Debate on the War in Iraq - 4/12

[DRR180]

Quick! Someone tell George Galloway the topic of the debate.

[HuMuSuX]

It's was the eleventh of September, no the ninth :o

[Byron10301]

Galloway: supporter of Islamic terrorism (is there any other kind of terrorism left in the world these days?) ... Galloway is also a supporter of the FASCIST Islamic regime of Iran, and is PAID by the mullahs of Iran as well.

[Ruffneckization]

@Byron10301How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war & post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths

[Seaworldexists]

I take it that people cheered for galloway because the nation was so divided ont eh iraq issue that as long as they heard the odd confirmation of their belief in his irrational rantings they supported it.

[nubbs]

7:30 hitchens is the man. look at him getting all worked up, and galloway just sitting there, taking it like a bitch

[Ruffneckization]

@nubbs How can you debate the war in iraq? Not only was it bad enough that the U.S. SUPPORTED saddamn in the 80's when he actually used chemical weapons, but they then blocked an uprising (an uprising they called for) after the first gulf war that would have removed him from power, they then imposed crippling sanctions for a decade killing tens of thousands, then the keystone cops ran the MOST INCOMPETENT war and post war administration in U.S. history causing hundreds of thousands of deaths

[LukasPress]

Galloway is a total gasbag. No actual content at all, just grandstanding and slagging off Hitchens because he grew out of Trotskyism.

[architect333]

@LukasPress You don't feel the greed of elite u.s corporations to secure economic power in the future, or selfish greed in plain sight causing the world recession effecting "their own", or how bout your deficit? but side with hitch for the moral reasons of freedom by which the "corps" setup for you to agree upon your hard fought values in the past! How can you be so blind? Mass media indoctrination! American soul will rise above the greedy f**ks controlling them once the truth is accepted!

[seanotube85]

Fuck Christopher Hitchens. He doesn't give a flying fuck over the over 1 MILLION Iraqis who got killed because of the invasion. He only cares about the (5,000 at this point) Americans who died. Does he believe that we have honestly done away with 1 million bad guys?? FUCK THAT STUPID FUCK! Stop trying to sound like you're smart you fuckin asshole. The war in Iraq was a useless tragedy that spurred more death and murder than had already been going on, and its purpose was to get money from OIL!!!

[adraim69]

@seanotube85 Translation: "I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT HITCHENS SAID. I DON'T LIKE HOW MUCH APPLAUSE HE GOT WHILE DESTROYING GALLOWAY. I'M GONNA USE AD HOMINUM ATTACKS TO TRY AND JUSTIFY NOT LOOKING AT THE SITUATION CRITICALLY"

[seanotube85]

@adraim69 I understand perfectly well what Hitchens is saying. He's defending the invasion of Iraq as a logical course of action. Please explain to me the logic, smart ass.

[exupstreetfighter]

@seanotube85

If hitch didnt explain it eloquently and concisely enough for you here, then I just hope you have a long, happy,peacefull life.

But I also hope that your aparent inability to recognise sound logic and inability to detect stupid ideas die with you.

[seanotube85]

@exupstreetfighter Sound logic which you obviously can't explain because you leave it all up to your master Hitchens who has a very eloquent way of stepping around obvious facts like how we aren't making progress in Iraq and how there was obviously no sign of WMD's in the first place. Hitchens is an intellectual fumbler stuck with a case of cognitive dissonance on this one I'm afraid. And you are simply defending your idol for fear that him being wrong is a personal blow to your intelligence.

[waldoistwisted]

Galloway give speeches like hes doing it to a Nuremberg rally

[tmyavuz]

to all my young friends who understood a word that gg said pls dont even bother arguing with ppl who somehow cant see the real picture....THE BIG PICTURE!!!!! This was a wrong move...when the war started they said the gas will be lower!!!! Nope!!! It is 3.19 in some places in ny now! It was either 95 cents or a $1 before the iraq war!!! No jobs out there!!!! Seniors are struggling about their pentions!!!! Come on now be realistic...See the truth pls:(

[drgoodvibesxxx]

klrdotorg i will take a bit of my time to remind you why the US are the real terrorists. IT spends more money arming itself than any other nations, it attacks other nations like Vietnam, Cambodia, Libya, Panama, Cuba, Grenada, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan etc. It overthrows democratically elected regimes like Mossadeq in Iran, Ecuador, Chile, guatemala, Panama etc. and uses weapons of mass destruction. Killiing millions of people in the process. sure i forgot some but need i say more ???

