Saddam is not that bad
Hehe. "At last someone from the AI left went overboard and said what they really mean. Time for some ass whipping inflamatory posts"
Sorry groverat. Just a funny tidbit from before Saddam played the Islam card. He really liked you christians out there.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in546287.shtml
Sorry groverat. Just a funny tidbit from before Saddam played the Islam card. He really liked you christians out there.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/...in546287.shtml
Comments
I sure wish some people would realize that allies can become enemies and vice versa over time, over situations that arise, etc. Those of you whose idea of a stellar argument against this war is to point out "yeah, but we helped him when..." apparently think that we should still be duking it out with Japan and Nazi Germany too?
Things change.
Originally posted by pscates
Things change.
Others don't.
Originally posted by Defiant
Others don't.
hehe
Originally posted by Defiant
Others don't.
Huh?
A danish reporter actually made a better article than this one based on the the same story. He interviewed the priest in the church who was very open and frank about it. Only when ithe was asked to comment on the big S and H on the side of the church he had problems expalining himself.
I hear them every single day, on TV/radio or in real life. That's why I wrote what I did.
Wasn't dinging on you at all.
Originally posted by pscates
Huh?
I don't know. I'm not hunting you down or anything, but I distinctly remember you writing a month or two ago that you were 'done with AO', and would not return. So it IS a bit of a deal-breaker to see you back. (don't hold this against me though.)
Originally posted by Anders the White
He really liked you christians out there.
Look, I haven't bothered to read your link, but I can imagine. At least he was western-minded enough to be the US' biggest friend in the oil-ridden middle East all through the eighties.
Originally posted by pscates
I wasn't talking to/about you, Anders, in my post above. I was referring to the article itself and for those here (and elsewhere) who constantly trot out the "yeah, but a decade ago, we..." argument.
I think it is an important issue to point out. We should be careful who we support now because it may blow back on us later. The only way to improve is to acknowledge past mistakes. (Not that this particular article has much to do with that, but we have supported Sodom in the past when we shouldn't have.)
Originally posted by BRussell
I think it is an important issue to point out. We should be careful who we support now because it may blow back on us later. The only way to improve is to acknowledge past mistakes. (Not that this particular article has much to do with that, but we have supported Sodom in the past when we shouldn't have.)
hmmm... pondering on all the countries getting US military aid at the moment. let's call it present mistakes...
Originally posted by der Kopf
I don't know. I'm not hunting you down or anything, but I distinctly remember you writing a month or two ago that you were 'done with AO', and would not return. So it IS a bit of a deal-breaker to see you back. (don't hold this against me though.)
I took a nice long 3-4 week break and posted in other forums because this place will make you old and gray before your time, especially lately. I can't remember if I said "never". If I did, then I'm big enough to cop to having broken that.
Fair enough? I won't weasel out of it with double-talk or engage in any sort of "what 'is' means" type of nonsense to cover my butt. Maybe I had my fill of things for a bit and took a relaxing break, but when war drew closer and I saw the staggering display of goofball, "give me more proof...okay, more...no, I want more...nah..." posts (the resident U.N. groupies are especially maddening) and "I know everything about everything because in my freshman year I took a class in..." armchair analysts, I just couldn't help but chirp in when warranted.
But there was indeed someone (I can't remember who) who did make a pretty stern blanket statement about leaving and not coming back. I can't remember who it was though.
In any case, what could you possibly care about it? I'll come and go as the mood hits me, you know? I go days without visiting and I go days where I post quite a bit. Just depends.
Originally posted by New
hmmm... pondering on all the countries getting US military aid at the moment. let's call it present mistakes...
New I noticed a few things and you seem to continue on a theme.
First it is as if you want America to fail at things. I would say I would never wish that on any European country.
Your Signature is very telling as well. I would even go out on a limb and bet money you are not against the War in Iraq like many of the 3 year olds that protest the war the world over and if the truth be known you are simply anti-American and anti-Bush.
??
I think the attitude you display with your hope of american mistakes showes a blatent hatred on your behalf. Sure I could be reading you all wrong but come on let's be honest? What is your motivation? Are you Anti-American? Anti-Bush?
I would hope that you could grow up a little if that is the case.
Fellowship
Originally posted by pscates
But there was indeed someone (I can't remember who) who did make a pretty stern blanket statement about leaving and not coming back. I can't remember who it was though.
Way back before the big blackouts in AI, I stomped outta here, saying 'I split' . . . when it was at the heighth of conservative-reactionariness . . . well . . .things have actually changed . . .now the conservatives have to defend in stead of merely attack everything the administration does . . .it was so silly
but I came back . . . though it is probably the worst decision i have ever made
Originally posted by fantastic happy dinner man
With the news this evening I just hope we capitalized on the lesson we learned in Afghanistan, the "snooze you lose lesson", and got the SOB wih the 4 JDAMs and the thread subject will be "Saddam wan't that bad"
Things change.
Yes they do. Saddam invaded Kuwait.
Why did Saddam invade Kuwait? A simple reason: Kuwait dumped oil on the world market in 1990, collapsing the price of oil. Iraq's economy in the meantime was shredded to the tune of $60 billion debt from the 8 year war with Iran (with US backing) and was unable to compete.Simultaneously Kuwait was slant drilling under Iraq's borders and stealing Iraqi oil. So, after numerous unheeded requests and demands to the Kuwaitis to quit, together with an assurance that if Iraq invaded Kuwait the US would not respond, .... in he went.
Whats the point of this little bit of history? Had Saddam not initiated the 1991 Gulf War, then it is more than likely that Iraq would still be on diplomatic terms with the US, WMD or no WMD. After all, during the Iran-Iraq war Saddam Hussein was gassing the Iranians on a daily basis, not only with the grace of the US but aided by our intelligence resources as well!
Is this war all about WMD then? Doubtful. Iraq now is under the ultimate threat: the elimination of their sovereignty under endless foreign occupation. Their military is in tatters, there's huge damage to their cities, 1100+ civilians killed in the first 3 weeks or so, etc etc....and have they used these WMD (if they exist even?). Uh...no. (not yet anyway....but it looks less likely with each passing day).
Is this war about the "liberation" of the Iraqis, and human rights concerns, you know...all that "moral stuff"?? Like hell its not. Since when did the US (government) suddenly include "human rights" as a factor in determining foreign policy? Who boycotted the ICC, when virtually *every* other nation on the planet signed it?
Is this war all about oil?
OK: One question: Honestly now, would the U.S. commit $100 billion a year, 350000 troops and alienate 80% of the rest of the planet in order to invade a nation whose main natural resources were, for example, olives and kumquats?