What is Digg?278 Comments
- GhostsAwake, on 12/11/2007, -47/+221We destabilized Afghanistan over box cutters. We killed and displaced millions of Iraqies over slingshots and tacks???? Wonder what Iran has???? Butter Knives?
- blacklouis, on 12/11/2007, -6/+106Worse... Iran has the spork!
- Napoleone, on 12/11/2007, -15/+112Alas... the incontrovertible truth of Saddam's diabolical plans for world domination finally surface. He was gonna go Dennis the Menace on us!
Poor Iraqis. - barryiggins, on 12/11/2007, -15/+75Yeah, you're laughing now... just be grateful we stopped him before he could deploy those weapons along with the secret stockpile of stealth ninjas inside US borders.
- DeadRooster, on 12/11/2007, -5/+50Just think if they had discovered the sick combination of loading the tacks into the slingshots--it may have changed the entire course of the war.
- lhbaker, on 12/11/2007, -3/+45Looks like the arsenal from Ben Hur.
- tugger, on 12/11/2007, -5/+46the knife and fork was invented in persia, so it's unlikely they'd adopt sporks. Sugar tongs, however, may be enough to trigger Bush's middle-east-domination part 3. What I'm wondering is whether chopsticks weilded by the chinese are enough to cause the same response. Was it Karate kid who used them to catch flies? Man, thats dangerous... but then the chinese have no oil do they..??
- imnojezus, on 12/11/2007, -7/+46I don't know about this one, it seems like it's being taken out of context. To me, it looks like he's inspecting confiscated weapons. Saddam's ego was FAR too big to be proudly displaying something like this unless these weapons were used in a failed protest or crushed uprising. I think we went to war on false pretenses, but I don't think this is evidence of that.
- MerryMortician, on 12/11/2007, -4/+39Listen.. in the right hands.. those knives could... spread violence!
- ashlvsya, on 12/11/2007, -12/+41Looks like Al Qaeda in the background and a nuke to me /Fox News glasses on
- Boddhistava, on 12/11/2007, -5/+33Mission accomplished
- SoundJudgment, on 12/11/2007, -4/+31The Soviets saw that very video and sent real guns and mortars over to Iraq out of pity. ;)
- Terr01, on 12/11/2007, -1/+27AFAIK it is real--I guess Saddam told his guys:
"When the Americans invade, we need a way to conduct a guerilla war and arm the populace to drive them out. But I don't trust that much of the populace, so we can't just give them guns, because we need the guns so that we can get back to power afterwards. Give me options!" - rpi22, on 12/11/2007, -1/+24why do you think they lost?
- betterth, on 12/11/2007, -1/+22I can't believe it's not WWIII !
- inactive, on 12/11/2007, -13/+31This cant be a real video .... can it?
- inactive, on 12/11/2007, -5/+22Actually, in terms of pure standard of living, the sad thing is that the Iraqis WERE better off under Saddam - evil and vicious dictator that he was. The invasion of Iraq has led to more deaths of innocent civilians than were killed by Saddam in over 30 years. Under Saddam, the Iraqis had fresh running water, functioning educational facilities, electricity and other amenities that they *still* do not have now. There were no insurgent gangs roaming the streets massacring people (because Saddam had them all killed or imprisoned). There was no Al Qaeda in Iraq under Saddam, they were opposed to him and him to them. Women were allowed to wear western clothing and to be employed as professionals in medicine, law, etc, in fact Hussein had them in his cabinet. So, really, insane as it sounds, the Iraqis were in fact better off under Saddam. That is how badly this war has been prosecuted. A total disaster for everyone - oh, except the US military manufacturing sector and Halliburton (and other contractors).
- inactive, on 12/11/2007, -4/+20Good thing he was stopped before he acquired nunchuck technology.
- donte, on 12/11/2007, -1/+16They sent them back though because they weren't quite sure which end of the gun the thumb tacks went in.
- Murdats, on 12/11/2007, -2/+17maybe they wouldnt want to shoot americans if the poor iraqis hadnt had their families raped and murdered, then let off scott free by americans.
- edzilla, on 12/11/2007, -1/+15You probably are more at risk of being shot by blackwater guys...
- robberry, on 12/11/2007, -0/+14What stealth ninjas? I don't see any stealth nin-- ACK!
- Mongo61, on 12/11/2007, -1/+15The real question: If Saddam had Weapons of Mass Destruction, WHY DIDN'T HE USE THEM? "Ok, I've stockpiled chemical and biological weapons, but I'll hold off using them until after I'm hanging from a rope."
- inactive, on 12/11/2007, -1/+14Totally wrong. Hussein allowed inspectors in. U.N. weapons inspectors entered Iraq on November 27th, 2002. They searched for illegal weapons, finding few and only minor violations, "no evidence that Iraq was pursuing a nuclear weapons program," and "no mobile facilities for producing weapons." (source: Arms Control Today, the publication of the Arms Control Association, citing UN Weapons Inspector Hans Blix).
Weapons Inspectors only left Iraq in March 2003 when the U.S. told them to leave, because an American attack was imminent. They had not yet completed their work.
Bush tried to bluff Saddam with the weapons inspection deal. Saddam allowed them in, but Bush, pissed off, effectively spluttered "but but but it's too late!" and attacked anyway.
If anyone tells you different, they are lying. - Deomonte21, on 12/11/2007, -5/+18ok...so we have some sharpened jacks, a wrist rocket slingshot, and a water balloon launcher. I wasn't aware you could buy your army's tactical weapons in the sporting goods section at Wal-Mart.
