Angelo dela Cruz (Merged threads)

[boydapa]

paano kaya kung si yebo yun hostage
edi yari na mukha ata walang tutulong....

[ajb0613]

join ako sa discussion :-)

Sabihin ko lang, ako proud to be Pinoy, nakaka desisyon na para sa sariliing interest ( kung ano man yun :-) ).

Palagay ko medyo nakakahiya mga Kano at gobyerno nila, parang high school bully eh, ini-ignore nila UN, occupied/bombed Iraq dahil meron daw WMD, eh wala naman. So, either kasinungalingan yun para sa kanilang interes or palpak sila magtrabaho. Tapos ngayon i-bully tayo dahil sa pull-out. Tignan natin kung parusahan si Bush ng mga Kano sa election nila, or tuloy ang "kahihiyan" nila. ;-)

[boydapa]

ako rin basta ang importante desisyon natin yun at wala tayong pakialam kung magalit ang america o hindi.

sumoporta ang malaysia sa decision natin. sana dumami pa ang mag lakas ng loob...

malamang naiconsider din nila arroyo yan re election ni bush mukha kasing paalis na sya for good dahil sa mga kapalpakan nya. grabe dahil sa kanya umabot sa 25 gas natin

[roninblade]

finally, how can you speak of "putting yourself in the shoes of the Iraqis?" how do you know the true sentiment of the Iraqi people? what we know of Iraq we mostly got from American media... and that is worth a very long thought. American media serves America first and the Iraqis last.

then dont tell me that you understand what these so called freedom fighters are fighting for because we can never know. not unless we talk to them face to face.

my words may have been misworded, or i didnt explain myself clear enough. im not saying "what if the us puts its sight on yet another country". im talking about what has already happened not what is going to happen or what could've happened. and im not telling you to guess what the iraqis are feeling. im telling you to put _yourself_ in their shoes and decide what _you_ would feel like. that's what i did, and that's what im asking you to see.

that is why America should never have gone to Iraq. that is why the Philippines should never have gone to Iraq.

this is already a moot point since the line has already been crossed. although i agree that it is never a good reason to invade another country on the pretense of helping them in an internal problem.

[Wouie]

Sa mga opinyon nyo na nabasa ko, ako ay sumasang-ayon kay yebo. Bakit nga ba hinostage si Angelo?

Ang mga taong sinasabi nyong mga terorista ay mga mamamayang Iraqi na sumusuporta o mga dating tauhan ng dati nilang president na si Saddam. Sila ay mga Muslim na galit sa mga Amerikano at may matindi silang dahilan kung bakit. Sa totoo lang hindi man lahat pero 8 out of 10 na mga Muslim ay galit sa mga Amerikano at yan ang katotohanan. So lahat ng papanig sa America ay kaaway na rin nila. Kaya nga nanghohostage sila ng mga mamamayan ng sinumang bansang may mga sundalo roon bilang kapalit ng pagpapauwi sa mga sundalo nila. Kaya naman pag nagmatigas ang isang bansa, patay ang hostage.

Sa pagpapauwi ng Pilipinas sa mga sundalo nila, hindi lang si Angelo ang maliligtas rito (na karamihan sa inyo ay syang iniisip). Bakit lagi nyong sinasabing "bakit kailangan nating mag pull out kapalit lang ng buhay ng isang hamak na Pilipino" hindi nyo ba alam na buhay ng lahat ng mga OFW na nasa middle east ang nakataya rito. Ang pag pull out natin ay di nangangahulugan ng pagsuko natin sa mga militante kundi sa pagpapahalaga sa buhay ng bawat OFW doon. Ano ba ang kabutihan sa ating bansa kung mananatili ang mga forces natin doon? Magulo ang Iraq dahil may mga bansang nakikialam at nagpapagulo. So pabayaan na lang natin silang magpatayan ng mga Amerikano.

Ngayon, kung wala na roon ang mga sundalong Pilipino sa palagay ba nyo'y hohostage pa sila ng isang Angelo kapalit naman ng pagpullout ng mga Amerikano? Di ba hindi, sa halip maaaring isa na namang Amerikano. Kung titigil naman tayo roon baka marami pang OFW ang susunod. Hindi mga Pilipino ang kaaway ng mga militanteng ito kundi mga Amerikano so bakit kailangan nating magsakrepisyo.

