The Yanky soldiers are weaker than our tough SAF
-
I think your flow of thought seems to be very unstable, by picking key words from different points of my posts, and piece your replies in a very incoherent fashion.
One must guess tat the weopons sold r up to no good. I think rogues states in Africa are not any less deadly than Middle East terrorists group. As I have said many times, do u believe if Africa killed a lot of people with those weopons they have gathered is okay, while to middle East is WRONG. I ask AGAIN. IS lives of African any lesser to those in other parts of the world ? Or r u gonna say again the average Africa r foolish and desereve to die ?
How did you pick up the topic of average African lives from my last posting ? I am getting to be quite impressed by your ability to cook up new "smartisstupid" ideas to shore up your position.
Have you considered replacing the mix of 'fertilzer, strong chemicals and a small quantity of explosive as primer" with a deadly WMD material such as Biological, Gas, or Nuclear device ?
I got it now, SO u think CAR BOMBS r weopons of Mass Destruction ? If tat is the case, then Indonesia has TONs of them. And Australia just TAUGHT everyone, with their recent broadcast on how to make CAR BOMBs using domestic products obtainable in supermarkets. I guess america used to have a website on how to make them too. I guess all supermarkets r potential storage for WMD too then. Frankly, car bombs just need fertilizer and strong acid such as drain decloggers to work.
It seems that you have missed out a fair section of my last postings on the concern of Saddam Hussein developing such a device, and passing it to Al Qaeda and all the related Hamas, Hisbollah, Jemayah Islamiah, Abu Sayyef, and any other like minded Islamic Fundamental and Radical Groups.
You should try harder at being "stupidissmart", as you seem not to be living up too well to that name.
If this is not foolishness, what else can we describe the mind of the average Iraqi ?
""""
If despite the tough laws that the Singapore Government has introduced, and the dedicated service of the Singapore Home Team and the SAF, who will be responsible if all Singaporeans refused to co-operate with the Singapore Government ?
What if Singaporeans are not afraid of the tough response from the Government, and we decide to agitate, demonstrate, and fight with the Singapore Riot Police in the streets - (just like the South Koreans and Taiwanese and the Hongkongers) ?
Who will be responsible for the lawlessness then ?
""""
I am trying to interprete your above statement. U said Iraq is foolish. Why ? U give example of people "agitate, demostrate and fight with riot police" as an example. The last sentence u implied tat it is the fault of the citizen, thus linking to the explanation why u said they r foolish. Is my interpretation correct ?
If so, this will be my reply.
Okie, only Singapore and a handful of small states don't have demonstration. All the other parts of the world have some to a certain extent. So are singaporean the only smart ones while the rest of the world r foolish on your terms ? R we really smarter than Koreans, Hong Kongers and Taiwanese ? America do have their share of demostration too. They must be pretty dumb too.
How do u know they r not coorperating with US ?
In your post of 8 September 2003, you had ended with the following remark: "Wat happened now ? No public servant, no rules, no traffic police, no electricity. I think it is just a big mess there."
My response on 8 September 2003, to your post was:
"With regards to the lawless situation in Iraq, the Iraqis are responsible in contributing to an unstable and volatile situation
Even just when Baghdad had fallen, and before Saddam, his Sons, and the leadership had been captured, the Iraqi Religious Leaders were already working the ground, agitating the Iraqi population to demonstrate to kick the US Army out of Iraq.
If this is not foolishness, what else can we describe the mind of the average Iraqi ?
With regards to Singapore and the Other States that do not demonstrate - how about including Iraq in the "Other States" ?
Was there any demonstrations AGAINST the mis-rule of Saddam, the abuses of his Sons, and the malpractices and mistreatment of his Government to the Iraqi Citizens ? "
How about addressing the issues as they were written, as you do not seem to be too successful in trying to interprete my posts in any other ways.
Read again my last posts concerning the examples of different demonstrations against the Governments of Taiwan, Korea, and Hongkong - before you exercise your brilliance in being "stupidissmart". -
It is truly remarkable how you managed to piece so many different response to different issues, and lumped them to fit a new point of argument.
Tis is quoted from u again
""""
If average Iraqi People love Saddam Hussein, why were they so relieved at the arrival of the US led Coalition Forces into the various major cities of Iraq ?
There were crowds rejoicing at the toppling of Saddam HusseinÂ’s statues, there were vulgar acts of insults to Saddam HusseinÂ’s photo images.
""""
Tat is their initial reaction after Saddam rule. Now US has rule for almost 1/2 a year, how is Iraq response now ? Wat do u mean they r not coorperating with US ? Read below from u again.
