Chickens are Coming Home to Roost

#16 and more by SR, Ferozk, mirmir,

I am afraid your historian friend is no political science expert so his conclusions are devoid of any reasonable argument about the current situation in Iraq. There is a difference in the perception and reality. Reality is that there was a legitimate concern in two successive US administrations and in Europe that Iraq under Saddam was a likely candidate to fall under the terrorist influence. I had tried to explain that in my post #9 but either I have not done a job of it or you are deliberately sidestepping the issue.

Let me try it again.
The world learns from experience. The fascist in the last century were just local goons until they were able to control two states in Europe and what happened afterwards is now history. The communists were a nuisance in Europe and only a handful of Bolshevik were not worth the second look by any country in world until they controlled a state, Russia. The first wave of Bolsheviks was a little closer to the ideology but the next was not any different than the emerging fascist states in Germany and Italy.

Those two ideological extremists consumed whopping resources of the world and eliminating them needed a large number of human as well as material sacrifices not to talk of wasted years that could have helped human development.

Islamic terrorism though has not reached that level but it sure is not due to lack of effort on their part. The terrorist groups were strengthened after they got hold of a state in Afghanistan. Check the number of terrorist attacks by Bin Laden group before and after they became a part of the Taliban regime.

The concern that Iraq may fall to terrorist was genuine and the impact of that would have been terrifying to the world.

There is no doubt that a preemptive action was required before Iraq was lost to the terrorists. We can argue that the Bush admin was inept in making its case and was grossly incompetent in managing the war in Iraq. We can also say that Bush is not the smartest pea in the pod and we can also say that Rummy is borderline crazy but we need to face the reality that Iraq in terrorist hand would have been something the world would have regretted for a long long time.

Remember the old saying: If you throw rocks into a pack of dogs, the dogs yelping the loudest are the ones that got hit.

Who is making more noises about Iraq? The Islamist fundamentalists!
It is strange that the liberals hiding behind their criticism of the conduct of war are tacitly supporting the Islamic fundamentalists’ argument against the US.

Let’s talk about the newly emerging pet leftist theory that the US Empire is about to implode out of its own contradictions.

The US Empire, and if it is an Empire at all, is only 60-70 years old. It is the most advanced, sophisticated, high tech and is built on some ideas that have been honed in years of knowledge and education. The level of sophistication the US state brings to the table is much larger than any Empire seen in the history of mankind. There is no way that the hollowed leftists theories and quotes from some ancient philosophers are to going to bring this modern Empire down from within, not in the next 300 years.

Re#29 MirMir

[``And then of course there are the communist sympathizers like mirmirs who are fine with illegals breaking all rules of border crossings, who want the US to pump and pump money into the UN, who could NEVER run a democracy and a clean judiciary in their own countries themselves – but have the audacity to turn around and start bad-mouthing the US – simply because they can get away with it. It is not the first time I have seen such an utter lack of logic and common sense!``
Say what???? Where do you get this stuff, Mr. (Bee)J. McCarthy?]

Dear sir, why don’t you go ahead and tell me your actual positions on those issues. I base my statements on reading of your stuff and I don’t see you denying what I say above – you seem to be just asking me how I got it.

(And just for information, I always LIKED Speedy Gonzales, so don’t take that as an affront!)

(Also, the word “adrak” has a special meaning according to certain interactors, which appears consistent with the frame of mind in which this article appears to have been written.)

(Also, it is utterly ludicrous that a criticism of illegal immigration should be taken either as a criticism of Spanish speakers generally or as a personal attack.)


Re#30 Ana

Ana, you are NOT being stalked – so stop flattering yourself!

And may I know which interact of mine on the Gandhi board got you so ticked off – since I see NO record of any interact from me to you on that board!