Kaguluhan muna sa bansa ang dapat isaayos bago pumasok ng panibagong gulo.

[mazdamazda]

Originally posted by Wouie
Kaguluhan muna sa bansa ang dapat isaayos bago pumasok ng panibagong gulo.

America, South Korea, Bulgaria, Poland and the other countries that form part of the humanitarian contingent also has their own problems. the problem with that thinking is that we are being too selfish to see the other problems countries have. right now, Iraq is on the edge - wouldn't you want to do something to help? even if it means that we have just a token force (which hardly contributes anything realistically) it just just for moral and psychological support.

if that was the thinking of the Americans during World War II, the whole of South East Asia would already be speaking Niponggo now and mainland Europe would still be flying the colors of Germany.

if China invades Spratly islands right now - to whom would we running to? I'll give you one guess.

by the way, pardon if I answered your Filipino comment in English - am just more comfortable writing in English.

[mbt]

but why support an unjust war? that is the essential question. it is greed that sent that token force over there -- in the hope that America will give the Philippines juicy, but tainted, spoils of war -- and not a desire to help Iraqis.

Iraq is on the edge, true. but it is because of Bush's war that precisely it is on edge. we have no business in Iraq.

and again, the situation of World War 2 was very different and is hardly an adequate parallel. did Iraq threaten to dominate half the world in 2003? The answer is no.

[mazdamazda]

unjust? just read below on the summary of the atrocities committed against the Iraqi people... Marcos looks lame when compared to him!!!

==============

Fact Sheet
Office of the White House Press Secretary
Washington, DC
April 4, 2003


Life Under Saddam Hussein: Past Repression and Atrocities by Saddam Hussein's Regime


For over 20 years, the greatest threat to Iraqis has been Saddam Hussein's regime -- he has killed, tortured, raped, and terrorized the Iraqi people and his neighbors for over two decades.

When Iraq is free, past crimes against humanity and war crimes committed against Iraqis, will be accounted for, in a post-conflict Iraqi-led process. The United States, members of the coalition, and the international community will work with the Iraqi people to build a strong and credible judicial process to address these abuses.

Under Saddam's regime many hundreds of thousands of people have died as a result of his actions, the vast majority of them Muslims. According to a 2001 Amnesty International report, "victims of torture in Iraq are subjected to a wide range of forms of torture, including the gouging out of eyes, severe beatings, and electric shocks ... some victims have died as a result and many have been left with permanent physical and psychological damage."

Saddam has had approximately 40 of his own relatives murdered. Allegations of prostitution are used to intimidate opponents of the regime and have been used by the regime to justify the barbaric beheading of women. There have been documented chemical attacks by the regime, from 1983 to 1988, resulting in some 30,000 Iraqi and Iranian deaths.

Human Rights Watch estimates that Saddam's 1987-1988 campaign of terror against the Kurds killed at least 50,000 and possibly as many as 100,000 Kurds. The Iraqi regime used chemical agents to include mustard gas and nerve agents in attacks against at least 40 Kurdish villages between 1987-1988. The largest was the attack on Halabja which resulted in approximately 5,000 deaths. o 2,000 Kurdish villages were destroyed during the campaign of terror.

Iraq's 13 million Shi'a Muslims, the majority of Iraq's population of approximately 22 million, face severe restrictions on their religious practice, including a ban on communal Friday prayer, and restriction on funeral processions.

According to Human Rights Watch, "senior Arab diplomats told the London-based Arabic daily newspaper al-Hayat in October [1991] that Iraqi leaders were privately acknowledging that 250,000 people were killed during the uprisings, with most of the casualties in the south." Refugees International reports that

"Oppressive government policies have led to the internal displacement of 900,000 Iraqis, primarily Kurds who have fled to the north to escape Saddam Hussein's Arabization campaigns (which involve forcing Kurds to renounce their Kurdish identity or lose their property) and Marsh Arabs, who fled the government's campaign to dry up the southern marshes for agricultural use. More than 200,000 Iraqis continue to live as refugees in Iran."

