Iraq is a Safer Place Without Saddam?!!

Another dimwited post claiming that Iraqis were better off under a despotic megalomaniac dictator than a representative Government elected by the people.

Yes; lefties are THAT incredibly stupid.
 
NOVA said:
Who was it again that demanded the US get out of Iraq and leave them to suffer civil war ?

And who ultimately did abandon them..?
Click to expand...

But the American occupation produced all the killing. Things were better while Iraq was a native tyranny, for almost everyone but the Kurds.
 
Truth Detector said:
Another dimwited post claiming that Iraqis were better off under a despotic megalomaniac dictator than a representative Government elected by the people.

Yes; lefties are THAT incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...
a simple question for you:

do you believe that the people of the artificially constructed "country" of Iraq have a greater stake in establishing and promoting a Jeffersonian multicultural democracy than they do in their own self identities as sunnis, shiites and kurds?
 
maineman said:
many of us on the left, especially those who had experience dealing with arabs and muslims, knew that the artificially created "country" of Iraq was a foolish contrivance of ignorant western european christians in the wake of WWI who had no idea about the incredible enmity that had existed for a millennium between sunni and shiite muslims and kurds. Iraqis have no inherent deep seated identity as Iraqis, but as sunnis or shiites or kurds foremost. They will always be at each other's throats and we could accomplish any long term peaceful "resolution" - and I use that term in its loosest form - were we to partition the land into three different countries. In absence of outside "peacekeepers" keeping a lid on sectarian violence by force of arms, the muslim sects forced to coexist in "Iraq" will forever be slaughtering one another.

And if Bush had surrounded himself with real middle eastern experts instead of neocon buffoons, he would have known that.
Click to expand...

So we were to forever have troops standing guard in the no fly zones? Had Bush not gone in to remove Saddam, was that the option you wise people on the left would have suggested?

If so, keep in mind, the very rationale for terrorists attacks on the US and its citizens by Al Queda and the like was that US troops were on Arab soil in Saudi and Kuwait to begin with.
 
maineman said:
the partitioning of the former Ottoman empire, done by victorious europeans, was done without regard to the ethnicities and the animosities of the people summarily and artificially clumped together. Are you really doubting that?
Click to expand...

Who has questioned the stupidity of what was done back after WWI????

Are you suggesting we leave dictators in power to rape and murder those they choose? Or perhaps you have a resolution for the problems in the middle east you would care to share?
 
Superfreak said:
Who has questioned the stupidity of what was done back after WWI????

Are you suggesting we leave dictators in power to rape and murder those they choose? Or perhaps you have a resolution for the problems in the middle east you would care to share?
Click to expand...

Perhaps it is none of your business and should be arranged by those concerned?
 
all the people who are now dead because we went into Iraq might have a bone to pick with you super duper.

I guess that is why your happy they are dead and cant speak
 
iolo said:
Perhaps it is none of your business and should be arranged by those concerned?
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should refrain from entering a conversation if you have nothing of value to add. He posed a point, I asked for his opinions. If you don't like that, perhaps you could shut your ass.
 
Anti-Party said:
"
I had a feeling that damn ignorant Christians were to blame for everything"

Take your time an explain why the Christians are at fault...

After all you are a Right Winger and know about Christianity and I don't because in your eyes I'm a Left Winger when I state Im a Right Winger.

"I'm through feeling sorry for women getting stoned and the little girls forced to screw old men....time to realize,

we can't win 'em all....." Well yea, you cant win when you are Libertarian. Because of a false perspective.

Libertarians and Tea Party are NO different than the Barbarians. It's the absolute definition of Conservative. Those who do not want change in any way/shape or form.
Click to expand...


Why should I explain why Christians were at fault....Maineman made the claim, ask him.

Libertarians and Tea Party are NO different than the Barbarians. It's the absolute definition of Conservative.?
Really ?.....Look up the definition and give us some proof. Or better yet, just stfu.
While you at it, look up the definition of sarcasm and learn to recognize it when you see it in print...
 
Superfreak said:
So we were to forever have troops standing guard in the no fly zones? Had Bush not gone in to remove Saddam, was that the option you wise people on the left would have suggested?

If so, keep in mind, the very rationale for terrorists attacks on the US and its citizens by Al Queda and the like was that US troops were on Arab soil in Saudi and Kuwait to begin with.
Click to expand...

what do the no-fly zones have to do with this discussion? Do you think we might have taken into consideration the wishes of the Iraqi people when we began muddling in their internal affairs? And that question is valid all the way back to the end of WWI. "Iraq" is a ridiculous, artificial construct of victorious europeans who didn't know the difference between a sunni, a shiite and a kurd.... to them, they were all just vanquished brown skinned rag headed savages sitting on oil.

