war in Iraq? No.

Am I glad Saddam is now sitting in a US brig? Hell ya!

But now is the time to show the world that the US can do things other than war, right.
Slipknot, you going conspiracy on us? :-)

Hey I got one, let's arrange a Lee Harvey scenario for Saddam!
Yeah, maybe. Now that Saddam is in an "undisclosed location", my guess is that he is sitting with an 80 some year old JFK on the set where they faked the moon landings, sharing a laugh with Jimmy Hoffa ;)
So, Gunbei, what music do you favor then? Myabe you mentioned it among the bifurcation sorting and I missed it? ;-)
Gunbei, Great historical perspective. Thanks for taking the effort! You are right on the money. 4yanx and Slipknot1, great contributions from you guys too. And Slipknot1, remember that when anyone criticizes your conspiracy thoughts.....just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. ;)
Yeah, I kinda have mixed feelings on this. I'm damn glad we got him and the possibly bright future for the Iraqi people it could yield if we play this out correctly.

We have to take into consideration the feelings and culture of the Iraqis though, and allow them a bigger role in constructing their "new" country. We're walking a tightrope because there are so many ethnic and religious groups to appease. Maybe we can take a cue from the Kurdish people in Northern Iraq and see how they've built a government and semi-thriving albeit western-type society.

But as we've already seen, in a land with ethnic and religious diversity and long-standing hostilities it's gonna be supremely difficult. If you placate the Shiites, you piss off the Sunnis, and don't forget about the Kurds and how the Turks just north of the border feel about them. And that's one of the reasons I was opposed to the war. I think we bit off way more than we can and care to chew. We have a history of going in and getting what we want, then leaving. I pray I'm wrong.

As for my Saddam musical request? How about some old Parlament/Funkadelic, "Shit, Goddamn, Get Off Your Ass and Jam!!!!"

Now where are we gonna find that 6' 4" wirey-bearded ex-Yemeni/Saudi, rich boy, Afghan Mujahadeen MoFo??!!!!!!
Celebrate what?...that one former USA puppet dictactor will be replace by another one.This "war" is not over,in fact I doubt he was ever in command since the first shot was takened since the start of the war,there is a element that the USA cannot identified that is finacing the "insurgents" and planning the bombings of US troops.Look at Saddam,he looks that he been in that hole for 8 months,you think he had the ablity to give orders?.This is not the end but a beginning of more terrorist attacks against US interest.The only people that are laughing are the back room accountants for the military contracts that the Bush goverment is handing out like candy at your local 7-11..Congress is expected to approve another 85 billion dollars if this war drags on until 2006-7(If bush is still president),the USA could had medicare system up for every citizen int the USA for 1/10 of the cost of this "rebuilding" of the locations the USA destroyed,but we know that KBR (Kellogg Brown & Root)Halliburton(Dicks former company)is making HUGE profits from this rebuilding projects.Where is the media?..why arent they questioning the White House back room deals,you know why because they are labelled anti-american.World news media even came out and mentioned that this war was the most censored conflict ever inline with what the media could publish,and what they can see.Im not anti-american,I just dont think that USA could bypass the UN and conduct wars at their whim..
Gunbei, you said it all, much better than I could. Just because there are some nuts in the White House doesn't mean that the US is not a great country, and, on balance, a force for good in the world. If only McCain had one the Republican primaries.
Bmwhaus, I couldn't agree more.

I remember at the beginning of the year all the flack that the White House was taking when it was announced that Haliburton might have an inside track with post war rebuilding. Supposedly they were eliminated from the bidding, then were allowed back in, so surprise surprise when it came out that they've been over charging the whole time.

It bothers me that throughout the world and especially in Europe we're viewed as out of control cowboys because we act unilaterally, and break international trade agreements when they don't suit us. While I can understand that GW wants to protect US interests at home and abroad, his actions are isolating us from even our closest allies. Just a couple weeks ago Bush had to give in to a European and Japanese trade war threat because of the new [illegal] steel embargos he imposed.

