 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Sava
I'm not disagreeing with the fact that Saddam is bad. My whole point is that the US, and the UN Sanctions are doing more harm to the Iraqi people than Saddam. And its grossly hypocritical to ignore this fact.
Ned, your errors are in your generalization of your perception of the "anti-war" mindset.
And what's funny, is that all of you are falling for this whole smoke-and-mirrors routine. Bush is keeping to focus on Iraq because as long as he stands at the podium spouting anti-Saddam rhetoric, the people don't stop to realize that he's a terrible president and turning America (especially the economy) into sh!t... |
I agree with you, Sava, that the sanctions are not affecting Saddam and are only hurting Iraq. I am not sure though that the sanctions are responsible for the deaths of 500,000 people. I think this is the fault of Saddam who would prefer to fund WoMD than buy food. But the fact that he chooses armaments over food is why 1) the sanctions do not work against dictators; and 2) why sanctions against regimes like Saddam do not harm the intended target, the dictator and his regime, but the people who have no defense against the dictator.
We are somewhat in agreement, Sava, that sanctions against Iraq are wrong.
This leads one to the conclusion, though, that Bush I should have removed Saddam in '91 and that Bush II should do it now - in order to end the sanctions regime an get on with our lives.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sava
|
 |
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001 time: 23:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Ming
It is also grossly idiotic to not blame Saddam for his crimes against his own people. Pleople like you who believe his propaganda "that it's all the US's fault that people are dying" is his license to continue allowing his own people to die and suffer. In a way, you are also to blame for the deaths as well, because if people like you didn't believe his crap, he wouldn't have a reason to continue to let his people die for the sake of propaganda. |
Okay, drop the stereotype and look at what I've written, then perhaps you can understand me better 
Two wrongs don't make a right. Saddam is bad and should be gone. The UN Sanctions are wrong and should be gone. More Iraqis die from the the sanctions than from Saddam. Case closed. It isn't black and white Ming, just because I'm not a war-drum, mindless, flag waving buffoon, doesn't mean I'm a flower power, pinko, peacenik either 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Main_Brain
|
|
Economic World Center
Jul 2002 time: 06:25
|
|
Well but who comes after Saddam?
It seems like the Choice between a Dictatorship supressing the Majority and a Fundametalistic State closly related to Iran I guess...
I wonder wheter the US (goverment&corporations) would care about ME if the Oil was in Africa?
//ME like Middle East not like in 'me' but you already did know that didn't ya?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Main_Brain
|
|
Economic World Center
Jul 2002 time: 06:25
|
|
Regarding SaudiArabia:
Are Americans aware of the Problems there Stationing of Troops created there? The Ruling ,mhh well Monarch Family would propably be the most correct name, has alot of Pressure from the Streets and the Congress/Ruling Scheiks to ask US Military to leave, whcih he of course cant do. It seems people there respect the US for saving them but feel mhh well 'occupied'. Also cultural Problems I guess.
I also heard that because of Logistic problems the US mostly has equipment there (speak tanks 'n stuff) because the Merchant Navy couldn't move this military Equipment fast enough in Time of Crisis? Is that true?
So well my Question would be would you agree that US Troop presence in the Gulf Region is generally problematic to Arabian States?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:25
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Main_Brain
Regarding SaudiArabia:
Are Americans aware of the Problems there Stationing of Troops created there? The Ruling ,mhh well Monarch Family would propably be the most correct name, has alot of Pressure from the Streets and the Congress/Ruling Scheiks to ask US Military to leave, whcih he of course cant do. It seems people there respect the US for saving them but feel mhh well 'occupied'. Also cultural Problems I guess.
I also heard that because of Logistic problems the US mostly has equipment there (speak tanks 'n stuff) because the Merchant Navy couldn't move this military Equipment fast enough in Time of Crisis? Is that true?
So well my Question would be would you agree that US Troop presence in the Gulf Region is generally problematic to Arabian States? |
Main_Brain, I agree we really need to get our troops out of the ME. But the only way we can do that is by elminating the original problem that caused us to be there in the first place. It really is a travesty that we left Saddam in power when we really had the opportunity to finish the war. Unfortunately, we thought we could simply leave our troops there indefinetely - like in Germany or South Korea. But, obviously, the culture clash with the people of the ME is too severe making our long term presence impossible.
Hopefully, Bush II will act soon to correct an historical mistake. As soon a vialble successor regime is installed in Iraq, we can pull our troops out of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. As soon as Iraq is stable, I hope we withdraw from there as well.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25. Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|