Posted on 06/22/2014 10:27:58 PM PDT by Reaganite Republican
1967 or so
Much obliged
Right on
Try 58,300 according to Wikipedia.
Try 58,300 according to Wikipedia.
One could say the Shah of Iran was the first domino.
Whoops! hit ‘post’ too soon.
George Bush did not wake up one morning and say “Saddam tried to kill dad, I will kill him” regardless of what the dems want people to think. It was not about oil either.
I suggest people do a Google search using the words “Clinton Saddam regime change’
The entire world thought he was developing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.
Clinton would draw a line, Saddam would cross. Clinton drew another line, Saddam crossed and on & on & on.
George Bush drew a line and gave Saddam a chance to comply. Saddam did not comply. Bush acted.
Had Clinton kept to his word and did what Bush did, I have no doubt he would be considered a hero to this day.
Were these photos used against him in his last election cycle?
Show me the links to your claims, if you will please.
None of the 911 terrorists were Iraqi’s or Libyans.
After Reagan bombed Gaddafi’s tent, he was a different man.
He was acquiring nuclear technology? Who is’nt?
7 countries have plenty of nukes. So who says any sovereign country can not develop nuclear technology? It is OK for N. Korea to have it but not Libya?
Most were Saudi’s and from rich families.
Bush-41 attacked Saddam after he conquered Kuwait.
To quote Hillary “What difference does it make” who owns the oil? They all must sell it!
Your analysis is correct. Except fall of Sadam and installing a Shia dominated government has not turned out well. Bush-43 should have quit right after Saddam fell, and not waste blood and treasure re-building Iraq and trying to democratize an Islamic country. No outside agency has succeeded in that effort in the middle-east in 1400 year history of Islam.
Yes, one can say that. If we are to learn anything from history of the middle-east, the only stable system is a secular dictator.
Off topic - but long overdue.
Personally I am sick of those who take the casual cheap shot that the Vietnam war was a “loss”.
With their suffering and deaths the Vietnam soldiers won a great strategic victory - the prevention of the fall of the Indochina region to the Soviets.
The Japanese accomplished that in 1942 and it was a disaster for the west.
Coupled with Soviets moves in Africa and the ME the fall of Malaya would have cut the west off from ME oil and made the Indian Ocean a Soviet lake.
They stopped the fall of Indochina with 10 years of hard fighting only to be scorned by an ungrateful nation and its whorish media.
Someday their victory may be seen and acknowledged - but apparently not yet in this benighted country.
On topic.
At Omdurman the British destroyed a Madhist army that had earlier overwhelmed Gen. Gordon at Khartoum in Sudan.
Of that victory it was said “we had the Maxim, which they had not.”
The Madhist army had spears and swords, while the British made use of gunboats, cannon and machineguns.
Napoleon first wiped out the Mamelukes of Egypt in 1800, beginning the Anglo-French domination of that country - followed by the Euro occupations of muslim countries from Morocco to Indonesia.
That period of less than 2 centuries was the only time that islam has not been at relentless war with the west.
Prior to that muslim pirates freely roamed the Med in slaving raids, and the Turks were shooting their way into Europe.
That time is returning - and this time, not only do they have the Maxim - they have nukes.
We are currently living in a dictatorship of the weak, but the future will be no place for the weak.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.