Its interesting to speculate what could've been if we avoided this war, concentrated more on rebuilding Afghanistan, and saved some of that 85 billion for Medicare. But since we didn't, and we are where we are we can't jump ship now and skidaddle out of Mosul and Tikrit. We have a moral obligation to finish what we started, and that is the rebuilding of Iraq.

Will the terroism stop with the capture of Saddam? Dream on. But if we respect the people of Iraq, allow them to help in the rebuilding process as partners and show that we're their friends and not powerful bullies, maybe we've got a chance.

I firmly believe that the reason 9/11 happened was because of our past Middle East policies how we seem to favor Israel in almost all conflicts when it comes to the Palestinian issue. The Israelis are good people. The Palestinians are good people. But since the beginning of the 20th century when Zionism started ona a roll and the British mishandled the whole Palestine issue, the Palestinians have been humiliated, dishonored and treated as second class citizens of the Earth.

Terrorism isn't an Arab invention. It's always been used by a weaker force to combat an overwhelmingly stronger force. Remember when future prime minister of Israel Menachem Begin and his terrorist group Irgun leveled a section of the King David Hotel in the late 1940's killing 91 people? The Palestinians learned from that and many other acts of Jewish terrorism against the British.

There are many people in Israel that want to peacefully coexist with Palestinians and that a sovereign Palestinian state should be established. And believe it or not there are even some in the Arab world that are willing to live peacefully with the Jews. I was very hopeful when Amram Mitzna former general in the Israeli military and mayor of Haifa where Jews and Palestinians coexist very well was running for office against Ariel Sharon in this year's elections. I was disheartened when he lost.

Jews, Arabs and the rest of the world can coexist peacefully. In today's world it ain't easy, and it's hard to believe that a little over a hundred years ago there was no "Middle East Crisis". It all starts with respect.

Here's something for you Bmwhaus and any of you conspiracy advocates. Do you think these secret, back room deals have anything to do with GW Bush's old Skull and Bones ties from his Harvard days? And since Skull and Bones members are supposed to help each other for life, it'll be interesting if Bush goes up against John Kerry in the next election since he's also a lifetime S&B member.
Great posts Gunbei, humour (cluster fuck, ROLOL!) and some very thought provoking info.

Watching the news up here in the "great white north" yesterday evening, our national, publicly-funded broadcaster showed file-photo footage of a broadly smiling Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam in the early '80s. The now-Defence Secretary was selling chemicals or something at the time of his meeting with SM.

One of the people interviewed by the CBC last night is a professor at Georgetown University who suggested that, although Saddam may have indeed been directing some of the insurgency up until some unspecifed time, there may be a number of groups that are likely acting independently of one another. He referred to two main groups: 1. Baathists loyal to Saddam and 2. Iraqi nationalists opposed to Saddam AND the US-led invasion. There was another analyst speaking of the three large ethnic divisions and their respective territories in Iraq: the Sunnis (Baghdad and Northeast), the Shiites (pretty much everything South of Baghdad) and the Kurds (North and Northwest). What a mess!

I wonder though, instead of invading Iraq and going after Saddam, if there had been as much effort and money put into the expedition to Afghanistan and getting bin Laden, would the latter now still be at large??? Should the US and its allies have finished the job there and, in the meantime, gather more concrete evidence of WMDs in Iraq before invading? One would think that the Allies were in control of a large part of Afghanistan at the time and with the patience/tenacity shown in Iraq could conceivably have captured ObL.

Don't get me wrong, I think the capture of Hussein is a good thing, but the rationale for the invasion was never what one could call rock solid. As for being a supporter of terrorism, one could argue that Saddam encouraged it with huge payments made to the families of Palestinian suicide-bombers, but that doesn't prove a link with Osama.

