Some Perspective . . . .

[Nikolai]

Originally posted by Sava


Of course it wouldn't. Why would the US bother supporting him before he was in a position to take control of the government?

America would have supported any Joe Schmussein who was in a position to become dictator. It's not like they gave a crap about Saddam one way or the other. But the fact remains, once he was in a position to take control of the government and it was clear that he would be friendly to US interests, they supported him.

Did you bother reading what I replied to? No? Thought so.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Patroklos


No, not by any stretch of the imagination.

Ok, but Rumsfeld and Saddam sure became good buddies after his own rise to power in Iraq in spite of Saddam's inhumane crimes against his own people.

[Dis]

Iraq just wasn't meant to be a whole country. Though I don't think dividing it up would be good either. People would just fight over territorial lines.

[Patroklos]

But the fact remains, once he was in a position to take control of the government and it was clear that he would be friendly to US interests, they supported him.

No, that is not the fact you stated. You are wrong.

Saddam was already in power and firmly entrenched before he recieved any support from the US.

The rest of your new point is stupid, obviously we didn't use him until he presented and opportunity to be used. Not that there is anything wrong with using one dictator to battle a political enemy. Where is the downside?

[Patroklos]

Ok, but Rumsfeld and Saddam sure became good buddies after his own rise to power in Iraq in spite of Saddam's inhumane crimes against his own people.

Using /= good buddies.