Re: # 33

Well said.

mirmir:

did you honestly think mccarthyism was dead? i suspect if you wear glasses or contacts they might have more than a slight tint of rose in them. :)

the application for citizenship still asks the question that used to be asked during those hearings that mccarthy was a part of. the end of the cold war has not meant an end to such -isms schisms. mccarthyism is just another in a long line of absolutist control techniques used throughout time, control via fear, by various groups including those like that committee in the 50`s, and those who are communists and fascists. (and i won`t talk about now)

here on chowk, people who are not strong nationalists, among other things, are referred to as ``pinkos`` and ``commies``. i guess this attitude is prevalent all around the world. i have heard it so much here in the US. my pakistani-american father referred to me as a communist because i was critical of american troops moving into grenada (remember that?). imagine that! i simply do not buy into this either or business.

i don`t know if you`ve ever seen ``a day without a mexican,`` this mockumentary by sergio arau, but he addresses various issues and stereotypes regarding the community. the movie doesn`t necessarily live up to its premise, but if you haven`t seen it already. . .

and i don`t know if you`re mexican, or mexican-american, you don`t state that and you don`t have to. i have lived in america practically all of my life, and i have heard such outbursts as those directed towards you from the mouths of racist jerks as well as seemingly benevolent and caring right leaning ``conservatives`` and left leaning ``liberals``. i didn`t know that you as a lone man had any control over who crosses over the border illegally. and i certainly had no idea that to show concern for undocumented folk was the equivalent of being a communist sympathizer. indeed that kind of language does approximate the fear that some used to ``rule`` over people in the `50`s. you cannot have been out of america so long to believe that some form of ``mccarthyism`` doesn`t exist?!

Re: # 33

HP:

I would disagree with you.

iraq under saddam had no chance to come under jihadis. Saddam ruled with an iron hand and didn`t tolerate muslim fundamentalism either. the country was weakened but the republican guards/iraqi army was capable of dealing with any jihadi. Only when this bulwark was demolished the jihadis now have a chance to usurp the state.

in afghanistan, al-qaida didn`t take advantage of taliban weakness, but the taliban themselves invited and tolerated them (as the ideologies were more or less the same). in case of saddam it would have never happened.

Hence bush continued to lie regarding 911 connection, WMD to the belt of democracy.

if iraq under saddam was going to come under jihadis then it would have made bush`s work simpler.

beej:

so in other words it is perfectly legit for you to use illegal immigration and associate it with communist sympathizer, but we should not think that being as critical as you are of illegal immigration has ANYTHING to do with prejudice and stereotypes.

yes, i do get the logic and common sense that guides you.

and actually one of your posts were directed towards me from the gandhi board, and an inference to me being some kind of liberal and i am not the only one who saw those so you cannot claim to have ever written them even if there is NO record of them. what makes you think it is what you`ve said on the gandhi board alone that has got me ``ticked off``? and ticked off?!

don`t flatter yourself by thinking i`m flattered, puhleeze. and really beej there is no need to be patronising by calling me a special interactor and telling me not to get all emotional about various interacts. i really don`t think you`re any more special than anyone else here, and judging from the few boards i have read and participated on you get pretty damn emotional yourself. so spare me the emotionalism and righteous indignation lectures from now on, thank you.

Re#38 by ana

You are getting too uptight and flushed over trivialities!

First, I have EVERY right to make fun of chowk staff for screwing up and deleting posts which had nothing to do with photographs of Mahatma Gandhi – but they deleted anyway in their zeal to teach a “lesson” to a certain gentle soul of an interactor!

I see no reason why you are so defensive of MirMir here who is fully capable of defending himself. And I doubt he needs assistance with the English language – therefore, what is the purpose of the Spanish translation – other than perhaps to show off your own acumen?

Besides:

I REPEAT – MIRMIR HIMSELF HAS NOT DENIED A SINGLE THING IN TERMS OF WHAT I ATTRIBUTED TO HIS POSITIONS!

Can you explain why?

I believe it is I who has been personally attacked – by both of you – using all kinds of names, including “McCarthy”! I don’t feel defensive since false labels don’t bother me.