[Enoemen]

The whole argument is pretty much right here. 'There were no weapons of mass destruction, there was no link to Al-Qaeda." In fact Hussien's forces were secular whereas Al-Qaeda's is religious. The two hated eachother and fought a lot. Anyone who is interested can read The End of Iraq by Peter Galbraith, (which Hitchens praised) to get an idea of what's going on over there. I like Hitchens but he is wrong on this.

[FLUSEM666]

Well said.

[tstruss912]

Actually, klrdotorg, Mrs. Sheehan totally agrees with Galloway you dumb shit. Thats why she said the "terrorists" were freedom fighters! Only little girl scout thinkers like you could fall for that one. You should probably crawl out of this forum now....

[tstruss912]

You just dont understand do you....Cindy Sheehan has figured out what all the intellectuals have figured out, that the real terrorists are the USA, Israel and Great Britain. You were the one tricked by a far right mouth piece (Hitchens). I may come off like a dick but its only because I care about America, shes dying! Also Ive never scored lower than 120 on an IQ test so trust me if you dont understand what Im talking about its because you dont learn as fast as me, not because your smarter.

[klrdotorg]

Ideology overpowers IQ in its ability to "dumb" people down.

"All the intellectuals" think that the US, UK and Israel are the real terrorists? I don't think so. No doubt some do. And a great many think that going into Iraq was not a smart move. But that's quite different from calling those countries the "real terrorists".

It helps to have some common sense, and a great number of "intellectuals" lack that trait. And while I feel for her loss, Cindy Sheehan is not too bright.

[architect333]

@klrdotorg the entire world knows the u.s mission in iraq was a fake, driven by securing strategic interest's in it's future plans for competing with emerging super powers. At 41 and you argue shes dumb because some guy "SAID" something about a war that had her sun killed? this should be embarrassing by your illogical reasoning alone! Words are words, even bias interpretations, but actions are dangerous haven't you figure out that much in boy scouts?

[klrdotorg]

"Is it not rather revolting to appear in Damascus, by the side of Assad, and to praise the people who killed Casey Sheehan.....and then to come to America and appeal to the emotions of his mother? ........ I say sincerely, I didn't think it could get as low as that." Christopher Hitchens discussing the deplorable George Galloway, 9/14/2005.

At that point, if Georgie had an ounce of shame, he would have crawled off the stage.

[glamfakir]

There are 2 distinct and different points:

1. GG is saying that Bush was wrong to send US recruits to invade another non-comabatant country;

2. The Syrians joined their near neighbours to resist the invasion.

The dead soldier's mother and GG agreed on point one.

GG made point 2.

No shame there.

[architect333]

@klrdotorg are you serious? GG doesn't praise any murdering of human beings but does respect defending your country. for hitch to manipulate with a twist of language that simple suggest why you can't grasp the hypocrisy hitch spit all over you. Recognize your bias and get the facts not quotes. GG spends all his life opposing injustice and proves it here. How come hes able to be friends with both sides of the spectrum should open your blinders? Once you break the rules of justice anything goes!

[klrdotorg]

@architect333 You said - "GG doesn't praise any murdering of human beings but does respect defending your country."

So blowing up the UN building (as Hitchens cites) is "defending your country"? Killing police recruits & thousands of innocent fellow countrymen - in suicide bombings - is "defending your country"? Your writing is nearly incomprehensible, but how anyone can watch this video, and still defend Galloway is remarkable to me.

Please point to Hitchens hypocrisy - in this video.

[architect333]

Read Chomsky and learn. what goes on when MILLIONS of people die and a countries infrastructure is crushed to poverty? put it into your imagination, your physically and emotionally broken, struggling for your next meal or the future, uneducated and furious about your murdered relatives, picture this for 8 years or so. "They" occupy your country and train "traitors" suggesting "puppet" democracies. can you even conceive Iraqi patriots? your version of WAR is incomprehensible and irrelevant!

[klrdotorg]

@architect333 You said - "your physically and emotionally broken, struggling for your next meal or the future ... picture this for 8 years or so."

And why would these unfortunate people be in this situation for more than a few weeks, let alone 8 years? Because of the people you & Galloway defend! The animals that you and he describe as "defending their country". The same fuckers who are blowing up more fellow countrymen than our soldiers. Are you calling the victims "traitors"? cont.

