error

Yeah, the american government is kicking his ass now becuse he killed the kurds with
poison gas in .. 19-? 198? 1981? It was 1981?
Then why is he shaking his hand in 1983?
I thought we hated these guys?

Oh, I get it. Ha ha.

20 year old picture. SO relevant.

You know, there are some pictures of Carter shaking Brezhnev's hand. Does this make the United States responsible for the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan?

You people are infants.

so I suppose that you, simple simon, excuse the Taliban right? Just coz they shook hands with al-qaida didn't mean they were responsible for al-qaidas crimes right?

Not exactly the same thing my Sri Lankan friend.

In the 1980s The United States had a vested interest in supporting the Iraqi regime against the encroachment of a belligerent and militarily potent Iran. The fact that we encouraged and supported Hussein against the Iranians has never been denied.

By 1989 our relationship with Hussein had cooled quite a bit. With Hussein's invasion of Kuwait in 1990 our relationship became adversarial. For the last 13 years we have been bitter enemies.

The Taliban are a collection of fundamentalist Islamists. They provided shelter to a terrorist organization which also, by chance, just happens to consist of fundamentalist Islamists. Their relationship would still be ongoing had it not been interrupted by the United States Army.

I fail to see the similarities between these two relationships.

Just because the vast majority of American Nazi's and KKK are republicans does not mean the republicans are Nazi's or racists.

Hey, Uncle Floyd!

Name a Republican elected to federal office that is now or has ever been a member of the KKK, and I'll name a Democrat that is.

Hell, I'll go first. Sen. Robert Byrd (D) W Va.

Your turn...

The US supported the shameful acts of the Iraqi regime. The Taliban supported the shameful acts of al-qaida.

The US didnt go after the Taliban because of its grave human rights abuses, it went after the Taliban because of its support of Al-Qaida.

Therefore it held the Taliban responsible for Al-Qaidas crimes. Similarly, the US should then be responsible for Saddam's crimes (during the 80s).


But answer me this. Why was Iran hostile to the US in the first place? Why were the students so hostile they took US citizens hostage?

Does hatred exist in a vacuum?

X you are not making a valid point.

The fact that we supported Iraq in a war against Iran in the 1980's doesn't mean we are responsible for the excesses of the Iraqis at the time - and we are especially without responsibility since 1990.

The Taliban were given an opportunity to surrender the terrorists that they harbored. They declined. They are hence guilty in defense. The decision to remove them from power was merely a pleasant side-effect of pursuing the terrorists.

The US was supporting Saddam with C and B weapons true? Although he used them on the Iranians, he also used them on the Kurds. Now if the US disapproved of him using them on the Kurds, surely they would have withdrawn support am I correct? But they did not, they continued support - thus condoning his activities. In effect, they were accomplices to the murders.

Its the same thing as providing a gun to a known felon.

Try doing that in the US and see if u dont go to jail.

In either case, please explain why Iran was a threat in the first place? Was the US not friendly with Iran up until the late 1970s? What was it that made Iranians so bitter towards the US?

You cannot expect these folks to jump up and start
airing dirty CIA laundry about the overthrow of democracies
and installations of nice little despots like the Shaw.
Come on.

The damn SHAH.
Fuck it.

X, your analogy to arming a criminal is not accurate.

Iraq was our client in a war against Iran. The purpose of this war (from the viewpoint of the United States) was to keep the Iranians occupied at home so that they could not continue with the exportation of their "Islamic Revolution". This Shiite religious revival was decidedly anti-Western in its leanings, and Islamic revolutionaries threatened what stability there was in the region. The Soviet Union had fairly reliable clients in Syria, Jordan and Egypt, and had invaded Pakistan when they proved to be less than reliable. Due to the fact that the Cold War was still in full swing, we could not countenance a threat to our ready access to Arabian oil.

You make the accusation that the United States provided Iraq with biological and chemical weapons. This charge has been repeated so many times here that no one has challenged it's authenticity. I do so now. Kindly provide evidence which proves the United States provided anything more than information on the manufacture of such weapons.

Who can be easily tied to Saddam Hussein's WMD programs are the French and the Germans, on the other hand.

"Kindly provide evidence which proves the United States provided anything more than information on the manufacture of such weapons" - Well what the fuck else is there? You get your panties in a bunch because the russians sold them nightvision and artillery and shit but when we give them a copy of 'Biochem Warfare for Dummies' you act like we were being benevolent to do so. Your disgraceful, obvious ploys to distract from the reality of matters is truly laughable and insignifigant. Just go home already (back to your freeper mothership) because no other than your fellow freepers is buying this shit. And they would believe anything you told them (case in point, they guy that said saddam kills 5,000 babies a day). Halfwit murderous bastards. Just fuck off and die already.