Unlike some people – who get highly defensive – perhaps there are REASONS to get defensive!

Regarding the issue of illegal immigration, people who stand in line for anything lawfully have every right to demand that others follow the laws and NOT cut in!

This has NOTHING to do with McCarthyism – its called abiding by the law – a concept you MAY be familiar with!

It is absolutely simplistic to make judgment calls regarding the emotional state or maturity of individual interactors based on the interacts they post here – if that were the criterion, 99 percent of such interactors (and 100 percent of the writers) would be immediately committed to an asylum – and the longer they have been on this site, the more “committed” they would be considered!

Yeah!

Come on guys, cool it. Enough is enough. It`s better if you come back to the theme of the article, if you`ve any thing more to say about it. Don`t try to outdo insulting each other. One expects intellectual sophistication from guys like you.

Mohammad Gill

#40 FreeThinker

[....from guys like you]

Dr. Gill,

I think you should make it ``guys and gals``, or you will be accused of ....

accused of....

accused of .....

....of SOMETHING (perhaps being politically incorrect?), I`m sure!

Sincerely,
Beej.

I share the author`s dismay that most of the interacters have missed the point and are debating pointlessly on something completely irrelevant.

Having said that, I think Mr. Gill should recognize that Iraq war is the most devastating consequence of the case you`re trying to have a debate about. Some would also argue that the V Plame outing is the consequence of the war plans. An Urdu proverb sums it well: ``kharbooza chhuri pe giray ya chhuri kharbooze pe, nateeja aik he hota hai`` (whether the melon falls on the knife or the knife falls on the melon, outcome is always the same). Thus, it would be unnatural, if not impossible, to not discuss the legitimacy or illegitimacy of Iraq war and Plame outing in the same discussion.

HP, with all due respect, may I please call you a jackass for the following reasons?

1. ``Check the number of terrorist attacks by Bin Laden group before and after they became a part of the Taliban regime.``

I`ve yet to have ONE political/security/terrorist `expert` explain what the HELL were US, English, French, Russian, Indian, and Iranian spy agencies (to name just the big dogs and bitches) doing when the Bin Laden group was becoming a part of Taliban, and the ISI was allegedly helping the Taliban to power.

Are you going to sit there and tell me that all these were freakin` ghoray gadhay baech k so rahay thay?

Open your mind, forget about your prejudices for a while, and connect the dot dude. It`s all part of a great big game that has the bookworm political scientists going crazy wetting their pants.

2. ``The concern that Iraq may fall to terrorist was genuine and the impact of that would have been terrifying to the world.``

Even if that was the case, the world was not at risk. ONLY Is-freakin`-rael was going to be in deep-bleeps. Thus, the so many hushed up Israeli/Jewish/Zionist controversies have erupted in the poet 9/11 USA. I`m sure you`re read about the Urban Moving compay in NJ; the israeli Students selling paintings in Federal bldgs; the recent AIPAC indictments; and numerous other unsolved myteries of the Israeli/American political twilight zone.

Considering the lies the current and so may previous US admins have fed the entire world, particularly to the Americans, I for one question the validity of any claim made by anyone in the US admin.

Just because the US govt and some of it`s bas-turdy Europeans and Puppet rulers across the Muslim countries say that the planes were hijacked by Muslims is not enough for any just person to swallow without proof. The people on the planes are dead. There`s no one to defend them.

Who is to know if there were Muslims on those planes? For yet another brief display of stupidity by someone in the admin, Atta`s passport was found somewhere in the Queens soon after the crashes. Go figure.

And if there were Muslims aboard those planes, who is to counter the argument that they were the culprits? Certainly they`re dead and are unable to defend themselves.

And if they were the culprits, then who is to say that they were Arabs? Just because OBL`s ghost appears in a video to corroborate the American propaganda? Everything OBL and his cohorts have done thus far has harmed the Muslims and helped the uniformed high-tech bandits of the West and Israel.