In 2002, the U.S. Committee for Refugees estimated that nearly 100,000 Kurds, Assyrians, and Turkomans had previously been expelled, by the regime, from the "central-government-controlled Kirkuk and surrounding districts in the oil-rich region bordering the Kurdish controlled north."

"Over the past five years, 400,000 Iraqi children under the age of five died of malnutrition and disease, preventively, but died because of the nature of the regime under which they are living." (Prime Minister Tony Blair, March 27, 2003) Under the oil-for-food program, the international community sought to make available to the Iraqi people adequate supplies of food and medicine, but the regime blocked sufficient access for international workers to ensure proper distribution of these supplies. Since the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom, coalition forces have discovered military warehouses filled with food supplies meant for the Iraqi people that had been diverted by Iraqi military forces.

The Iraqi regime has repeatedly refused visits by human rights monitors. From 1992 until 2002, Saddam prevented the UN Special Rapporteur from visiting Iraq. The UN Special Rapporteur's September 2001, report criticized the regime for "the sheer number of executions," the number of "extrajudicial executions on political grounds," and "the absence of a due process of the law."

Saddam Hussein's regime has carried out frequent summary executions, including:

4,000 prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in 1984;
3,000 prisoners at the Mahjar prison from 1993-1998;
2,500 prisoners were executed between 1997-1999 in a "prison cleansing campaign;"
122 political prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib prison in February/March 2000;
23 political prisoners were executed at Abu Ghraib prison in October 2001; and
At least 130 Iraqi women were beheaded between June 2000 and April 2001.

[Sleeper]

Found this on the net:



:D

[mbt]

perhaps, but i don't see how that gives the US the right to play cop. the UN fits that role more properly.

Marcos was a tyrant as well, but he was coddled by the Americans. why the double standard then?

oh well, i suppose we agree to disagree hehehe

[wowiesy]

mahirap talaga ang situation na to, kahit anong side ang kunin, siguradong may dire consequences... and choosing the lesser evil isn't easy since judging the lesser evil has a lot to do with each one's perceptions and priorities...

my take:

1. pulling out at this time - timing really sucks! sayang... even if we can argue na we pulled out not because of the terrorists demand, there will always be the perception that we did it because of the terrorists demands...

2. all the featured interviews regarding OFWs choosing to risk life and limb to work overseas rather than seeing their family starve to death is oh so noble... but when sh*t hits the fan (like what's happening now), the first thing that comes to mind is to bring him home... at least for this case we can bring him home... but what about the other OFWs in other countries who are facing life - threatening conditions? may pondo ba ang Pilipinas para ibalik silang lahat? at kung maibalik ba sila, mananatili ba sila dito? i guess not... wala ngang trabaho dito.. kaya sooner or later, babalik uli sa abroad...

3. the comment regarding the local militants is also right on! it's true that the current system we have sucks... but expressing their sentiments against each and every issue isn't enough.. all those expressions of indignation is worth nothing if they don't provide alternatives and make those alternatives work! puro dakdak lang .. pero wala naman silang binibigay na solution... puro pagpapabango sa mga sectors na kanilang "nire represent".. para saan? for them to be in power.. look at how many seats they have now via partylist...

4. local media coverage - again.. they prefer to do it closer to the hearts of the filipino public.. the very passionate and emotional theme... i'm not saying na huwag i feature yung emotional side (the family left here, etc).. but at least naman, give equal time to the other effects... our standing on the international community, the possible effects in our economy... the media is a good vehicle for education... sana wag laging i sensationalize ang issues... educate the masses... lumalala man ang educational system natin.. at least sana naman makatulong ang media natin para tumalino ang pilipino... pero sa nangyayari... iba eh...

[Wouie]

mazdamazda

So what kung maging selfish tayo, at least bayan natin ang tutulungan natin at di yong pakikialam sa iba na ni sarili nating gulo ay di natin maisaayos-ayos. Hindi mo pwedeng icompare ang America, sobrang powerful nila kaya kahit sino pinakikialaman nila. Kahit pa daang libong sundalo ang ipadala nila sa ibang bansa napapanatili nilang matahimik ang bansa nila. Isipin nyo yong mga rebeldeng kaaway ng pamahalaan, bakit napakarami pa rin nila. Nangangahulugan lang na kulang sa gawa ang ating gobyerno.