Well, Aren't you, simon, a product of biological warfare? Your brain got way messed up by something and you prove it everytime you post your inane garbage.

I once saw that movie where the beloved dog protested the family from harm and got rabid. Even though the family loved the dog once and fed it always they killed it. Et Tu Saddam?

...you did not just compare Saddam to Old Yeller. There is no way.

That just defies belief. I think I'll have to chalk that up as 'dumbest comment of the day'.

But at least thank you for not gleefully yelling about bombs dropping and bringing 'freedom' to the iraqi people. For that at least I thank you.

* shakes angry fist at simon *

Also, i notice the seemingly insignifigant typo regarding 'protested the family from harm'... could that be a freudian slip? Are you realizing that those who would implement our civil liberties are currently defending them? And thus the America we all grew up with, because truly the America of today is a much different beast.

Sadly , Old Yeller was a much better humanist than Saddam but in truth we did once support the Sadass until he became rabid. Like old yeller we had to put an end to him.

I'm no writer, but I do appreciate the award

Hey, whattdya know?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/13/wrus13.xml&sSheet=/portal/2003/04/13/ixportaltop.html

The Russians were spying on the British and providing the intelligence to Saddam Hussein.

Oh, those Europeans. So principled in their opposition to an 'unjust' war.

And POIO, your argument seems to be what, exactly? If the United States provided the Iraqis with technical know-how, but the French and Germans provided them with the actual materials and experts who is REALLY guilty of providing them with chemical and biological weapons?

Been to any 'massive' anti-war demonstrations lately? How many showed up in Rome today? Madrid? London? Berlin?

Stick a fork in 'em. They're done.

Simon has returned
to spread his disease
Even though he's resistant
Pass the penicillin please.

But in the end
he is only one
little and
lonely
virus.

And time will soon perforate his sticky membrane of hate.

Poetry falling from the lips of those who advocate human bondage.

Ah, Irony, where is your sting?

The irony Simpleton is that you use a phrase like irony in the same sentence where you accuse the poster of advocating bondage. The real pattern of your sick mind is that you advocate subjecting the American people and countless millions to vassalage and unending beneath the oil barons whose favor you so crave. You are a cur, a varmint, a sad pathetic excuse for what might have been. And your logic of disease is not creative or poetic it is merely trite repetitive propaganda.

You have no power here. Begone!

My, what a well-reasoned and consise appraisal of the situation.

Oil Barons to reduce American citizens to human bondage, eh?

Have you considered a switch to decaf? Or perhaps a nice green tea?

I accused the poster of being in favor of human bondage because it is obvious that the poster IS so inclined. The poster rises in support of the proposition that the campaign recently launched against Iraq is inhumane because of the number of civilian casualties. This position means that he or she would prefer that the campaign did not occur. Hence the poster is in favor of the status quo ante bellum - Saddam Hussein still in power and his people in a condition of human bondage.

Get it yet? Or do you need a diagram?

You scum, just because the tyrant is now the U.S. doesn’t mean they
are now all warm towards the source of the death that began 13 years ago when we told Saddam we don’t care about ‘your arab arab conflict’
allowing him to believe we had no problem with his invasion of Kuwait.
We shattered that people and your flapping lips (fingers, in this case)
wont change the face under the death mask even if it’s a different mask.

USA, France, Germany, Britain and Italy were all involved in providing Iraq with chemical and biological weapons. I cannot be bothered to find you the sources you request.

It is true that Iran was a threat to the US.

But the question I am asking you is:

Why was Iran a threat to the US in the first place?

I think I clearly stated the reason why Iran was a threat to the US above.

However, in the interest of clarity, let us recap.

The United States supported the Shah of Iran. The Shah of Iran was an autocratic ruler who kept people in line through his secret police. He was widely disliked. The Iranian Shiite population of Iran which opposed the Shah's regime adopted as a leader a fundamentalist cleric, the Ayatollah Khomeni. This man ushered into existence a new, stridently anti-Western religious fundamentalism, the decendant of which we now refer to as Islamism. It is in this conflict that the seeds of the current World crisis was sown.

So, in short, the Iranian fundamentalists resented the US for supporting the Shah, and the US feared the power of a popular religious movement (made more popular by it's demonstrated ability to humble the US under the weak-kneed President Carter) which could theoretically upset what stability there was in the region.

Simon, presenting calm, well-reasoned debate, 1.

