Lifted the following post from a discussion forum.

Enjoy the comedy, even though it basically replicates what we have in reality.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Q: Daddy, why did we have to attack Iraq?
A. Because they had weapons of mass destruction, honey.

Q: But the inspectors didn't find any weapons of mass destruction
A: That's because the Iraqis were hiding them.

Q: And that's why we invaded Iraq?
A: Yep. Invasions always work better than inspections.

Q: But after we invaded them, we STILL didn't find any weapons of mass destruction, did we?
A: That's because the weapons are so well hidden. Don't worry, we'll find something, probably right before the 2004 election.

Q: Why did Iraq want all those weapons of mass destruction?
A: To use them in a war, silly.

Q: I'm confused. If they had all those weapons that they planned to use in a war, then why didn't they use any of those weapons when we went to war with them?
A: Well, obviously they didn't want anyone to know they had those weapons, so they chose to die by the thousands rather than defend themselves.

Q: That doesn't make sense Daddy. Why would they choose to die if they had all those big weapons to fight us back with?
A: It's a different culture. It's not supposed to make sense.

Q: I don't know about you, but I don't think they had any of those weapons our government said they did.
A: Well, you know, it doesn't matter whether or not they had those weapons.We had another good reason to invade them anyway.

Q: And what was that?
A: Even if Iraq didn't have weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein was a cruel dictator, which is another good reason to invade another country.

Q: Why? What does a cruel dictator do that makes it OK to invade his country?
A: Well, for one thing, he tortured his own people.

Q: Kind of like what they do in China?
A: Don't go comparing China to Iraq. China is a good economic competitor, where millions of people work for slave wages in sweatshops to make U.S. corporations richer.

Q: So if a country lets its people be exploited for American corporate gain, it's a good country, even if that country tortures people?
A: Right.

Q: Why were people in Iraq being tortured?
A: For political crimes, mostly, like criticizing the government. People who criticized the government in Iraq were sent to prison and tortured.

Q: Isn't that exactly what happens in China?
A: I told you, China is different.

Q: What's the difference between China and Iraq?
A: Well, for one thing, Iraq was ruled by the Ba'ath party, while China is Communist.

Q: Didn't you once tell me Communists were bad?
A: No, just Cuban Communists are bad.

Q: How are the Cuban Communists bad?
A: Well, for one thing, people who criticize the government in Cuba are sent to prison and tortured.

Q: Like in Iraq?
A: Exactly.

Q: And like in China, too?
A: I told you, China's a good economic competitor. Cuba, on the other hand, is not.

Q: How come Cuba isn't a good economic competitor?
A: Well, you see, back in the early 1960s, our government passed some laws that made it illegal for Americans to trade or do any business with Cuba until they stopped being Communists and started being capitalists like us.

Q: But if we got rid of those laws, opened up trade with Cuba, and started doing business with them, wouldn't that help the Cubans become capitalists?
A: Don't be a smart-ass.

Q: I didn't think I was being one.
A: Well, anyway, they also don't have freedom of religion in Cuba.

Q: Kind of like China and the Falun Gong movement?
A: I told you, stop saying bad things about China. Anyway, Saddam Hussein came to power through a military coup, so he's not really a Legitimate leader anyway.

Q: What's a military coup?
A: That's when a military general takes over the government of a country by force, instead of holding free elections like we do in the United States.

Q: Didn't the ruler of Pakistan come to power by a military coup?
A: You mean General Pervez Musharraf? Uh, yeah, he did, but Pakistan is our friend.

Q: Why is Pakistan our friend if their leader is illegitimate?
A: I never said Pervez Musharraf was illegitimate.

Q: Didn't you just say a military general who comes to power by forcibly overthrowing the legitimate government of a nation is an Illegitimate leader?
A: Only Saddam Hussein. Pervez Musharraf is our friend, because he helped us invade Afghanistan.

Q: Why did we invade Afghanistan?
A: Because of what they did to us on September 11th.

Q: What did Afghanistan do to us on September 11th?
A: Well, on September 11th, nineteen men? Fifteen of them Saudi Arabians? hijacked four airplanes and flew three of them into buildings, killing over 3,000 Americans.

