or Connect
HotStockMarket › Forums › Community › Politics › Baghdad wants U.S. to pay $1 billion for damage to city
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Baghdad wants U.S. to pay $1 billion for damage to city - Page 3

post #41 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc View Post

These are pictures that I took the day after we were ambushed in Baghdad in 2003.  I was the squad leader and this is one of my three trucks.  Two of my Soldiers received purple hearts from this attack and one was evaced to the the states.  Keep in mind what THEY did to our Soldiers and equipment.

 

IED ATTACK 21 NOV 03 003.jpgIED ATTACK 21 NOV 03 006.jpgIED ATTACK 21 NOV 03 008.jpg

You also have to keep in mind that you were a foreign enemy that illegally invaded their country.
 

post #42 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Internationalstocks View Post



You also have to keep in mind that you were a foreign enemy that illegally invaded their country and also what your bombs did to their country and people too.
 

post #43 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjoke View Post

as i said WAR IS WAR,... things happen.. people die. TO assume everyone will not be killed or hurt is not applicable. They had the choice to leave to another region.

Also some of these so called people were taken and killed by iraq citizens. Not to mention  the unreliable nature of reportings and such over that peroid while a country is in crisis.

 

I dont see anyone else on this planet compensating people, nor over history... so therefore let someone else do it 1st then.

We have put billions into IRAQ on rebuilding and given them countless positive things, spent 100 of billions and what do they ask for .. oh its another 1 billion... pfft its out of line and more so money we dont have.  The rebuilding wasnt always the case until the US implemented it after WW2; before that you were just out of luck.

 

What happened with kuwait when iraq invaded, did they complain and ask for things from the foregin army? nope..

You always sure do seem to side with the arab world and the short end of the stick with the US.

 


 


I have been to many countries in the Middle-East,speak the language and know things from their points of view as well. We are entitled to our points of view just like they are entitled to their points of view. Had all the neighboring Arab countries agreed for the US to invade Iraq and Iraq not signed a peace treaty with all its Arab neighbors then I would be with the US on this invasion. The United Nations would also have supported this war had this been the case but it obviously was not.

post #44 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc View Post

Thats BS!  I was in Iraq in 2003-04 and again in 2009-10.  Leave the country if u can't appreciate ur Soldiers bitch.  Your damn right we killed many of their people after they started shooting at us.  You are talking out of your ass and if you have never been there and seen your buddy's blood spilled and fired a weapon than shut your fucking mouth.  Have you ever been in a convoy hit by an IED, I don't think so.  They should pay us a billion dollars for not making them our 51st state.    
 


 

If you were there legally they would not have been shooting at you. Most tourists travel freely these days without being shot at. You invaded their country and dropped bombs on them. You didn't expect them to run out and hand flowers to you or did you??
 

post #45 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Internationalstocks View Post



If you were there legally they would not have been shooting at you. Most tourists travel freely these days without being shot at. You invaded their country and dropped bombs on them. You didn't expect them to run out and hand flowers to you or did you??
 

 

Quote:

Iraq under Saddam Hussein had high levels of torture and mass murder.

Secret police, torture, murders, deportations, forced disappearances, assassinations, chemical weapons, and the destruction of wetlands (more specifically, the destruction of the food sources of rival groups) were some of the methods Saddam Hussein used to maintain control.[original research?] The total number of deaths related to torture and murder during this period are unknown, as are the reports of human rights violations. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International issued regular reports of widespread imprisonment and torture.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saddam_Hussein%27s_Iraq

 

 

 

you speak as if your words are coming directly out of the mouths of Iraqis.................All we have to do is look at the past...at what Iraq was like under Hussein and YOU/we will realize that Iraq and ITS PEOPLE are MUCH MUCH MUCH 10x better off now than they were under his iron fist rule...

