Miscellaneous > The Lounge
Iraqs new flag
TheQuirk:
^^^
Edit: or if you don't feel like it, I'll respond to the next thread that's going to have the same discussion in a week or so. (One always pops up...)
[ July 06, 2004: Message edited by: TheQuirk: I Just Want Attention ]
solarismka:
quote:Originally posted by TheQuirk: I Just Want Attention:
[QB]
--- Quote ---It's a bit different in Iraq's case.
--- End quote ---
Yep, one was for oil the other was for ethnic clensing. One defined it the other followed.
quote:
I don't know if it has been mentioned in this thread yet or not, but the fancy Arabic lettering on the flag is actually "Allah Akbar" in Saddam's handwriting.
--- End quote ---
So why couldn't the people of Iraq choose to change it of it offended them. Obviously the american flag was made to represent the many states joined together under truth and freadom but that flag is everything opposit to what that country holds dear. So I guess america should change its flag as well!
quote:
So changing a flag was in order.
--- End quote ---
If by following that standard then like I said before, a change in the american flag is in order as well.
quote:
You don't remove a leader with force from a country
--- End quote ---
No you don't thats one VERY big reason NOT to do it!
quote:
and then allow his mark to stay on one of the greatest treasures of a country!
--- End quote ---
Or to ruin it by stainning his own adgenda and his own values onto it. The U.S. flag means the deaths of many. So, yep you got to change it!
But seariously. Nobody is going expect america to change its flag simply because Bush has dirtied it. If you the americans want it changed then that is your choice. Its definnatly not Mine or any other countries choice. Likewize its not the choice of americans to choose the Iraqie flag.
quote:
Of course, simply removing that text or possibly using generic lettering would have made more sense,
--- End quote ---
If the Iraqies wanted it changed in the first place.
quote:
but we aren't in Iraq for being rational.
--- End quote ---
Nope. your not.
quote:
Edit: I just read everything you wrote, Solaris. Jesus Christ.
--- End quote ---
ok.
quote:
Edit #2: Solaris, that was a really silly bunch of posts. If you were to post them all in one single post, sans the screwed up formatting, I will gladly reply to all your posts.
--- End quote ---
Its just easier for me to quote you then right what I think underneath it. Thats all, but maby I'll just use the @ symbol instead or something.
--- End quote ---
TheQuirk:
Before I address this: what's going on there is not ethical cleansing.
In the same light, the US did not kill millions of people.
If by "millions" you mean 2,000,000 people or more, then you're saying we killed every two people in twenty-five people. That's a 1:12.5 ratio. That's an average of 15.4 kills per soldier, assuming there are 130,000 soldiers, ALL in combact roles. In truth, there are cooks, engineers, drivers, etc. Even if you claim half of those kills are attributed to plane bombings, then that's still 7.7 kills/soldier, which is ridiculous--especially when it's done "silently," with no one knowing about it (except for you, obviously).
Case in point: what the Janjaweed are (well, "were") doing--behind CLOSED COURTAINS, in a country no one actually pays all that much attention to, has been uncovered. You think no one would notice 2,000,000 dying all of a sudden, in a zone that's constantly in the news? Geeze.
-----------
I would reply to your post bit-by-bit if it wasn't that big of a pain, but since it is, I'll just give you my general view (which I think should mostly respond to what you're saying).
The Iraqi people did not ask the US to invade Iraq and remove Saddam. Whether they wanted the US to commit this or not is debatable, but not in this thread.
With this in mind, the next thing that the US did was invade Iraq--under multiple pretexts, including the removal of Saddam (oil isn't an official reason, so I won't include it). Be it (morally) right or wrong, this has already happened, and is irreversible.
Seeing as how the U.S forces are the liberators/invaders/freestyle rappers on tour, and are there to (supposedly, partially, whatever) remove Hussein from his reign of power, it's more than appropriate for them to change the flag to reflect that the state is no longer under Hussein's leadership. It might be morally wrong, but it's warranted for.
I'm not saying what happened is good or bad--all I'm saying is that this was part of the "deal," so to speak. What happened happened, and this is the next logical step. There's no protesting it--this action *has to take place*. Iraq, by itself, is in no shape to do such things. This is the cold, hard truth. The infastructure was destroyed (by the US). There is no census, and as such, an election can not take place. Including an election on a flag. The occupying forces and the UN are trying to fix this, but this will take time. Once a real government rises, they'll be free to change the flag, or whatever else they wish. This isn't the first time this has happened in history, and it won't be the last (Lukashenko and Belarus come to mind. Once he is outta there, it's pretty obvious the flag will revert itself to white-red-whire.)
To recap (I don't know if I made myself clear): What's done is done. The Iraqis (as a whole) are in no shape to do what they wish, but this is being fixed. Your demand of allowing the Iraqis to pick the flag is impossible, but is being worked on.
