08-10-08, 09:23 AM #181
Its not my theory, its that of the Iraqis. They consider it a part of their country.
Because under occupation, only the occupiers decide what the "news" will be?
08-10-08, 09:35 AM #182
What the fuck are you on about, S.A.M? Just answer the question I put forward, instead of evading it. Why is it OK for suicide bombers to kill the civilians of the country under occupation?
08-10-08, 09:39 AM #183
Ah geez Sam, what difference do you think it makes?
Lets see... Kuwait is a sovereign nation with clear borders. Something even Iraq recognised. And what? Saddam just changed his mind?... I guess you can't repay yourself your debts..
Look at Israel. 2000 years was not long enough.
Does not mean Israel's actions are in any way valid. Nor was Saddam's when he decided to rebuild the motherland.
08-10-08, 09:40 AM #184
08-10-08, 09:56 AM #185
Kuwait is an independent sovereign nation.
Westerners partitioning countries at whim and imposing their boundaries and puppet regimes on people is not incumbent on the people of any country.
On a side note, how much influence did the West have in the election of Sabah I bin Jaber as the first Emir of Kuwait? As I understand it, all leaders of Kuwait follow down the same family line as the first Emir.. So how exactly did the West impose their own puppet regime in Kuwait when the regime family line never changed from the first Emir?
08-10-08, 10:01 AM #186
Israel, like Kuwait, are sovereign nations, whether you agree with it or not. Does not mean Israel should have an open ticket to invade its neighbours and should the repurcussions of said actions be the same as what Saddam faced when he decided to invade his neighbour? Yes.
Whether the world's reaction to either being hypocritical or downright one sided, it still does not detract from the fact that Kuwait is an independent and sovereign nation.
08-10-08, 10:18 AM #187
This article is so american, they try so hard to make them middle class at first and then make everything seem so emotional and dramatic. I have full respect for muslims but i dont like this article, the way they have to say thing s implying they were not proper muslims therefore they are good. I realise its to gain sympathy but its milked.
08-10-08, 11:43 AM #188
08-10-08, 11:47 AM #189
08-10-08, 03:28 PM #190
08-10-08, 05:14 PM #191
So its official then. You do not need to be considered with legalities of kidnapping people from foreign countries, imprisoning or torturing them for several years and holding kangaroo courts convicting them of crimes on foreign soil, based on random, retroactive reinterpretation of events.
Originally Posted by Bells
Last edited by S.A.M.; 08-10-08 at 05:22 PM.
08-10-08, 05:22 PM #192
Countries like Australia have been formed on the basis that other people's rights to self determination do not apply if you do not recognise them. An invader can make up new rules of what defines recognition.
But was this the same with Kuwait? No. As I said before, Saddam probably figured he would not have to repay himself a huge debt if he forcefully absorbed Kuwait back into the fold.
08-10-08, 05:23 PM #193
08-10-08, 05:41 PM #194
Jokes aside, Saddam's invasion of Kuwait was not because he wanted to rebuild the motherland. And his having recognised and accepted Kuwait as a sovereign nation in all that time before the war is telling, is it not?
Surely you aren't advocating the forced re-integration of countries that were once one, where only one country is willing?
Oh, and you still didn't answer my previous question about your comments about Kuwait's puppet Government... "How much influence did the West have in the election of Sabah I bin Jaber as the first Emir of Kuwait?"
Did anyone invade Australia for making up their own rules of what constitutes their nation?
But again, Australia's inception is vastly different to that of Kuwait's. After all, wasn't it a de facto independent State even when it was under Ottoman rule and only came under British Protection by its own request when Turkey attempted to invade it?
08-10-08, 05:47 PM #195
Kuwait was a province of Iraq under the Ottomans. The question is, that Australia apparently does not recognise the sovereignty of countries like Iraq and Afghanistan to have their own laws, forget about the land grab from residents of Australia [from natives with a minimum of 40,000 years claim] as evinced by the presence of their troops in these countries. So its rather hypocritical to apply any such standards to Saddam Hussein.
08-10-08, 06:05 PM #196
The question is, that Australia apparently does not recognise the sovereignty of countries like Iraq and Afghanistan to have their own laws, forget about the land grab from residents of Australia [from natives with a minimum of 40,000 years claim] as evinced by the presence of their troops in these countries.
Both are still independent and sovereign countries. We have not implemented our own laws in their countries.
So its rather hypocritical to apply any such standards to Saddam Hussein.
08-10-08, 06:09 PM #197
08-10-08, 06:12 PM #198
08-10-08, 06:15 PM #199
But again, could you please enlighten me about your claims of a puppet Government in Kuwait, apparently put in place by the West?
After World War I, the Ottoman Empire was financially crippled and the invading British forces invalidated the Anglo-Ottoman Convention, declaring Kuwait to be an "independent sheikdom under British protectorate". On June 19, 1961, Kuwait became fully independent following an exchange of notes between the United Kingdom and the then emir of Kuwait, Abdullah Al-Salim Al-Sabah
08-10-08, 07:08 PM #200
Kuwait was founded in the early eighteenth century by the Bani Utbah in the year 1705. Kuwait was then known as Guraine, the Bani Utbah established the town and port of guraine and called it Kuwait ("little fort," from kut, "fort", ultimately derived from Persian kud, meaning "city") In the first half of the eighteenth century, the great grandfather's of the Al-Khalifa, Al-Sabah, Al-Jalahma arrived at Kuwait. They were desendants of the Anazia tribe who gradually migrated in the early eighteenth century from Nejd to the shores of the Persian Gulf. According to one local tradition, the Sabahs migrated south to flee drought in Najd in 1710, but found conditions bleaker. Finding conditions no better there, they finally migrated north to Kuwait where they found water and consequently settled. On the last leg of the journey they moved to the north and arrived at Kuwait in 1716. When they arrived at Kuwait, the great grandfather's of the Al-Khalifa, Al-Sabah, Al-Jalahma found a settlement by the Bani Utbah . Possibly the Bani Utbah had built a fortress from which the name Kuwait, a diminutive of kut or fortress, derives. Al Khalifa , Al-Sabah ,and Al Jalahma then entered under the umbrella of the Bani Utbah. They also raised the Al Sulaimi flag which belongs to the Bani Utbah .This flag was mentioned by lorimer in his gazetteer as being a stripped flag with four red stripes and 3 white stripes  The Bani Utbah migrated from Kuwait in 1732 to Zubarah and Furaiha in Qatar passing the torch to the Al Khalifa ,Al-Sabah,and Al Jalahma.
Linked from the site you quoted above
By darini in forum LinguisticsLast Post: 05-14-08, 07:22 PMReplies: 19
By Brian Foley in forum World EventsLast Post: 10-26-07, 12:36 AMReplies: 62
By Brian Foley in forum World EventsLast Post: 05-25-07, 11:13 PMReplies: 42
By Buffalo Roam in forum World EventsLast Post: 10-23-06, 07:59 AMReplies: 87