As a gay man born in Iraq, I know that western intervention is to blame for the murder of LGBT Iraqis

Jul 11, 2017 9:30 AM

Offline

Jan 2017

4225

Haittakari said:

Here's a few more links then, you gonna provide any of your own

https://www.thoughtco.com/g00/top-crimes-of-saddam-hussein-1779933?i10c.referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.fi%2F

http://academic.regis.edu/jriley/saddam_hussein.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/05/world/middleeast/05iraq.html

https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/nea/rls/19675.htm

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/criminal-cases-saddam-hussein-could-face-1.1183790

This last one has multiple parts so be sure click for the next parts

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iraq501/events_index.html

Or are you just going dismiss all of these as liars, without providing any support for your claims aside from you said so, too

All the crimes you are talking about were false allegations, just so they can invade Iraq for oil.
As for the Kurds, look at how they are boot licking USA, Israel and NATO in Syria now.
YPG and PKK (the Kurdish forces) have already participated in many terror attacks against Turkey.
And Kurdish people support it.
Also, even if I consider that Saddam really did commit those crimes then what about Hillary?
She funded Al-Qaeda and many terrorist groups in Libya.
She also massacred thousands of innocent Libya people.
She killed the ruler of Libya (Gadaffi) under false allegations because Gadaffi wanted to replace the US dollar with his country's natural resources. It would have decreased the value of US dollar, but it would also have provided free education, medical health, insurance, etc to Libya people.

https://www.rt.com/usa/388104-iraq-saddam-rice-democracy/
http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/mideast-crisis-iraq-islamicstate/
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/it-was-better-to-live-in-iraq-under-saddam-9532742.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/iraqis-say-they-were-better-off-under-rule-of-saddam-hussein/4320
http://www.rense.com/general74/kurds.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1148.htm
https://news.vice.com/article/the-cia-just-declassified-the-document-that-supposedly-justified-the-iraq-invasion

Haittakari said:
Proof, or are we yet again supposed to just take your word for it

Here are some more:-

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jul/28/iraq.usa
http://www.alancolmes.com/2016/01/05/its-time-to-admit-saddam-hussein-was-right/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4044216/CIA-agent-grilled-Saddam-Hussein-says-thought-knew-man-WRONG.html
http://www.truthaboutwar.org/1brutal.shtml
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cia-analyst-saddam-hussein-iraq/

Join Emilia's self-proclaimed knights club if you are a fellow Emilia fan

Jul 11, 2017 9:37 AM

#52

PetitePanda

Offline

Oct 2016

111

swirlydragon said:

Well it was acceptable whether you believe it or not.
Tho that doesn't mean they followed the same traditions as the Western world by holding gay pride and stuff

OMG I had no clue Muslim nations were so passionate about gay rights lololol... that's the best joke I've heard all day... and since you don't watch Western News channels.. u prolly get your news from Pakistan Express or something like that....which I mean is soooo much more reliable than the news channels of International Caliber right?

It doesn't freaking matter what the law says... I have enough Muslim friends from all parts of the word to understand that most despise homosexuality... They are good people - they just disagree with it based on their religious teachings.

I see you're googling and quoting dates of when homosexuality was legalized in Muslim nations.. but what you failed to do is actually read the damn article in detail - where they say that despite being legal, LGBT community face discrimination and harassment.

Jul 11, 2017 9:41 AM

#53

swirlydragon

Offline

Jan 2017

4225

PetitePanda said:

OMG I had no clue Muslim nations were so passionate about gay rights lololol... that's the best joke I've heard all day... and since you don't watch Western News channels.. u prolly get your news from Pakistan Express or something like that....which I mean is soooo much more reliable than the news channels of International Caliber right?

Pakistan Express?
Give me a break!
Your staw man arguments won't work on me

PetitePanda said:
It doesn't freaking matter what the law says... I have enough Muslim friends from all parts of the word to understand that most despise homosexuality... They are good people - they just disagree with it based on their religious teachings.

Despise homosexuality?
I have Indian Muslim friends, but I never heard any of them saying homosexuals are disgusting or something.
Anyway, I get your point.
Your experience seems to differ
But that doesn't mean your experience alone speaks for all Muslims

PetitePanda said:
I see you're googling and quoting dates of when homosexuality was legalized in Muslim nations.. but what you failed to do is actually read the damn article in detail - where they say that despite being legal, LGBT community face discrimination and harassment.