[klrdotorg]

@architect333 cont.

You and Georgie are sick twisted fucks. If you want to argue the point of the justification for the war ... fine. But it takes a particularly sick individual to defend the fuckers blowing themselves up - and terrorizing their country. And to imply that those who want to restore order are somehow "traitors"? I asked you to provide me with specific evidence of Hitchens' hypocrisy in this video. I was curious - but I'm not too keen on continuing a convo with u.

[architect333]

@klrdotorg its sad how your concerned about Iraqis, because you're living a decent life fought by individuals in the past who hold your values to oppose government control and live a free life. But you get emotional for what? favoritism? we agree on the principle to avoid suffering and injustice! Educate yourself on Chomsky. you'll only direct your hatred at your own government! What confuses you is hitch is fighting for a good cause, to fix the aftermath but reluctant to make the distinction!

[architect333]

@klrdotorg Hypocrisy of freedom under u.s hegemony. Read up history this is the course of all empires in history. you want to ignore the reason for the war? ok trade military money for education, reconstruction,technology and aid, given time they will take upon democracy on their own by the people, IF LEFT FREE not in slaved by a puppet! Don't forget America installed and supported Saddam's crimes. why do you think the world disagreed to u.s war! As Chomsky says if Americans only knew!

[sabine1470]

@architect333 Galloway does not oppose injustice , he just hates America. Galloway supported the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and has also denied the Tiananmen Square massacre.

[architect333]

@sabine1470 supported the war but why? But for arguments sake this only implies how hitch supports an invasion/occupation of iraq. the point is hitch has no case for the war. he doesn't even support it, like most of you confused he supports the aftermath. he just eloquently merges the two! Read Chomsky and u.s hegemony and hitch is lost, humans fight for irrational decisions and try to rationalize them based on biases. World is complex why point to favoritism? it's irrelevant!

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg Rather I would argue that if Donald Rumsfeld had any shame, when the video was posted of his shaking Saddam's hand in 1983 (a year after Saddamn first used chemical weapons) he would have crawled off the stage as it were. Rather the hypocrite who lobbied for the US to support Saddam in the 80's (Which they did) then called for his removal decades later for the exact same reason..he also being a bungler & incompetent made a mess of the war iraq causing hundreds of thousands of deaths.

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization = bigbossmann99 = multi-acct sock puppet troll. Mine some new material.

You hate America ... we get it. How many other countries traded arms with Iraq? Save some of your hypocritical comdemnation for the so-called "freedom fighters" whom Gallaway praised - who blew up and murdered tens of thousands of their fellow Muslims. Get lost idiot.

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg I obviously touched a nerve...calm down nutjob this is youtube. But I guess you would be upset when someone calls you out on your bullshit rhetoric and fanaticism. And I don't hate America...if that's the best you can do...PATHETIC & I love how you ignored all my points.The US VEHEMENTLY supported Saddamn in the 80's, more than any other country, knowing he was using chemical weapons, the hypocrisy is those same people in the Reagan administration wanted him removed years later..idiot

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization

Who are you today? bigbossmann or Ruffneck? "touched a nerve"? "nutjob"? No, I just call a troll, a troll.

It's called "the enemy of my enemy - is my friend". It's not always the best policy, and it's gotten us into trouble over the years, but it's an easy concept to understand.

"The US VEHEMENTLY supported Saddamn ..."? Really? We gave him some arms, so did others -- Iran was, rightfully, our enemy. And Saddam killed his people, not the sanctions - idiot.

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg Ugh...another moron who doesn't understand the concept of "books". Yes idiot, if you KNEW HOW TO READ, you would know that UN resolution 661 which put the sanctions on Iraq caused hundreds of thousands of deaths, mostly civilians & especially children according to unicef, human rights watch, amnesty international, several high ranking US diplomats and litany of other sources. & our support went beyond arms, we ENCOURAGED his killing and brutal behavior, i.e. we're complicit..now STFU.

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization /bigbossmann

Ugh ... is right. It takes a special type of asshole (like Galloway) to blame the USA and the international community for imposing santions against the rogue govt of a brutal dictator. And then, when that dictator starves his people, and enriches himself in the process, you don't blame the dictator, you blame us.

The fact that Amnesty Int. (& other liberal orgs), who do good work for the oppressed, makes that absurd assertion, doesn't make it valid. Idiot.