- steveoco, on 12/11/2007, -24/+37That country was better off under Saddam, diplomacy, maybe using Saddam could have been an alternative to the terrible situation the country now faces.
Bush really has blood on his hands. - inactive, on 12/11/2007, -0/+13Sarcasm tag? no? I find it hard to parse sarcasm these days, seeing as how some people seem to be utterly dumb as *****.
- DeviantDragon, on 12/11/2007, -6/+18Okay, I think most people can agree that the fighting in Afghanistan was more justified and more complex than just "box cutters."
- inactive, on 12/11/2007, -1/+13Oh SNAP!
- Delphium226, on 12/11/2007, -2/+14he looks like yo momma!
- stevetro, on 12/11/2007, -3/+14The war is over and we did win it. It's the OCCUPATION that we're having a hard time with.
- Delphium226, on 12/11/2007, -5/+16Nice theory there. However, on Planet Earth, Saddams WMD were destroyed in 1991 and by subsequent UN inspections. Read the Duelfer report: -
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A121 ...
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/duelfer/ - dafragsta, on 12/11/2007, -2/+13No, they have our money.
- inactive, on 12/11/2007, -3/+14I've read some pretty dumb statements on digg in my time.. but that one really is outstandingly stupid. Congratulations. I just hope that you were being sarcastic and forgot the tag.
- scottmoss, on 12/11/2007, -9/+19Wrong...Wrong.... This was a video of weapons that were confiscated from "dead" Anti-Saddam activists. That is if you really want to know the truth...
- lesosso, on 12/11/2007, -1/+10no they don't!!!
- Dumbledorito, on 12/11/2007, -0/+9Yes, and let us not forget how fearsome the Iraqi air force was when we invaded.
- Mongo61, on 12/11/2007, -0/+9I remember a story as we were gearing up for war late in 2000. The Iraqis were buying up PlayStation 2's and linking them together to build a missile guidance system.
No, I'm not ***** you.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20 ... - noots, on 12/11/2007, -0/+9did anyone else "lol" when he fired the catapult at the door?
- theaceoffire, on 12/11/2007, -0/+9I am so sad that your right.
- whisperedlie, on 12/11/2007, -0/+9you mean the *few* MiG-29s they had, right? the ones that were mostly unusable because they didn't have the parts or training to keep in working (much less, combat) condition?
- GiggleStick, on 12/11/2007, -6/+15Can someone who speaks their language please translate what they are saying into English. This is obviously not the Iraqi Army's state of the art weaponry. I hear him saying "molotov" when holding the glass bottle. I'm assuming that they are reviewing the weapons found with some dissidents (believe it or not one or two Iraqis were against Sadaam before we invaded). You see, the dissidents would only have these kinds of weapons, because regular citizens were not allowed to have guns, lest they revolt against Sadaam's iron grip. Now that I think about it though, you guys are right. It is pretty funny thinking about those oppressed Iraqis longing for freedom enough to risk torture and death to fight against Sadaam. I'll be chuckling about that all day.
- inactive, on 12/11/2007, -3/+12LLLLLIBERALLLLSSSS!!!
Damn, boy, do you know how ***** retarded that sounds?
All of the ***** sold to Saddam by the US (and yes, it was real, we have the receipts!) were destroyed either by us during the first Gulf War, or by Saddam himself in order to avoid sanctions. It was clear to all observers long before 2003 that Saddam's arsenal had been wiped out. Both Colin Powell and Condaleeza Rice stated that he was no threat in 2001 (before Bush and the Neocons decided it was expedient to say that he *was* a threat, as a justification for attack, a bit later). This does not mean that he did not receive arms from the US during the Iran-Iraq war, which ended in 1988. Wars tend to deplete weapons.
Nice try, though. - atchon, on 12/11/2007, -1/+9not sure if anyone else mentioned this, but this was actually like a promotional video of some of the weapons Saddam wanted to get into the hands of Iraqis so they could fight the Americans once the Iraqi army had failed. This is also a really old video this came out I think right after the invasion.
Funny nonetheless - aroundtown, on 12/11/2007, -2/+10Weapons of Major Disappointment.
- inactive, on 12/11/2007, -0/+8In the spirit of the Holiday season
"You'll shoot your eye out kid" - Delphium226, on 12/11/2007, -0/+8or armored horses
- inactive, on 12/11/2007, -0/+8After Kuwait, the West destroyed the Iraqi military, which never recovered. During sanctions, the UN repeatedly shelled and bombed Iraq. The Iraq-Iran war had been over since 1988.
So they were left with sweet ***** all. More than what we see on display here, and no doubt this video is something other than what it appears to be, but the weapons available to the Iraqis did not amount to very much compared to the US, and they were certainly no threat to their neighbours, let alone America or Europe (their pitiful SCUD missiles could barely even make it into Israel during the first Gulf War, after which they didn't have any)
Next time, try doing a little cursory research before spouting off a load of garbage. It's a bit more of a challenge, at least. - Delphium226, on 12/11/2007, -0/+8i win ;>
- rpi22, on 12/11/2007, -1/+8The US has nukes and we are the only country that has been insane enough to use them. We've also been responsible for the worst holocaust in history, the genocide of 10 million native americans. And then there's slavery...
Perhaps if we weren't constantly threatening Iran (and arming Israel with nukes and stuff) they wouldn't feel that they needed nukes to protect themselves from one of the largest hypocrites in history.
Plus, we overthrew their democratically elected government and install the Shah over oil. Then we wonder why they dont like us... -
Show 51 - 100 of 273 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is