Homosexuals facing discrimination, huh?
https://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=1630437
lol
Anyway, I never said homosexuals never face any discrimination, but generalizing each and every Muslims because of it seems ludicrous. It's just like saying all Muslim people support ISIS when in reality Muslims (and Russians) are the ones who slaughtered each and every one of them unlike America which just seems to bomb here and there.
America's airstrikes usually kill more civilians than ISIS members. America seems to arm more ISIS members (by arming Syrian rebels who later join ISIS while other forces like Russian, Iranian, etc do not arm them) than killing them.
It was Iraqi, Iranian, Syrian, Egypt, Libya and Russian forces that killed all ISIS members including their leader
Also, homosexuality is in fact legal in many Muslim countries whether you believe it or not.
And those Muslim countries also have higher literacy rate.
Therefore, they probably know about their country's LGBT rights.

swirlydragonJul 11, 2017 9:55 AM

Join Emilia's self-proclaimed knights club if you are a fellow Emilia fan

Jul 11, 2017 1:10 PM

#54

removed-user

Offline

Jul 2018

564612

swirlydragon said:

Haittakari said:

Here's a few more links then, you gonna provide any of your own

https://www.thoughtco.com/g00/top-crimes-of-saddam-hussein-1779933?i10c.referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.fi%2F

http://academic.regis.edu/jriley/saddam_hussein.htm

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/05/world/middleeast/05iraq.html

https://2001-2009.state.gov/p/nea/rls/19675.htm

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/criminal-cases-saddam-hussein-could-face-1.1183790

This last one has multiple parts so be sure click for the next parts

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iraq501/events_index.html

Or are you just going dismiss all of these as liars, without providing any support for your claims aside from you said so, too

All the crimes you are talking about were false allegations, just so they can invade Iraq for oil.
As for the Kurds, look at how they are boot licking USA, Israel and NATO in Syria now.
YPG and PKK (the Kurdish forces) have already participated in many terror attacks against Turkey.
And Kurdish people support it.
Also, even if I consider that Saddam really did commit those crimes then what about Hillary?
She funded Al-Qaeda and many terrorist groups in Libya.
She also massacred thousands of innocent Libya people.
She killed the ruler of Libya (Gadaffi) under false allegations because Gadaffi wanted to replace the US dollar with his country's natural resources. It would have decreased the value of US dollar, but it would also have provided free education, medical health, insurance, etc to Libya people.

https://www.rt.com/usa/388104-iraq-saddam-rice-democracy/
http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/mideast-crisis-iraq-islamicstate/
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/it-was-better-to-live-in-iraq-under-saddam-9532742.html
http://www.globalresearch.ca/iraqis-say-they-were-better-off-under-rule-of-saddam-hussein/4320
http://www.rense.com/general74/kurds.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1148.htm
https://news.vice.com/article/the-cia-just-declassified-the-document-that-supposedly-justified-the-iraq-invasion

Haittakari said:
Proof, or are we yet again supposed to just take your word for it

Here are some more:-

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jul/28/iraq.usa
http://www.alancolmes.com/2016/01/05/its-time-to-admit-saddam-hussein-was-right/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4044216/CIA-agent-grilled-Saddam-Hussein-says-thought-knew-man-WRONG.html
http://www.truthaboutwar.org/1brutal.shtml
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/cia-analyst-saddam-hussein-iraq/

Hillary is a red herring, we are discussing Saddam not her. Unless you have proof that she is somehow related to Saddam guilt, she is irrelevant to the discussion.

I'm half inclined to give you a taste of your own medicine by dismissing RT as nothing more than Russian propaganda, but I'll be better and go through all of it. (I suspect you didn't actually go through the links I gave you, based on how quickly you responded. Well engaged indeed.)

Unlike you I'm going to leave some evidence of RT here. This isn't related to Saddam, but since you're bringing up unrelated points as well, we might as well discuss the reliability of your sources.

http://archives.cjr.org/feature/what_is_russia_today.php

http://littleatoms.com/russia-today-piers-robinson

On to the stuff you posted.

Youtube video is about Gadaffi, another guy. Stay on topic. It is quite amusing to hear Putin complain about people attacking smaller nations though.

RT story about Rice

This story claims that the invasion of Iraq was about getting rid of Saddam, you claim it was about oil. Which is it? Both? You didn't provide any evidence that it was about oil. You seem to just assume that it's self evident, like grass is green. It's not, a war is a ridiculously expensive way to get oil. Are you claiming that Saddam was unwilling to allow the US to buy said oil and the US therefor has to kill him to get the oil?

The baathist story

For those who don't wanna read TL;DR version is, after Saddam was gone his intelligence officers moved to work for ISIS. So Saddam had intelligence officers, who after losing their employer went to work for other people. What is this supposed to prove? That the West should have left him in power, because he was the lesser of two evils and now his power is in the hands of that greater evil? The article itself says ''Saddam had run a brutal police state'', now the men who ran it are working with ISIS. This isn't really supporting your case of Saddam's innocence at all.

The independent story

Firstly the article makes mention that Saddam visited ''an adoring Kurd village (this was before the notorious gas attack on Halabja)''.

For those who do not know what this attack was, and why the mention of Kurds need to be followed up by saying it was before the attack
http://www.rudaw.net/english/kurdistan/15032017

Again, kinda failing to prove Saddam's innocence, but okay...

Another quote from the article, you apparently didn't read before linking.

''Baghdad was noisy and mucky and full of building sites, but it was bustling and thriving. There wasn’t a huge amount in the shops, but people had all they needed to get by.