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization

In addition to arms, we gave Saddam intelligence against Iran.

If we "ENCOURAGED" (fucking all-caps queer) Saddam to kill his own people, then serve up the proof. If we did, shame on us. But that has little to do with the dabate in this video.

Give me the link to your evidence of that claim, or stfu.

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg you're ignorance and naivety is embarrassing (for you). We did more than just support him during the war with Iran, our support CONTINUED (i know you're slow, i want you to pay attention to the "important" words) after the war with Iran up until he invaded Kuwait. It was only partially based on Iran, our support for him was the same reason we supported Mubarak (to the tune of 2.2 billion dollars per year from 1978 until...now), the reason we supported Pinochet, Suharto, Mobuto and

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg (continued) and every corrupt and brutal dictator we could get our hands on...the reason being access to important resources such as oil, copper, uranium, natural gas, etc. And we have cared less about the actual people in these countries. Now there are several ways in which we actively aided Saddam in his use of chemical weapons in the 80's, thus encouraging and enabling him to use chemical weapons.

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg (continued) our first green light to him was when that criminal and hypocrite Rumsfeld visited him in 1983 after he first used chemical weapons and we removed him from terrorist list and resumed relations thus letting him know we approved of his use of chemical weapons. The US senate banking committe reported the United States actually shipped large quantities of toxigenic and pathogenic materials to Saddam tht he used to build up his chemical weapons arsenal

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg Also by blocking U.N. resolution after U.N. resolution to condemn Iraq for use of chemical weapons, we again let him know we approved and as if that weren't enough we funneled almost 4 billion dollars to him in the 80's that he used on top of the chemical agents we sent him against Iranian soldiers, civillians and the Kurds.Finally after the gulf war, we encouraged his people to rise up (which they did) and then when they realized they could win, we temporarily removed the no fly zone

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg (continued) and the result of that was that tens of thousands of civilians were killed, and as if that wasn't enough, we then imposed crippling sanctions that killed hundreds of thousands, we then invaded Iraq (a country that had never attacked us by the way) to remove the dictator that we had supported in the first place, and to make matters worse, you had two draft dodgers (bush, cheney) who had no idea what they were doing and bungled the entire operation from start

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg (continued) botched the entire war, put too few troops in, disbanded the iraqi army (yeah real smart send home 400,000 angry guys with weapons training who wanted to help the U.S. & do it before you secure the ammo depots,hear it for paul bremer!!) allowing a bloodbath to emerge killing hundreds of thousands more..all this we did to a nation that never attacked us. & you have the gall to defend bush? Now provide me a response with no facts, no argument & a ton of rhetoric..fuck off

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization

Six posts huh? And just seething with hate for the U.S. The Iraqi army "who wanted to help the U.S." lol. I never said firing them and sending them on their way was a smart idea - never. But the way you frame this fiction. Does anyone take you seriously? You're a joke dude.

"& you have the gall to defend bush?"

Point to where I defended him. Or Bremer, for that matter.

We removed the no fly zone - so he could massacre his people? Link the evidence please.

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg haha again you completely ignore what I say (of course you do, you cant logically refute it) & yes I posted 6 times to demonstrate the difference between us (one of us..take a guess who) knows a great deal about this conflict,dating back to the early 80's..the other (take another guess) only knows generic & superficial knowledge prob dating back to 2003 & knows nothing about the conflict.The fact you didn't even know about the rebellion in 91 says it all..give it up man..embarrassing

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization

Stop stroking yourself ... it's embarrassing. I didn't say I wasn't aware of the '91 rebellion - did I? You're the first I've heard frame it that way. I asked for a link to confirm your assertion that the US stopped the no fly zone - just as the rebels were close to winning.  Give me the link. What are your sources for this narrative you've put forth?

I also asked you to point out where I defended Bush, or Bremer. Still waiting.

And try it w/out spamming - troll.

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg stroking myself? Is it possible for you to a) have an intelligent argument without making a childish insult and b) can you address any of the thousand points i've brought up? You do nothing but evade the issue. So if I mischaracterized your position, I apologize, since by your comments it appears you're nothing but an obsessed Bush supporter. So where do you stand on the Iraq war? Do you agree then it was a criminal & incompetent act by an administration of hypocrites and bunglers?

