this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024

327 points (88.1% liked)

Microblog Memes

5778 readers

2322 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
Be nice.
No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

ReadyUser31@lemmy.world

aeronmelon@lemmy.world

327

To protect and seize (lemmy.world)

submitted 8 months ago by Linkerbaan@lemmy.world to c/microblogmemes@lemmy.world

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 78 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Why is misinformation from 2003 being spread again? American soldiers did seize a lot of gold but that but that gold was not taken from Iraq. It was given to the new Iraqi government.

2003 article about the gold. Edit: replaced link with a more detailed article.

Some of the "gold" wasn't even real (paywalled).

Government Accountability Office report.

[–] Dasus@lemmy.world 41 points 8 months ago

Some of the "gold" wasn't even real

I sort of guessed this. I mean, I might be wrong, but that one dude is holding — with one hand — what looks like a bar that's about 1.5-2 liters in size at least. Meaning like ~60kg (~130lbs).

Ofc I'm waaaay eyeballing it and might be wrong, but either those guys are stronger than they look or that's not gold.

[+] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -26 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Ah yes a bribe for the "new government" which was installed by America. This makes it better.

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 30 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Should they have given it back to Saddam Hussein?

[+] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

They should have not overthrown the Iraq government in the first place to install their own puppet regime.

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 21 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The war in Iraq was a mistake for multiple reasons, one of those being the fact that the USA didn't manage to establish an Iraqi government that was particularly friendly to it.

What does that have to do with the claim that the USA took that gold from Iraq, or the ridiculous implication that taking that gold motivated an invasion that cost about a thousand times more money than it is worth?

[+] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Occupation of Iraq (2003–2011)

A military occupation was established and run by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), which later appointed and granted limited powers to an Iraq Interim Governing Council. Troops for the invasion came primarily from the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, but 29 other nations also provided some troops, and there were varying levels of assistance from Japan and other allied countries. Tens of thousands of private security personnel provided protection of infrastructure, facilities and personnel.

Coalition and allied Iraqi forces fought a stronger-than-expected militant Iraqi insurgency, and so the reconstruction of Iraq was slow. In mid-2004, the direct rule of the CPA was ended and a new "sovereign and independent" Interim Government of Iraq assumed the full responsibility and authority of the state. The CPA and the Governing Council were disbanded on 28 June 2004, and a new transitional constitution came into effect.[1]

Sovereignty was transferred to a Governing Council Iraqi interim government led by Iyad Allawi as Iraq's first post-Saddam prime minister; this government was not allowed to make new laws without the approval of the CPA.

The Iraqi Interim Government was replaced as a result of the elections which took place in January 2005. A period of negotiations by the elected Iraqi National Assembly followed, which culminated on 6 April 2005 with the selection of, among others, Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari and President Jalal Talabani. Prime Minister al-Jaafari led the majority party of the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), a coalition of the al-Dawa and SCIRI (Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq) parties. Both parties are backed by Tehran, and were banned by Saddam Hussein.

an invasion that cost about a thousand times more money than it is worth?

OPEC disagrees with you.

[–] Tvkan@feddit.de 33 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm still surprised they didn't find any. Not that I think Saddam actually had them, but I thought they'd find them anyway.

[–] Hyperreality@kbin.social 21 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I'm honestly surprised they didn't find at least some squirreled away. Don't forget they had an active programme till 1991. Used them in the 80s. You have that many weapons, you'd expect to forget a barrel or two somewhere in a shed.

Means the UN destruction of what remained and regular inspections were actually thorough. IRC the Iraqis also claimed they'd destroyed some on their own, which apparently wasn't a lie.

Or perhaps they sold what they had left. IRC there were reports of a lot of transports to Syria before the war broke out. Would explain where Syria got (some of) its chemical weapons from.

[–] Cheradenine@sh.itjust.works 2 points 8 months ago

Well some of them were used against the Kurds, possibly the Marsh Arabs as well.

Still surprising there was nothing left though.

[–] FireTower@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago

Not going to lie if I was there I would've had to pull a Huel

[–] Delphia@lemmy.world 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I mean... if they did find any chemical weapons sitting on them and taking selfies might not be a good idea.

Just saying.

[–] Flumpkin@slrpnk.net 7 points 8 months ago

Hmm. Is money the weapon of mass destruction that will lead to the end of the world?

[–] UltraMagnus0001@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago

well, they might have switched to the gold standard