General discussion


The War Is In Iraq.

By jardinier ·
When a discussion has passed the 150 postings mark, I think it might be a good idea to start a fresh one to get back to the original topic.

The way things are going, we might end up discussing the Civil War or the War of Independence.

Mallard's discussion: "Time To Pay The Piper" has certainly proved to be an excellent vehicle for the exchange of views, experiences and general information.

Good one, Duck!

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

87 total posts (Page 5 of 9)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

I pulled it

by LordInfidel In reply to Change or memory glitch?

straight out of the AR.

Since it's MEPS, it should all be the same.

I only did my once (8 May 88), so I can't remeber verbatim the exact words. But I do rememeber support and defend the constitution.

I did not loook at a revision date of the AR.

Collapse -

Appreciated the link

by Oldefar In reply to Change or memory glitch?

I saw that, Lordinfidel, and did reference the link. I last took it in 1980, and it was in 1976 that I remember the "lawful" part since the captain administering the oath made me redo that line. My "uh" made it sound like "unlawful orders". :)

I believe the discussion regarding why it specifically included lawful orders came about at the NCO Academy in 1977.

Of course, my memory could be shot. A lot of alcohol was consumed during those days, a lot of good cells died young.

Collapse -

Not that I know of.

by jardinier In reply to Questions Needing Answers

No, apart from the unfortunate camerman, I haven't heard of any Australian casualites, although this is not surprising as our troups number less than one percent of the allied forces.

We have been told right from the beginning that our SAS soldiers were amongst the first to penetrate into enemy territory. And as you know, RAN divers risked their lives to locate and remove mines in the Gulf to allow safe passage for supply ships.

Because we are such a large country in physical size, but small in population (20 million) we could never defend our country from attack with our own military resources. So we can't afford to send all our military to the other side of the world.

I realise that you are only asking a simple question, but I do feel compelled to suggest that Australia's contribution to this conflict has been quite significant relative to the small size of our population.

Collapse -

Thanks again

by dcosgrove In reply to Not that I know of.

I know I said this in another discussion, but I don't mind restating. As an American, I truly appreciate the support of the Australian and British governments. I can understand the public sentiment regarding this, you are not as closely involvedinthe middle east as the U.S. I have never even thought the Australian contribution to be less than GB's due to numbers, I have not actually stopped to consider numbers at all. The Aussies are there with us and that's all that matters.

Collapse -

OK, Suppose we capture Saddam Alive

by road-dog In reply to The War Is In Iraq.

What should be done with him?

I've got 3 scenarios:

1 - UN War Crimes Trial
I'm against this one because Saddam's fate would be decided in a forum where his trial would become a propaganda farce that Arab extremists would use as fodder for terrorism.

2 - Trial under Iraqi Law
I think that Saddam's crimes are against the Iraqi people but trial under the new interim government would be too inciteful of extremist groups and sorely test the fledgeling new government. There is also the possibility that such an action would be illegal, as laws against Saddam's actions would be enacted after the actual rimes.

3 - Islamic Trial
This is my personal favorite. I think that Saddam should be tried in a Shiite Islamic venue. This will almost certainly result in a horrific execution that Islamic Extremists would have little justifiable argument. Additionally, It would provide some cathartic justice for the Shiite clergy that has already issued a fatwa sanctioning the invasion if Iraq.

Let's hear your opinions!

Collapse -

On the outside chance

by MallardtooXX In reply to OK, Suppose we capture Sa ...

We capture that jackhole alive I want an islamic trial. That would provide quite a specticle and it would allow Iraq the ability to strike the final **** in this war. This will work in our favor simply because he is muslim and he is Iraqi if we take him to the UN ( I will have my dissertation of the un later) he will get off and go live with his life partner chirac in paris for the rest of his days. I don't think the world would settle for an Iraqi trial, too vindictive. I personally would like to see a new line of American products with the words FULLY TESTED ON SADDAM HUSSAIN printed on the label. Things like extra strength laxitives and super hot salsa for starters =)
I just hope they leave windex out of it as I would have to switch to 409 and it just doesn't taste as good and it leaves streaks!


Collapse -

Another Vote for option 3!

by road-dog In reply to On the outside chance

OK, now assuming that Saddam is duly tried, convicted, and summarily executed, now how can his sizable assets be seized for use in rebuilding Iraq? As I'e heard it, Saddam has ~20 Billion in personal assets accumulated during his reign of terror. Ideally, these assets would be liquidated to pay for the huge costs associated with bringing Iraq's oil industry back online and to start them on the road to economic independence.

Saddam's assets reside in vast volumes of shares in hundreds of companies controlled by various front companies. It stands to reason that similar arrangements have been made by his psychopathic progeny.

I'm not sure how this situation was addressed with a similar former despot, Manual Noriega. I suspect that some of his assets were seized by the US government under the auspices of drug interdiction.

Any accounting types out there who could shed some light on this?

Collapse -

Number 3.

by jardinier In reply to OK, Suppose we capture Sa ...

Yes, I would go for Number 3 also, and am in 100 per cent agreement with the reasons which you cite.

Collapse -

..then we kill him.

by TomSal In reply to OK, Suppose we capture Sa ...

Drawn and quartered would be a fitting way for one of his likes to go I think..

Collapse -

Actually, D&Q is fairly

by road-dog In reply to ..then we kill him.

compassionate as Islamic executions go. I lean more toward stoning, but the rocks should be limited to those small enough to cause pain but not render him unconscious too soon. Further, the traditional bag placed over the condemned's head should be forgone.

Perhaps his staff rapists' services could be brought into play before they are executed in foul manner as well.

Personally, I think Baath part members should be forced to dig up and open 55 gallon drums in these chemical weapons sites.

Back to Community Forum
87 total posts (Page 5 of 9)   Prev   03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums