39. "i love when activists think they can do battle on the net lol" In response to In response to 37
>>right...did you see iraq before the first gulf war? >obviously >>not. > >Um, yeah I did, what about it?
you couldnt say or do shit without a thousand saddam spies waiting to jump on your ass. how you gonna revolt for freedom when the majority are too scared to take a shit without asking.
> >>>Further, U.S. subsidies increased >>>right around the time Hussein was >>>gassing the hell out of the Kurdish >>>population, therefore, your beloved >>>"democratic" heros in Washington never >>>had any intentions of liberating the >>>Iraqi people. >> >>that was then, this is now. your logic is severely flawed as >>always. > >My "logic"... Hell outta here >with that horsecrap. > >Yeah, that was "then", hotshot... >And there's a common thread that >runs through the past to the present: >U.S. motives. > >If you would have me to believe >for one moment that by some quirk >of nature the U.S. just suddenly >decided to care about Iraqis, your >dumber than you already portray your- >self. > >Let's examine the U.S. government's >legacy in Iraq. It warmly supported >Hussein during his most brutal acts >of genocide, and supplied him with >duel-use technology right up until >the invasion of Kuwait (Great Britain >as well). > >And your assertion is that Washington >one day decided that after all the mass >murders, it felt morally compelled to >help Iraqis make a transition to a >democratic regime? Do better. > >On the contrary, guru, Washington >decided to rid the Middle East of >Hussein after he decided he no >longer wanted to be a client of U.S. >"interests" -- much like Noreaga. > >This is well understood in Washington >and had been reported in the foreign >press for years. Institutions and >Middle East experts you call morons, >'Mr. Foreign Affairs' expert.
yea apparently you dont get the point of changing presidents every 4-8 years. could it be that one administrations views on the world could be different than the next?