Posted on 02/14/2016 5:44:10 PM PST by Helicondelta
yes, they always use fear devoid of reason. that’s why they need the federal schools. baraq is the culimation for us. but putting him in historical perspective with the enabling actions of the bushes and the gope turned out to be the opening salvo in my political education.
however, throughout history, it’s leftists in the main (think of the lenin, stalin, hitler, chamberlain, etc. for instance) who have caused, enabled, incited or started many needless wars in their evil imaginations—always using fear sans reason—for power, money or ideological purity.
Read all 121 posts so far. Think there was WMD’s evidenced by evidence. Syria = one route..other routes? Anyone remember the Food For Oil scam(s)?? If they could siphon over a billion dollars I’m sure there was hush money for some weaponry to go elsewhere or at least the opportunity was there.
” Bush tried in vain to get Saddam to allow inspectors in but to no avail.”
That’s not the way I remember it. As I recall, there were UN inspectors who’d been allowed into Iraq, under Hans Blick. They were doing inspections, and Blick said he couldn’t find any WMDs. He kept asking BUSH to hold off on any invasion so they could keep inspecting. Bush ignored him.
The whole argument doesn’t stand up over time. Lots of countries have WMD. 20/20 hindsight and a lot of beloved Americans gone and clearly the war was a mistake.
Saddam thought he had WMDs; he paid a ton for their procurement and manufacture. And tons of Iraqis and Europeans made a lot of money off it.
“The problem with isolationism,”
How do you define “isolationism”? Is an “isolationist” somebody who did not support invading Iraq? Is that the definition?
If so, was Reagan an isolationist? Saddam was in power while Reagan was president. Reagan didn’t invade Iraq. Also, Reagan didn’t invade Iran; he didn’t invade Syria, North Korea, China, USSR. He did send Marines into tiny Granada to get some medical students out of a hostage situation. Other than that, Reagan didn’t do any invasions during the entire 8 years of his presidency, not even of tyrannical countries. So was Reagan an “isolationist”?
So what if Saddam got Kuwait, what’s the big deal. It was formerly a part of Iraq anyway. Why are intra-Arab squabbles any of our business.
Plus, Kuwait was busted side-drilling into Iraqi oil fields.
what argument? the fruits of bush and the best efforts of gopes in iraq speak for themselves. contrast that with say the fruits of a far more desparate and dark time during and after wwII.
make sure, yaelle, that we don’t confuse theory with facts. nobody can prove or know what sadam thought. if there was a mass deception going on by his underlings, i think a careful study of the iraqi sources and documents recovered would expose it. i haven’t seen or heard anything of that via my network, which is pretty well informed.
but, that said, i think your theory is at least plausible. and might be a factor in the intelligence snafu surrounding iraq.
Yes. There is no legal, ethical or moral principle that would ever allow for the indiscriminate targeting of civilians in a military campaign.
They’re hiding something and I have no idea what. But they aren’t really hiding the tons of WMDs Saddam had. The Bushes don’t hide the fact that they are globalists very well either.
Yes, Iraq did. No nukes but chem weapons. . .and he used them.
WMD, weapons of mass destruction, include nuclear, biological and chemical.
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.