""""
shows that the general population are accepting the reality of the situation and [b]co-operating with the US led Coalition Force. It is the DIEHARD Saddam Loyalist and foreign elements fighting the US led forces.
""""
U here say MAJORITY r coorperating too isn't it ? Only left a few MINORITY tat spoils things. Now things go wrong, u said
""""
If this is not foolishness, what else can we describe the mind of the average Iraqi ?
""""
Iraq can't please American.
Freedom and liberty can not come hastily for any nation. It takes years of peace and education for a country to cultivate such state. If it is not for those strong rulers, situation may still be chaotic. [/b]
Let me see how I can help you to be more "stupidissmart":
From the points that were used to clarify the situation, it showed that the Mullahs were agitating and encouraging the majority Sunni Muslims to protest publicly in mass, to demand that the US Army depart from Iraq. The purpose is only obvious, that the Islamic Mullahs have personal ambitions to take over Political Control over Iraq, and create another Islamic Republic similar to Iran - (without considering the fact that the younger Iranians are tired of the Rule of the Mullahs over every aspect of Iranian lives).
How enlightening to see that you have departed from dogmatically being "stupidissmart", by accepting that "Freedom and liberty can not come hastily for any nation. It takes years of peace and education for a country to cultivate such state. If it is not for those strong rulers, situation may still be chaotic".
This seems to be a far cry from your impatient demand as to why the US Army could not restore law and order, despite half a year in Iraq - (not to mention your ridicule of the US in your posting over the last week).
Are you quite certain that "before LKY, Singapore has no water, no money, no resources, no land, no army, and no nothing" ?
China : Before Mao, they r in domestic war between Kuo Min Tang and Kong Cang Tang, also after WW2 with much destruction from Japanese to almost all infrastructure. Mao did not start the domestic war, it started after Sun Yat Sen death.
""
Did you get your time line correct and place correct ?
""
Before LKY, singapore has no water, no money, no resources, no land, no army, nothing. It only have multi racial and poor people with bad housing and communists problem. Does the name "Pearl of the Orient, the Center of Gravity of commerce" sounds tat IMPORTANT then ?
Did u get your priorities right ?
The recent Water Dispute between Malaysia and Singapore was over a Water Agreements signed in 1927, when LKY was only 4 years old - where do you think he got his water for all his little boy's needs ?
I will concede one point concerning the fact that there was no money in the Singapore Treasury, when LKY took over the State Governent - as it was emptied by an ineffective Chief Minister Lim Yew Hock.
However, LKY's State Government was supported and financially bailed out by the Colonial Office, as Singapore had not received full independence until it joined Malaysia in 1962.
No resources still remain a factor in Singapore - if you are referring to Natural Resources, as LKY did not magically made Natural Resouces available when he came into being or into Political Power.
Land remains scarce, and is not much better before LKY, even with land reclamation, as the square area per Singaporean is no better with a much larger population size.
Even during the British Colonial days, Singapore had a Volunteer Army and a People's Defense Force; when LKY's government came into being, the SAF got bigger.
No nothing ? Hmmmm, I believe it remains status quo with quite many issues, as in before LKY coming. According to LKY, Singapore still lack talent which seem to be abundant from his family and those that were lucky enough to be DNA associated by marriage. -
Ambivalent feelings towards anyone, shows emotional stress, and the inability to come to terms with conflicting issues.
Country should not be interfering other countries affair. We prefer to be in a country where we, citizens rule our own countries. As I have said, your notion of peace and freedom cannot applied to Iraq, not yet. This need many years of peace and education for them to gradually attained such a state. And according to u too, Iraq is considered a developed country with gradually increasing level of education. Why attack them now and spoil everything ? read below again.
""
Like most developed countries in the Middle East, their population will have at least ten percent being educated up to tertiary levels, and at least forty percent with high and middle school education, and another forty percent having at least primary education.
""
I support singapore decision. tat is very wise indeed. I rather America giving us the carrot than the stick. But deep inside me, I despise America for comminting such disgraceful acts.
It shows in your confused state of argument.
After the first Gulf War, there were cries from Iraqi nationals for USA to intervene in the affairs of Iraq, and get rid of a cruel despot that knows only abuse in power.
Should USA stand aside ?
There were cries for International Interventions to stop the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, Croatia, Albania, Rawanda, and some other countries in similar straight jacket situation.
Following your position, we should not intervene in anyone else's country.
You will probably condone the continued abuse of the East Timorese by the Indonesian Elite Military, and let the murder, rape and burning take place, after the East Timorese voted for independence from the illegal take over of East Timor by Indonesia. -
This is my final conclusion of my argument abotu US and Iraq. I do not have the luxury of so much free time to spend on writing replys.