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization

Yes! Stroking yourself. Yes it is possible to have an intellegent debate ... the childish comments have been coming from you. Accusing me of not being able to read would be one. Patting yourself on the back about your extensive knowledge of the US / Iraq relationship. Good for you. When I asked you to point to where I defended Bush, you can't point to anything, but you then go on to say I'm "an obsessed Bush supporter". Based on what? Back it up.

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg again stop evading the issue! what exactly is your stance? secondly you kept bugging me for articles and sources regarding the us's strong and undying support for saddam...& I sent you about ten links and i can send you ten more..why are you now ignoring those? And anyone else who would like links i will gladly send but anyone can do a simple google search and type "us supported saddam" and will see a litany of sources that should be appalling for any American to see what our govt did

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization

My stance is: I think Sadam was a tyrant and needed to go. I supported going in to take him out. I think our military handled many things very badly. I couldn't believe they didn't guard the munitions dump - and those explosives were used against our soldiers for months/ yrs. One of many fuckups. If I knew there would be so many fuckups, I'm not sure I would have supported the invasion. I'm going to read your links and get back later.

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization

I read all the articles from the links you sent me that night. I was going to look for more links giving a counter argument, and while I'm sure they're out there ... I ran into a wall. Your links were enlightening, and our hands are much dirtier than I had thought. And we did leave the insurgents hanging after encouraging their uprising - which is awful.

But I would not characterize events as you do, not even close. If you want to discuss more, pm me.

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg and I just emailed you several links supporting what I said and outlining U.S. support for Saddam during the 80's and even after when it had nothing to do with Iran but keeping a strongman in the region to support our interests, regardless of the fact that he used chemical weapons.

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization

??? I don't know. I didn't block you. I'm interested in seeing them.

And if you don't like insults from me ... then keep yours to yourself. I called you a multi-acct troll. I can back that up. You denying you've used two accts on these videos?

The only thing you know about me - is I think Galloway is a scumbag. And I don't share your opinions of the history that led up to this war. But I'm willing to listen to your arguments - if you drop the pompous lectures.

[Ruffneckization]

@klrdotorg these aren't pompous lectures, these are facts. Our government supported a sadistic monster who idolized Stalin and had anyone who resisted him killed. He used chemical weapons on thousands of iranians, and tens of thousands of his own people (mostly women and children) and we supported him through it all because we didnt care, we wanted a strongman in the region to replace the shah and pursue our interests...that doesnt disgust or bother you in the slightest?

[klrdotorg]

@Ruffneckization

Yes, pompous lectures. You lay out your narrative, and end your post with "that doesnt disgust or bother you in the slightest?" If all that is true ... of course it does - dickhead. That would bother me alot more than the "slightest". Check your bullshit tone and stop sounding like a prick.

I'm going to read your links and search others. I'll get back to ya when I get back to ya.

[Ruffneckization]

is it equally revolting for Donald Rumsfeld to go to Bagdhad just 6 months after according to Hitchens himself, Saddam first used chemical weapons, & also according to hitchens, for the US government to SUPPORT saddam in the 80's knowing he was using chemical weapons, and not caring? Then some of those SAME people years later in the Bush administration call for his ouster, launch a war, mishandle it causing hundreds of thousands of deaths?..if they had any shame, they wouldve resigned

[xarsshtey6]

Galloway is the business!

[Lion117]

8:57

[ivnmoreno]

It struck me as a surprise to see/hear Hitchens oversimplify the discussion of prowar and propeace to a point of being easily underminded by any group of my teenage students. Both men, have their points to discuss and they may have more in common than initially evident.

[humanaftertaste]

Aside from being frivolous and usually plainly wrong, Galloway is just a poor public speaker. STOP THE MONOTONE SHOUTING! GAH!!

[FlexMasterFlex]

I think every single thing you just mentioned is in fact the direct opposite. Good job.

[Jelperman]

Hitchens is lying about Cindy Sheehan. He claims she sent an anti-Semitic e-mail to ABC Nightline. ABC said they never received any such thing from her.

Of course pimping forgeries is Hitchens' M.O.

[theironlenin]

Galloway is a slobbering idiot. He has associated with, supported, and encouraged some of the most despicable people in recent history. He has spoken more kind words to and about Saddam Hussein, a sadistic murdering pyschyopathic dictator, than about George W. Bush, the democratically elected leader of the freest society in the world. He supports Taliban fighters more than American and British soldiers. What a disgusting human being.

