Yes. There are pictures of him shaking hands with Rumsfeld and probably others. He may have been a blood thirsty dictator, but I guess he was *our* blood thirsty dictator at one time.
But I agree with pfflier. We should have made sure there was a viable replacement.
The answer is no. See my reply.
Pictures of Rumsfeld with Iraqis notwithstanding, our policy was to support the Kurds since Nixon’s time and to use Iraq to fight Iran and vice versa. The policy was to maintain a balance in the region in order to keep the price of oil stable and not have our economy crippled by energy prices and availability. Having Iraq bomb an Iranian nuclear site is worth a handshake.
Saddam had no love of us because he knew darn well the US and Israel backed his Kurdish opponents.
The answer is no. See my reply.
Pictures of Rumsfeld with Iraqis notwithstanding, our policy was to support the Kurds since Nixon’s time and to use Iraq to fight Iran and vice versa. The policy was to maintain a balance in the region in order to keep the price of oil stable and not have our economy crippled by energy prices and availability. Having Iraq bomb an Iranian nuclear site is worth a handshake.
Saddam had no love of us because he knew darn well the US and Israel backed his Kurdish opponents.
(Saddam was the USSRs bloody dictator. That’s why his arsenal was full of Soviet weapons along with French and Chinese weapons.)