Q: So how did Afghanistan figure into all that?
A: Afghanistan was where those bad men trained, under the oppressive rule of the Taliban.

Q: Aren't the Taliban those bad radical Islamics who chopped off people's heads and hands?
A: Yes, that's exactly who they were. Not only did they chop off people's heads and hands, but they oppressed women, too.

Q: Didn't the Bush administration give the Taliban 43 million dollars back in May of 2001?
A: Yes, but that money was a reward because they did such a good job fighting drugs.

Q: Fighting drugs?
A: Yes, the Taliban were very helpful in stopping people from growing opium poppies.

Q: How did they do such a good job?
A: Simple. If people were caught growing opium poppies, the Taliban would have their hands and heads cut off.

Q: So, when the Taliban cut off people's heads and hands for growing flowers, that was OK, but not if they cut people's heads and hands off for other reasons?
A: Yes. It's OK with us if radical Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing flowers, but it's cruel if they cut off people's hands for stealing bread.

Q: Don't they also cut off people's hands and heads in Saudi Arabia?
A: That's different. Afghanistan was ruled by a tyrannical patriarchy that oppressed women and forced them to wear burqas whenever they were in public, with death by stoning as the penalty for women who did not comply.

Q: Don't Saudi women have to wear burqas in public, too?
A: No, Saudi women merely wear a traditional Islamic body covering.

Q: What's the difference?
A: The traditional Islamic covering worn by Saudi women is a modest yet fashionable garment that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes and fingers. The burqa, on the other hand, is an evil tool of patriarchal oppression that covers all of a woman's body except for her eyes and fingers.

Q: It sounds like the same thing with a different name.
A: Now, don't go comparing Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are our friends.

Q: But I thought you said 15 of the 19 hijackers on September 11th were from Saudi Arabia.
A: Yes, but they trained in Afghanistan.

Q: Who trained them?
A: A very bad man named Osama bin Laden.

Q: Was he from Afghanistan?
A: Uh, no, he was from Saudi Arabia too. But he was a bad man, a very bad man.

Q: I seem to recall he was our friend once.
A: Only when we helped him and the mujahadeen repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan back in the 1980s.

Q: Who are the Soviets? Was that the Evil Communist Empire Ronald Reagan talked about?
A: There are no more Soviets. The Soviet Union broke up in 1990 or thereabouts, and now they have elections and capitalism like us. We call them Russians now.

Q: So the Soviets ? I mean, the Russians ? are now our friends?
A: Well, not really. You see, they were our friends for many years after they stopped being Soviets, but then they decided not to support our invasion of Iraq, so we're mad at them now. We're also mad at the French and the Germans because they didn't help us invade Iraq either.

Q: So the French and Germans are evil, too?
A: Not exactly evil, but just bad enough that we had to rename French fries and French toast to Freedom Fries and Freedom Toast.

Q: Do we always rename foods whenever another country doesn't do what we want them to do?
A: No, we just do that to our friends. Our enemies, we invade.

Q: But wasn't Iraq one of our friends back in the 1980s?
A: Well, yeah. For a while.

Q: Was Saddam Hussein ruler of Iraq back then?
A: Yes, but at the time he was fighting against Iran, which made him our friend, temporarily.

Q: Why did that make him our friend?
A: Because at that time, Iran was our enemy.

Q: Isn't that when he gassed the Kurds?
A: Yeah, but since he was fighting against Iran at the time, we looked the other way, to show him we were his friend.

Q: So anyone who fights against one of our enemies automatically becomes our friend?
A: Most of the time, yes.

Q: And anyone who fights against one of our friends is automatically an enemy?
A: Sometimes that's true, too. However, if American corporations can profit by selling weapons to both sides at the same time, all the better.

Q: Why?
A: Because war is good for the economy, which means war is good for America. Also, since God is on America's side, anyone who opposes war is a godless un-American Communist. Do you understand now why we attacked Iraq?

Q: I think so. We attacked them because God wanted us to, right?
A: Yes.