 

keep trash talking about America...YOUR words are not the words of the Iraqi people:

 

A Better Life
Poll: Most Iraqis Ambivalent About the War, But Not Its Results

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/goodmorningamerica/iraq_anniversary_poll_040314.html

 

 

MOST Iraqis believe life is better for them now than it was under Saddam Hussein, according to a British opinion poll published today.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1530762.ece
 

you can argue that the clean up effort of Iraq hasn't gone as smooth as everyone would like...but there is NO arguing that the people are much better off now without Hussein.

post #46 of 109


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vlandsponger View Post



 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saddam_Hussein%27s_Iraq

 

 

 

you speak as if your words are coming directly out of the mouths of Iraqis.................All we have to do is look at the past...at what Iraq was like under Hussein and YOU/we will realize that Iraq and ITS PEOPLE are MUCH MUCH MUCH 10x better off now than they were under his iron fist rule...  Some may be better of now and some may not be better off now. Many lost friends and family members.

 

keep trash talking about America...YOUR words are not the words of the Iraqi people: You can visit the middle-east and hear the words of the Iraqis that left Baghdad and moved to Damascus or Dubai.

 

A Better Life
Poll: Most Iraqis Ambivalent About the War, But Not Its Results

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/world/goodmorningamerica/iraq_anniversary_poll_040314.html

 

 

MOST Iraqis believe life is better for them now than it was under Saddam Hussein, according to a British opinion poll published today.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article1530762.ece
 

you can argue that the clean up effort of Iraq hasn't gone as smooth as everyone would like...but there is NO arguing that the people are much better off now without Hussein.  Obviously there are some that are better of and some that are not better off. The Iraqis should be able to choose for themselves what is better for them. What if Israel was invaded to free the Palestinian people from their current misery that they live under now? Would you then accept a poll asking the Palestinians if they were better off now that they were freed from their current occupation and blockades that live under? confused.gifrolleyes.gif


Main point is the Iraqi people should be compensated for their damages and not about exactly how many are better off now and how many are worse off now. This topic was not to debate that a certain percentage are happier off now and the ones that suffered losses are on their own because there are a few happier people in Iraq.

post #47 of 109

No they shouldnt be compensated, nor any other county in the manner you are viewing it. LET OTHER COUNTRIES ENDORSE THIS 1st. Just because america is fair doesnt mean its stupid and will pay anything.

 

By your perspective i suppose once we take care of this IRAN problem, youll say the same things as you are with IRAQ.

however, the rest of the area wants it resolved. - When we invaded iraq, i didnt see countries left and right breaking ties, or condeming the actions.


Most of the tourists just get  harrassed if your from america .. tourism is dead. I suppose thats why reporters and others are attacked in that region, but never ever in Europe.

Why doesnt serbia or other countries express this constantly then, saying we owe them; or other countries which we have invaded in the past  have this perception?

hmmmmmmmmm ya.

Next youll say freedom of expression and such is endorsed. Give me a break, you are so slanted its unreal.  America is always in the wrong as per your views on anything.

 

Let the rest of the countries deal with their own problems and see how bad the region let alone the planet gets.

 

What about the BILLIONS in AID we send this country and others, but hey its still acceptable to talk smack and say we owe more? When we are the most humaine nation on the planet.. 

Lets see how long they last, when we stop getting oil from them, as its a wealth transfer and we never needed to obtain oil from these countries... but what else are they going to export, camel spit or sand?? The day the US stops, then we will see if they practice what they preach.  Dont bite the hand that feeds you.

 

Did we pay vietnam anything after the war nope, nor does other countries.. or how about russia when they invaded afghanistan, yet i dont hear you complaining about those? ...

What is with this lame reverse PC crap.. when its acceptable to talk shit about christians and jews burn flags etc, but when anyone mentions islam its wrong and blah blah blah....   ya, same thing as expecting to pay additonal funds, when they never have nor anyone else.

 

America is just in the wrong, even when its right..as per the middle east..

post #48 of 109


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjoke View Post

No they shouldnt be compensated, nor any other county in the manner you are viewing it. LET OTHER COUNTRIES ENDORSE THIS 1st. Just because america is fair doesnt mean its stupid and will pay anything.

 

By your perspective i suppose once we take care of this IRAN problem, youll say the same things as you are with IRAQ.

however, the rest of the area wants it resolved. - When we invaded iraq, i didnt see countries left and right breaking ties, or condeming the actions.


Most of the tourists just get  harrassed if your from america .. tourism is dead. I suppose thats why reporters and others are attacked in that region, but never ever in Europe.

Why doesnt serbia or other countries express this constantly then, saying we owe them; or other countries which we have invaded in the past  have this perception?

hmmmmmmmmm ya.