Slipknot and Bmwhaus, your skepticism is understandable. There are too many coincidences, including profits for those close to the White House, for there not to be serious questions. Whether are any real answers are given, or just the same stonewalling platitudes, is another matter. I won't hold my breath though.

Just my 2 cents (Cdn), 1.4 (US). :-)

Oh yeah, music to celebrate... I think I'd rather spend time remembering those who have lost their lives during the events of the past couple of years and teach my children about what it means to me to be a good person. Tolerance, love your fellow (wo)man, etc.

Peace, everyone.
Very inciteful posts as usual. However... Skull and Bones is a Yale society not Harvard. The only reason Dubya got into Yale was papa Bush.
"Bombs over Bagdad" By Outkast.

Frankly, im amazed that saddam was not "shot while trying to escape" with "300,000"USD on him.


soldiers are honest!:)
Ahh, Yale? My mistake, I knew it was of them thar skoolz. Papa Bush AND Grandpappy Bush were all in the same society. I thought they were all Free Masons until I saw that 60 Minutes piece on Skull And Bones. Thanks Slipknot!

Mghcanuck, If I were GW I would have followed the path you described. Easy for me to say though because we don't know what they knew at the time, but also kind of spooky when you realize they didn't really know that much and seemed to have made up some stuff to bolster their case against Iraq.

My fear is that Bin Laden had been planning his escape for many years and he was ready for the possible repercussions of a US led invasion. It seems Hussein was also well prepared, but he finally got caught. However, when the White House realized we weren't making the kind of progress we'd hoped for in Afghanistan in regards to catching Bin Laden, maybe due to faulty intelligence, I don't know...that's when we decided to shift the world's and our nation's focus from one Middle East nation to another more "winnable" situation. It just seems that way.

Now let's enjoy the holidays and hopefully by catching that scraggly old fellar there might be a boost in holiday retail sales.

One question. Who the heck are you guys gonna vote for in 2004? I haven't a clue yet. We've had an actor as president and California governor, and an ex pro wrestler as Minnesota governor. Maybe a cast member from Survivor or Queer Eye For The Straight Guy might run.
Gunbei, the attacks on the U.S. on 9/11 were the result of the internal politics of Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden wants to topple the Saudi government and one of his strategies is to show that the U.S., Saudi's greatest ally, is weak and ineffectual. 19 of the 21 hijackers purposely were chosen to be Saudi citizens. This was done to drive a wedge between the U.S. and Saudi and to demonstrate to the Islamic world at large the Saudi's government's lack of legitimacy and popular support. To the extent that one of bin Laden's major goals was the expulsion of U.S. troops from Saudi Arabian, then his strategy has worked. The U.S. is not completely out of Saudi, but it is now the stated goal of the Saudi government to have U.S. forces there reduced to a bare minimum.
BOn jovi: wanted dead or alive!
Onhwy61, I didn't think about that but it definitely sounds like a real possiblity. I'm sure people like Bin Laden would like nothing better to do than to make us look weak in the eyes of the world. Specifically, the Arab World and our Arab allies. I heard a young Arab man say he was glad 9/11 happened because the US finally got a punch in the nose. He was from an Arab country friendly to the US, I forgot which one, but although he admires our culture and people, he is sick of our policy in the Middle East. I've seen this echoed in interviews with young Arab college students from countries that are US allies. This is a very tricky and confusing dynamic.

Bin Laden being exiled from Saudi Arabia might have something to do with him wanting to stir the pot in his ex-homeland. Frankly, I'm more fearful of guys like Mullah Mohammed Omar the ex-head of the Taliban and Ayman Al-Zawahiri who's most likely the real guiding force behind Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

I've seen interviews with people of varying Arab nations who are more afraid of their own government than they are of the US or radicals within the Muslim world. As benign as Saudi Arabia often appears because they're to an extent our ally, I wonder how much this applies to the ruling Saudis and their people. It's hard to imagine this would be the case in Kuwait or Bahrain.