[durbansouthafrica]

You chastise Galloway for "supporting" despicable people. How about America currently supporting the Saudi Arabian dictatorship? How about America supporting "President" Teodoro Obiang, the brutal dictator of Equatorial Guinea? How about America's CIA helping orchestrate the coup which ultimately resulted in Saddam's rise to power? How about America supporting Saddam through the height of his brutality? How about America's support for a host of tyrants and dictators throughout the years?

[grayabc1234]

I never claimed two wrongs make a right - there are lots of evil dictators in the world, but that doesn't make removing Saddam wrong. Hitch himself says that Bush Snr made a mistake allowing Saddam to stay in power in 91, we should have got rid of him then, but at least his son is prepared to rectify his dads error. ALso, I spent this afternoon reading a chapter of Nick Cohen's What's Left? book lamenting John Major's cowardice over Serbia, so I have no desire to defend all the West's decisions.

[paulclargo]

America is quite free yes but what about all the countries in the "third" world? They are not free because of American foreign policy, sanctions, The IMF, The World Bank, WTO etc.

George Bush and his gang of funded-mentalists have more blood on their hands than even Saddam...........

[grayabc1234]

I hate to point out the bleeding obvious but George Bush doesn't control the IMF, World Bank or WTO (unless you want to advance a very well-evidenced conspiracy theory). Even if (hypothetically) the US did control these organisations, they were all set up way before Bush's time so you can hardly blame him. The phrase that springs to mind is "give a dog a bad name"

[paulclargo]

I was speaking mainly about American foreign policy over the last 50 years or so.

I know that Bush has very little to do with The IMF, World Bank or WTO, I'm not into the crazy conspiracy theory thing, but he is to blame for the Iraq war. He lied and as a result many thousands of innocent people have died and will continue to die unless people start to wake up. I say put the dog down

[grayabc1234]

Yes, thousands of innocent people have died.... at the hands of immoral gangsters supporting the likes of Al Qaeda, the Ba'ath party and the Iranian fundamentalist, dictatorship government. To walk away from the Iraqi's and leave them to these butchers would be utterly reprehensible. It is US and UK forces that are trying to (re)build infrastructure, support Iraqi's in designing their own government where ALL groups have a share of power. I know who I'm supporting out of these two groups!

[paulclargo]

America has been dropping bombs all over Iraq onto innocent civilians and family gatherings with not even a hint of "terrorist" activity in these areas. Who are the butchers? The majority of Iraqi's dont want to live under occupation. They should be allowed to choice their own form of government and not pick between a few puppets that the Americans have chosen for them.

[theironlenin]

Any civilian casualties in Iraq by Coalition Forces are accidental and regrettable, whereas they are desired and purposefully perpetrated by the terroristic insurgents. The Iraqi government is not a 'puppet', it is a democratically elected representation for the Iraqi people-remember the purple thumbs? The very fact that Maliki is now making demands that run counter to U.S. wishes (troop withdrawal) shows that he is not a puppet (or at least, not a very good one).

[JACKtheRIPP3R189]

Well said sir.

[grayabc1234]

The idea that Iraqis are living under occupation is simply not true - I can't think of how, if the US was a selfish, nasty occupying force they would "allow" the US to have a diverse coalition government that even passed a law giving pension rights to former Baathists and have a constitution that prevents the passing of laws that contradicts Islam! The government of Iraq doesn't seem like the US' ideal choice to me. I have no knowledge of the bombings you talk about, care to elaborate?

[skipscobie]

Throughout the history of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (the World bank), the United States has been the largest shareholder and the most influential member country. U.S. support for, pressure on, and criticisms of the Bank have been central to its growth and the evolution of its policies, programs, and practices." -published in a book commissioned by the World Bank to recount its first fifty years of existence. STOP SCOFFING START RESEARCHING

[grayabc1234]

I don't dispute that, I just claimed that the US does not CONTROL the IMF and World Bank. Being the most influential member does not equal outright control, in the same way that Germany is the most influential member of the EU, it certainly doesn't "control" it.

[skipscobie]

if something can be "very well evidenced" and still be considered by you a "conspiracy theory", upon what basis do you form your opinions? or is what you really mean "I'll believe what I like no matter what the facts say"?

[theironlenin]

That's not true at all. Saddam Hussein was a brutal, genocidal, and pyschopathic dictator who flouted every conceivable international law. That's such a huge accusation to bring with little or no evidence on your side. And by the way, Bush did not lie, all the intelligence at the time supported the WMD assertions.