Q: But how did we know God wanted us to attack Iraq?
A: Well, you see, God personally speaks to George W. Bush and tells him what to do.

Q: So basically, what you're saying is that we attacked Iraq because George W. Bush hears voices in his head?
A. Yes! You finally understand how the world works. Now close your eyes, make yourself comfortable, and go to sleep. Good night.

Good night, Daddy.

well afam

u have done it again, i just wish there are ways to get back at US for crimes they r committing to lesser economic powered countries

cos i dont see why cuba should be tortured and china goes free

9/11 was carried out by saudi's not afghanistanians so how come saudi's are home free and war is on the other side of town

this is fishy all with evil capitalist motives.

Osama Bin laden and his fourty "mytrs" carried out 9/11 attacks not the Saudi's. Afghanistan was attacked because the Taliban (who had imposed themselves on the Afghans) were housing him and his merry band.

Afghanistan is now in control of the Afghans. The Taliban are attempting to recapture the country again. There is nothing fishy about this.

@ topic,
I saw this already. it was interesting then and it still is now.

What a lovely satire! The papa was just contradicting himself!

Very interesting indeed! that's just America for you.

@Kaecy5,

Well done. I believe in facts because facts don't change and they don't lie.

I guess the number of contradictions and double standards clearly shown is so high that is has made it difficult for those that attack anyone that does not blindly sing the praises of the US to defend them or label correct issues as mere political correctness.

Afam,

RESPECT bro

Easyy:

Afam,

RESPECT bro

@Easyy,

Thanks and take good care of yourself.

We shall continue to spread information based on truth, facts and devoid of unnecessary bias, sentiments and sometimes outright lies.

Enjoy.

Well said Afam.
The concept is simply brilliant! Only one question though,
What can be said on Nigeria's foreign policy?

firestar:

Well said Afam.
The concept is simply brilliant! Only one question though,
What can be said on Nigeria's foreign policy?

Well, I am neither a politician nor a government worker so will always state my position based on what I see and believe which may not be entirely correct.

In my views our foreign policies are many but I believe the present government has been consistent even though such consistentcies are not to the benefit of the common man in Nigeria which is a shame.

It seems the government is interested in pleasing the international community while relegating to the background the needs of the common man.

All in all, in the international arena, I believe Nigeria has been a responsible nation that has used its position well when compared with the US.

I wish Nigeria will focus on making life better for the majority of its citizens just like countries like China, Venezuela are doing.

Again, these are views of an ordinary Nigerian living in Nigeria and should be treated as such.

well afam
if u claim the Nigerian international policies are favoring the international society
is it the international society or the American govt?

well cos i think Nigerian govt have yet not realized the intentional act by the foreign community to continue to confuse the govt and make them ride on with their poverty enhancement schemes.

i wonder why we would pay our foreign debt when there are a lot of things to do with monies back home

if i might ask does America pay back its debt or it just prints dollars from its backyard?

America's debt is staggering
And they are most likely never going to pay it.

@nilla

now u see the politics of deceiving the black man

i just wonder why our leaders at times make me sick

now they r in the process of nominating news leaders to succeed them, that wont blow their ass out

do u think there is any need to vote anymore

The total debt of the US some 2/3 years ago was well over 7 trillion dollars.

Are they interested in paying? I don't think so just as they are getting free oil outside of the US because all they need do is print more dollars for your oil.

Part of Saddam's wahala started when he threatened to trade Iraqi oil in a non dollar denominated curreny.

Today, the US is concerned about China and I couldn't believe my ears when someone said that China could destabilize the world economy if it decided to trade in any currency other than the dollar.

Why is the US so concerned?

On the issue of Nigeria's foreign policies, it is actually more to please the Western powers than the international community but by not being like Britain it has attracted a decent level of respect, at least OBJ opposed the illegal invasion of Iraq, a move that prompted the US embassy to close its doors for some days and withdrew the so called military assistance it cliamed it was rendering to Nigeria.

The US and even Britain do survive on the sweats and bloods of people outside the US and Britain.

