Re: OT Big surprise

On Jan 24, 2:13 pm, traveler_...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jan 24, 1:57 pm, woland99 <wolan...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Jan 24, 12:16 pm, traveler_...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

On Jan 24, 10:34 am, Alex <apeche...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

no funnier than how the left overlooks the torture, lack of human
rights, treatment of women and byzantine economics of these terrorist
countries. I thought the left was supposed to be carrying the banner
for civil rights but you guys really seem to prefer to overlook these
little impediments in favor of trashing your own country.

No problem. The torture, lack of rights, treatment of women and
byzantine economics can be quickly remedied by an incompetent invasion
and some carpet bombing.

The invasion was incompetent, no doubt about it. The positive side is
Iraq has an elected parliament now. A flawed one but they have it.
They've been given an opportunity to build a representative
government. Maybe it can't work and we never should have tried to
overthrow a despot and give a very important country with an educated
populace the opportunity to develop. I am extremely upset at how it
was handled and about the lying and lack of leadership by Bush and
Cheney and Rumsfeld when things really went off the tracks there. The
cost in men material and treasure is appaling. I do believe that there
was a humanitarian and military basis to justify taking Saddam out.
The world community should have come together to find a way of dumping
him instead of taking his bribes and looking the other way while he
sponsored terror and torture and thumbed his nose at the UN about the
weapons inspections. He was a beast and many Iraqis wanted him out
but they had no way of getting rid of him. Clinton enforced a no fly
zone against Saddam Hussein for his entire presidency just to make
sure he didn't attack anyone else. I guess you lefties are probably
against the war in Afghanistan too. Perhaps you'd like to see the
Taliban with all their violence and repression back in power
supporting al qaeda.

Key word is ROI - Return On Investment.
Sure we "take out" any evil dictator in the world. But we are
not world policemen or some sort of charitable big brother.
Unless you take care of your own best interest first and maintain
a sound defensive ability then everybody is a loser. Our attack
on IRAQ and removal of Saddam made IRAN into a regional superpower.
And there is NOT much we can do about it at this point. We blew it.
So as much as Saddam was evil - big picture is IRAN is a bigger
threat than Saddam ever was (if at all). And we WASTED hundreds of
billions dealing with IRAQ - our position against IRAN is much
weaker.
You are fishing when you insinuate that "we lefties" were against
Afganistan too. Your statement like:> Perhaps you'd like to see the Taliban with all their violence
and repression back in power supporting al qaeda.

betrays classic propaganda tactic to bait opponent into discussion
of BS emotional issues. So you will have to forgive me that I will
not address it. It is nonsense and you know it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I'm not baiting with propoganda tactics btw... I'm stating an opinion
that many of Bush's critics are oblivious to the real world and prefer
to criticize him rather than come to terms and develop solutions on
how to deal with real threats. You may be right that we helped Iran by
blundering into Iraq but it has also sent a message -especially post
911 - that we will get in the face of countries that engage in state
sponsored terror against us.

The MAIN sposor of terrorism in the world is Saudi Arabia - to the
tune of couple billions a year. And we do not do shit about it.
I mean literally NOTHING. Not a word of criticism. Is Bush oblivious
to that fact or was IRAQ just a smokescreen to draw attention and
post 911 anger off the Saudis? If you have a shred of intellectual
honesty in you then the answer should be obvious.
And yeah IRAQ was a supporter too - Saddam sent few checks for $5000
to families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Big deal.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Iraq Is the War on Terror
    ... The Bush administration evidently believes revisiting the case for toppling Saddam Hussein is a political loser. ... The president's poll numbers are plummeting, largely due to the success the opposition has had in portraying Iraq as a misadventure — a diversion from the "real" war on terror, disintegrating into a chaotic mess of dubious nation-building. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Iraq Is the War on Terror
    ... As the administration stays curiously mum, ... toppling Saddam Hussein is a political loser. ... terror, disintegrating into a chaotic mess of dubious nation-building. ... and has since allowed Iraq to be etched as the ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • support or oppose ending of Saddams reign of terror?
    ... Saddam studied and built on Hitler's and Stalin's police states. ... Saddam ran the whole show in Iraq with respect to ... government-run reign of terror over ... 113 Kurds Are Found In Mass Grave ...
    (soc.religion.quaker)
  • Wearing down the West
    ... THE war on terror, the long war, just now is going badly. ... It has established a vitally important new base in Iraq. ... secretary of state Rich Armitage told me that the danger of Saddam co- ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Re: OT Jerry "Foot-in-Mouth Falwell
    ... Did Saddam have links to al Quida? ... You do realize that the major-majority of politicians today are ... They say that Iraq has 100 billion barrels of oil. ... countries have switched to Euros, ...
    (alt.sports.basketball.nba.la-lakers)