History has shown that politics and who you choose as an ally plays an important part in the survival of your country or kingdom. It's an interesting paradox for the Saudis to have the US as an ally which affords them a great deal of security from their hostile neighbors. But on the flip side having infidel military bases on Muslim soil also causes great consternation. Being a ruler is no fun at all, because you can never make everyone happy. All you can do is to try to survive.

As for the hijackers I may be mistaken, but I thought guys like Mohammed Atta and the others were mostly Egyptian. The curious thing about guys like Atta and some of the other Palestinian suicide bombers is that they weren't radical until they went abroad to study in Europe. There they were recruited by radical clerics and brainwashed into making themselves human missiles.

I've asked my Dad about this kind of thing since he was a pilot in the Japanese Imperial Navy during WWII and how is it that people can be mass mobilized for a cause like this. He and some buddies volunteered for the Naval academy when they were still in high school. At 16 and 17 they were ready to die for Japan. I've heard all these stories how Japanese mothers sent off their boys telling them they should die for the Emperor. It's funny because my Grandmother told my Dad not to do anything stupid and to come back alive. Did I have the one sane WWII Japanese Granny? Hahah. Curiously, my Dad really doesn't have an answer for his youthful zealousness, saying maybe it was just that. But he also doesn't think Japan was wrong either. Have any of my fellow Audiogoners ever wondered what was on the minds of young Germans and Japanese during this period?

There are so many things that contributed to 9/11. And the sad thing is that it might have been avoided if we had just acted more responsibly in the Middle East.
I got an unrealistic extremist idea.

Lets disarm our nukes by dropping em all on the middle east!
Blast that sand to glass!
Then take out a buncha windex and wipe it clean. No streaks, no sheeks


Just kiddin.

I think it is amazing how well the U.S. connected Bin Laden and Saddam Huseein without really connecting them. A little hint here, a little hint there. Next thing you know 50% of americans believe that Saddam and Bin Laden are comrades.

I see the point of view for both sides. I think saddam had to be dealt with though. You got alot of space out there where WMD can be hidden. They have already found trace elements of chemical weapons, and doing evidence of larger ops, but nothing really concrete.
It might show up yet.

I also have to agree with the idea that the rebuilding contracts SHOULD go to the countrys who supported the invasion. I dont think france or germany should be able to sit there and benefit from this when the whole time they were making escuses for putting this off.

Saddam had what, 10 years to get his act together? and all he gave was crap, lies, and grief. He was responsible for what? 60,000+ dead iraqies? he Chemmed his own damn civilians. I dont care what anyone says, they are better off now than when he was in control.
I think there could have been better planning to rebuild iraq though.

On the other hand, the way i see it, im sick of us spending billions of dollars each year to support other countrys and governments. Concessions are nothing other than bribes and blackmail and seldom fix a problem rather than prolong it.

If it were up to me, the USA would pull ALL of its troops from any country that does not welcome them. We would cut ALL funding to other countrys, its time for them to start wiping thier own asses.
With the money we are spending on foriegn aid, we could feed and shelter OUR homeless, take care of OUR problems.

Let the rest of the world go to hell.

If we wanted the oil in the middle east, the easiest way to do it would be to say "Screw em", pull alll our people out, let them duke it out.

20 years later when everyone on that side of the world had blown eachother to bits and leveled every socioty out there, we could just walk in and take it, nobody would complain. know why? Cause they would have all killed themselves.

Screw em, if they dont want our troops, they dont get our funding. If they dont trade with us we dont trade with them.

We are out there trying to help other people live the life that we enjoy. They dont want it, fine. They dont get it.

let them blow themselves to hell.

Wanna be friends with the USA? Come to us, and be our friend, trade with us, talk with us.

You dont want to be USA's friend? Then fine. You dont get squat. Im sick of my money being taxed and given to some country ive never hgeard of that hates us.
Pull the funding, lets see how fast alot of attitudes change.

