What do you think of George W. Bush?

Post Reply New Topic

the us didnt try and contain saddam. they helped put him into power and supported him for 30 years.

was the u.s allowing saddam to put down the shia uprising containing or supporting him do you think?

he was good for the stability of the region and the stability of the oil supply as far as they were concerned. human rights and democracy have nothing to do with it except in the sense that the last thing washington wants is democratic control of oil supply. everyone knows that the the chief executive of exxon has not just a privilege but a right to take all of iraqs oil profits.

no error. stormin norman let saddam fly his planes into the no fly zone especially to butcher the uprising.

and the exxon thing isnt a joke its reality

incorrect, get facts straight

I was under the impression that in late 2002, early 2003, Saddam cooperated with the inspectors. Can you name an incident or a report from the inspectors themselves that said Saddam didn't cooperate at that time?

How about the months leading upto the war and even a little before that? Not a specific incident, but the delays and uncooperative nature of the Iraqis was what got the ball rolling. He did allow inspectors, but not free access like he was supposed to cornice.

That exxon thing must be a joke or someone is playing one on you car crash.

"The practical expression of this policy came in the decisions made by the military on the ground. U.S. commanders spurned the rebels' plea for help. The United States allowed Iraq to send Republican Guard units into southern cities and to fly helicopter gunships. (This in spite of a ban on flights, articulated by Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf with considerable swagger: "You fly, you die.") The consequences were devastating. Hussein's forces leveled the historical centers of the Shiite towns, bombarded sacred Shiite shrines and executed thousands on the spot. By some estimates, 100,000 people died in reprisal killings between March and September. Many of these atrocities were committed in proximity to American troops, who were under orders not to intervene. "


http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... ge=printer

theres at least two problems with this: one its Bush, Sr., who at the time I did not care for, and two, you're quoting the left one sided Washington Post, which much worse to the left back then.

Which would be to the centre... liberal = tolerant/progressive in social terms, as opposed to moralising or authoritarian. I suspect genuinely radical social views which are the hallmark of the left don't get much of an airing.

Incidentally, as this is a political issue not a social one in question, I think my point was pretty valid.

Dunc

[quote="duncvis]Sounds like your doggedly held opinions being questioned, rather than cast iron facts Epimonandas... conservative media never distort the truth do they?

Dunc[/quote]

Neither do the Left media do they? (I'm being sarcastic of course).

No, I don't think that Bush thing is true. I just meant it mattered less because I WAS left for his administration and I still did not disagree with the Iraq attack. I don't think the Post is that truthful especially back then as I've they have gotten a little less left only recently.

And the get the facts straight quote just meant I thought that stuff was pure bull.

thats what they would say on fox news.

do you think the ceo's of most corporations vote democrat epimonandas?

because as far as i can see. the person who owns a media outlet is the person most likely to have control over that outlet.

how many american papers actively opposed iraq war II. the "liberal" new york times was all for it wasnt it? that guy (i forget his name) who was clintons foreign policy chief stated his reasons for supporting the war as "the hidden hand of the market sometimes needs the hidden fist".

friedman is his name. he wanted to force private i.e american ownership of iraqs economy. he can come out and say it, bush cant. no right minded indivdual is going to support that war so they have to drum up reasons for it like WMD and democracy.

its a complete crock of s**t in all honesty