Freedum. . ift! ( l, commits Freedum ift! ( l commits
Upload
Login or register
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (242)
[ 242 comments ]
Anonymous comments allowed.
49 comments displayed.
#28 - pappathethird
Reply +29
(04/22/2013) [-]
The roots of this conflict are much deeper than just 9/11.
#34 to #28 - carnagejc
Reply +124
(04/22/2013) [-]
All the way down to the oil wells.
#190 to #34 - doddythechef
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#195 to #34 - anon
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
the amount of ignorance in this comment is reflected in the high amount of green thumbs, since as we know, FJ ers are mostly immature ignorant kids.
just sayin.
#217 to #195 - carnagejc
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
Or you could, I don't know... try taking a joke on a site intended for jokes?
#204 to #195 - anon
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
More thumbs = ******** content
#107 to #34 - pjotor
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
#41 to #34 - anon
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
Which would be pretty neat if, you know, we were actually getting any oil out of either Afghanistan or Iraq.
#64 - felixjarl ONLINE
Reply +66
(04/22/2013) [-]
#86 - sometimeswefuck
Reply +32
(04/22/2013) [-]
yes...."helping iraq".....heh...heheh...
#87 to #86 - somedsoup [OP]
Reply +5
(04/22/2013) [-]
#37 - jiltist ONLINE
Reply +30
(04/22/2013) [-]
Well I mean but they were pretty expensive buildings....
#32 - butiloveu
Reply +28
(04/22/2013) [-]
To be fair, if some destroys your two nipples you would destroy their bodies also.
To be fair, if some destroys your two nipples you would destroy their bodies also.
#27 - magsschroedinger
Reply +23
(04/22/2013) [-]
Sure you destroyed the _ right_ country?
#103 - teutoburg
Reply +19
(04/22/2013) [-]
>Playing civilization
>randomn country captures a worker
>YOU WILL BURN IN HELL YOUR ENTIRE COUNTRY WILL BE RAZED THE ONLY REMINDER OF YOUR EXISTENCE WILL BE EMPTY ROADS LEADING TO PILES OF RUBBLE
#117 to #103 - schneidend
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
> Enemy kills a scout with a tank.
> Kill all of the enemies' tanks with veteran pikemen somehow.
#206 to #103 - yutdollacwwwthree
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
>playing CIV III
>it's in the 1850s
>I have tanks
>At war with France
>see barbarian, **** yes Imma kill this guy
>engage in combat, the barbarian defeats my tank
>**** that ****
>quit
#9 - luidias
Reply +19
(04/22/2013) [-]
canadafag here. I'm usually a pacifist about this kind of crap, but quite honestly, the US got rid of saddam hussein, who was a brutal, unfair leader. Even considering civilian casualties, Iraq is still better off. Saddam killed a LOT of people (and his actions TARGETED civilians specifically, unlike the US military, who targets terrorist groups and will avoid killing civilians if possible)

tl;dr however much the war in the middle east sucks, IMO it's better than having let the area fester and succumb to corruption and genocide, even if america's motives were questionable.
#35 to #9 - carnagejc
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
The issue now is that the majority of people in the occupied territories want a Tyrant back. The worst the Americans did for the Palestinians is making Saddam look like an Angel in comparison. Nostalgia also has the effect of making the past seem better than it was, which furthers the issue.

Also, although the US does claim to avoid civilian populations they still inflict massive damage on civilians, mostly because of drones in urban areas. Drones are single handedly painting the USA as a force for evil in the middle east.
#244 to #35 - luidias
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
the difference is that, despite the fact that yes, drones are out there and are killing civilians, the civilians themselves are never who the US targets. Saddam specifically targeted civilians with his mustard gas.
#246 to #244 - carnagejc
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
Yeah I understand mate, i'm just explaining that what ultimately matters is the public opinion of those living there, which is rapidly deteriorating.
#247 to #246 - luidias
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
yeah. the whole war is one nasty can of worms, for both sides.
#102 to #9 - benjaminbutton
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
Yea, we also spent 4.4 trillion dollars. I read an article by Chomsky, good read, and he explained quite nicely how Osama Won. Sure we killed him, but he led us to spend exhaustive amounts of money in the war and because of our egoism we fell for it hook line and sinker. "Murica.
#108 to #9 - redtooth ONLINE
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
#119 to #9 - anon
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
guess why saddam became leader of iraq, not on his ******* own
#167 to #119 - defender
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
he actually did you should look into his rise to power instead of talking
#147 to #9 - anon
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
>implying USA did not choose Saddam to be in the command of Iraq
There's a darker face in USA. Disguised as freedom and BS of sorts, but it's there. You just don't know about it.
#38 to #9 - Gandalfthewhite
Reply +3
(04/22/2013) [-]
the country may be a bit worse off now, but Germany was a complete mess after world war 2 but it was worth it
#125 to #38 - recio **User deleted account**
+3
has deleted their comment [-]
#132 to #125 - ciarancrashy
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
I laughed too much at this
#145 to #132 - recio **User deleted account**
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#148 to #145 - recio **User deleted account**
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#149 to #148 - recio **User deleted account**
-2
has deleted their comment [-]
#51 to #9 - zalaman **User deleted account**
+3
has deleted their comment [-]
#47 to #9 - aussiepridevil
Reply +4
(04/22/2013) [-]
your overlookingt he fact the US installed saddam hussein, amognst other brutal dictators.