And yes... Osama bin Laden loudly proclaimed that the evil USA would, in fact, invade, conquer and occupy an oil rich arab nation. Nothing like playing right into the enemy's hand's, eh?
 
maineman said:
what do the no-fly zones have to do with this discussion? Do you think we might have taken into consideration the wishes of the Iraqi people when we began muddling in their internal affairs? And that question is valid all the way back to the end of WWI. "Iraq" is a ridiculous, artificial construct of victorious europeans who didn't know the difference between a sunni, a shiite and a kurd.... to them, they were all just vanquished brown skinned rag headed savages sitting on oil.
Click to expand...

NO ONE is questioning the stupidity of what was done after WWI. So why don't YOU tell us what that has to do with the Iraq war and removal of Saddam. What was YOUR idea as to what should have been done. There were three options:

1) Remove Saddam from power
2) Let Saddam remain in power and keep no fly zones
3) Let Saddam remain in power and don't keep no fly zones

So tell us Maine... what is it that you would have had us do?

This discussion was about the Iraq war that continued under Bush. Or did you fail to read anything prior to your posting about the Ottoman breakup?

And yes... Osama bin Laden loudly proclaimed that the evil USA would, in fact, invade, conquer and occupy an oil rich arab nation. Nothing like playing right into the enemy's hand's, eh?
Click to expand...

LMAO... way to avoid what I stated. I will ask again... was the fact that US troops were on Saudi soil a point of contention with the terrorists and used as a justification for attacks on US interests PRIOR to the continuation of the Iraq war under Bush?

I know you can have an honest discussion Maine... so lets try to do so.
 
Superfreak said:
Who has questioned the stupidity of what was done back after WWI????

Are you suggesting we leave dictators in power to rape and murder those they choose? Or perhaps you have a resolution for the problems in the middle east you would care to share?
Click to expand...

leaving dictators in power to rap and murder those they choose seemed to be just fine with both republican and democratic administrations when it came to Idi Amin in the 70's. Message boards like this didn't really exist then, but, do tell... were you clamoring for America to invade, conquer and occupy Uganda?

Regarding my suggested resolution to the middle east, I will just say that I spent enough time there to learn that I didn't know anywhere near as much as I thought I did or should about that region and that my government shared in that ignorance. I have little hope for peaceful solutions, but I have a good idea what WON'T work, and that would be to try and cram Jeffersonian democracy down the throats of sunnis, shiites and kurds thrust together by idiotic europeans. The disparate ethnic groups living within the geographic borders of the place we call Iraq have no interest in sitting down and singing Kumbaya by the banks of the fucking Euphrates, that is for certain. They aren't as enamored with western democracy as we are.
 
maineman said:
leaving dictators in power to rap and murder those they choose seemed to be just fine with both republican and democratic administrations when it came to Idi Amin in the 70's. Message boards like this didn't really exist then, but, do tell... were you clamoring for America to invade, conquer and occupy Uganda?
Click to expand...

So your answer is yes, you think that is what we should do? Understood.

Regarding my suggested resolution to the middle east, I will just say that I spent enough time there to learn that I didn't know anywhere near as much as I thought I did or should about that region and that my government shared in that ignorance. I have little hope for peaceful solutions, but I have a good idea what WON'T work, and that would be to try and cram Jeffersonian democracy down the throats of sunnis, shiites and kurds thrust together by idiotic europeans. The disparate ethnic groups living within the geographic borders of the place we call Iraq have no interest in sitting down and singing Kumbaya by the banks of the fucking Euphrates, that is for certain. They aren't as enamored with western democracy as we are.
Click to expand...

So your solution is to stay the hell out of it. That is all you had to say.
 
absolutely. Infidel troops on sacred muslim soil infuriated OBL and were a great recruiting tool for Islamic extremism. The way to fix that, according to the neocons, was obviously to send in a half a million more infidel troops onto oil rich muslim soil, conquer, and occupy that land, and then shove the teachings of our founding fathers down their throats. Wicked smart.
 
Superfreak said:
So your answer is yes, you think that is what we should do? Understood.



So your solution is to stay the hell out of it. That is all you had to say.
Click to expand...

why did you avoid giving me an honest answer to my question about Uganda? I'll wait tip you grow a set.
 
maineman said:
why did you avoid giving me an honest answer to my question about Uganda? I'll wait tip you grow a set.
Click to expand...

No, I don't think we should go in to Uganda.

Funny how you complain about my not answering a question on a country we aren't discussing... when at the same time you continue to fail to answer the questions I asked you.

With our troops on the border protecting the no fly zone... what do you think we should have done at that point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top