This is our stand, u have the tendency to believe in the arms inspection made 10 years ago while I am basically interested in the most recent inspections done in Iraq.
The reason why u do not believe the checks now is because u have doubts about the weopon inspectors Han Blix. Although he was chosen by UN, even though he was neutral, even though he was the head of the IAEA for so many years, even though there are 50++ other inspectors.
The reason why I go for the recent arms inspection is because if there is a newer update on the situation, why go for one tat dates back 10 years ago ? And wat happened after US get invade Iraq now, and US can choose anyone to be the "arms inspectors" now. Is there any result gathered ? 1/2 a year, more time has been given to the new arms inspectors than US had given to Han Blix. Do they produce the same or worse result ?
North Korea issue. If u talked about WMD, then I have strong belief that North Korea has as many, or indeed more WMD than Iraq. Note: at tat period, Korea OPENLY declared he has WMD while there are no concrete evidence on Iraq case yet.
North Korea has sold their weopons to other countries, in a dubious, secretive and suspicious manner. If America is selling weopons to reputable countires like Taiwan and Singapore, they will be announcing right to everybody about it isn't it ? As said by u before
""""
The North Koreans have certainly sold their missiles and missile technologies to some of the rouge states in the Middle East and Africa, but they have not sold any weapons or WMD end products to groups such as Hamas, Al Qaeda, or the Hissbola –
""""
Hence the suspicious is not to myself only.
About Africa issue. I was just wondering from the above statement why do u think it is of lesser importance tat the weopons r sold to rouge states in the Middle East and Africa compared to groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda, or the Hissbola. I don't wanna add any additional points to tis anymore, since u tend to avoid tis statement u have said. I asked again.
Why do u think it is of lesser importance tat the weopons r sold to rouge states in the Middle East and Africa compared to groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda, or the Hissbola ?
So u find tat Iraq may produce WMD in the forms of Biological, Gas, or Nuclear device etc and stuff in car bombs and may send to other terrorrists group in the world. But up till now, is there any such agents found in the car bomb attacks ? No such attacks had been found and no concrete evidence that Iraq has manage to export such weopons and I believe that it is drawn from your own conclusion, expolating into a future possibilities.
One thing is for certain again. North Korea did sold its rocket launcher, rifles, missiles and maybe nuclear weopons to other dubious countries. They actually caught one of the ship trying to smuggle weopons. The grade of weopons sold from Korea, to me, is certainly a grade higher than those from Iraq. Using a rocket launcher, or missiles are better than using a typical car bomb.
""
With regards to the lawless situation in Iraq, the Iraqis are responsible in contributing to an unstable and volatile situation
Even just when Baghdad had fallen, and before Saddam, his Sons, and the leadership had been captured, the Iraqi Religious Leaders were already working the ground, agitating the Iraqi population to demonstrate to kick the US Army out of Iraq.
If this is not foolishness, what else can we describe the mind of the average Iraqi ?
"""
Is it because of the demostration by the Iraqis tat lead to no power, no water, no public servant, no jobs etc ? South Korea and Taiwanese can have all the demostration they want, they still have their power, water and order etc. Is demostration considered lawlessness ? Are their demostration done to a big scale frequently ? Had demostration result in hindering the build up of reservoir and power grid ? With regards to lawlessness, is the sacking of all Saddam related offices like police and army the main cause or just demostration by the people ?
Initially I thought the more important reason why peace is not established is bacause of attack on US troop from the DIEHARD Saddam Loyalist and foreign elements. Tat is why I demand for explanation for why blame the whole Iraq if there is only a small number of such extremists.
In such a chaotic country with many tribes, many political parties trying to take control, it need someone who is harsher to take. Iraq has been deeply religius muslim country. If like America, suddenly exposing the people to mad rush of infomation, offering no control thus no order, it only result in creating more havoc and helplessness.
It was after being in control of a harsh leader for many years, after the dispute between different political parties and tribes have quiet down or put down, with years of education, then can they gradually increase the awareness of notions such as freedom, liberty and social grace.
As I have said, the person going to take over Iraq have not displayed any incredible talents, nor does it have any impressive merits under its belt. It is unlikely it will be harsh enough to put down any possible opposition thus resulting in lack of control. It will not gather the respect of the people and will not stop them from being rebellious.