Next youll say freedom of expression and such is endorsed. Give me a break, you are so slanted its unreal.  America is always in the wrong as per your views on anything.

 

Let the rest of the countries deal with their own problems and see how bad the region let alone the planet gets.

 

What about the BILLIONS in AID we send this country and others, but hey its still acceptable to talk smack and say we owe more? When we are the most humaine nation on the planet.. 

Lets see how long they last, when we stop getting oil from them, as its a wealth transfer and we never needed to obtain oil from these countries... but what else are they going to export, camel spit or sand?? The day the US stops, then we will see if they practice what they preach.  Dont bite the hand that feeds you. Between Asia,Europe and the rest of the world there is enough demand for oil and gas from the middle-east.

 

Did we pay vietnam anything after the war nope, nor does other countries.. or how about russia when they invaded afghanistan, yet i dont hear you complaining about those? ... I don't hear you complaining about the aid the US sends Israel every year so why complain about the $1 Billion USD that we caused in property damage to the Iraqis from the bombs that we dropped on them and the roads that we damages along with their infrastructure? Billions in Aid every year to Israel is ok with you but $1 Billion to pay for damages that were caused by us to Iraq is not ok? Be reasonable and fair at the very least.

What is with this lame reverse PC crap.. when its acceptable to talk shit about christians and jews burn flags etc, but when anyone mentions islam its wrong and blah blah blah....   ya, same thing as expecting to pay additonal funds, when they never have nor anyone else.

 

America is just in the wrong, even when its right..as per the middle east..


I am not denying that America does not do good and am not saying that all it does is wrong but I am bringing up what I feel is wrong and what most of the people in the world feel. Do not make this personal.

post #49 of 109
Thread Starter 

Invading Iraq didn't make us safer, more financially secure, or stronger. Invading Iraq didn't make Iraq safer, more financially secure, or stronger.

 

You can argue that invading Iraq was morally the correct thing to do and I couldn't disagree more. I would agree if we invaded half of Africa and the rest of the Middle East.

post #50 of 109

we toppled the Hussein regime for MORAL reasons as well as pro-active defensive measures...Hussein once invaded Kuwait...he was harboring and funding terrorists, and he had stock piles of WMDs...

 

 

All the democratic congress members prior to the Iraq war were demanding action be taken and were claiming Iraq had WMDs (which was true)...

 

 

Now that a leftist trusted website has released documents PROVING that WMDs are/were in Iraq, what will be the liberal crying point now?

post #51 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJaffeJoe View Post

Invading Iraq didn't make us safer, more financially secure, or stronger. Invading Iraq didn't make Iraq safer, more financially secure, or stronger.

 

You can argue that invading Iraq was morally the correct thing to do and I couldn't disagree more. I would agree if we invaded half of Africa and the rest of the Middle East.

 

Ya, I think they forgot about Sudan, Somalia, and the rest of Africa.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vlandsponger View Post

we toppled the Hussein regime for MORAL reasons as well as pro-active defensive measures...Hussein once invaded Kuwait...he was harboring and funding terrorists, and he had stock piles of WMDs...

 

 

All the democratic congress members prior to the Iraq war were demanding action be taken and were claiming Iraq had WMDs (which was true)...

 

 

Now that a leftist trusted website has released documents PROVING that WMDs are/were in Iraq, what will be the liberal crying point now?


Uh, it hasn't changed.  Lots of liberals were against the war from the get go.  Maybe not the politicians if that's who you're implying, but liberals in general wanted no part in that war.

post #52 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJaffeJoe View Post

Invading Iraq didn't make us safer, more financially secure, or stronger. Invading Iraq didn't make Iraq safer, more financially secure, or stronger.

 

You can argue that invading Iraq was morally the correct thing to do and I couldn't disagree more. I would agree if we invaded half of Africa and the rest of the Middle East.



Deposing Saddam Hussien not only made us safer, it freed the Iraqi people from a brutal regime and brought Democracy to the people.

 

post #53 of 109


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJaffeJoe View Post

 

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110217/wl_nm/us_iraq_usa_damages#mwpphu-container

 

Yay or nay?


Nay...