Sa palagay nyo ba nakakatulong ang mga sundalo natin sa mga Iraqi. Nadon sila para tulungan ang America na patayin ang mga tauhan ni Saddam habang ginagamit ang dahilang "peacekeeping " ang layunin nila. Bakit di nyo tanungin ang mga Iraqi kung safe sila ngayon habang naroroon ang mga sundalo ng ibat-ibang bansa. Sabi nila mas maayos pa ang buhay nila nong panahon ni Saddam kesa ngayon. Yong mga taong nagsasaya nong mahuli si Saddam ay di mga tunay na Iraqi kundi mga dayuhang naninirahan sa Iraq.

Pasensya na rin kung tagalog itong post ko, sawa na ako sa ingles. Ito rin ang isang bisyo ng mga Pilipino, sa pakikipag-usap nila gusto agad mag-ingles para class ang dating. Tingnan nyo ang mga politiko, sa mga meeting nila pilit ingles ang sinasalita kahit namimilipit, na kayang kaya namang sabihin sa tagalog. Mas mahaba pa ang oras na sinayang sa pagsasabi ng "eh, ah eh" sa pagitan ng bawat salita. Pag di gaanong magaling mag-ingles tinatawanan. Bakit kailangan nilang mag-ingles eh pilipino naman ang kaharap nila. Sorry kung tamaan kayo.

[yebo]

originally posted by mazdamazda:

"if that was the thinking of the Americans during World War II, the whole of South East Asia would already be speaking Niponggo now and mainland Europe would still be flying the colors of Germany."


nah! the americans would have gone to war with the japanese even if the japs did not bomb pearl harbor.

the question in world war II was not whether america did us a favor by defeating japan and thus declaring us free in july 4, 1946. the question was whether america could afford an asia dominated by japan. that is why they defeated the japanese in papua new guinea, indoneisa, malaysia, thailand, burma, philippines, formosa, china, and korea. that is why they dropped the A-bomb on hiroshima and nagasaki. the americans could not afford an asia dominated NOT by them.

besides, try not to read history the way it was written by america. they knew about pearl harbor before it happened. kating-kati na sila sumali sa gyera, they needed an excuse. same as when they needed an excuse when they allowed one of their ships to be bombed in cuba to go to war with spain and wrestle spain's colonies. to prove that the americans was eager to go to war with japan, there is a wreck in the mouth of subic bay (forgot the name of the ship) that was being readied by the americans to go to shanghai in 1941 so that the japanese can sink it. that was their first option of excuse to go to war with japan.

but of course you will not see that in any american history book. they will never admit that they prepared that ship that is now a wreck in subic bay. they will never admit they knew about pearl harbor before it happened. history, afterall, is written by the victors.

sabihin nyo na naman anti-american gulpihin ko na kayo! :-)


now about talking face to face with "so-called freedom fighters", or so-called terrorists...

until 1988 my view of arabs, and specially palestinians, was the typical Golan-Globus bad guy chuck norris was born to annihilate. but then i went to saudi arabia and lived there for a year. i worked with palestinians. sure i was scared of them on the first day. the second day not so, and they eventually became my friends. let me tell you the story of one particular guy, his name is ali hussein.

ali hussein's family was a typical palestinian family, big, extended (parang pinoy din ano, big, extended). ali was studying to be a doctor in the UK. his whole family was also planning to emigrate, if not to the Uk then to the US. he said he was very much pro-west that time. he was married, 1 baby girl. his wife and baby lived with his parents and brothers and sisters in lebanon. one day, he told me, the israeli planes came flying over their house and dropped a bomb. his entire family was killed. he had to go home from london to bury not just one, but his entire family.

when i met him in riyadh in 1988 they (i mean the plo) were just driven out of lebanon. they had been allowed into saudi arabia to work. ali had 3 scars made by bullet wounds in his body. he was, and he admitted it, what the world would call a terrorist. he said he had planted bombs in israel, shot israeli soldiers on patrol, even killed an israeli he chanced upon in lebanon with a knife.