For LKY issue, I have tis feeling tat u felt he did nothing impressive and anyone who was in his shoes will perform better. Wat others things does the government have then ? It has communists, it has disputes, riots fights between different races who are all speaking in their own languages, it's government is formed not long ago from a WW2, unemployment reached unacceptable levels. Housing for the people r just wooden shacks, Malaysia isn't very friendly towards us then, world economy cannot be any more distressing and local Volunteer corps doesn't seemed to be a match for Indonesia army who has sent a cache of commandoes in. Problems seemed to pour at every turn. If British remains at the helm of singapore then, do u think the situation will be better ? At least be grateful for him.
""
After the first Gulf War, there were cries from Iraqi nationals for USA to intervene in the affairs of Iraq, and get rid of a cruel despot that knows only abuse in power.
""
US is just an idealistic fool hiding its real agenda of gathering its oil reserves. Well Iraqis r now also requesting American to leave, should USA stand aside ?
Wat I am trying to say is tat Saddam is bad, but he isn't any worse than many other countries. Military do not go about murder, rape and burning of their infrastructure. He has a lousy eldest son, thus he replaced his heir to his second eldest son. Their countries r not going hungry, and citizen get to have their education even for women. They joined in international sports such and women can took part in beauty pageants. And they do not have such things as 10 years national service (North Korea men have to serve tat long). Now compared it to North Korea.
10 years ago he did many atrocities, tat is true. But before he is disposed, wat r the things he have done ? If UN did nothing to them 10 years ago, why attack them now ?
I will be ending my note here, not replying anymore about tis issue as it appears to be endless.
I will still stick to my belief tat US is wrong in the attack and management of Iraq, and should be resisted to hold as an example for other nations not to declared war so recklessly. USA cannot act in such a unilateralism manner.
Atobe will still believe tat attack is necessary and should be encouraged. As he had said, if the class monitor has a black belt, he can go inside a class and wallop Ah seng back, disregarding school rules like US disregarding International rules. -
rare do i see atobe being agitated in his replies.
you've outdone yourself. -
Many thanks for your assumption of my position, although made based on your refusal to understand the directions and emphasis of my postings.Originally posted by stupidissmart:This is my final conclusion of my argument abotu US and Iraq. I do not have the luxury of so much free time to spend on writing replys.
This is our stand, u have the tendency to believe in the arms inspection made 10 years ago while I am basically interested in the most recent inspections done in Iraq.
The reason why u do not believe the checks now is because u have doubts about the weopon inspectors Han Blix. Although he was chosen by UN, even though he was neutral, even though he was the head of the IAEA for so many years, even though there are 50++ other inspectors.
The reason why I go for the recent arms inspection is because if there is a newer update on the situation, why go for one tat dates back 10 years ago ? And wat happened after US get invade Iraq now, and US can choose anyone to be the "arms inspectors" now. Is there any result gathered ? 1/2 a year, more time has been given to the new arms inspectors than US had given to Han Blix. Do they produce the same or worse result ?
It is not just the last 10 years of inspection alone that is important, but the fact that up to the time when the Second Iraq War broke out, there were still concerns expressed by Hans Blix in his report to the UN Security Council on 14 February 2003 - (see my post dated earlier this Saturday, 13 September 2003).
The fact that Saddam Hussein has been playing games - in hiding and refusing to surrender those weapons - for the last 10 years are important considerations, and should be seriously considered in the light of Hans Blix reply of 14 February 2003.
In his reply of 14 February 2003, Hans Blix was walking a tight rope between admitting that Saddam Hussein had co-operated - (in his ever famous inch-by-inch "strip tease" revelations of information concerning his WMD stocks and development status) - and the fact that there remain glaring shortfalls in accounting and information of the discoveries made during the LAST 10 Years - (a fact that Hans Blix himself need to use as reference, and which you refused to accept the importance of the last 10 years of inspection).
In his dithering non-commital reply, Hans Blix could not give the UN Security Council any decisive direction to break the impasse between the deep security concerns felt by USA and its Allies - (with their mind on the 9-11 incident and Al Qaeda continued threat to harm US interests), and the interests of France and Russia with their commercial contracts that will be threatened when Saddam is toppled, and China's interest to show its own influence as one of the 5 Permanent "Head Honcho's with a veto vote" at the table of the UN Security Council.
The UN Security Council was split by its own divided interests - (commercial, political and national security); with the Russian and France losing focus of the issue that it is not for the UN Inspectors to search, locate, find and destroy the WMD that Saddam is developing. It was a UN Resolution that DEMANDED Saddam to openly and unreservedly SURRENDER and DESTROY ALL WMD stocks and development programs.
In Hans Blix report of 14 February 2003 - (which confirmed again all the other reports from the previous 10 Years) - that Saddam Hussein has failed to give satisfactory and convincing accounts and evidence of the missing stocks of confirmed WMD equipment and stocks.