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Internationalstocks View Post





I say we pay up. We damaged their country and killed many of their people. In fact we were found have been killing at a higher rates then the insurgents.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/16/us-civilian-death-idUSTRE71F3KL20110216

 

Did you read the article the OP posted??? I failed to read anywhere that they want money because "all the deaths the U.S. have caused"

Last time I checked the U.S. wasn't the only country that went to war with them, but only call out the U.S. riiight.

 

Blast walls were placed to PROTECT THEM!!!

I'm sorry Steve Jobs didn't design them to look pretty and be light while enduring mortar stikes  Internationalstocks....

 

 

 

Quote:

BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Iraq's capital wants the United States to apologize and pay $1 billion for the damage done to the city not by bombs but by blast walls and Humvees since the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.

The city's government issued its demands in a statement on Wednesday that said Baghdad's infrastructure and aesthetics (LOL) have been seriously damaged by the American military.

"The U.S. forces changed this beautiful city to a camp in an ugly and destructive way, which reflected deliberate ignorance and carelessness about the simplest forms of public taste," the statement said.

"Due to the huge damage, leading to a loss the Baghdad municipality cannot afford...we demand the American side apologize to Baghdad's people and pay back these expenses."

The statement made no mention of damage caused by bombing.

Baghdad's neighborhoods have been sealed off by miles of concrete blast walls, transforming the city into a tangled maze that contributes to massive traffic jams. Despite a sharp reduction in overall violence in recent years only 5 percent of the walls have been removed, officials said.

The heavy blast walls have damaged sewer and water systems, pavement and parks, said Hakeem Abdul Zahra, the city spokesman.

U.S. military Humvees, driven on street medians and through gardens (LOL,  should I drive on the road and risk an IDE or preserve the beautiful gardens..hmm.gif.), have also caused major damage, he said.

"The city of Baghdad feels these violations, which have taken place for years, have caused economic and moral damage," he said.

U.S. troops pulled out of Iraq's cities in June 2009 before formally ending combat operations last August. Around 50,000 remain in Iraq but they are scheduled to withdraw by year end.

Baghdad is badly in need of a facelift. Electricity and trash collection are sporadic, streets are potholed and sewage treatment plants and pipes have not been renovated for years.

Iraq has seen growing protests in recent weeks over poor government services.

Zahra said the city's statement issued on Wednesday would be the start of its measures to get the United States to pay for damages but he did not say what other steps might be taken.

(Reporting and writing by Aseel Kami; Editing by Jim Loney)

 


 

post #54 of 109
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baggi View Post

Deposing Saddam Hussien not only made us safer, it freed the Iraqi people from a brutal regime and brought Democracy to the people.

 


 

If we were able to defeat Saddam's military in a few weeks, was he really ever a threat to us? On the other hand, invading Iraq weakened our military and the safety "benefits" we gained did not offset the detrimental effects of the invasion. Imagine invading Country Z, toppling their leader in a month, and staying in there for almost a decade trying to battle insurgents. We are definitely not safer.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vlandsponger View Post

we toppled the Hussein regime for MORAL reasons as well as pro-active defensive measures...Hussein once invaded Kuwait...he was harboring and funding terrorists, and he had stock piles of WMDs...

 

 

All the democratic congress members prior to the Iraq war were demanding action be taken and were claiming Iraq had WMDs (which was true)...

 

 

Now that a leftist trusted website has released documents PROVING that WMDs are/were in Iraq, what will be the liberal crying point now?


The man who lied about Iraq having WMDs admitted to lying about Iraq having WMDs.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/iraqi-defector-al-janabi-codenamed-curveball-admits-wmd/story?id=12922213

post #55 of 109

 

Quote:
If we were able to defeat Saddam's military in a few weeks, was he really ever a threat to us? On the other hand, invading Iraq weakened our military and the safety "benefits" we gained did not offset the detrimental effects of the invasion. Imagine invading Country Z, toppling their leader in a month, and staying in there for almost a decade trying to battle insurgents. We are definitely not safer.

On the contrary, we definitely are safer.

 

You are right about one thing, however, we are not safer from Saddam's military. That was never the point though, and therefore, is a straw man. We never went into Iraq because we were concerned about the Iraq military. Except to put that forward as a straw man, not sure where you would get that idea.

