"Who gives a shit. Had they not started a war in the first place that would not have happened to them." Brandonf Amen. The Nips forget their unspeakable barbarism in WW2 .. they do remember Hiroshima. Thats cool because it keeps reminding the arsewipes not to go to war again!
I think everyone should remember the statement out of the middle east: "We are not fighting so that you will offer us something. We are fighting to eliminate you"
Bull shit! Brandon We are not fighting back. We did not fight back in Vietnam either.( as a country ) Our powers that be are dancing around the issue. They are attempting to take over other country's, instead of fighting a WAR. We are NOT fighting to win! There is no need to make this skirmish last 10, 20, 30, or more years. We could end it quickly, if we wanted to. If we have to be in a WAR, we need to find a leader who is capable of winning it.
Iraq was just a pawn in the 80's in a greater international concern called the USSR. Foreign policy in the Arab countries was mostly with regards to a real concern of the growing nuclear tensions. It is not fair to blindly consider U.S. policy in regards to Iraq without giving consideration to the greater international picture. At the time the cold war threatened the entire planet. 10 years ago the U.S. would have never gotten involved to free Kuwait from invading Iraq. The USSR would have flipped out. We might have taken a stance when they pushed on to Saudi Arabia (Hussein's announced plans). Point is you have to evaluate U.S. foreign policy based on the time it was made. It is not sufficient to say the U.S. should have some omnipotent powers to foresee every future development.
Just like Chile. The USA, to the free world's great relief, skilfully helped Pinocet smash the Commies who were beefing up there to ruin the place with hyper-inflation already wrecking the economy. Today its a unique example of a thriving capitalist economy. But of course now the world's Lefties plus almost everyone else and his dog prefer to sh*t all over Pinocet .. the man who saved his country.
And have not dropped any more since then. But of the rogue nations who also know of the same lessons learned in WWII, who are now actively seeking to obtain nuclear weaponry, does one imagine their goals are to obtain atomic weapons and their delivery systems for the purpose of not using them?
Personally I think the simplest and most elegant solution is take all these myopic USA haters that have started coming out the woodwork on this thread and give 'em a bullet between the eyeballs. Same old moronic ultra pacifist bullshit that pretty much led to WW2 -- yes, I'll defend this point using history and logic, it's not just spin -- is happening all over again. Socialists come to power in Spain. Fucking fantastic. I always suspected the "anti-war" crowd, and liberals in general, as being just neosocialists, carying Marx in their back pocket rather screaming him from the pulpit. I guess some dickheads just never learn.
saddam was never a threat to the usa. north korea might be.. whats a connection between hitler and saddam there is none!
90% of Spain ain't "neosocialsts," they just don't wanna get creamed by supporting a war there's no winning. "a bullet between the eyeballs." would that mean I no longer have to tweeze the hairs there? gr
You mean like the 1000s who have lost their lives and gotten wounded in Afghanistan and Iraq at the hands of the US and the allies? Btw, it is only presumed that your "thousands more" would've lost their lives. Very close to "pre-emptive strikes" on "terrorist nations" scenario. It still doesn't add up. You know something that no one has really considered in all this? What happens if the terrorists win? gr