Have you forgotten that Hans Blix screwed up his job, when he failed to discover Saddam Hussein's Nuclear Development Program in the 1990's (before the First Iraq War), and gave a glowing report that confirm Saddam Hussein's Iraq as having NO Nuclear Program.
Yes, North Korea had talked about WMD, but only talked.
North Korea issue. If u talked about WMD, then I have strong belief that North Korea has as many, or indeed more WMD than Iraq. Note: at tat period, Korea OPENLY declared he has WMD while there are no concrete evidence on Iraq case yet.
Did Kim Il Jung or his father (Kim Il Sung) used toxic gas or biological weapons on his own North Korean dissidents that wiped out entire villages - as Saddam Hussein had done to his own Iraqi Kurdish dissidents, or launching poison gas attacks against Iran during the long 7 Year Iraq-Iran War, or did North Korea invade any of her neighbors as Saddam had insanely performed an "Ali Baba" invasion of Kuwait ?
North Korea may have developed its WMD, but there are no clear and full evidence of its works, and there are definitely no real threatening moves made by North Korea towards its neighbors.
Concerning your statement that North Korea has sold its weapons and missile technologies in a "dubious, secretive and suspicious manner" - it is purely your own views.
North Korea has sold their weopons to other countries, in a dubious, secretive and suspicious manner. If America is selling weopons to reputable countires like Taiwan and Singapore, they will be announcing right to everybody about it isn't it ? As said by u before
""""
The North Koreans have certainly sold their missiles and missile technologies to some of the rouge states in the Middle East and Africa, but they have not sold any weapons or WMD end products to groups such as Hamas, Al Qaeda, or the Hissbola –
""""
Hence the suspicious is not to myself only.
About Africa issue. I was just wondering from the above statement why do u think it is of lesser importance tat the weopons r sold to rouge states in the Middle East and Africa compared to groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda, or the Hissbola. I don't wanna add any additional points to tis anymore, since u tend to avoid tis statement u have said. I asked again.
Why do u think it is of lesser importance tat the weopons r sold to rouge states in the Middle East and Africa compared to groups like Hamas, Al Qaeda, or the Hissbola ?
Actually, North Korea had refused to acknowledge or recognised any authority or international governing bodies that allow interference into their government-to-government transactions in weapon sales.
Nothing dubious, secretive and suspicious about such sales just because it is not announced by the North Koreans; as any such Military Sales by our Singapore GLC to any countries are not announced either - so is our Singapore Government acting in similar "dubious, secretive and suspicious manner too" in your eyes ? -
oh man... this has been dragging for too long...Originally posted by nismoS132:rare do i see atobe being agitated in his replies.
you've outdone yourself. -
quote]
So u find tat Iraq may produce WMD in the forms of Biological, Gas, or Nuclear device etc and stuff in car bombs and may send to other terrorrists group in the world. But up till now, is there any such agents found in the car bomb attacks ? No such attacks had been found and no concrete evidence that Iraq has manage to export such weopons and I believe that it is drawn from your own conclusion, expolating into a future possibilities. [/quote]
Surely being so smart, you cannot be so stupid at the same time, to the extent that you will offer such a point of view ?
If we were to wait until a 'car bomb' is fitted with a WMD device, do you think we will still be around to have such a debate ?
North Korea had sent a shipment of Surface-to-surface Missile to Yemen, which is recognised as a sovereign state with legitimate needs for its own defence - although one may need to question what use have they got with such a missile system, given their own small population size and a smaller standing military force.
One thing is for certain again. North Korea did sold its rocket launcher, rifles, missiles and maybe nuclear weopons to other dubious countries. They actually caught one of the ship trying to smuggle weopons. The grade of weopons sold from Korea, to me, is certainly a grade higher than those from Iraq. Using a rocket launcher, or missiles are better than using a typical car bomb.
For your information, the ship was allowed to continue its journey to Yemen and unload its cargo.
I am not sure if you understand the secretive and surreptious nature of terrorist work, that capitalize on the suddeness of an attack that spread terror, pain and death in such a sudden and fast pace of events that panic is created.
With a launching of a missile, the launch can almost be immediately picked-up, trajectory detected, and the point of launch can be determined. If you are referring to the strength of the warhead and the size of a car bomb, it should be about the same 300 kg power.
If your "stupidissmart" logic do not prevent your mathematical mind from working, you will note that a car used in a car bomb attack is relatively cheap (anywhere in the world except Singapore) than a Missile.
Your logic used and approach is questionable.
