Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 249
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

I really don't care WHO the US backed. Both Iran and Iraq are better suited to be lakes.

??

“There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver."

--Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007

Posted

Yes and even most of orgional supporters of this meme have long backed off and left it behind.

Yes, they had the dignity to know when they were bested in argument. The shrunken little minority of stragglers seemingly didn't get the memo.

Hell, i almost forgot that some people really, really thought that scary Saddam was a terrible threat to the West. :)

It was funny then, and it's funny now.

“There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver."

--Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007

Posted

Yes, they had the dignity to know when they were bested in argument. The shrunken little minority of stragglers seemingly didn't get the memo.

Hell, i almost forgot that some people really, really thought that scary Saddam was a terrible threat to the West. smile.png

It was funny then, and it's funny now.

Can I quote you as being like these others claiming Iraq never had a chemical weapons program? Or are you more on the side of the chemical weapons fairy and believe she arrived late one night to remove all traces of Saddam's chemical weapon program?

Posted

Can I quote you as being like these others claiming Iraq never had a chemical weapons program?

No, it's not my view. My view is that the weapons program, whatever it's state in 2003, was irrelevant, part of the overarching propaganda series aimed at convincing a reluctant public to go to war. The others being "terrorism," "democracy," and occasionally, "Hitler."

My view is that the war was fought not for self-defense, nor to protect the innocent, nor for the sake of "spreading democracy"; I understand the war's boosters love the idea of the benevolent USA flitting about a hostile world trying to do Good, in the face of evil enemies and weak allies.

I've read the same epic poems and children's tales...I simply choose not to plagiarize from them.

(Oh...I almost forgot about the horrible "Fifth Column," made up mostly of the political Left, who are, so I'm told, actively (even intentionally)plotting the destruction of the West...or at least of America. Hell, some people put Obama in this category! :)

So no, i don't take any of this clownishness serously, and am surprised that the claims are ever made with a straight face.

“There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver."

--Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007

Posted

Chemical Weapons Fairy then? Sounds...plausible.

So you can't respond intelligently to my post. That's cool. Go play with your strawmen, then.

“There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver."

--Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007

Posted

Either he had 'em or he didn't.

My point is that it's not important; it's not related to why the war occurred, beyond the (obviously effective!) propaganda campaign.

“There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver."

--Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007

Posted

Not with weapons.

Are you sure ? They provided training and funding at least, correct ? Isn't that tantamount to supporting Iraq ? Clearly it was a mistake, but what should they do when something like that happens ? Take responsibility ?

 

Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase !

Michael Hardner

Posted

Are you sure ? They provided training and funding at least, correct ? Isn't that tantamount to supporting Iraq ? Clearly it was a mistake, but what should they do when something like that happens ? Take responsibility ?

Sure they supported Iraq at that time. The Iranians were bigger a**holes than the Iraqis and both were already duking it out.

Posted

I thought the Iraq War a stupid move. But, as BC-2004 and I mentioned: His 25 cents were up.

Right....the UK/USA containment policy was no longer acceptable after 9/11, which made the invasion politically possible. Toppling Saddam Hussein had been the policy of the US/UK since Gulf War I. So it was written, and so it shall be done.

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted

Sure they supported Iraq at that time. The Iranians were bigger a**holes than the Iraqis and both were already duking it out.

So ... my question. Propagating a war between fringe states like (at that time) Iraq and Iran - is that something they should avoid in the future ? Should they own up to their part in this somehow ?

 

Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase !

Michael Hardner

Posted (edited)

Right....the UK/USA containment policy was no longer acceptable after 9/11, which made the invasion politically possible. Toppling Saddam Hussein had been the policy of the US/UK since Gulf War I. So it was written, and so it shall be done.

I felt they should have done it then in Gulf War I. I was a bit surprised when the US reigned in...but, as you mention...politics doesn't always allow the easiest solution.

Edited by DogOnPorch
Posted

So ... my question. Propagating a war between fringe states like (at that time) Iraq and Iran - is that something they should avoid in the future ? Should they own up to their part in this somehow ?

Nah...why lose sleep over the Middle East? They're going to fight anyways.

Posted

Nah...why lose sleep over the Middle East? They're going to fight anyways.

I've noted similar responses elsewhere, and often, over charges of Western collusion with invasions, despotism and terrorism.

But surely, that these things occur routinely does not absolve us of responsibility for our own part in it?

That is, if mass murders, terrorism, etc are occurring, how can we rationally claim that our own culpability is trivial, simply because such things occur anyway without our help?

They occur without our help...but if and when we do help, we are responsible for that. Obviously.

“There is a limit to how much we can constantly say no to the political masters in Washington. All we had was Afghanistan to wave. On every other file we were offside. Eventually we came onside on Haiti, so we got another arrow in our quiver."

--Bill Graham, Former Canadian Foreign Minister, 2007

Posted

Nah...why lose sleep over the Middle East? They're going to fight anyways.

Luckily George W Bush had a higher view of humanity than you when he stated that he wanted to bring democracy to the region. If you don`t ask people to clean up their messes - as GWB advocated - then you lose the ability to legitimately criticize people for not doing the same.

 

Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase !

Michael Hardner

Posted

It's absolutely indisputable that Iraq had WMDs. They used them on the Kurds. It's not a matter of opinion.

You're right about denial.

It's hilarious. Iraq was never able to reconstitute any WMD program after the first gulf war. But why is there no outrage now? The current Iraq regime/government is still attacking the Kurds in the north, at the same time a NATO member that is Turkey have also crossed the border into Iraq to cause problems for the Kurds. Quite the double standard.

Posted

Luckily George W Bush had a higher view of humanity than you when he stated that he wanted to bring democracy to the region. If you don`t ask people to clean up their messes - as GWB advocated - then you lose the ability to legitimately criticize people for not doing the same.

So when is democracy coming to the Middle East? True real change comes from within, not by force from outside.

Posted

So when is democracy coming to the Middle East? True real change comes from within, not by force from outside.

That's a side question. The point is that GWB did not say "who cares about the middle east" ? He said let's try to put some kind of real democracy in place. As for outside forces - if they put somebody into power maybe they can help set things right as well ?

 

Looks like someone has a new patronizing catch phrase !

Michael Hardner

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,024
    • Most Online
      2,945

    Newest Member
    portman123
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...