Such lies and unsubstantiated allegations of the stupidest proportions are feeding the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan, and nurturing the anti-western sentiments in the entire world, particularly among Muslims. Just like most Iraqis did not support Saddam but they despise the western invaders even more so, most Muslims do not identify with OBL & CO for their dubious strategies and A/V tapes myteriously (read conveniently) appearing on Al Jazeera whenever Western offensives or elections are in the offing.

3. ``There is no doubt that a preemptive action was required before Iraq was lost to the terrorists. We can argue that the Bush admin was inept in making its case and was grossly incompetent in managing the war in Iraq. We can also say that Bush is not the smartest pea in the pod and we can also say that Rummy is borderline crazy but we need to face the reality that Iraq in terrorist hand would have been something the world would have regretted for a long long time.``

In case you haven`t noticed, today the world regrets the insurgents/terrorists anyway, in spite of the war that you seem to imply as ``just``. Americans regret it more so than others...did you notice the drop in Bush`s ratings to 37%? Only people who sympathize with Israeli Zionist agenda support the war and still think it`s just. So what has anyone achieved with this stupid war besides Halliburton et al?

Bush & Co could not make the case because there was no case to go to war. That`s why the admin has been changing it`s rationale ever since the first IED popped a GI on the Iraqi dirt road like a stray dog. That`s exactly why Plame was outed. That`s exactly why Powell didn`t continue in the 2nd term and now his close aide Col. Wilkerson is ripping Bush, Cheney, & Rummy threesome apart publicly. That`s exactly why Scowcroft is coming out with a scathing book on GWB`s faggotism with the neocons and Israelis. That`s why Sibel Edmonds was fired from FBI and became the most-gagged-person in the USA by the Ashcroft mafia. That`s why Scot Ritter, Semour Hersh, Paul O`Neil, Richard Clarke, and others have written books that dry up the American right wing wet dreams into nightmares instantly.

Same is the case with their exit strategy. Like Justin Riamondo said, there is no exit plan because they DON`T intend to exit from Iraq. Period.

BTW Justin Raimondo is the editorial director of Antiwar.com. He is the author of ``An Enemy of the State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard`` (Prometheus Books, 2000). He is also the author of ``Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement`` (with an Introduction by Patrick J. Buchanan), (Center for Libertarian Studies, 1993), and ``Into the Bosnian Quagmire: The Case Against U.S. Intervention in the Balkans`` (1996).

He is a contributing editor for The American Conservative, a Senior Fellow at the Randolph Bourne Institute, and an Adjunct Scholar with the Ludwig von Mises Institute, and writes frequently for Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture.

So he`s certainly not a Nobody from the left ;-)~~

It always has been about O I L for Halliburton, Exxon, Boing, Lockheed Martin, The Carlyle Group, etc to lube the gullible tax-paying backsides of the American first and rest of the world subsequently. Israelis are making it happen for Dubya and Dickie and other demented characters on the American political stage to their ends, and you guys are liking it too...lol

4. ``Remember the old saying: If you throw rocks into a pack of dogs, the dogs yelping the loudest are the ones that got hit.

Who is making more noises about Iraq? The Islamist fundamentalists!
It is strange that the liberals hiding behind their criticism of the conduct of war are tacitly supporting the Islamic fundamentalists’ argument against the US.``

You sound like an incorrigible Republican of a worst redneck type. The above comment is usually uttered by the blot on the American landscape that ends up with his grandparents as in-laws everytime he gets married...and who`s got sh*t everywhere in his trailer home except for the toilet.

The loudest ``yelping noise`` right now is coming from an American woman by the name of Cindy Sheehan. Does it ring a bell? I guess not.

By the way, if you read their (leftist`s) essays, they don`t support the Islamic fundamentalism any more than the right wing zealots. They`ve simply made the neocons and caught their smitten Limbaughites red-handed while looting the American treasury and liberty. But like a fictitious col. famously said: ``you [simply] can`t handle the truth``, lest you naturalized citizenship is revoked beyond recognition...lol

5. ``Let’s talk about the newly emerging pet leftist theory that the US Empire is about to implode out of its own contradictions.