Im no politician, obviously, but i think the USA has enough problems of its own. I'm more concerned about the USA Disabled War Vetrans who will be spending xmas in a cardboard box in some alley.

Maybe it is just time for the USA to butt out of all of it. Like china minus the communism.

Who is right and who is wrong is all determined by the winner. They write it as they want to.

If Hitler won WWII, the history books will all claim what a wonderful man he was and what a dirgbag the americans were.

Its all perspective, and the onyl perspective that ends up counting 200 years down the road is the winner of the fight.

The U.S. Nuked japan not just once, but twice. Countless women, children, civilians dead. That was not needed.
Read history books, it says that the USA did it to save lives. Well, they might have saved the lives of soldiers, but the price was to kill two citys packed full of civilians, women, children. That attack was worse in my opinion of 911.

If the US had lost the war, that nuclear attack would have permanantly burned the USA with a reputation comparable to how we view the Nazis.

Slappy, that's exactly how my Dad looks at it.

It would be hard for many Americans to believe anyone could have such a viewpoint, especially the way we're taught history in school, but there is another side to WWII.

As an American of Japanese decent I'm deeply ashamed at what happened in Nanking for three terrible months, and events like the Bataan death march. We also can't forget the inhumane biological experiments performed by the Japanese on unwilling Chinese prisoners. What gets my goat is that the German and Japanese scientists that committed these heinous crimes were allowed to avoid war crimes trials and immigrate to the US in secret in order to work for us!

On the flip side, my aunt was one of the young victims at Hiroshima. My Dad remembers returning from the war and seeing all the skin on his kid sister's arms hanging from her finger tips. For many years my Dad was afraid of what might happen if my aunt had children. Luckily they turned out fine.

Interesting thing about the TWO bombs. It seems Truman as well as most of the high ranking military commanders knew the Japanese were beaten, and that they were actually trying a face-saving surrender through the Russians. Although Truman seems to have been reluctant, it was Secretary of State James Byrnes who gave the Manhattan Project top priority and convinced him to go through with it. The decision to drop the bomb was made to end the war, but more probably to send a message to the Russians that we don't mess around. Can you imagine that, the obliteration of almost two hundred thousand people just to make a statement to Stalin?

Wouldn't it be nice if one day Iraq and the whole Middle East could become close US allies the way Germany and Japan have? If that ever happened, who would our enemies be then?
Probably canada.

I spent a couple years in japan, nobody ever really talked about it. I think it was a pretty brutal thing to do. I really enjoyed Japan, loved the culture and the lifestyle. It is a great place. I took a trip to Hiroshima while i was there. It has healed nicely, but there is definatly a scar beneath

lets just hope that everyone learned from it, especially the U.S.A.
One countries terrorist is another countries hero.Its in the way you want to look at it.Americans DO NOT understand the middle eastern cultures,nor do they wish to understand it,its irrational to think the Iraq people welcome a foreign force inside their nation,they are just glad Saddam is gone,heck Mickey Mouse would be a welcome change compared to Saddam's regime.If Bush makes another comment about the "axis of evil" Im going to choke my on Wheaties.There will be two consequences now that the "leader"(Saddam) of the attacks against the american soldiers is captured...Power struggle between the actual insurgents inwhich who can kill more americans...or other "axis's of evils countries" will use the USA prosecution trails against Saddam as a focal point to entice more radicals to feed their causes.Maybe Bush will wear his airforce jumpsuit and announced the war is over...again........
Ya know, this is what really bugs me about everything.

You can go to any country in the world and live there and make plenty of friends. Any country. They might be your friends but they will still hate your country.

It boils down to this, there are upwards of 6 billion people on the planet, and the wars that kill millions are because of the actions of probably far less than 1 million.

Every country has its dark period, every country becomes a monster at one point. No country is immune.Even the high and mighty USA, took a dark step when they nuked japan.