 

As for "insurgents" that is why we went into Iraq. Better to be killing them over there than over here. We got lucky in George W. Bush. He was smart enough to get our military into Iraq and then draw all the flies in the middle east into attacking our strength, rather than our weakness.

 

Thank God for the wisdom of George W. Bush.

post #56 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baggi View Post

 

On the contrary, we definitely are safer.

 

You are right about one thing, however, we are not safer from Saddam's military. That was never the point though, and therefore, is a straw man. We never went into Iraq because we were concerned about the Iraq military. Except to put that forward as a straw man, not sure where you would get that idea.

 

As for "insurgents" that is why we went into Iraq. Better to be killing them over there than over here. We got lucky in George W. Bush. He was smart enough to get our military into Iraq and then draw all the flies in the middle east into attacking our strength, rather than our weakness.

 

Thank God for the wisdom of George W. Bush.


He doesn't look too smart to me.

500
post #57 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baggi View Post

 

On the contrary, we definitely are safer.

 

You are right about one thing, however, we are not safer from Saddam's military. That was never the point though, and therefore, is a straw man. We never went into Iraq because we were concerned about the Iraq military. Except to put that forward as a straw man, not sure where you would get that idea.

 

As for "insurgents" that is why we went into Iraq. Better to be killing them over there than over here. We got lucky in George W. Bush. He was smart enough to get our military into Iraq and then draw all the flies in the middle east into attacking our strength, rather than our weakness.

 

Thank God for the wisdom of George W. Bush.


I don't think we are safer. Iraq never possessed any threat to the US or any American in the US but now we have more enemies in the middle-east due to the fact that we declared war on Iraq and killed many Iraqis in the process.
post #58 of 109

ya okay, rolleyes.gif

post #59 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Internationalstocks View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Baggi View Post

 

On the contrary, we definitely are safer.

 

You are right about one thing, however, we are not safer from Saddam's military. That was never the point though, and therefore, is a straw man. We never went into Iraq because we were concerned about the Iraq military. Except to put that forward as a straw man, not sure where you would get that idea.

 

As for "insurgents" that is why we went into Iraq. Better to be killing them over there than over here. We got lucky in George W. Bush. He was smart enough to get our military into Iraq and then draw all the flies in the middle east into attacking our strength, rather than our weakness.

 

Thank God for the wisdom of George W. Bush.




I don't think we are safer. Iraq never possessed any threat to the US or any American in the US but now we have more enemies in the middle-east due to the fact that we declared war on Iraq and killed many Iraqis in the process.


"We will chase [Americans] to every corner at all times. No high tower of steel will protect them against the fire of truth."

 

"Every Iraqi child, woman, and old man knows how to take revenge...They will avenge the pure blood that has been shed no matter how long it takes."

 

"Does [America] realize the meaning of every Iraqi becoming a missile that can cross to countries and cities?" 

 

"If the attacks of September 11 cost the lives of 3,000 civilians, how much will the size of losses in 50 states within 100 cities if it were attacked in the same way in which New York and Washington were? What would happen if hundreds of planes attacked American cities?"

 

"The United States must get a taste of its own poison..."

 

All quotes from Saddam and his regime prior to 2003.

post #60 of 109
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed98 View Post





"We will chase [Americans] to every corner at all times. No high tower of steel will protect them against the fire of truth."

 

"Every Iraqi child, woman, and old man knows how to take revenge...They will avenge the pure blood that has been shed no matter how long it takes."

 

"Does [America] realize the meaning of every Iraqi becoming a missile that can cross to countries and cities?" 

 

"If the attacks of September 11 cost the lives of 3,000 civilians, how much will the size of losses in 50 states within 100 cities if it were attacked in the same way in which New York and Washington were? What would happen if hundreds of planes attacked American cities?"

 

"The United States must get a taste of its own poison..."

 

All quotes from Saddam and his regime prior to 2003.


“He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.”

 

 

“Saddam Hussein’s forces are in a state where he cannot pose a threat to his neighbors at this point. We have been successful, through the sanctions regime, to really shut off most of the revenue that will be going to build his—rebuild his military.” 

 

 "Saddam does not control the northern part of the country," she said. "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

 

All said before 9/11 by Rice and Powell. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Politics
HotStockMarket › Forums › Community › Politics › Baghdad wants U.S. to pay $1 billion for damage to city