Originally posted by chancremechanicWell, if the cap fits; wear it.
Get your reasoning in perspective, Howard. If the US hadn't armed the mujahadeen in their fight against the Soviets, we would have been damned for letting them go to the Commies...duh!
I don't necessarily agree that we should have helped Saddam fight the Ayatollah, but at the time the US and Iran were at serious odds...
But my point is that ...[text shortened]... ed "Well, America armed and trained them!" Can't you come up with something more original?🙄
Tell me C, do you think interferring with the Ruskies in Afghanistan and arming Sadam against the Ayatollah was worth the twin towers + Madrid + London bombings + 3 gulf wars + War in Afghanistan?
Originally posted by howardgeeThese US foreign policy decisions were based on the principle 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend'. At the time, the USSR was the biggest enemy of the US. Another was communist China. The US had been fighting these by directly or indirectly in various arenas for decades: Korea and Vietnam for example. They probably saw Afghanistan as potentially the USSR's Vietnam, and so armed and trained the muhajadeen. Iran was also causing problems for the US, so they armed Iraq its hostile neighbour.
Well, if the cap fits; wear it.
Tell me C, do you think interferring with the Ruskies in Afghanistan and arming Sadam against the Ayatollah was worth the twin towers + Madrid + London bombings + 3 gulf wars + War in Afghanistan?
Much later, Saddam invaded Kuwait. He must have imagined that the US would sit on its hands. In that respect he made the same mistake that Hitler made with Britain when he invaded Poland (although he was probably enboldened by previous victories that Britain took no real steps against). Could Saddam have done it without weapons he had obtained from the US? I don't know, but perhaps without US assistance, Iran would have conquered Iraq and caused even more problems in the region. I am sure the US did not want to face the prospect of a more powerful Iran under Ayatollah Kholmeini and his ilk. So, supporting Iraq at the time seems like a sensible decision. If the US supplied Saddam specifically with chemical/biological weapons then obviously there is an additional ethical issue there. But Saddam didn't have to invade Kuwait - it wasn't obvious he would do so. The US would have expected him to remain an ally and not cause problems. But since he is a backstabbing little sh^t, that didn't work out. As for Osama, the US might also have reasonable expected him to stay onside, given their assistance in fighting the invaders of Afghanistan, the USSR. Osama's story is that he turned against the US after seeing a building in Beirut bombed, but i suspect he is just a twisted f^ck, and would have found some other pretext. Another one he has come up with is the continued presence of US forces on Saudi Arabian soil post-GW1. Well, they were there with the blessing of the ruling Saudis - it was no occupation. I think Osama and his ilk just hate the US and the West in general in the same way Hitler and his cronies hated the Jews. Notice how both blame the problems of their people on their chosen hate object? And of course, Osama and his crew hate the Jews as well...
So in summary, no foreign policy decision will ever be 100% perfect because no-one has a crystal ball to see into the future with. all you can do is make decisions based on ambiguous and incomplete intelligence, history and guesswork. you may as well argue that allowing Marx and Engels to observe social conditions in England led to the October revolution. in a sense it is true, but it could not be forseen.
Originally posted by howardgeeWell, do you think the treaty of Versilles after WW1 and Chamberlain's and the rest of Europe's limp-wristed approach to Hitler were worth 6,000,000 Jewish lives, and 55,000,000 dead soldiers, sailors, airmen, and civilians from various nations? Tell me, when do you think military action is warranted in similar circumstances? Do you think we should cow-tow to the Islamofascists as Chamberlain did with Hitler? Since you don't believe in God, you should thank whatever or whomever it is you believe in that there was a man called Churchill.....
Well, if the cap fits; wear it.
Tell me C, do you think interferring with the Ruskies in Afghanistan and arming Sadam against the Ayatollah was worth the twin towers + Madrid + London bombings + 3 gulf wars + War in Afghanistan?
Originally posted by dfm65Unbelievable post!!! I couldn't have said it better. Thank you, dfm65 for your unbiased and accurate picture of U.S. foreign policy the past 25 years. If I could, I'd give 20 recs, but alas, all I can do give you a fat-juicy rec...thanks...😲 🙂
These US foreign policy decisions were based on the principle 'The enemy of my enemy is my friend'. At the time, the USSR was the biggest enemy of the US. Another was communist China. The US had been fighting these by directly or indirectly in various arenas for decades: Korea and Vietnam for example. They probably saw Afghanistan as potentially the USSR's ...[text shortened]... ns in England led to the October revolution. in a sense it is true, but it could not be forseen.
1 edit
Originally posted by arrakisWe haven't changed our minds, for one thing they'll cost £100 (about $150) and you have to buy them...
Attack on London: Blair Plays the Terror Card
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/070705terrorcard.htm
80% of people were against the idea of forced ID cards.
Originally posted by chancremechanicI can't see this as the right thread for anti war and US policy discussion, you'll turn it into yet another dead end anti-war thread.
Unbelievable post!!! I couldn't have said it better. Thank you, dfm65 for your unbiased and accurate picture of U.S. foreign policy the past 25 years. If I could, I'd give 20 recs, but alas, all I can do give you a fat-juicy rec...thanks...😲 🙂
Just remember that when they stopped treating the Soviet Union as an enemy the iron curtain came down and we all started getting on. The big scarey bear was a teddy after all.
Please be very specific when you point fingers at terrorists. Ordinary muslims and arab people are some of the friendliest people on earth and wouldn't harm a fly.
Originally posted by Tirau DanYes, and most of those thousands of Russian Mobile IBMs spotted from Satelites were wooden replicas!
I can't see this as the right thread for anti war and US policy discussion, you'll turn it into yet another dead end anti-war thread.
Just remember that when they stopped treating the Soviet Union as an enemy the iron curtain came down and we all started getting on. The big scarey bear was a teddy after all.
Please be very specific when you point f ...[text shortened]... ry muslims and arab people are some of the friendliest people on earth and wouldn't harm a fly.
Never forget that American Intelligence is an oxymoron.
Originally posted by howardgeeYet they had built the satellites that did the surveillance, and their economy was good enough that they didn't have to build wooden replicas - they could afford the real thing...
Yes, and most of those thousands of Russian Mobile IBMs spotted from Satelites were wooden replicas!
Never forget that American Intelligence is an oxymoron.