If you were Kurdish, or a dissident, life wasn’t like that, and I’m not suggesting for a second that we should forget their suffering. But by and large, life was OK in Saddam’s dictatorship.''

This article is saying, that Saddam was bad, but what is happening now is worse, so maybe he should have been left in power. It's an interesting argument, but not the one you're making.

Global research article

More about how Saddam was better then what is happening in Iraq now. Many who disliked him are now admitting that it was likely a mistake to depose him only free up the religious horror he was holding down. They say this as an argument from lesser evil. If you wish to argue that he was ''the lesser of two evils'' you'll need to find another opponent, I'm not sure what to think of such.

Rense article

In regards to WMD accusation from one of the links I posted

''Iraq admitted to producing biological agents, and after the 1995 defection of a senior Iraqi official, Iraq admitted to the weaponization of thousands of liters of anthrax, botulinim toxin, and aflatoxin for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs and aircraft.''

''Saddam Hussein launched a large-scale chemical weapons attack against Iraq's Kurdish population in the late 1980s, killing thousands. On at least 10 occasions, Saddam Hussein's military forces have attacked Iranian and Kurdish targets with combinations of mustard gas and nerve agents through the use of aerial bombs, 122-millimeter rockets, and conventional artillery shells. ''

Are you confusing WMDs with nukes, they aren't synonyms you know? Here's the definition of a WMD https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/weapons-of-mass-destruction

They used chemical weapons and they admitted that they had biological weapons, therefor this isn't a lie. The article you claims that it is a lie, leading me question the validity of any other claims made by the article.

Further corroboration that they did admit it. Page 8. https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/DOC_0005479946.pdf

Information clearing house

This also admits that Saddam had crimes to answer for, it only disputes whatever or not the Kurds at Halabja were killed by Iraqis. It makes mention of a document that states the Kurds were killed by a gas that had a blood agent, which the Iraqis were not known to have access to, meaning the deaths would be on Iran. The author does however admit that there was an invested interest by the US to find Iraq innocent at the time as they were allied with Iraq then. This document isn't linked to and I can't find it.

The author again says Saddam committed human rights abuses, he was a tyrant. He only argues that this tyranny isn't why the US invaded.

This one also question your oil line, saying the rivers were much more lucrative.
(You really need read the stuff you link.) On this point however, war is awfully costly way to do this. It's not defined no, US may have heavily underestimated the cost of the war, but it does bring the question of; Considering that the US had previously worked with Saddam, why wouldn't they just make a deal with him? Why the need to depose him?

How much the war cost
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iraq-war-anniversary-idUSBRE92D0PG20130314

Vice

Again about the WMDs. They admitted they had them, back in 1995. By the way, here's the actual document they are talking about. Page 9 summarizes the findings. It again states that Iraq had biological and chemical weapons, which are WMDs. Only thing unknown are the nukes.

http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB129/nie.pdf

All your links talk about Halabja or WMDs, they make no mention of the other crimes. You just say that those are lies. Evidence, it's important. You can't just say stuff and expect people to believe it.

On to the gay stuff.

Guardian

...Hmm. Again, read your links, this is about oil and the dollar, it makes no mention of homosexuality.

Alan Colmes

Are any of these proof of the acceptability of homosexuality? This says that when Saddam declared the battle in Kuwait was to be ''the mother of all battles'' he should be interpreted as having meant that all future battles would be traceable to it... What does this have to do with anything?

Daily Mail

This isn't about the gays either... I'm not reading through the whole article by this click bait trash site. It mentions the WMDs again. I've responded to that enough times already.

Truth about the war

No gays here either. What a surprise. Did you not understand what Panda and I were talking about?

TL;DR version of this link

There are other brutal dictators. Nice what aboutery there.
US was allied with Saddam and helped get into power in the first place.
Etc etc. It's all the US's fault, Saddam was a nice man, the US made him do it.

This one does again contradict the whole no WMDs. As it says chemical weapons were used. You have seriously got to read what you send, these aren't even consistent with each other. Basically it says that Saddam did bad things, but it was the US's fault, and they've been exaggerated.

Free thought project

A repeat of the Daily mail story. Which is contradicted by the information about the WMDs, in your other sources... No mention of homosexuality. It dos yet again admit that Saddam was ''a ruthless dictator''.

Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page ) Luna - Aug 2, 2021	272	by traed »» Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 ) Desolated - Jul 30, 2021	50	by Desolated »» Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China. Desolated - Aug 5, 2021	1	by Bourmegar »» Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor law Desolated - Aug 3, 2021	17	by kitsune0 »» Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To Itself Desolated - Aug 5, 2021	10	by Desolated »» Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM

As a gay man born in Iraq, I know that western intervention is to blame for the murder of LGBT Iraqis

More topics from this board

Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )

» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )

» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.

» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor law

» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To Itself

MoreTop Anime

MoreTop Airing Anime

MoreMost Popular Characters