5 ms·

> Congrats, number one stupidest comment I have ever seen on HN. Pointing out facts (which you go on to agree with) is the stupidest comment you've seen on HN?

> Congrats, number one stupidest comment I have ever seen on HN. Pointing out facts (which you go on to agree with) is the stupidest comment you've seen on HN? And, you know, "people" speak out against everything so that's not really a valid point -- "unnamed people said UN sanctions against Iraq were a war crime, news at 11..." > Just don't talk about subjects you know nothing about or speak for the Iraqi people you are not a part of. I was just talking about my personal experience dealing with the good people of Iraq (in my previous comment not the one correcting you for "talk[ing] about subjects you know nothing about") during and after the second invasion, who's speaking for them? But, anyway, pointless discussion...

cncrnd 8y ago
>Pointing out facts (which you go on to agree with) is the stupidest comment you've seen on HN? My apologies for the misunderstanding, I was referring to the original comment in which the US was the savior of the Iraqi people. >And, you know, "people" speak out against everything so that's not really a valid point -- "unnamed people said UN sanctions against Iraq were a war crime, news at 11..." This article has some names of notable critics, searchable as well. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/magazine/were-sanctions-right.html https://mobile.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/magazine/were-sanction... >I was just talking about my personal experience dealing with the good people of Iraq during and after the second invasion You are an American, perhaps ex military? My only explanation for this is that the people who talk to you on the subject are self selecting, giving you a biased view of the situation. I can certainly say that what you propose is a narrative that even some of the most ardent war hawks from the bush era wouldn't claim. It's not a pointless discussion to me. It can be useful to someone reading this thread in the future to have different viewpoints and decide who they agree with.

cncrnd 8y ago

>Pointing out facts (which you go on to agree with) is the stupidest comment you've seen on HN? My apologies for the misunderstanding, I was referring to the original comment in which the US was the savior of the Iraqi people. >And, you know, "people" speak out against everything so that's not really a valid point -- "unnamed people said UN sanctions against Iraq were a war crime, news at 11..." This article has some names of notable critics, searchable as well. https://mobile.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/magazine/were-sanctions-right.html https://mobile.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/magazine/were-sanction... >I was just talking about my personal experience dealing with the good people of Iraq during and after the second invasion You are an American, perhaps ex military? My only explanation for this is that the people who talk to you on the subject are self selecting, giving you a biased view of the situation. I can certainly say that what you propose is a narrative that even some of the most ardent war hawks from the bush era wouldn't claim. It's not a pointless discussion to me. It can be useful to someone reading this thread in the future to have different viewpoints and decide who they agree with.