The US Empire, and if it is an Empire at all, is only 60-70 years old. It is the most advanced, sophisticated, high tech and is built on some ideas that have been honed in years of knowledge and education. The level of sophistication the US state brings to the table is much larger than any Empire seen in the history of mankind. There is no way that the hollowed leftists theories and quotes from some ancient philosophers are to going to bring this modern Empire down from within, not in the next 300 years.

Abay bhai, while you`ve been reading up on so many things, we`d all have been spared your defunct theory if you had read one simple reality...or may be two:

jub cheunti ki maut aati hai to uske per nikal aatay hain...it becomes more advanced than the other insects of its kind.

and

jub geedar ki maut aati hai to wo shehar ki taraf aata hai...goes up-town with misplaced hubris and gets plastered on the road by automobiles if it survives shootings, beatings, and plain old human stampede. All that humiliation in spite of the `advanced` hunting skills, deft sharpened fangs, and lethally dextrous claws.

As successful imperialists the French and the British were a thousand times more advanced and sophisticated than the peoples they had subjugated. Yet, ironically for you and your theory, these advanced masters were BOOTED out like pigs by the ``uncivilized and backward people`` within 100-150 yrs. Furthermore, the faster one rises, the harder he falls. USA is going to prove that one more time ;-)~~

Judging from your pseudo Americanism, you may not like the example of Vietnam and Korea, but these further discredit your theory.

The simple idea, my political scientist brother, is that the weaker party doesn`t have to floor the stronger party`s shoulders in order to win the battle. Just the fact that the former refuses to allow the latter to pin him to the ground makes it a winner and the other a loser. Even if the strong wins, the weak still doesn`t lose because it had already lost by virtue of the aggression against it. The humiliation alone, due to the failure to control a weakling, causes the Empire to implode; just so a freer, stronger, and cleansed nation could emerge from the ruins. So, ruins it must become first and foremost...for which the ball has started to roll, even if you prefer not to admit.

What is the gasoline price at these days in the US? How about the real estate market? Do the banks have enough consumers looking for cheap loans? No? How about the army recruitment going? Oops, I almost forgot, why the heck did Dubya have to create a special post for Karen Hughes? Is she having fun trotting about the Muslim world trying to change opinions? I guess not.

Nothing personal dude. It`s your opinions...they`re so irritatingly out-dated, narrow, and unrealistic. The PS buzzwords you inject in your posts become meaningless with your ill-logic. Sorry.

Ciao :-)~~

Re: # 42

its good to know that there are muslims who still think that 911 was a jewish/american conspiracy.

``For yet another brief display of stupidity by someone in the admin, Atta`s passport was found somewhere in the Queens soon after the crashes. Go figure. ``

if you are travelling wihtin u.s. you don`t have to carry your passport with you. state issueed i.d. or drivers i.d. is good enough.

HP #33: ``There is There is no doubt that a preemptive action was required before Iraq was lost to the terrorists. . ``

How exactly have you come to this conclusion? ``No doubt?`` Those are strong words. No doubt in whose mind?

The Iraq war was opposed by the majority population of all the countries in the world, except two. The two were USA and Israel. Now even the majority population of the USA is against the Iraq war. So that leaves only one. Israel.

This was, infact, the most opposed war in world history!! Every single country that has been invaded by Iraq, was against the USA invasion of Iraq. Countries at hot and cold wars against each other, like India and Pakistan, both opposed it.

How can you so casually state that there, ``is no doubt that a preemptive action was required before Iraq was lost to the terrorists,`` when out of the 190 or so countries in the world, the majority population of 188 (now 189) is agaisnt this war?

There has to be more to the world than a US leadership getting up, claiming someone a terrorist, and then killing 100k of its citizens.