i asked him once if given the chance he would turn himself into a suicide bomber. without hesitation he answered "yes". i asked him again "so you hate the israelis so much huh?" again without hesitation he answered. but he answered in the negative. he does not hate the israeli people. he is at war with the "zionist". by that he meant israelis who believe that their land (palestine) was part of the promised land and therefore part of israel.

hirap intindihin ano. but of course that was about palestine. and it could be very well different with iraq. or is it? could it be that those people who you now call "terrorist" lost someone when the americans bombed baghdad in 1991 or 2003?

(maybe now also you see why i have a different opinion on those iraqi "terrorists".)


on the war in iraq being just...

there is one war being fought in iraq now that is justified. it is the war that the "terrorists" are waging to free their country from all foreign domination. any war of independence, no matter who the enemy is, is just.

the americans, on the other hand, no longer believe in that war. just read the news, majority of the american people now want their troops to come home.

and here we are debating that our troops should stay.

[Karding]

sabihin nyo na naman anti-american gulpihin ko na kayo! :-)

:hihihi: yari tayo dito....haha

Originally posted by mbt
perhaps, but i don't see how that gives the US the right to play cop. the UN fits that role more properly.

Marcos was a tyrant as well, but he was coddled by the Americans. why the double standard then?

oh well, i suppose we agree to disagree hehehe

They US didnt want to play world cop. But most countries have appointed them to do so. They are a world cop, not by choice.

If you have time to read:

I'm not going to get into a history lesson. The short, short version is
that the League of Nations (established after WW I to prevent wars) failed
to stop Mussolini's Italy from invading and conquering Ethiopia. It failed
to stop Japan from invading and conquering Manchuria and much of China.
Their committees wrung their hands spoke in platitudes but did absolutely
nothing to stop war.

At France's coaxing Britain's prime minister Nevil Chamberlain met with
Adolph Hitler in Munich and surrendered the Sudetenland to Nazi Germany in
the interest of "peace in our time." The French and British watched as
Germany took Austria, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia. They all had committee
meetings and wrung their hands and talked of peace.

World War II erupted when Nazi Germany invaded Poland. Britain had a
mutual defense treaty with Poland so they couldn't escape. They declared
war on Germany. Germany had a mutual defense treaty with Japan so Japan
declared war on Britain. France wet their pants and surrendered to Germany
as fast as they could and gleefully shipped all the Jews they could find to
death camps in Germany to prove to Adolph that they really were on the side
of Germany.

Japan attacked the United States and, because of Japan's mutual defense
treaty with Germany, Germany declared war on the United States.

Up until December 7th and the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, a large
number of our people were wringing their hands and saying, "Appease Hitler.
He is really a good guy who just needed a little more land for his
expanding population. The dear man just wants peace. And World War II was
in full swing leaving better than 50,000,000 people dead including about
450,000 American soldiers and sailors.

Three cheers for the League of Nations!


After World War II it was decided to do the whole thing all over again.
This time we would call it the United Nations and we will have committee
meetings and hand wringing parties and make sure peace prevails throughout
the land.

While that august body wrung hands the Soviet Union split Germany, invaded
Poland and Yugoslavia, Rumania, Hungary and Bulgaria along with Latvia,
Lithuania and Estonia. The peaceful world saw Korea with 37,000 American
soldiers killed, over 1,000,000 South Korean soldiers and civilians killed
and the country nearly destroyed.

Since then we have had over 50,000 American soldiers killed in Vietnam and
have fought wars in Somalia, Herzegovenia, Panama, Granada, plus the Gulf
War when Iraq invaded Kuwait.

We should have gone into Baghdad and taken out that evil regime then but
the United Nations would have no part of that. All they would allow was for
us to chase the Iraqis out of Kuwait, then peace would prevail.

Now, here we are with Saddam violating all 17 United Nations resolutions
while he has massed poison gas and bio weapons.

He is frantically trying to develop a nuke and his buddy, Kim Jong-Il of
North Korea may give him a few. (It was the United Nations who prevented us
from taking North Korea when the war was hot and we had the means to do it.)
Peace!!!!!!!! Sure.