""
With regards to the lawless situation in Iraq, the Iraqis are responsible in contributing to an unstable and volatile situation
Even just when Baghdad had fallen, and before Saddam, his Sons, and the leadership had been captured, the Iraqi Religious Leaders were already working the ground, agitating the Iraqi population to demonstrate to kick the US Army out of Iraq.
If this is not foolishness, what else can we describe the mind of the average Iraqi ?
"""
Is it because of the demostration by the Iraqis tat lead to no power, no water, no public servant, no jobs etc ? South Korea and Taiwanese can have all the demostration they want, they still have their power, water and order etc. Is demostration considered lawlessness ? Are their demostration done to a big scale frequently ? Had demostration result in hindering the build up of reservoir and power grid ? With regards to lawlessness, is the sacking of all Saddam related offices like police and army the main cause or just demostration by the people ?
During the New York and London black out, do you think there will be a restoration of electrical power in any faster period of time if those affected people had rioted and organised demonstrations to protest the removal of all the Government system and personnels ?
Similarly, in Iraq, the damage to the electrical grid, water and sewer system was not caused by the US Armed Forces, which had avoided damaging such civilian infrastructure during this Second Iraq War.
In Korea, Taiwan, and Hongkong, the citizens's objectives in demonstating against their respective Governments had nothing to do with such basic infrastructural services.
They were demonstrating against job losses and politics, which you will know that no matter how much you demonstrate, job losses will continue and may even destabilize the economic environment that will aggravate the situation further. So does demonstration achieve any purpose if it is not focus on the actual cause ?
After the initial warm reception by the Iraqi citizens to the arrival of the US led Coalition Forces in the North and the South, the remaining loyalists in Saddam Hussein's home state in the Middle of Iraq remained defiant.
Initially I thought the more important reason why peace is not established is bacause of attack on US troop from the DIEHARD Saddam Loyalist and foreign elements. Tat is why I demand for explanation for why blame the whole Iraq if there is only a small number of such extremists.
With the exception of the Kurds in Northen Iraq that continued to work closely with the US Armed Forces, the Islamic Clergy in Southern Iraq agitated the population to demonstrate against the US Led Coalition Forces; which caused further disruptions to the efforts to re-establich public security.
The Saddam Hussein loyalists, and reported foreign fighters filtering back into Iraq, picking easy targets at isolated pockets and unwary soldiers of the US Led Coalition, caused major disruptions that seemingly gave a helpless quagmire situation that the US Led Coaltion seemed to have found themselves in.
In such a scenario, with the Islamic Clergy motivating the large Muslim population to mindlessly demonstrate for the departure of US Led Coalition, and the endless pin-prick guerilla skirmishes with Saddam's loyalists and unknown persons from inside or outside Iraq - this has caused the statement to be made that the Iraqi people has also to be made responsible for the situation that they have found themselves in.
The poor infrastructure system experienced by most Iraqis during the period that Saddam was in power, was never announced nor could any public protests be allowed by Saddam and his henchmen.
At least, with the liberation of Iraq by the US Armed Foces, a certain degree of freedom to demonstrate against the USA is alllowed.
Why are you so impatient with achieving results, when the US Armed Forces is still trying to complete Level 2 of its present Computer Game of Command and Conquer to get rid of Saddam Hussein and his henchmen ?
In such a chaotic country with many tribes, many political parties trying to take control, it need someone who is harsher to take. Iraq has been deeply religius muslim country. If like America, suddenly exposing the people to mad rush of infomation, offering no control thus no order, it only result in creating more havoc and helplessness.
It was after being in control of a harsh leader for many years, after the dispute between different political parties and tribes have quiet down or put down, with years of education, then can they gradually increase the awareness of notions such as freedom, liberty and social grace.
As I have said, the person going to take over Iraq have not displayed any incredible talents, nor does it have any impressive merits under its belt. It is unlikely it will be harsh enough to put down any possible opposition thus resulting in lack of control. It will not gather the respect of the people and will not stop them from being rebellious.
Do you seriously believe that the harsh and iron hand rule of Saddam Hussein had allowed a high standard of infrastructure to be abandoned and fall apart the moment Saddam has left the scene ?
By the same token, this concern has also been mine, concerning the very finite life span of LKY as he move into his twilight years.
Will the absence of the strong hands of LKY result in a similar decline and breaking down of the entire infrastructural system in Singapore then ? -
This is the problem with the Asian mentality that seems to degenerate into the worshipping of its leaders.