[Oceanica22]

Fact is, and that is always the problem for us normal people:

Both Hitchens and Galloway have their own agenda, they are selling their own cause and because of that are both very selective in what they say and do not say. So simply put: it is hard for us to find out the truth about things because really fair and honest people do not last a second, do not even get a real chance in the mainstream media.

[erik24077]

hitchens' line at 8:40 was a haymaker. lights out galloway

[grayabc1234]

Absolutely. Every time Georgie tries to say something vaguely intelligent, Hitch floors him and Georgie moves onto his next insult.

[meiitbe]

The fact that Amy Goodman is moderating this debate shows its liberal bias from the outset.

[curiosofsigns1234]

Somebody should tell George Galloway he's got a microphone.

[davidesugar]

quite so!

he always launches into this kind of evangelical style of lecturing.

[incubusdragon101]

Galloway relies on emotional content. His speaking style is molded on Adolf Hitler's rally speeches.

Hitchens makes some solid points, but I disagree with the invasion of Iraq...

There are simply too many other places in the world that needed seen-to before Iraq, and so the basis to invade was completely wrong at that time it occurred.

[GeorgeThePirateKing]

Someone needs to tell Galloway that the person who yells the loudest doesn't necessarily win the debate.

[allteesup1]

If George picks a subject he is usually undebateable.

His style adds weight to his facts and his forum is often outside public speaking which often requires projection.

[SourAlex85]

well i'm sure he is. maybe i should debate hitchens on the merits of 1930's swing jazz...

[rolotomassi78]

"You can no more win a war than win an earthquake." - Jeannette Rankin

[RuthieWeLoveYou]

Galloway is a great orator,but in a debate ad homineims have no value.....

[MichaelFrances]

Excuse me? Hitchens may be more articulate? What because he is a toff? Because he had many advantages which others don't have? Should this even come into the debate?

[meiitbe]

George Galloway is a fascist -coddling nitwit.

[requiemdexter]

Galloway's getting blown away here :)

[SourAlex85]

true.

[kakahass]

americans are asses but im iraqi and i testify that more than 50% of iraqis welcomed the USA even tho we knew they were using us for oil- freedom is more important than anthing and our young democracy shall prosper- god bless america and god bless a free iraq

[requiemdexter]

Your statement was complete and very respectable without the use of the word "god".

[kakahass]

point taken!

[morgandrim]

I can`t pretend to know much about world affairs, but it seems to me that war is utterly disastrous. It appears to be accepted merely because it is common. But it remains - to my mind - disastrous. I do not believe in any concept of `The Just War.`

[Dundee1961]

I would call hitchens the fuckwit but I would leave out the wit part ...the man(?) is a complete tool and as usual GG handed him his ass.....the simple question for all of us is was this worth 4000 American boys and girls lives ...hundreds of other coalition lives and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis........hussein and his sons were complete cunts ...the world is better without them bu=ut was the price woth it?

[genovesachx]

Galloway is a fuckwit. Just keeps yelling and pointing his finger, it's impossible for me to take him seriously. He's a crook who uses the weak anti-war left idiots to cheer on his braying. Not saying all left-leaning people are idiots, but the animals in the audience just prove how despicable and moronic they can be. Hitchens demolished Galloway in this one.

[bemmington]

No, Galloway is an honorable man who was not demolished by the ragged and despicable wretch named Hitchens. Hitchens may be more articulate, I'll give him that but -galloway has facts and morals on his side and that has proven to be quite helpful in the past.

[Sirwastealot]

Galloway is an exception, usually people who point out the truth are mild mannered and polite. In the world of politics, and now the world of media as well, such voices are laughed at or ignored. Galloway's aggressive manner is necessary to put his point across, listen to what he's saying and you'l find not one of his points is a fabrication or half-truth.

[dubzy81]

Galloway was throwing his dummy out of the pram.

[NuevoNumeroNueve]

Galloway has proven to be right and Hitchens backed a disaster.

[dubzy81]

Galloway looks like he's been studying Hitler's mannerisms.

[PinkoPapist89]

Ah the reductio ad Hitlerum! How...quaint.

[kloten]

George W Bush's grandfather looks like he had been sponsoring Hitler with American dollars.

[sjam042]

I completely agree.

Shouting, finger-wagging, populist ranting.

Dickhead.