France is wetting their collective pants in fear that the United States
will take Saddam out and along with him, France's 60 billion dollar
contracts with Iraq. Russia hedges because Iraq owes them 6 billion dollars
that they sorely need.

In answer to your question....... hell yes we should go to war with Iraq.
We should have done it six months ago. We should also get out of the United
Nations. Can you believe that the United Nations has appointed Iraq and
Syria to head up the United Nations Disarmament Committee? Can you believe
they have appointed Libya to head up the Human Rights Committee?


All three of these countries are on the UN List of Terrorist
States..........Absolutely unbelievable.

Just don't get me going. Throughout recorded history the only time peace
has prevailed is when the good guys have militarily whipped the bad guys.
Who are our best friends in the world? Japan because we whipped them.
Germany because we whipped them. Italy because we whipped them. Britain
because we whipped them.

UN doesn't fit the role. How many times do we need a resolution for Saddam? 14 resolutions have to be made. But yet, he failed to comply. Why did Saddam kicked the UN Inspector from continously monitoring and inspecting their so called Nuke Power Plant for electricity use in the late 90's? Why did Saddam waited for 14 resolutions? If you have nothing to hide, why not comply?

[Karding]

quotes from Wouie's post:

Magulo ang Iraq dahil may mga bansang nakikialam at nagpapagulo. So pabayaan na lang natin silang magpatayan ng mga Amerikano.

Ang ganda ng pananaw mo sa buhay kapatid. Sana pinabayaan lang din tayo nung unang panahon ng mga kano, 'no? Sana, pinabayaan na lang din ng US ang Taiwan, ang Kuwait to name a few.

Ang pag pull out natin ay di nangangahulugan ng pagsuko natin sa mga militante kundi sa pagpapahalaga sa buhay ng bawat OFW doon.

in denial ka pa na hindi pagsuko sa militante ang ginawa ni GMA? Sana kunin or pauwin nyo na 3,000 OFWs in Iraq kung kaligtasan ng mga Pinoy ang gusto nyo. At sana, may mapakain si GMA sa mga OFW na uuwi.

Ang mga taong sinasabi nyong mga terorista ay mga mamamayang Iraqi na sumusuporta o mga dating tauhan ng dati nilang president na si Saddam. Sila ay mga Muslim na galit sa mga Amerikano at may matindi silang dahilan kung bakit.

The terrorists who held Angelo as a hostage does not represent the country of Iraq. Alam mo ba ang background history ni Saddam? Nakaka bwiset ulitin pero paki-research na lang kung ano ginawa ni Saddam sa sarili nyang tao. To say that those people who have held Angelo as a hostage is NOT a TERRORIST, a pure ignorance at its fullest.

I just hope that what GMA did will not turn the Philippines into something like CUBA. Where the US or not one country cares about their economy and well being.

[RedHorse]

Lupang Hinirang, our national anthem, at one point last night, I almost sang the last line with gusto:

ANG MAPAHIYA NANG DAHIL KAY ANGELO

the original line is:

ANG MAMATAY NANG DAHIL SA IYO

[boydapa]

grabe akala ko sa situation na ito magkakaisa na mga pilipino di pala hati pa rin---di nakakapagtaka wala tayong nararating.. pugot kng pugot, uwi kung uwi. kung magkakaroon ng pagkakataon at pupunta ako sa gera ayoko sumama sa isang bansang nangiiwan...gusto ko we go as one, we leave as one(unless magpaiwan ako).. some branches of the military have that principle/code

napatunayan ko rin na sa kahit anung situasyon sarili ang unang iniisip ng pilipino...

[mazdamazda]

tapos na ang debate!!! hahaha!!!

Angelo was deposited safely in the UAE embassy there...

Philippines, get ready to be terrorized by these kinds of empty threats again.

[zero]

lumaya na pala si angelo.


pwede na ulet pabalikin ang tropa ng pinoy siguro? hehehe... :D

[RedHorse]

we have a walking $6 Million Dollar Man

or let's put it:

$6 Million Dollar worth of SONA