For LKY issue, I have tis feeling tat u felt he did nothing impressive and anyone who was in his shoes will perform better. Wat others things does the government have then ? It has communists, it has disputes, riots fights between different races who are all speaking in their own languages, it's government is formed not long ago from a WW2, unemployment reached unacceptable levels. Housing for the people r just wooden shacks, Malaysia isn't very friendly towards us then, world economy cannot be any more distressing and local Volunteer corps doesn't seemed to be a match for Indonesia army who has sent a cache of commandoes in. Problems seemed to pour at every turn. If British remains at the helm of singapore then, do u think the situation will be better ? At least be grateful for him.
With or without LKY, Singapore would have continued to prosper and excel, much as Hongkong did and is performing without any strong personality as LKY; and yet Hongkong has produced more talents and entrepreneurs that continue to this day, while LKY - (and even GCT and LHL) - continue to claim that it is difficult to find talent, leadership quality persons, and entrepreneurs in Singapore.
LKY, GCT and LHL must even invest money to teach students from tertiary institutions to be entrepreneurs, as if entrepreneurs can be cultivated in a laboratory.
You have been fed by the corn feed propaganda information of decades of rule by a Single Political Party, that rewrote political events in Singapore that put the Ruling Party in a positive spotlight.
With more personal memoirs printed by past Singapore Political Leaders, perhaps a more balanced and revealing picture would have appeared for the benefit of the present and future generations.
Unfortunately, the much awaited memoirs of the late Dr Lee Siew Choh - (who was one of LKY's political adversary) - were not put to print, as the surviving family members decide to put the past politics into the cobwebbed ridden storeroom.
This is a disservice to Singaporeans.
The other surviving Political Leaders from the first State Cabinet of Internal Self-Governing Singapore to independence with Malaysia in 1962, is largely unable to write their own experiences in any direct and contradicting manner, due to their Oath of Secrecy taken when they assumed their previous positions in Government.
From your writing, it seems that the miracle of Singapore is largely created by his hand alone, and Singaporeans should only be grateful to him.
Hardly, if you will know that the strength of Singapore is largely due also to the strong minds of Dr Goh Keng Swee, Dr Toh Chin Chye, the late Rajaratnam, Mr Jek Yun Thong, Mr Lim Kim San, late Mr Hun Swee Sen, Mr Ong Pang Boon, and a few more strong minded politicians who were able to conduct strong alternative debates with LKY, that allow alternative policies to develop.
Much of Singapore problems today, is also created by LKY, if you were to look back at some of the weaknesses of his policies; and there were experts in the Civil Service that raised their concerns - but unfortunately, they had no political muscle, and their voices were seldom or never heard.
The consequencs of a declining population, high property prices, high wage, high CPF, high costs of cars, dearth of talent and entrepreneurships, are all by-products of a Single Party Rule that is intolerable to any form of Opposition to their supreme views of How Life should be in Singapore.
How do you compare "Saddam is not worse than many other countries" ?
""
After the first Gulf War, there were cries from Iraqi nationals for USA to intervene in the affairs of Iraq, and get rid of a cruel despot that knows only abuse in power.
""
US is just an idealistic fool hiding its real agenda of gathering its oil reserves. Well Iraqis r now also requesting American to leave, should USA stand aside ?
Wat I am trying to say is tat Saddam is bad, but he isn't any worse than many other countries. Military do not go about murder, rape and burning of their infrastructure. He has a lousy eldest son, thus he replaced his heir to his second eldest son. Their countries r not going hungry, and citizen get to have their education even for women. They joined in international sports such and women can took part in beauty pageants. And they do not have such things as 10 years national service (North Korea men have to serve tat long). Now compared it to North Korea.
10 years ago he did many atrocities, tat is true. But before he is disposed, wat r the things he have done ? If UN did nothing to them 10 years ago, why attack them now ?
How many countries do you need Saddam to be compared with before it becomes intolerable ?
By replacing the crippled Uday with the second Qusay, Saddam did not improve the situation any better, as Qusay was just as deadly and brutal in his methods compared with his elder brother Uday.
From the following referenced site - featuring the achievements of Qusay Hussein (second son of Saddam):-
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qusay_Hussein
Unlike his brother Uday who was known for extravagance, Qusay Hussein kept a low profile.
Qusay Hussein played a vital role in crushing the Shiite uprising in the aftermath of the 1991 Gulf War and is also thought to have masterminded the destruction of the southern marshes of Iraq. The wholesale destruction of these marshes ruined the habitat for dozens of species of migratory birds, and ended a centuries-old way of life that prevailed among the Shiite Marsh Arabs who made the wetlands their home: the Iraqi government stated that the action was intended to produce usable farmland, while a number of outside observers felt that the destruction was aimed against the Marsh Arabs, as retribution for their participation in the 1991 uprising.