That is why it goes against any country that refuses to take orders from the White House but partners with even known dictators and military heads of states.

@ afam

I'm genuinely surprised we have a foreign policy as in do we have people who actually sit down and formulate what it should be?
No disrespect to my country but our voices are not even heard in the intl community (for reasons we all know) and less so now especially as the US is preoccupied with its 'war on terror' and North Korea and co's nuclear issues. But as soon as they need Africa's support, they should come peddling back I guess.

@OdBr,

I share your sentiments on Nigeria's foreign policies as regards whether we have a solid structure in place that takes time to formulate them.

I still prefer the present positions that Nigeria as a country has taken on some issues anyway in the international stage, from opposing the US led invasion of Iraq to maintaining peace in the continent and the peaceful resolution of the Bakkasi wahala.

I guess things naturally favour us in this country, the only problem being lack of purposeful leadership.

On a lighter note, I believe the best brains we have may be selling pure water on the streets or turning to violence due to a systematic deprivation that face them through no fault of theirs.

On a lighter note, I believe the best brains we have may be selling pure water on the streets or turning to violence due to a systematic deprivation that face them through no fault of theirs.

Selling pure water is ok. What does Dangote sell? Mere sugar! It's all about dedication and scale.

Turning violent is not ok. Criminals will always find something to blame their actions on.

Selling pure water is a legitimate business. Turning violent is criminal. Don't talk as if they are basically the same.

Seun:

Selling pure water is ok. What does Dangote sell? Mere sugar! It's all about dedication and scale.

Turning violent is not ok. Criminals will always find something to blame their actions on.

Selling pure water is a legitimate business. Turning violent is criminal. Don't talk as if they are basically the same.

You cannot compare Dangote with the pure water seller on the street, can you?

On the issue of violence, while I agree that criminals will always find something to blame their actions on, it is equally important that you realize that circumstances, opportunities or outright deprivations may act as catalysts in turning people into criminals.

I don't know where you got the following from as I cannot remember comparing the two let alone even remotely implying that they are the same. You may read my post again to be sure.

Don't talk as if they are basically the same.

@ Afam,

Afam:


On the issue of violence, while I agree that criminals will always find something to blame their actions on, it is equally important that you realize that circumstances, opportunities or outright deprivations may act as catalysts in turning people into criminals.

If i get you right, you seem to be against the Invasion of America into some of these countries, how then will you explain the fact that if Americans had not invaded Afghanistan, Iraq, the level of suicide bombers been trained by the terroist groups in this various countries could have escalated? Taking into consideration your outlined quoted statement above outright deprivations may act as a catalyst in turning people into criminals in this case SUICIDE BOMBERS?

Waiting for your reply.

@Mrpataki,

For the simple fact that not a single suicide attack ever took place in Iraq before the illegal invasion of that country and today it is a haven for recruitment of suicide bombers goes to show that the illegal invasion was a complete disaster. And yes, a lot of people are opposed to the illegal invasion including some Americans and the last mid term elections still proved that many are not happy with it because it has increased the level of insecurity the world over.

In the interim, under the Taliban, the sale of opium reduced from Afghanistan but today we are seeing increase in sales.

mrpataki:

@ Afam,
If i get you right, you seem to be against the Invasion of America into some of these countries, how then will you explain the fact that if Americans had not invaded Afghanistan, Iraq, the level of suicide bombers been trained by the terroist groups in this various countries could have escalated? Taking into consideration your outlined quoted statement above outright deprivations may act as a catalyst in turning people into criminals in this case SUICIDE BOMBERS?

