Suicidesoldier#1
(?)Community Member
- Report Post
- Posted: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:15:46 +0000
The20
Suicidesoldier#1
The20
It's not so much that they have wars, it's more that they started them all, lie to get them started and are in the news because of dead civilians all the time.
That and Guantanamo.
That and Guantanamo.
The irony being of course that it was never us that tortured Detainees.
An unfortunate truth perhaps?
Lie to get them started? xp
So Saddam Hussein wasn't evil? xp
Or perhaps Osama Bin Laden?
Oh, and Saddam was evil? Well, maybe the US should have thought of that when they supported him during the Iraq-Iran war in the eighties.
This gem that was part of the campaign to get the rest of the world involved in the first Gulf War: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_(testimony)
On a side note, who tortures detainees in a detention camp inside an US military base if not the US?
The military builds the bases, but the military does not operate in them. Iraqi forces for instance, were responsible for such things, and
There were many justifications for the war, such as previous human rights abuses, including the Halajba poison gas attacks, the An-Anfal Genocide,, his sub-sequent violation of his treaty and attempted *second* invasion into Kuwait, and he did in fact have weapons of mass destruction in 1991; there was no reason to believe he wouldn't, now. He did in fact have what would classify as WMD's, but more importantly he had what was mostly botched materials. Since his poison gas and nerve gas degraded over time it likely would have been unable to kill as many people, but since he had tried before and was willing to use it, and obviously thought it would work, it does not in any way spare him from guilt or violation of his treaty for trying to develop working weapons. Some informants in Iraq did lie about the volume of potential materials present, but he still had at least 1000 tons of VX gas and 8500 liters of Anthrax still unaccounted for in the U.N.'s resolution. Again, while a lot of it degraded, it doesn't mean he didn't have it, keep it, or try to use it etc. But no, it's not the only reason for the invasion, nor was it the only proposed.
As far as your first idea that the Persian gulf war was only around the Nayirah testimony?
The criticism, has mostly been, that the Iraqi's returned the incubators and only killed 100 babies, instead of several hundred. But the fact still remains he killed at least 10,000 people with poison gas and nerve gas, literally the single most painful way to die, and countless more people who died from side effects years later. He was waging a campaign of genocide and tried to wipe out the kurds, whom he killed hundreds of thousands of, and presumably into the millions since so many people can't be accounted for. If that's not a call for war, I don't know what is. What, so I mean, let's pretend the testimony was a farce and Iraq had only killed 2 babies. In what way does this invalidate the rest of what Saddam did?
Also Iran attacked first and we were reluctant to help out either side until the U.N. called for an intervention. Since we neither destroyed Iran or Iraq our goal was mostly to end the fighting.
As well, we've supported lots of people with a history of problems. Cuba, for instance, we initially supported the overthrow of the previous government, until a worse man came to power. Britain had anti-Semitic views and refused to defend Israel when they literally left them to die in in the 6 day war. So, yes, we've supported a lot of organizations who weren't necessarily right in order to quell violence and put an end to fighting. This was WWI, and WWII, where we put an end to the bloodshed, which both of which were presumably "just another European war". France, Britain, Spain, Germany, had all been allies and enemies at one point before.
We've always been reluctant to intervene. Perhaps too much so. It's not until American soil is attacked or we're faced with massive bloodshed that we suddenly intervene when we could have prevented it, earlier.
I'll agree that had we just stepped in sooner, we could have solved the issues. But the idea that now that we're invading we're evil? Kind of silly.