Re#42 by ntsyed

NTSyed sahib,

Since WE may not have interacted before, let me introduce myself – I am Beej – not to be confused with any other interactors who may have assumed similar sounding nicknames (some of them obviously quite devious people, since they appear to have done so even BEFORE me) just to confuse simple souls like you who so peacefully inhabit these premises and do minimal damage – with the possible exception of raising the blood pressure of certain other highly serious interactors!

(And unlike certain others, I think your emoticons are fine, JUST the way they are!)

I must respectfully disagree with you regarding the Iraq war. In this day and age, people have become so self-centered and countries so focused on their narrow interests, that they think of nobody but themselves. The USA is a true exception and therefore it stands out – baffling many “run of the mill” individuals and countries – and even you (Note: I’ll NEVER categorize you as “run of the mill” (nor “run of the mule” as some nasty interactors may suggest))!

The freedom of the Iraqi people from the oppressions of dictatorship is a noble objective – that the US gets some uninterrupted oil supplies in the process (and for which supplies we do PAY, mind you) is a mutual side benefit – for everybody.

The American people have been steadfast in their support of the US invasion of Iraq! Please do not go by the example of peaceniks and other outdated creatures who inhabit the crevices of this chowk cave and make dissenting noises in the wild!

Individuals like Dr. Gill (occasionally fondly referred as the “Gillster” – a term specifically designed for him to reflect his newly developed carefree personality and his retried attitude toward life!) are just as steadfastly opposed to the invasion!

Always were, always will be!

But they have no clout – because the American people wanted to go in! and the American people want to STAY in!

Always had, always will!

Therefore, having been beaten in their designs – such individuals try a sneak attack!

They try to trip the Veep over a trivial trip by a CIA hubby – and make the case file deliberately chubby!

They improvise, they devise, they surmise, and they romanticize, fantasize, supersize – all to get to their prize!

To prize the veep from his duties – such are our peace-loving beauties!

And they all synchronize – much more than ANY kharboozas ever could – or should!

Your consternation regarding the western intelligence not doing its job PRIOR to 9/11 is understandable (and contrary to what you imply – they usually do not hire sleeping donkeys and horses to those positions – the closest animal approximations are the K-9 officers) – and we have come up with a whole new cabinet agency to address that problem.

I think you should be especially commended for requesting individual interactors to eschew their deeply-rooted prejudices and for being concerned regarding the moisture contents of their undergarments!

Your extreme confidence in the abilities of Israelis is to be marveled at! As somebody who is absolutely enamored of what that tiny little country has been able to accomplish – and not just in the battlefield but also in such areas as science and technology (I am sure the Gillster’s earlier board explained that to you at length) – I must sincerely thank you! I have every confidence that your faith will continue to be justified down the road as that tiny country continues down that path of success and accomplishes all its objectives in the future, too.

Your lack of faith in government is shared by vast number of Americans who use the popular joke to ridicule – “I am from the government, and I am here to help you!”

NT Syed sahib, kindly consider our (US) efforts in Iraq as our very own little tribute – our heartfelt hands of help – coming to you and other such warm-hearted individuals who really NEED the help (alas many of you just don’t know about it yet – or are just too intimidated to admit it or ask for it openly – it can hurt the pride of many males in certain patriarchal societies– we understand!)

I could go on further – in considerable detail and address the many (alas so many) points that you have raised – but the lady of the house has asked me to procure some vegetables – and even though a case can be made that dipping into the vast chowk stock of interactors one could come up with quite a few of those – I am still required to head toward the local “sabji-mandi” which closes shortly!

Therefore, kindly accept this meager ration of my humble offerings until we have another opportunity to revisit some of these highly important topics of the world affairs!

May your beard continue to flow gracefully and to regale us with many, many stories down the road!

Sincerely,
Beej.

ntsyed,

I am glad that you got upset as what I wrote actually it hit some raw nerve there. Yelping part was not bad really as it got you doing your thing…yelping!