Iraqi dissidents claim that Qusay Hussein was responsible for the killing of many political activists. The Sunday Times (London) reported that Qusay Hussein ordered the killing of Khalis Mohsen al-Tikriti, an engineer at the military industrialization organization, because Qusay believed he was planning to leave Iraq. In 1998, Iraqi opposition groups accused Qusay Hussein of ordering the executions of thousands of political prisoners after hundreds of inmates were summarily executed to make room for new prisoners in crowded jails. However, groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International report none of this, and show Qusay's human rights record as being about on par with most Arab royal family members. -
Too bad that you have to call it quits, as we seem to be getting somewhere, and the list of "deviasionist thought issues" from you seem to have grown shorter, as you seem to abandon certain positions after some clarification given.
I will be ending my note here, not replying anymore about tis issue as it appears to be endless.
I will still stick to my belief tat US is wrong in the attack and management of Iraq, and should be resisted to hold as an example for other nations not to declared war so recklessly. USA cannot act in such a unilateralism manner.
Atobe will still believe tat attack is necessary and should be encouraged. As he had said, if the class monitor has a black belt, he can go inside a class and wallop Ah seng back, disregarding school rules like US disregarding International rules.
I am surprised that you admire LKY so much to the extent of hero worshipping his strong hand in governing Singapore; which more often then not allowed events to move along according to his own dogmatic views - that resulted in some failed policies (discussed in other threads) - and signify "UNILATERILISM" on his part.
Strong leaders behaving in unilateral manner are like LKY's insistence on a high 40 percent CPF, higher price to own cars (resulting in the infamous COE system) within a limited period to exercise such car ownership rights, or like Saddam Hussein's unilateral decision to wage war with Iran, and to invade Kuwait.
If you admire such strong leaders to bring order to their supposedly disorderly societies, why do you object to USA acting as a strong responsbile World Leader, to make a unilateral decision to prevent Saddam Hussein from developing and possessing any WMD systems that can threaten the World Community ?
USA had to make a unilateral decision, when the UN Security Council were split according to the self-interest objective of the Permanent Five Powers at the UN Security Council.
Just as Saddam and LKY cannot tolerate long hours of talking, USA had acted with strong decision to move ahead unilaterally - as a strong leader will act - to resovle the problems getting of a very real impending threat of Saddam working with Al Qaeda to attack US interests, and coupled to Saddam's WMD program and refusal to disarm according to the UN Security Council Resolution.
Concerning the Class Monitor - in an adaptation of your Water Bomb story - I did not write that "the Class Monitor the class monitor has a black belt, he can go inside a class and wallop Ah seng back" - it was a twist of the words used to suit your own position.
It was clearly stated that the Class Monitor went to the next class, in which Ah Seng had taken refuge under the protection of Ah Beng; and the Class Monitor demanded that Ah Beng should surrender Ah Seng to him.
It was Ah Beng who challenged the Class Monitor to enter the Classroom if he dared, to apprehend Ah Seng and his gang of bullies.
The Class Monitor took the challenge and entered the class under the control of Ah Beng, and was immediately attacked by Ah Beng and Ah Seng, and their gang members.
Did I write anywhere that the Class Monitor started to beat everyone up when he entered Ah Beng's Class ?
If Ah Beng refused to surrender Ah Seng and his gang, and challenged the Class Monitor to dare walk into Ah Beng's Class, why should the Class Monitor not accept the challenge and walk-into Ah Beng's Class ? The Class Monitor is authorised by the School to look after the discipline of the School.
I had also written that if the Principal and the Discipline Master, are afraid to confront Ah Beng and Ah Seng, and their gang members, then the Class Monitor should be allowed to handle the situation if he is confident of doing so.
If the Principal, the Discipline Master, and even the Class Monitor allowed Ah Beng, Ah Seng, and their gang members to have the freedom to abuse the legal framework of the School, then there will be no law and order.
Similarly, if so many resolutions have been passed, and so may UN sanctioned inspections have been completed over the last 10 years - all confirming that Saddam is hiding and preventing full inspection of the missiles - then a stong leader must take action to prevent a bad situation from deteriorating further.
Singapore did support USA, as GCT, LHL and LKY had approved of USA's strong leadership to act UNILATERALLY.
You dare to form a different opinion from LKY, a person whom you seem to worship for his past actions and judgments ? -
Wow, I expect the silly Knight in armour won't be coming back. What started as a silly remark about how better weaker scrawnier Singapore soldiers are against tougher Yanky Soldiers, has now turned into Iraqi policy and WMD debate, with a touch on domestic government matters too