I was in the military, and i knew there was a possibility that i would have to kill for my country, and sometimes i wondered about that, about how different i am from my enemys. Im just some joe, joined the service to to get hot meals and a warm bed. How much different is my enemy?
My enemy probably joined for the same reason. We are pawns who pay the ultimate sacrifice because world leaders cannot get along.
Instead of me killing him, and him killing me, what would happen if we had talked without somone we know of but never met stating we are enemys?
We would probably get along. Probably become friends.

It is very easy to assume that a county is the sum of its leaders. Unfortunatly, that is not usually the case.

Too bad the young have to die when the old start the wars.

I think the children of politicians should join the military. Maybe they wouldnt be so hesitant to start wars.

Im still glad we got that sonofabitch saddam. He had to go.
Slappy is certainly on to something here.

You certainly have a very, very good understanding of history. I've enjoyed your posts to this thread a lot. You've put considerable effort into your posts and have enlightened many readers that obviously are emotional on these subjects rather than intellectual.

My father barely survived the Bataan death march. He didn't speak of his experiences until shortly before his death of cancer in 1995 and only then because I begged him. I had been told by one of his fellow Marines of his attempt to save his closest, wounded friend by physically assisting him. The Japanese soldiers that forced this march were furious that Dad and his wounded friend could keep up the pace and made a cruel game out of slowly making them fail. Dad received several minor bayonet wounds that ultimately slowed them down. At a point when his friend slipped from his grasp he turned, locked eyes and watched as a bayonet was shoved through his friends throat. Even after this experience Dad never spoke harshly of the Japanese as a people.

It has been estimated that 500,000 US soldiers lives were saved by the two bombs dropped on Japan. In Harry Truman's own words that is why he decided to use nuclear weapons. Saving face lost its significance once the bombs were dropped. So, now we know that saving face is determined by its cost of doing so. Since there is no such threat today Japanese society doesn't feel compelled to lose face by admitting and apologizing for the slave comfort girls from Korea and China. Pride is keeping hatred throughout the Orient on a low burn.

I've had the pleasure of working intimately with several Japanese engineers on an egg breaker joint project in the mid 80's. (Before you make fun of an egg breaker, understand that it separates the yolk and egg whites to the tune of 36,000 eggs per hour with one operator. We're not talking about throwing eggs here.) I enjoyed their company immensely and we became good friends, or as good of friends as we could during the three months we were together. One of the engineers was a survivor of Nagasaki. On an evening when I arranged a huge Japanese meal, figuring they were growing tired of American food, this fellow spoke of WWII. All of his subordinates were solemn while he spoke as was I. He wanted me to know that he felt the Americans did what they had to do and he had no hard feelings at all. This was a totally unsolicited commentary.

Slappy is right. If only the likes of that elderly engineer and my father could have a meaningful voice in world affairs we would live in a better place. Unfortunately it's a rare occurance when a real human being rises to leadership.

Most conflict on the world stage arises by design. Even knowing history from every textbook angle one must be Sherlock Holmes to see the real criminals. The money brokers control the unfolding of events and the outcome. Their roles are left out of the textbooks because too few even know who they are. War is a huge smokescreen that keeps them hidden from view. Once war is over they scoop up property and industry when governments are destroyed and religious institutions are weakened.

Slappy is right that problems are created by a small percentage of the worlds population but it is far less than a million. More like a handful.
Great Posts!

"Politics is the allocation of resources"

This is the oldest definition, and now especially that Saddam is no longer to be feared, everyone in Iraq will be posturing for the best leverage. Those who have an interest in the Americans staying will continue to pretend they are in command. The ones who are most adept at getting their way will and, quite frankly, for all of our good intentions, money and military, we will be irrelevant.

We do still get the oil, but then we never didn't have it. George W. Bush got Saddam. Everyone wins.

Except the dead and their families.