Now let me take all your point apart w/o going into the abuses that is a part of Islamic fundamentalists’ arguments and I know it pretty well as eik omr guzri hai iss dasht ki saiyahi mian.

1 and 2 is actually one long drivel without any substance to it. Actually you are saying two things there.

First, you are implying that it was the US itself that attacked its own country thru some proxies who may not be Muslims. If translated into political terms, it means that the US was fighting on the both sides of the fence. It attacked itself on 9/11 and then it attacked Afghanistan. I think that is a very “rational” approach and that’s why most of the Islamist believe in it. So hearing it from you doesn’t startle me a wee bit. I let you ponder on just one thing here. If 9/11 was planned by the US itself, how many Americans were part of that conspiracy that was pulled off so successfully. None of the American involved in killing 3000 American has squeaked yet out of guilt for killing his fellow citizens. Are you claiming that the US government employees are so unconscionable that they would murder their own fellow countrymen to get to some cavemen?

Next,

I like this part of your post even better. “Everything OBL and his cohorts have done thus far has harmed the Muslims and helped the uniformed high-tech bandits of the West and Israel.”

So now Muslim holy warriors are disowning OBL. Calling him a US shill and again implying that it was the US that attacked itself thru OBL and his followers.
You are saying that the US needed such an elaborate arrangement-getting OBL, getting Taliban to capture Afghanistan, then training some people, and then attacking the US mainland in the broad daylight- to get what—Afghanistan? Sir, is there any rational behind such an elaborated scenario?
Just sit back and think before you write anymore lyrical conspiracy theories.

3 and 4,
In my posts I pointed out the reason for the US attack on Iraq and I also mentioned that the war is badly conducted and I also believe to some extent, the US has lost its way in Iraq and it would be better to leave Iraq as soon as possible. So I agree with the anti-war crowd in a sense that the war in Iraq was badly conducted and the Bush admin perhaps is inept. My point that I think I made very clear was the fear that the Iraq would fall into the terrorist hands was valid and nowhere do I see you deny that. The whole anti-war crowd is talking about the conduct of the war and not the reason for the war. These two things are separate from each other. I don’t know how hard it would be for you to follow this but I will try again. I support the purpose of this war but not the conduct itself.

Some in the anti-war groups have developed thesis and you are supporting that too that the whole war was for the OIL. Nobody has ever answered one simple question. Would Saddam had refused OIL supplies to the US or Europe if the West had offered him some deal? Sir, if the US was so interested in OIL, it would have made a deal with Iraq right after the 1991 war. Saddam was down then and would have signed on anything.

Before I spilt, one more question. Would you say that the resistance in Iraq is also US sponsored as it is allowing the US to stay longer in Iraq? You know your US fighting on the both sides theory…

#43 in fact most airports did not even ask for photo ID for domestic travel in US....it was like taking your local bus.

#37 by Netizen

“iraq under saddam had no chance to come under jihadis. Saddam ruled with an iron hand and didn`t tolerate muslim fundamentalism either. the country was weakened but the republican guards/iraqi army was capable of dealing with any jihadi.”

This is an old argument it also includes this cliché that Saddam was a secular leader.

Saddam was a dictator and his first impulse like any dictator was to support himself. As I have argued in my other posts, the Iraqi government was weak and he probably was losing support in the Iraqi army too. In situations like that, dictators can and will accept help from anywhere. Terrorist did not have to fight war with him but could have offered him support in exchange for political help in Saudia. OBL definitely cut some deal in Afghanistan with the Taliban to stay there.

Just to give you one more example. Libya’s Qadafi posed as a revolutionary, anti American for a long time. He went to the extremes to help in blowing up an American plane. But when he saw he was going to lose his power, he turned real fast. Now, he is a staunch American supporter in the area. Dictators like Saddam and Qadafi have no ideology. They would do whatever it takes them to keep power.

So the assumption that Saddam would make a deal with the Terrorist was not unfounded but actually had very strong footings.

Romair,
Please read post #9 too.