Tweet
I'm short-sighted? And you think Saddam just flys airplanes himself and sprays DU and causes cancer, poisons water and food supplies etc.???
Good old Uncle Sam put Saddam in power long time ago, while he obeyed you. As a matter of fact you feared another Iran and you'd rather have him and stop the spread of Islam.
here is an ok source for a Saddam Bio, i just got it off the first thing on a google search:
However, the US did 'support' his regime early on because he was enemies with Iran, and as the old axiam goes, 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'. How would Saddam further the spread of ISlam, and why would America care? Islam is the fastest growing religion in our country and thats great. I think you are refering to radical Islam, and if that be the case, then again, we were choosing the lesser of two evils at the time.
One of the ways CNN describbed backwardness under the Taliban regime was its maltreatment of women, who were beaten and forced to wear veils over their faces and were banned from education etc. Not a single change has happened under the new regime.
) and I have seen numerous stories on the betterment of so many peoples lives. Of course not everyone is happy, but no one ever is, and alot of people are upset or disappointed. But I am quite certain there have been significant changes for the better since the Taliban was deposed. To deny this is rediculous. Ill get some sources later, if you wish, but I havent the time presently.
Have YOU ever lived under sanctions? I guess not so don't even think on basing an argument purely on that Saddam could divert more money in infrastructure when there is no way of making an income or importing essential goods. And the ways shipments of medicines for cancer and similar diseases has been banned because chemicals used in them could be turned into weapons makes me sick.
Let me ask you somethn. Are you aware of why there are sanctions on Iraq for such items as medicines??? Those sacntions were added after Saddam expelled the arms inspectors, because without the arms inspectors in the country there would be no way to keep tabs on Saddams WoMD manufacturing. This being a major threat to the US we have to hinder his progress as best as possible by denying him access to these products. It is very, very sad indeed
. But it is ALL Saddams fault. He never had to kick the UN inspectors out, and he can always invite them back at anytime. But he doesnt cause he can care less about his own people and cares more about his precious WoMD.
Because a trully democratic regime wouldn't care less about your interests and would not let its country be manipulated by corporate power. Plus placing another dictator wouldn't be the first time.
Please. Our closest allies are democracies and they all care about Americas interests just like we care about theirs because this is an interconnected world. We are all on the same team. But if you wish to believe your fanciful little conspiracy theories of the evil corporate Americans then go right ahead.Though I can recall many occasions that the US has backed dictators, because, again, they were the lessor of two evils, I cannot recall a single time the US has deliberately placed a dictator in power.
But AMAZINGLY, I can recall many, many times where we have set up democracies, and it has worked out in our best interests almost everytime, with the exception of a few. Such would include the Philopeans, Japan and Germany (two of some of the most prosperous nations today, may I add
), Cuba (that was ok for about 50 years, until the communists seized power), and alot more.
quote:
hmmm, lets try to blow things out of proportion just a little more, ok?
Stating the facts in the way the rest of the civilized world sees it doesn't mean blowing things out of proportion.
hmmm, lets try to blow things out of proportion just a little more, ok?
Stating the facts in the way the rest of the civilized world sees it doesn't mean blowing things out of proportion.
I graciously said that the number of children that die each month is roughly the same as the number of civilians killed on 9/11. Not to mention the rest of the adult population. And their deaths are partically if not mostly caused by the US army. Yeah, radiation and cancer just happen out of poor standards of living, right?
IIRC, 1 in 3 people will get cancer (at least in the US, i dunno if that is a world wide stat). Thats alot, and cancer happens almost regaurdless of the standard of living. Of course in more developed nations where there are restrictions on carcinoginic chemicals that helps make the cancer rates drop when compared to developing nations that use pesticides and such like DDT that has been long banned in many developed nations. Plus better water quality, etc helps too.
I dont understand why you mention radiation?
THAT IS A LOAD OF BLATTANT LIES I need only state that in Bosnia and Serbia (including Kosovo) cancer rates have soared since the "humanitarian" interventions. And any number of deaths by this way is inhumane IMO.
If depleted uranium is so radioactive, then how do explain the normal occurance of cancer in the Tank crews of MI-A1 abrhams who work next to an entire cache of the stuff???
Same exuses you use in every war you get involved in. When Yugoslavia was bombed, on the news there were claims that there were mass arsenaries of weapons in hospitals, schools and factories. I watched one NATO missile bomb video on how the bomb aproached a building that was a typical Belgrade block of flats - later on, the video was shown no more and no one uttered a word of its existence.
.You shouldnt forget, either, that the US is only one member of NATO...
Im not denying that innocents died by the hand of NATO...but...no...you are right... we should of let the Serbs continue to ethnically clense thousands... what were we thinking???
I read a report some while ago about an Iraqi family of shepherds who had a gathering in a valley, and they were bombed to bits by the US aircraft. Yeah, sheeps had uranium-rich wool I should think. Of course, this was never mentioned by the media.
Ya know if this ever happened, AL JAzeera and countless anti-American publications around the world would of been all over it. But if one believes something so strongly, another can do nothing to change that.
Kman
he wouldn't......
)
Comment