Posted on 09/18/2014 7:53:44 AM PDT by ComtedeMaistre
Americans have to face the painful reality that Arabs are, when judged by 21st century Western Standards, a crazy people. This is not meant as an insult. Early this year, the Iraqi parliament proposed a law that would permit men to marry 9 year old girls. The law had the support of a majority of parliament. The law would also permit men to beat up and rape their wives, and prevent women from leaving the house without the permission of the husband. These SOBS are supposed to be the allies of America in the fight against ISIS. The Shia regime that rules Iraq, is made up of people who are just as crazy as ISIS.
http://www.sfgate.com/world/article/Iraq-law-would-allow-9-year-old-girls-to-marry-5319224.php
Imagine what Americans would do to a congressman who proposed that 9 year old American girls be married off. Wouldn't he be put in a straight jacket?
Islam makes Arabs crazy. Islam has the same impact on Arabs, that the pre-Christian religion of the Danish people had on the Danes. The pre-Christian Vikings specialized in the rape of nuns in convents. The miracle that Christianity has performed, in civilizing the barbarian Danish Vikings, has simply been amazing.
Saddam Hussein was a crazy dictator, who ruled over an even more crazy people. Saddam's craziness enabled him to understand the crazy people that he ruled, which enabled him to keep the most extreme forms of craziness in check. This enabled the Christians and Yazidis to practice their religion.
It’s the Middle East, they’re ALL bastards.
I have two trains of thought on that.
One is close to yours.
The other takes into account that we came up with an Arab coalition during that first war. That was a coalition that amazed not only me, but most folks. Part of the agreement that saw that shape up, could have been an agreement that we would not remove an Arab leader from power in Iraq.
We may have screwed up. We may also have gained some trust in a region where they viewed us as pro-Irael and anti-Arab at every turn.
If we kept our word, it may have been a plus.
It seems somewhat strange to me that we seem to know all the financial payments to terrorists that the Saudi Family makes, but we can’t find a paper trail on any other backers of terrorism.
Why is that? Is someone spoon feeding us information that could serve to destroy a relationship that has been beneficial to the United States over the years?
Saddam’s intelligence service knew what was happening in regards to 9/11. He could have stopped it but allowed it to happen.
No doubt the Saudis were scared S-less of Saddam. He threatened their dreams of establishing a Wahhabist Islamic Caliphate.
If Obama said this afternoon that Keystone is being fast tracked, this would all be over in a month.
OK-lets follow your line of reasoning and say we took out Saddam in the first Gulf war. So he was replaced earlier lets just say. You trust the PC run US Govt to come up with a good plan to replace Saddam? I posit that we would be singing the same tune regardless if Saddam got booted by Sr or Jr Bush.
That was the war that baffled me. I will admit that there is a peace in the region I never saw coming prior to our actions, but the bombing we conducted was just plain idiotic to my way of thinking.
I could be wrong here.
In truth, I never viewed it as anti-Russia. Russia may have seen it differently though, more close to your view.
Ok, so put yourself in Saddam's shoes. Don't you think after what happened back in 1991-2, he would have had some revenge on his mind? That's precisely why it was dumb to leave him in power, once we decided to go in.
That may very well be true. Which points why in the end, it was very short-sighted to go in.
Why should we have given a rip about Kuwait anyway. It was historically a part of Iraq, it was a gift to the oil companies, courtesy of British map-makers. Just a bunch of Arabs anyway, and they were no saints, either. They hired a PR firm to make up stories, like the one about the Iraqis stealing incubators. And they were side-drilling into Iraqi oil fields.
Well at least then the mask would come off, and Americans would wake up to what we should have done back in 1973, and realize that energy policy is our number one National Security concern, and Energy Independence should be our Number One goal.
Russia has a long relationship with Syria. It goes back deep into the cold war days at least the 60s ad 70s. It may go back farther. I don’t know.
As for Iran, we can thank Jimmy Carter for that.
The Shah was a proud ally of the West, and particularly the United States. Today we understand the dynamics of terrorism, the sects of Islam and how they fight amongst themselves. The Shah had to rule with a firm hand, but he was by no means the type of guy Hussein was (for instance).
Western culture had become common there. Women could walk around in Western clothing. They could attend school and college. It as an enlightened nation.
People immigrated to the United States. It was a cordial relationship.
In walks Jimmy Carter, he saw the couple of thousand (supposed) political prisoners, and he determined the Shah had to go. Carter had all the savvy of a six year old on this subject. It didn’t occur to him that Iran was by far the closest nation to the United States in the region outside of Israel.
The Shah had stuck his neck out to befriend a Western nation, from that region. Carter betrayed him. Carter, a supposed Christian, hated the man so much that when the Shah needed treatment for cancer, he refused him and his family an entry Visa into the United States.
On top of that, Carter didn’t realize that he was sending a clear message to every single ally of ours, that at a moments notice the leadership in the U. S. could change and they could become an instant adversary of ours.
Think what a chilling damper that would be for a leader in the region who might have wanted better relations with the U. S. Who would stick their neck out after that? Who would anger their own people, then risk having the U. S. turn on them too without cause?
We handed Russia Iran on a silver platter.
That could be. I haven’t observed that goal of the Syrian leadership. You could very well be right.
There was an interesting dynamic going on though. Iran was supplying Hezbollah with weapons for Southern Lebanon. Iran would truck those through Iraq into Syria, and then into Southern Lebanon.
There had to be some kind of an agreement between powers to do that. Hussein being a devout enemy of Syria (if that were true), would mean that he would probably be reluctant to see weapons transferred (apparently) to it by Iran.
I have agreed that we needed energy independence since the early 70s. We were effectively over a barrel, and yes the pun is intended.
Some OPEC nations wanted to reduce oil production to spike oil prices in the West. Some just wanted to arbitrarily raise prices drastically.
Either of those and the impact on the U. S. in those days would have been devastating. Saudi Arabia always shot those down. IMO we were exposed to a 2008 type situation back then, and by Saudi Arabia acting on our behalf, that was avoided.
All you have to do is remember the long gas lines in a day when there were probably twice as many gas stations as we have now. Imagine what it would have been like, if on top of that OPEC had cut production or raised gas prices by half again or double.
The filthy islamist saudis should have preceded him. And should still be taken down.
We were then hooked on ME oil and our allies too. If Saddam later on went in and blocked the Persian Gulf that would have been a war just as well. The less we have to deal with those whack job muzzie Arabs the better. Those fat Saudi Arabs are corrupt backstabbers anyway. They use their oil wealth to help fund muzzie terrorists against the west.
Why don’t those fat sheiks help their lesser, poorer muzzie brethren in the sandrat hellholes? Answer—they are selfish fat bastard backstabbers secretly doing dirty deeds and don’t give a rip about them except to exploit them.
True be dat. Today's 'muzzie allies' are tomorrow's enemies.
Well, we have a general idea.....
Syria's Chemical Weapons Came From Saddam's Iraq
And we know about the yellow cake uranium that Jack Wilson claimed Hussein never had..........
Thanks. Good points.
Remember those reports from ISIS a month or so ago too, when they claimed they discovered a cache of chemical weapons in North Western Iraq.
Now did they, or not? Who knows...
Saddam never had to worry about collateral damage.
Bandar Bush
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.