Bush Family History -- The Money Trail

[Defiant]

troubles today gunkulator.

[Sava]

Simple question Sava: Are the Iraqis better of now? Yes or no?

They were better off under Saddam pre-Gulf War I. I'd say they are the same now as they were pre-Gulf War 2. Whether the future will be better, that will remain to be seen. Things aren't looking good.

BTW, you do know Truman is the guy that bomber Japan with nukes, how's does that sit with your ideology.

I don't think dropping the bombs was necessarily a mistake. I think it saved a lot of American lives, and it certainly kept the Soviets at bay.

C'mon Sava, it has been only weeks since the war ended, it takes time to rebuild, you know better than that, and the Americans are still doing it while facing remenants of the Saddam regime. Didn't you hear #4 was caught today.

American soldiers and Iraqi children are still dying.

[Sava]

Oh god. Not again, Sava. I couldn't care less about GWB.

Blame Defiant. He challenged me in the other thread to provide proof of my assertion. Game set match...

anyways, nobody forced you to come to this thread.

[Defiant]

Ah Sava,
Saddam was witholding billions for the oil and food program and that was killing more children, you can't honestly believe they are not better off now. I don't see the 10's of thousands of Kurds or Shiites dying anymore, do you. So far the New Iraq future is weeks old, you really can't even preview it in under a year, if you do, what makes you think so????

Also there are alot of liberals that don't think we needed to bomb Japan, but that is for a different thread.

[Defiant]

I am only challenging you to better yourself and seek the truth, it is out there, and if you don't watch FOX I must pick up the slack.

[gunkulator]

Originally posted by Sava
They were better off under Saddam pre-Gulf War I. I'd say they are the same now as they were pre-Gulf War 2.

I see. So the 375,000 Iraqi casualties from the Iran/Iraq war plus the 100,000 dead Kurds plus Kuwait losses plus whatever the cost would have been when Saddam invaded Saudi Arabia - all of these pale in comparison to the evilness of the Americans? You are simply amazing, Sava.

Why is it so hard for you to admit that maybe, just maybe, GWB might have done a good thing for these people? Not for the right reasons, surely not, but overall a positive thing for their nation. Look, I don't like Dubya either. Didn't vote for him. Didn't support his stupid adventurous wars. But you seem to have some personal issue with the guy.

American soldiers and Iraqi children are still dying.

People are murdered everyday. Gangland killings in NYC and LA take a daily toll too but I don't hear you screaming "anarchy" over it.

[Sava]

You guys seem to forgetting that life in Iraq wasn't so bad before the first Gulf War. Their economy was good, there was little poverty, and despite Saddam's US FINANCED WAR with Iran, the people were better off. You guys can red herring yourself into little tizzies all you want, but facts are facts.

[Defiant]

Sava,
I would disagree with you on Iran-Iraq war, I believe the soldiers probably didn't like it nor their families and the Kurds were gassed in 1988 prior to the first gulf and we would have probably left him alone except the wingnut went into Kuwait and if we hadn't acted, Saudi was probably next, they were no match for his army at the time.

With the exception of the Bahgdad, Tirkut the rest of Iraq was pretty much poor.

[Sava]

Sava,
I would disagree with you on Iran-Iraq war, I believe the soldiers probably didn't like it nor their families and the Kurds were gassed in 1988 prior to the first gulf and we would have probably left him alone except the wingnut went into Kuwait and if we hadn't acted, Saudi was probably next, they were no match for his army at the time.

Are you disagreeing with the fact that the US helped finance the war with Iran? Or the need to fight Iran? IIRC, Saddam started that war.

I should clarify something, when I say life was better pre-GulfWarI, I'm referring to Iraqi's, not the Kurds or any other oppressed ethnic group. Of course Saddam was bad, evil, etc... I'm glad he's dead. But I'm not giving Bush credit for "liberating" Iraq when Reagan and his daddy was the reason he survived so long in the first PLACE!

[/endthreadjack]

future postings should be about the topic, and not Saddam or the Iran/Iraq war. Or the current War... there are enough threads for that. And I will not respond to further off-topic posts

[Defiant]

Sava,
this is about the topic, you are trying to crush Bush with misleading facts and you are continuing it. I never denied we supported Iraq in the Iran war but Saddam at any time could have quit. Shiites or Kurds are under the Iraqi flag, so they are all Iraqi's, you can't change the facts to just fit your ideaology. You even posted "facts are facts", make sure you believe in the right ones, don't let ego interfer. Don't fall into that liberal demeanor of creating facts to fit yourself.

[Kidlicious]

He's a baby eater.

[Sava]

What's misleading about fact's surrounding the Bush's previous Nazi dealings? Prescott and George Herbert Walker Bush helped the Nazis? What's misleaing about that?

Perhaps you mean "the truth hurts" :

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Sava
IIRC, Saddam started that war.

Wrong as usual.

[Sava]

The Iran-Iraq War permanently altered the course of Iraqi history. It strained Iraqi political and social life, and led to severe economic dislocations. Viewed from a historical perspective, the outbreak of hostilities in 1980 was, in part, just another phase of the ancient Persian-Arab conflict that had been fueled by twentieth-century border disputes. Many observers, however, believe that Saddam Hussein's decision to invade Iran was a personal miscalculation based on ambition and a sense of vulnerability. Saddam Hussein, despite having made significant strides in forging an Iraqi nation-state, feared that Iran's new revolutionary leadership would threaten Iraq's delicate SunniShia balance and would exploit Iraq's geostrategic vulnerabilities--Iraq's minimal access to the Persian Gulf, for example. In this respect, Saddam Hussein's decision to invade Iran has historical precedent; the ancient rulers of Mesopotamia, fearing internal strife and foreign conquest, also engaged in frequent battles with the peoples of the highlands.

Saddam invaded... FACT!

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/iran-iraq.htm

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Sava
Saddam invaded... FACT!

Ruhollah Khomeini, on the other hand, was determined to extend his revolution across the Islamic world, starting with Iraq. By late 1979, Tehran was pushing the Kurdish and Shiite populations in Iraq to revolt and topple Saddam, and Iranian operatives were trying to assassinate senior Iraqi officials. Border clashes became increasingly frequent by April 1980, largely at Iran’s instigation.

Iran provoked the invasion.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/wwwboard/walts.html