@@ Obviously the american flag was made to represent the many states joined together under truth and freadom but that flag is everything opposit to what that country holds dear. So I guess america should change its flag as well! @@
Totally different standard. The old Iraq flag represented Iraq and Saddam's rule. The new one represents Iraq. The US flag represents the US, and has no mark of any president. It's politically neutral, you could say.
solarismka:
quote:Originally posted by TheQuirk: I Just Want Attention:
Before I address this: what's going on there is not ethical cleansing.
--- End quote ---
No its a theft of a natural reasourse that belongs to Iraq and not the U.S.
quote:
In the same light, the US did not kill millions of people.
--- End quote ---
Millions, thousands it doesn't matter its still wrong! Why are we even debating this. Its always coming up.
quote:
If by "millions" you mean 2,000,000 people or more, then you're saying we killed every two people in twenty-five people. That's a 1:12.5 ratio. That's an average of 15.4 kills per soldier, assuming there are 130,000 soldiers, ALL in combact roles. In truth, there are cooks, engineers, drivers, etc. Even if you claim half of those kills are attributed to plane bombings, then that's still 7.7 kills/soldier, which is ridiculous--especially when it's done "silently," with no one knowing about it (except for you, obviously).
--- End quote ---
I have posted the information SHOWING the U.S KILLING, HURTING and HUMILIATING Iraqi civilians.
Its not up to me if you ignore that information. The same people here that have that appathy might as well ignore the holocaust. Its the same exuses.
quote:
Case in point: what the Janjaweed are (well, "were") doing--behind CLOSED COURTAINS, in a country no one actually pays all that much attention to, has been uncovered. You think no one would notice 2,000,000 dying all of a sudden, in a zone that's constantly in the news? Geeze.
-----------
--- End quote ---
Geeze yourslef!
MOST of those 'militas' are made up of fathers and sons defending a country from occupation forces. It is in the news and on the internet, heck Moore has made a film. Lots of people HAVE noticed people dying in Iraq. Heck they knew before the invasion what would happen and because of this its a non argument. Its a non debate.
quote:
I would reply to your post bit-by-bit if it wasn't that big of a pain, but since it is, I'll just give you my general view (which I think should mostly respond to what you're saying).
--- End quote ---
Its a pain reading some of your replies. But hay i'm still going to respond
quote:
The Iraqi people did not ask the US to invade Iraq and remove Saddam. Whether they wanted the US to commit this or not is debatable, but not in this thread.
--- End quote ---
Then why even write that?
quote:
With this in mind, the next thing that the US did was invade Iraq--under multiple pretexts, including the removal of Saddam
--- End quote ---
Thats an exucse along with the WMD's with no proof and was NOT a viable reason.
quote:
(oil isn't an official reason, so I won't include it).
--- End quote ---
It is now that the information is so blaintently obvious.
quote:
Be it (morally) right or wrong, this has already happened, and is irreversible.
--- End quote ---
Yes I do agree. So why doesn't the occupation just leave. Ah yes can't leave without 'protecting U.S. interests.'
quote:
Seeing as how the U.S forces are the liberators/invaders/freestyle rappers on tour, and are there to (supposedly, partially, whatever) remove Hussein from his reign of power, it's more than appropriate for them to change the flag to reflect that the state is no longer under Hussein's leadership.
--- End quote ---
'Its more than appropriate' is it? They invaded. Killed innocent people, raveged the land and humiliated them as well so that makes it OK for them to change the flag.
So when Hitler ivaded, Poland, France and Germant it was ok for him to change the flags of their counrty? Simply because they were now under hitlers rule and the flag no longer represented those countries leaders and beliefs?
Get real! Oppressers and ivaders do not have the right for anything! Expecialy in this war and in this day and age where History and knowledge is abundant!
quote:
It might be morally wrong, but it's warranted for.
--- End quote ---
Yep, I can see that Nazi flag flying in Europe.
It was not just 'morally' wrong IT IS wrong and no it was not warrented for. Americans are NOT Iraqies.
quote:
I'm not saying what happened is good or bad--all I'm saying is that this was part of the "deal,"
--- End quote ---
What deal? The deal to have there reasources stolen from them. To replace on tyrant with another but only this time with more force? If thats a 'deal' then I can't wait till the U.S. gets the same 'deal.' Maby you'll finaly learn what others had to go through.
quote:
so to speak. What happened happened, and this is the next logical step.
--- End quote ---
Were talking about an invasion force that has the same motives as Nazi germany and your stating that this is a 'logical step.'
quote:
There's no protesting it--this action *has to take place*.
--- End quote ---
Thats right. A pile of sand in a country that can't even defend itself and the U.S. HAD to take 'action.'
Your right though. There is no protesting! This action SHOULD NEVER of taken place!
quote:
Iraq, by itself, is in no shape to do such things. This is the cold, hard truth.
