I believe Iraq started the war when they invated Kuwait, and rampaged that country. Or do you doubt that happened too because none of us were there? Don't be silly. Of course it happened. Apples and oranges.
Like you said Glynch, apples and oranges. I'm comparing this to WWII, but history has shown when you let a meglomaniac go free and do nothing about it, you pay a price. That is why I also made a point to discuss Hirohito, and Bin Laden, which I see you made no reference too.
Dude, I saw Hitler just the other day. You'd think he'd change that mustache, given the last 65 years of bad press and all, but no. There he was, sipping a latte and talking on his cell phone in German.
Dude, I saw Hitler just the other day. You know one of these years they'll be claiming to have seen Osama Bin Laden in Argentina or perhaps Graceland. Unfrotunately the OBL thing, is not that funny as we're pretty sure that sob is still alive. I have no way of knowing this, but I have to assume that eventually he will become a sort of cult hero again in the Arab world if he keeps at large for years and years. I must admit I'm amazed that he is still alive. Another wierd thing. Are we going to have Sadam Hussein sitings for the rest of our life, too?
I lived in Jubail Saudi Arabia on the Eastern coast very near Kuwait, about 300 miles from Khafji. When Kuwait was invaded everybody in my town was scared ****less that we were about to be taken at any moment. At that point in time you couldn't get CNN there, only Arab news and it didn't give any information. The information we got was from American troops fortifying our town. They actually used the local hospital as a base and set up air defense and artillery. My parents would cook meals for the service men and they would tell us what in the hell was going on. There was no doubt, even among the Saudis, that Iraq would take as much oil rich land as it could. The only reason Saddam showed restraint in the first war is because he knew if he pushed it any farther he would have been taken out of power. If you wants facts about this Glynch, we are about to see how much restraint he shows when he knows he is getting taken out. And one thing your brother is right about is that the US does help keep the Royal Family in place in Saudi Arabia. That is because of Islamic fundamentalists like OBL trying to start a revolution and send the country back into the dark ages. The Royal Family likes modernization but there are many elements in Saudi that want it to remain a purely religious state without the complications of modern society polluting its sacred purity.
Someone needs to find Osama Bin Laden and blow him out of that cave he's hiding in. I still don't know how this at all equates with Iraq though. And if anyone wants to know some of the true reasons as to why Iraq invaded Kuwait, not that I agree with them, read about horizontal oil drilling by Kuwait into Iraqi oil reserves. This was a topic that had been disputed for quite some time. I personally have spent time all over the world and have not seen any Anti-American sentiment in the Arab or muslim world. I'm sure you can find people cheering for anything in the US. I remember talking to some people in the biggest cities in Pakistan after September 11th when there was cheering there portrayed by the media, yet these people in the three largest cities saw nothing of that and said most people were shocked and mournful. Of course bombing Iraq again because "they might" attack us isn't going to increase our popularity. What if Iraq shot missles at us today and used the same rationale that it was because they knew we were going to attack them? How does that make us different?
The flaw in that LeGrouper is that irregardless to what the people choose, they want their choice heard. They are refusing to live in a totalitarian, oppressive regime and I applaud that. Simply because a dictator appreciates modernization makes them worthy of our support?? How are Saudi's supposed to feel when if they speak against their government they dissappear at night when the secret police come after them?? And our military is propegating this regime?? What if the French, instead of helping us attain freedom, sent their Army to empower the King of England because he believed in "modernization" when we wanted freedom. I don't believe you can repress the will and the desire for freedom and our army is seen as the oppressor as well. Since when did the US, the mainstay of freedom and democracy begin to support totalitarian dictators instead of the will of the people?
Legrouper , fair enough. I don't think you proved your case, though as the troops would be fed the Pentagon line and though I can understand the fear of Iraq at that time, that fear does not mean Iraq was a threat to Saudi before Saudi assisted the US in attacking Iraq. Sadam had no quarrel with Saudi at that time. It is interesting that you agree that our troops keep the King in power. This is not exactly textbook promotion of democracy, if we insist on keeping an absolute king in power. I know he has been proven to be a monster, but I do think it is arguable that bin Laden who was at one time an ally of the US and who as you know is from perhaps the most prominent family in Saudi that is not a Royal by blood, might not have become such an extremist if he had been allowed to become a politician in Saudi, Of course all political activity is banned by law in Saudi by the dictator/king. My brother in law tells me that many of the ordinary troops he worked with hated the Royals and viewed them as parasites, which to me would seem quite normal. Don't they basically ,with no apologies, treat the treasury as their own check book? I've heard many a story about Saudi as my sister met her husband, who is also an American in their years over there. They lived in Riyadh. They now live in Houston. I had wanted to visit there after their stories, when they came home on extended vacations,but it was always so damned expensive and I guess it was sort of touch and go with getting tourist visas to Saudi.
