"OLT is losing its credibility through the posting of journals such as this"

what credibility? How does an online forum that doesnt even require people to put their name to their comments have any credibility whatsoever. And anyway, what's particularly wrong or incredible about this particular journal?

I'm always surprised how hyper-sensitive many OLO posters have been about the tightening of anti-terror laws (which I support) - they strongly oppose the government line.

However concerning the coalition killing many thousands of Iraqi civilians they support the government line. The numbers of Iraqi's killing Iraqi's are even worse. Yes Saddam was far better than Mao (who the West began to back in the 1970's). However is the escalating civil war in Iraq worse than Saddam? - no studies are permitted.

As many intelligence insiders (and even celebrities) have said about Iraq "its was about oil not WMD or terror."

Now that many Muslims have been killed in Iraq, the West has nurtured the terror industry in Iraq, in Madrid and in London - perhaps in Bali. And next?

We'll hear more about 4 Aussies murdered by terrorists in Bali than 18,000 Pakistanis dead from the earthquake. Should the media airtime be based on nationality and nature of political murders alone or should we look at the foundations of these murders more fundamentally.

Every death is sad - and acutely felt - whereever it is.

Politicians justify death (by tough talk) in someone else's country.

Many celebrities like Peter Ustinov, were or are, deep. They're aware how politicians manipulate the media.

plantagenet,
You are part of the double speak industry. You either support the diversity of the West or the self defence line of the Muslim propaganda. With statements like: Quote, "intelligence insiders.. have said about Iraq "its was about oil not WMD or terror."..."the West has nurtured the terror industry in Iraq, in Madrid and in London - perhaps in Bali. And next?"

We are at war against terror, so reveal your allegiance!

The Muslim terrorist agression is hitting Australian families so get real, Quote, "We'll hear more about 4 Aussies murdered by terrorists in Bali than 18,000 Pakistanis dead from the earthquake." One is a natural disaster that we can do little about except offer personal and material support; the other is a deliberate criminal act against families who are our relatives.

Yes, Philo, I think you summed it up rather well with the comment

"No one would now be killed in Iraq if radical Sunni Muslims stopped their slaughter of the new democratic Iraqi Government"

I hope that all critics of the Iraq situation would take this to heart.

If there is obvious evidence to the contrary, please state it ?

But as I observe, the only impediment to a future for Iraq, is the above mentioned statement.

One thing is clear though, human nature being what it is, the previously 'privileged' Sunni's would more likely feel 'oppressed' if they had to live on the same level as every other Iraqi, without the benefit of selective prosperity which was bestowed on them by Sadaam for reasons of political support and at the expense of all other majority segments of the country such as the Shia, along with minority Christian and Kurd.

Can someone contradict this view ?

Philo:

- "We are at war against terror, so reveal your allegiance!"

I hate to be impolite, but honestly, grow up!

That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard!

You suggest that you have to either 100% blindly support the government line, or you are 100% in support of terrorism. The world was not made to be a linear, fixed system. It is possible to support NEITHER of these positions!

- The Big Fish:

I cant belive that some of us think that the policies and actions of GWB are worth defending. The man is quite obviously a complete idiot! There is no need to try and justify him, every person with at least half a brain and a little independence can see the man is stupid.

- "No one would now be killed in Iraq if radical Sunni Muslims stopped their slaughter of the new democratic Iraqi Government"

Um, actually, yes, there would still be the 100 odd thousand people who were killed during "shock and awe".
Even that 'ligitmate' opening round of the war was a useless slaughter.

Most of those soldiers in the Iraqi army were conscripts who were forced there by a totally brutal system against their will. Im sure many of them hated Saddam as much as the next guy. Then the US military comes and slaughters them in there tens of thousands for being a part of a military in which they had no choice.
Is that fair? - Its a brutal disgrace.

The situation before the war was terrible and needed to be changed.

But is the situation now any better?
Probably not. THe question is then, was it worth it to go and sacrifice thousands of US soldiers (among others) to get us to a position that is no better than when Saddam was in? Im sure many parents in the US would think not...

Funkster,

I hate to be impolite, please pull your head in. I have not defended the actions of anyone, please tell me where I have done that? Just stated some facts. Unlike you. Using that 100 Thousand. That number has been discredited a while ago now. So either you are ignorant or being dishonest.

And as to if Iraq is better now versus Saddam. Best people to tell us that are the Iraqis. I wonder if you have looked at the polls being done in Iraq lately?

So I will repeat carefully. Listen to what people say not what you think they say. It help in discussions on this forum.