Bush: 'Iraq should be grateful'

[Johnny Canuck3]

The US doesn't have to "own everything" though, does it? It can dominate a nation's markets and economies in other ways...although you wouldn't understand that since your job, here, is to defend the USA (odd thing for a Canadian to do).

I gave the xample of Liberia....pity you had to misrepresent my post in order to make a cheap shot.

Out of all the world's economies, you pick Liberia because it might fit your theory. Too bad most others don't.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

It has spent a great deal of time, effort and money trying to hijack the economy and get its 'revenge'.

More paranoid thinking, plus projection.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Johnny, These were well-off developed countries to begin with, the impact the war had was to just to give them a blip in their progress, they would have become what they are now anyway - I can't believe you are falling for such spurious logic.

Which war are you talking about, WW1 or WW2?

 

[newharper]

Without the rise of fascism, it likely would have become a communist country.

What you seem to be blinded to, is that, that may have not been a totally disastrous possibility.

Communism has been no more tried than democracy.

 

[yield]

But the Vietnamese are clamouring for business with the US, there is a tourism business growing there for US tourists, and everyone wants the Yankee dollar. Meanwhile, the USSR is gone, and they hate China.

So: who won that war after all?

Sometimes you have to take the long view.

Strange I thought you were a Humanist, Johnny? Were's your compassion?

The "long view" as in "history with be my judge"? It's a fucking tragedy. The Lancet reckons that hundreds of thousands are dead as a result of US/UK actions. To be brutally honest I'm beginning to think that, yes, most Iraqis and definitely those who have lost someone they love, were better off under the brutal tyrant Saddam Hussein.

The long view?!? Given long enough the Sun will be gone...

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

What you seem to be blinded to, is that, that may have not been a totally disastrous possibility.

Communism has been no more tried than democracy.

I know about this hypothetical communism that's never been tried.

What I meant when I said that, is that they would have gotten the same kind of communism, or something similar to what was in the USSR.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Strange I thought you were a Humanist, Johnny? Were's your compassion?

The "long view" as in "history with be my judge"? It's a fucking tragedy. The Lancet reckons that hundreds of thousands are dead as a result of US/UK actions. To be brutally honest I'm beginning to think that, yes, most Iraqis and definitely those who have lost someone they love, were better off under the brutal tyrant Saddam Hussein.

The long view?!? Given long enough the Sun will be gone...

It has nothing to do with humanism. Death does occur. To try and base a politics on the proposition that at no time and under no circumstances, must people die, would be noble, but naive.

 

[yield]

It has nothing to do with humanism. Death does occur. To try and base a politics on the proposition that at no time and under no circumstances, must people die, would be noble, but naive.

Strange, I would have thought a well educated man, like yourself, would both know what Humanism was and also be polite enough to address the point they were quoting?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Strange, I would have thought a well educated man, like yourself, would both know what Humanism was and also be polite enough to address the point they were quoting?

I guess there were some gaps in my learnin'.

 

[N_igma]

It's ironic that some people believe that this war was fought in a realist paradigm.

The opposite is true, the neo-cons are an Idealist bunch and they just assumed that "liberating" Iraq would be beneficial to them. I.e. Having the Iraqi people on their side, securing oil revenues in return of Iraqi support and "stablizisation" of the area. Never did their research though, if history teaches anything, it's to stay the fuck away from the middle east. Fact.

 

[Rentonite]

What is So hard to understand?
The war on Terror is in defense of the United States
Getting rid of the Taliban and Saddam is just a start.
this whole thing is in response to the muslim terrorist attacks.

On the global scale Iraq is just a brush fire.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

What is So hard to understand?
The war on Terror is in defense of the United States
Getting rid of the Taliban and Saddam is just a start.
this whole thing is in response to the muslim terrorist attacks.

On the global scale Iraq is just a brush fire.

But, the US has faltered in its resolve, hasn't it?

911 was too long ago. Now, they're cutting and running from Iraq, and it's my guess that the US public won't have much stomach for many more overseas campaigns.

Where will the war on terror next be fought?

 

[Kaka Tim]

What is So hard to understand?
The war on Terror is in defense of the United States
Getting rid of the Taliban and Saddam is just a start.
this whole thing is in response to the muslim terrorist attacks.

On the global scale Iraq is just a brush fire.

Yes - Many many people fear that Iraq and Afghanistan were 'just the start'.

the start of world war three.

 

[Aldebaran]

US President George W Bush said Iraqi people should be grateful to the US for the 2003 invasion and the removal of Saddam Hussein.

He accepted that the conflict, which has cost tens of thousands of lives, had destabilised Iraq but insisted getting rid of Saddam was essential.

"We liberated that country from a tyrant. I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude," he said.

Answer of Aldebaran:
Would he dare to say that in my face, he would have no teeth left before he could blink his eyes (possibly some other dammage could be added).

Answer of the direct relatives of my loved ones killed by this mass murderer:
"Would he say that to my face he wouldn't have a life left".

Multiply that by hundreds of thousands in Iraq and you have the amount of gratitude he seems to think he has a right to expect.

salaam.

 

[nino_savatte]

Pa-ra-noid.

Hmmmm, you often shout this when I get close to the truth. This is what is commonly known as demonising your opponent. But you're used to smear tactics, that's what you do best. If someone exposes your lies you resort to the tried and tested smear tactic.

W.E.A.S.E.L
L.I.A.R.

 

[nino_savatte]

Out of all the world's economies, you pick Liberia because it might fit your theory. Too bad most others don't.

It isn't a theory, it's a reality and it actually happened in Liberia. I could list many other countries where this has happened. The trouble with you, Johnny, is that you can't stand the truth. In Canuckworld, everyone loves the Yanks and every country wants to suborn it's markets and economy to the US without so much as a fight.

But for you, everyone "wants the Yankee dollar", that's what is called a "narrative". Funnily enough, you have nothing to support your shoddy thesis, whereas there is plenty of evidence to support what I am saying.

 

[nino_savatte]

Can't be arsed...

Of course not, you're too weak.

 

[nino_savatte]

More paranoid thinking, plus projection.

How typical of you not to refute my argument. Instead you rely on ye olde smear tactic. Nice...but totally expected from a man with the intellect of a cream cracker.