Everybody else, oferring historical distorsions, hysterical pronouncements, and outright personal abuse: 0.

It is as you said.

Now why did the US support an asshole like the Shah in the first place?

To Simon

ABC123

X, the reason we supported the Shah was one of geopolitical necessity. His country provides a buffer state which denied the Soviets easy access to the Persian Gulf or to the subcontinent of India. He was also a reliable ally in a region filled with other despots who were more willing to play both sides of the fence (Egypt comes to mind).

President Carter's subsequent failure to deal effectively with the Iranian Islamic Revolution is the catalyst for all the troubles which the United States is now dealing with today.

And of course the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to that dismal failure of an anti-semitic appeaser. But then again, why not?

As I am sometimes reminded by the Wall Street Journal, Arafat won a Nobel Peace Prize in 1994.

Conservatives:1
Evolution:0

...the Shah was that he was not a supporter of Arab Nationalism, was "our kind of guy" to the elites, and was willing to rape his country for the benefit of himself and the Oil Elites.

"Friendly" Despots are easier to "do business with" than Democratic Regimes that look after their country's interests first.

either way,

The US held the Iranian people hostage in order to further its own goals

WHO CARES IF AMARICA CONSPIRRED WITH SADDAMA OSAMA!!!

THIS IS AMARICA AND IF YUO DONT NOT LIKE IT THAN GET THE FUCK OUT AND GO TO CUBA AND KILL YORESLEF!!!

WE MAKE ALLANCIES WITH WHO EVER WE NEDE TO. WHEN WE NEDED SADDAMA HE SHOWED UP FOR DUTY TO GET THE COMMYS AND THE DIRTY IRANI FUNDYS.

AND NOW HE DEFIED US. SADDAMA HAD THIS DUM ASS IDEA THAT ARAB OIL SHOULD HELP THE ARABS!!

YEAH TOO BAD THAT YOUR WEEK AND WERE STRONG PUNK!!!! WE GOT YOURE OIL NOW!!!

RUMSFELD 4EVER!!!!

Its relevant because we should look at it long and hard while we are "helping" Iraq create their new government. The choice/backing of a leader 20 years ago can have large consequences today.

Earlier today, I read a post on here where utterfailure, our resident imbecile, claimed this picture was taken "after" Hussein massacred the Kurds.

This picture was taken in 1983 and the Kurdish massacre occured in 1988.

It is easy to recognize that these 5th Columnists have absolutely zero credibility, provided you can stomache their dribblings long enough!

"Yeah, the american government is kicking his ass now becuse he killed the kurds with
poison gas in .. 19-? 198? 1981? It was 1981?
Then why is he shaking his hand in 1983?
I thought we hated these guys?"

It happened in 1988 you fucking pig eating moron.

http://www.kdp.pp.se/chemical.html

March 17, 1988.

Do some fucking research, idiot.

"...you fucking pig eating moron."

Way to go, Eric. Whenever we conservatives have nothing intelligent to say, we can always resort to hurling asinine insults. It really helps demonstrate how simpleminded and childish we are. Great job!

[It happened in 1988 you fucking pig eating moron.]
Don't you like fucking and eating pork? Against your religion?

I'd rather eat tube steak, if you know what I mean. I'm also skilled at playing the skin flute, if you know what I mean.

I know exactly what you mean. I plan to be eating systemfailures "tube steak" a little later this evening!

I can't wait to stick it to you tonight, Diogenes! You're such a slut. You gonna wear that mini-skirt and pumps?

I can't wait for my big stud to give it to me hard!!

Can I get in on a little bit of the action? Maybe some three way, or sloppy seconds?

Two big studs in the same night! I'm a lucky girl I am I am!!!!

We'll plug every orifice you've got, you fucking whore. You've got three holes and two hands. You need to cover up the two holes you don't want to start with!

Maybe afterwards, I can't get you to fuck me up my ass system? I've always wondered what it would feel like to have a man up there, rooting around...

I'm all about fulfilling fantasies. I'll fuck you in the ass. No problem. Just let me satisfy that bitch Diogenes first. k?

You two need to remember:

Systemfailure rulez, bitches!

You da bomb, baby. You da bomb!

I'm not gettin' none. Though I'd not mind buggering the lot of ya and then headin' down to the pub to get pissed...

..bad people.
Blaim the British.

Would you be willing to give me a golden shower?

www.kobehq.com

watch out!! There's are "Dio, Sheepdog, systemfailure & Meyer imps" under your bed!

You're nutty as a fruitcake!

All of us KOBES are nutcases.

www.kobehq.com