and the future of iraq is very uncertain, with no real government in power iraq could turn to dictatorship again.
#245 to #47 - luidias
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
When they had him take over, I highly doubt that it was their intention to have him kill one million people during his leadership.
#48 to #9 - lufieh
Reply +10
(04/22/2013) [-]
Pseudo-pacifist detected.
The Iraq embargo in the 90s resulted in 500 000 Iraqi deaths due to starvation. The NATO intervention was backed by nothing more than banking interests.

#184 to #48 - jikario
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
You seem to be forgetting the ******* Gulf war. Ya know, The one that started by Iraq Invading Kuwait. You think the U.N would just embargo an impoverished country for banking interests? Rather than ya know... the fact that the country was being ruled at the time by a tyrannical mass-murdering dictator?

You're brilliant. I'm so glad I got to see this new, obviously educated viewpoint.
#205 to #184 - lufieh
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
I was talking about the intervention after 9/11, not the Gulf war. The intervention followed only after Saddam refused to trade oil in USD, which threatened to cripple the petrodollar system.
See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrodollar

As for the sanctions, they lasted up to 2003 - long after the Gulf war.
#210 to #205 - jikario
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
You can't just go from one NATO intervention to another completely different one, man. Ya gotta differentiate. How was I supposed to know you were talking about another on of the various times NATO met to discuss an issue? :I
#216 to #210 - lufieh
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
Even still, you should know very well that nothing in geopolitics is done out of good will and humanitarianism. The sweet talk is merely war propaganda, whereas elite interests always lie behind the scenes.
#243 to #48 - luidias
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
close to 1 million died in the iraq war started by saddam. He also was targeting civilians (killing 5000 with chemical warfare in one town at one point) and didn't show any signs of stopping his ********. Then there's the people that died due to his invasion of kuwait.

another thing, keep in mind how relentless and cruel chemical weapons are. It's a torturous death.
#252 to #243 - lufieh
Reply 0
(04/23/2013) [-]
That 5000 death toll you mentioned is related to the Iraq-Iran war. It's interesting to note that the US supported Saddam in that war. Later, of course, everything changed.

>close to 1 million died in the iraq war started by saddam.
>started by saddam.
What?

And nobody is debating the moral side of chemical warfare. It's gruesome and atrocious however you look at it. I'm not a Saddam apologist, but the US intervention was the complete opposite of what it pretended to be. Even if US soldiers did not outright execute civilians, the actions of the West caused much more damage in the long run. (see sanctions' aftermath and region destabilization)

#256 to #252 - luidias
Reply 0
(04/23/2013) [-]
saddam initiated the iraq-iran war, where 1 million people died. 100,000 of those were civilians. Another 180,000 or so wee also killed in the kurdish genocide.

I agree that the states' motives were wrong, but I still maintain that iraq is better off without saddam. He did more damage than the US has done, and wasn't about to stop any time soon.
#133 - ruinsage
Reply +17
(04/22/2013) [-]
This image has expired
Get's mad when bombed
bomb's everyone else
#136 to #133 - certifiedidiot
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
Pretty sure there's been more people dropping dead from a heart attack at the heart attack grill than people who got blown up in boston
#215 to #133 - thejgwentworth
Reply 0
(04/22/2013) [-]
That isn't america authorizing drone strikes, it should be a picture of Scumbag Obama.
#151 to #133 - casinoer
Reply +1
(04/22/2013) [-]
#22 - anako
Reply +12
(04/22/2013) [-]