it favors the american more to support a dictator/king who sell oils to american then other possiblilities.
larger % of oil in the world is in the middle east (saudi, iraq) ,i read not long ago the us get oil from middle east reduced to 22%, but in the future the oil from africa n south america will eventually run out n americans have to heavily depends on the middle east again, this is why bush want to invade iraq , to control the oil supply!! when u control the oil supply u control the world!
I really don't feel that this is the situation. Why would a country not sell oil to the largest country in the world?? Even Iran, in which we have an economic embargo, sold Oil "illegally" to Marc Rich a Israeli-American, who turned around and sold it on the open market for billion dollar profit. If Iran is willing to sell its oil to that guy, who Clinton pardoned, then i'm sure the US would not have a problem. I think it boils down more to Israeli influence. A democracy may lead to a more religious based government that will criticize the Israeli breaches of UN regulations and the continued occupation and settlements in occupied territories. Again, we are putting aside our global and economic interests in favor of Israel.
How is the US oppressing them? It's providing troops to protect the country, and this may be misunderstood as propping of a dictatorship. If there isn't hatred from at least some of the population then why are there so many terrorist threats from there? It's a fact that there are many Muslim extremists from that area. Anyways, I agree the US should pull out of these areas. It seems that every country the US subsidizes ends up hating the US more- look at South Korea and Germany.
It is definitely true that the political landscape in Saudi Arabia is in disarray and something will change, but that was not my point. I was being honest in saying that our government definitely supports the royal family, BUT, if you think Iraq was invading Kuwait because of lateral drilling then you are fooling yourself. You don't invade and occupy a country for that reason alone. That is a stupid suggestion Khan, sorry but I have to keep it real on this one. We are not invading Iraq preemptively because we think they will invade us, I don't know where ya'll got that idea. We are invading Iraq because they are building WMD's and we don't want another WTC occurance - plain and simple. WTC was the last straw. If you have visited ground zero you would think no other way. We simply cannot take a chance that something like that could happen again. If Saddam was able to sell a nuke to Bin Laden, we could have a catastophe that would make WTC look like child's play. The US has to sell to the UN that we want to invade because Iraq is not following the UN arms inspection guidelines, but Iraq has never adhered to those guidelines. The reason we want to go in now is that we simply CAN'T take a chance of something like that happening. If WTC had not occured then this would not be occuring. And that is the thing, why is it that America is portrayed as the aggresor? We are responding to a severe attack on our country. If Iraq wanted to avoid war they could very easily allow full and complete inspections without hindrence. But they choose to lure us into a confrontation they know we must undertake.
first is wmd and democracy for the iraqis, now u link iraqis to bin laden , n possiblities of selling wmd to terrorist, so wouldnt u worry about north korean a little more the possiblity of selling wmd to terrorist and why not invade paskitan , bin laden n most of his gang is there! so just becuz to prevent another possible 911 ,peoples in another countries have to suffer n die!!?? american govenment is doing a good joob fooling the american to support the invadesion of iraq!
Well to be honest with you fatfatcow, I don't know too much about N Korea so I wouldn't like to pretend like I do. But it each situation is different and I think it is quite apparent that we are trying to do something about N Korea. And when you say it like "so just becuz to prevent another 911..." you not only reveal your lack of proper grammar but you also display that you do not have the proper appreciation for the calamity that occured on that day. If Iraq had that appreciation too, they would allow full inspections. Then there would be no war.
come on people die much worse n horrible ways in war then people in 911, just becuz it happaned in america to american doesnt mean those life are more important so others have to die ! people keep talking about terrible those who die in 911 n never want to see such thing happan again , but do u realize the people in other countries , eg the peoples in iraq whos family , firends and relative died in gulf war dunt want to see a war happan again at their home!!
u dunno much about the north korea situation becuz gwb main focus now is iraq , after iraq is done he properly will presend same the **** that north korean is such a threat with wmd american must take him out, so then are u going to support another war on n.korea......or properly not becuz north korean dunt have much oil.....