--- End quote ---
Yep I bet not even the mighty U.S. couldn't turn around and slaughter themselves and pawn off all their natural reasources. It does take a savage to do all the plundering.
quote:
The infastructure was destroyed (by the US). There is no census, and as such, an election can not take place.
--- End quote ---
Of course not. It can never take place under a puppet council or goverment that is governed by a forren country.
quote:
Including an election on a flag.
--- End quote ---
Of course it can! Once that puppet council is removed and the occupation forces leave.
quote:
The occupying forces and the UN are trying to fix this,
--- End quote ---
When Iraq handed over their country to the people, you know what happend? Nothing. All that has happend is a few american heads left. The occupation force is STILL there and the puppet coucil IS STILL taking orders from a forren invader. So much for 'fixing the problem.'
quote:
but this will take time.
--- End quote ---
A wound will not heal so long as you are always opening it. Remove the occupation and the puppets and then a Iraq can finnaly repair itself!
quote:
Once a real government rises, they'll be free to change the flag, or whatever else they wish.
--- End quote ---
'Once a real goverment rises.' correct. but ether way its STILL Iraqies that can change the flag not the U.S.
quote:
This isn't the first time this has happened in history, and it won't be the last (Lukashenko and Belarus come to mind. Once he is outta there, it's pretty obvious the flag will revert itself to white-red-whire.)
--- End quote ---
And even in that instance shows it was not right! So shouldn't we have learn't from history that invasion isn't correct. It is proven that those that do not learn from their mistakes are doomed to repeat them.
quote:
To recap (I don't know if I made myself clear): What's done is done. The Iraqis (as a whole) are in no shape to do what they wish, but this is being fixed.
--- End quote ---
They were 'in shape' before the invasion. Thats even under saddam andf they will be in shape once the invaders of that country leave. But up untill then its still the Iraqie's decsion on what happens with the flag not the U.S. What the U.S. should do to fix the problem is leave.
quote:
Your demand of allowing the Iraqis to pick the flag is impossible, but is being worked on.
--- End quote ---
What demand. I simply stated who has rights on changing any flag. That would be the Iraqie people not the U.S.
Its also upto the people to choose their goverment and call their own elections.
All this can be done once the U.S. leaves and takes their mess with them.
quote:
Totally different standard. The old Iraq flag represented Iraq and Saddam's rule.
The new one represents Iraq. The US flag represents the US, and has no mark of any president. It's politically neutral, you could say.
--- End quote ---
For many Iraqies the old flag represented the country and not just saddam. As you yourself claim that the U.S. flag represents your country and is nutral to you even when bush has now changed the meaning of that flag!
For alot of people the U.S. flag means death and not freedom. So given that should an outside force invade your country and change your flag simply because to the invaders your flag represents bush?
SheedRicolan:
Hello old chaps!
My, my, you seem like a very well informed fellow. Being the intelligent scholar that I'm sure you are, I hope you won't mind if I go through this post in your own coveted style of posting (but perhaps with better "grammer").
quote:Of course not. To do that you have to know what democracy is, your 'country' does not.
--- End quote ---
What the US is currently "selling" to Iraq is the best thing they can give them. If we were to suddenly make Iraq a clone of the USA in terms of government and liberties, all hell would break loose, as if it hasn't already.
quote: The why haven't you A.) Changed the U.S. Flag and B.) Kicked out Bush? Since its America that needs to be 'liberated' more than Iraq.
--- End quote ---
Hmm, while I don't disagree that Bush isn't the greatest President our country has ever known, and while I don't agree that we should've invaded Iraq, there is a rather large difference between Mr. Bush and Mr. Hussein. Mr. Bush hasn't indiscriminately killed Iranian civilians using chemical weapons (and although I don't speak from personal experience, I can't imagine that's a very nice way to die). Mr. Bush didn't control the media and the press. Mr. Bush is the product, albeit an unfortunate product, of a free society.
quote:Well, investers ARE scared of america. Not because of the flag but because of your 'leader.'
--- End quote ---
Oh shit! It's America!
quote:great, thats all the Iraqie people need. A hateful dictator that is completly mad!
--- End quote ---
Since you seem to be able to delve into the inner mind of our god-fearing President, perhaps you could tell us his favorite breakfast cereal.
quote:Not when a war was not justified. People are getting killed because of the greed of the U.S.
--- End quote ---
Uh, whether or not the war was justified is a completely moot point. Shit happens. It's war. 'nuff said.
quote:Are you an Iraqie?
--- End quote ---
Are you?
quote:Yep, one was for oil the other was for ethnic clensing. One defined it the other followed.
--- End quote ---
How is what we're doing ethnic cleansing?
quote:No its a theft of a natural reasourse that belongs to Iraq and not the U.S.
--- End quote ---
So it's first an ethnic cleansing, now it's not? By the way, what's a reasourse?
[ July 08, 2004: Message edited by: SheedRicolan ]
[ July 08, 2004: Message edited by: SheedRicolan ]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version