Waiting for your reply.

well mr mrpataki

i think u have been brain washed by the American media and now u also think America is correct in its fake policies

well if i might ask can we get the data during Bill clinton, then we would really know if the sale of opium and alike did increase then or it only increased now?

during Clinton tenure the world was more of a safe haven but today bush had turned the world into a jungle

America should get out of iraq they dont have rights to dictate to people wat kind of democracy they should practice cos in most countries democracy does not apply

perhaps we should try American democracy on the British monarchy system

perhaps we should try American democracy on the British monarchy system

you dream too much

the British monarchy is "just there" they don't make laws _{they just say sign papers and drink tea with biscuit actually- ambassadors}

i think the British foreign policy is far better than the American before George dubbya bush came along

LoverBwoy:

you dream too much

the British monarchy is "just there" they don't make laws _{they just say sign papers and drink tea with biscuit actually- ambassadors}

i think the British foreign policy is far better than the American before George dubbya bush came along

British foreign policy has been much better than American foreign policy since the arrival of George Bush in the white house. That explains why Americans are much more likely to be attacked by foreigners than British citizens despite the fact that British government fully participated in the immoral, illegal and unjustified attack on Iraq.

LoverBwoy:

you dream too much

the British monarchy is "just there" they don't make laws

One cannot dispute the hidden powers of the Monarch. Yes, they don't make laws but the lawmakers are loyal to them. It is an extension of indirect rule and they can't get rid of that. Uncle Tony would not have been the Prime Minister without the Queen's sanction. Thinking otherwise is just being oblivious of the system.

All hail the queen.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. ~ Plato

Ynot:

We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. ~ Plato

Very so true. If I may add to the last part: The real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the truth.

Still on foreign policy, why is the West not asking for Saddam not to be executed as it normally does when people they like are sentenced to death?

Iraq re-introduced the death penalty in 2004 to pave way for a certain death for Saddam andit seems ok for the US that has held Saddam for 3 years even throughout the trial process that sentenced him to death.

But the world seems to speak out when Libya sentenced to death some Bulgarians that were responsible for transmitting HIV to children in Libya even though the medical workers claimed the children contracted the virus from unhealthy surroundings (strange explanation).

The death penalty wont vanish after the death of saddam
The country should follow their own law

If the west speaks out against the death of people they like, that doesnt mean those countries will obey them. I think it is proper for US to hold him during the trial process.


@Ynot
Uncle tony wouldnt have become PM if the PEOPLE didnt vote for him! the monarchy dont choose leaders for the country-not in this era anyway!

Q: why didnt America speak up about the military coup in Fiji

@Afam,

Still on foreign policy, why is the West not asking for Saddam not to be executed as it normally does when people they like are sentenced to death?
Iraq re-introduced the death penalty in 2004 to pave way for a certain death for Saddam andit seems ok for the US that has held Saddam for 3 years even throughout the trial process that sentenced him to death.
But the world seems to speak out when Libya sentenced to death some Bulgarians that were responsible for transmitting HIV to children in Libya even though the medical workers claimed the children contracted the virus from unhealthy surroundings (strange explanation).

How can you compare these two situations?  They have nothing in common at all.  The former is a case of proven ethnic cleansing and genocide, while the later is a case of possible victimisation. If you follow the stories, you will realise that the Doctors and Nurses, who usually swear to protect and save lives, confessed to injecting the ill-fated patients with HIV under torture. They still maintain their innocence up until today.
Libya's motives really needs to be examined closer in this situation. They have said they will only let the professionals go if their countries will pay up some millions in damages to the affected families. Now does that sound like people seeking justice or blackmail? The Bulgaria Government refuses to pay any money, rightly claiming such action will only be an admission of guilt.

TayoD:

@Afam,How can you compare these two situations? They have nothing in common at all. The former is a case of proven ethnic cleansing and genocide, while the later is a case of possible victimisation. If you follow the stories, you will realise that the Doctors and Nurses, who usually swear to protect and save lives, confessed to injecting the ill-fated patients with HIV under torture. They still maintain their innocence up until today.
Libya's motives really needs to be examined closer in this situation. They have said they will only let the professionals go if their countries will pay up some millions in damages to the affected families. Now does that sound like people seeking justice or blackmail? The Bulgaria Government refuses to pay any money, rightly claiming such action will only be an admission of guilt.

That is not exactly true because in some places around the world,death sentences are withdraw by THE families of the victims in return for some form of repatriations. Libya cant just throw cases out because they are foreigners the law of the country have to be followed atleast they've gone through the appeal process.
At the same time libya is contributing money with some other countries to fund the treatment of the victims.