1  2  Next

Funny, but the Vancouver Sun ran an article about 3 weeks ago about an Iraqi who'd moved here who both Saddam and the US occupation (his word, not mine)

So I guess for every one example there is an equal and opposite example.

   

Most of the Iraqis that have been interviewed (who are still in Iraq) don't want the US there anymore either. At least under Saddam they had clean water and weren't being beaten in their homes so often.

   

3 weeks ago?

I don't think he fled neither Saddam nor the USA, but for sure he fled the insurgency, and we are going to see many such Iraqis coming here than going anywhere else...

   

oops, typo!


Let me try this again.....

Funny, but the Vancouver Sun ran an article about 3 weeks ago about an Iraqi who'd moved here(Canada) who despised both Saddam and the US occupation (his word, not mine)

   

And who, human, would you hold responsible for this insurgency?

   

If he moved after both Saddam and the US occupation my answer stand.

   

The Muftis of Syria, the Mullah of Iran, and the Imams of Iraq ALONE.

   

First off - I'm not entirely against the U.S. military being in Iraq from the perspective of spreading democracy but ...

The U.S. military is like the proverbial bull in a china shop.
Simple military operations like black op sweeps are conducted with little or no respect to the general populace.
When a person's home is invaded and ripped apart without any sense of decorum, you will make an enemy. When your home is invaded and ripped apart it is like being raped.
When a Stryker runs over a person's vehicle with a reckless disregard, you make an enemy.
If the U.S. Military would just treat the citizens in Iraq like they would treat other U.S. citizens, things would calm down at an exponential rate.

   

They had no power in Iraq before the US illegally invaded to get at the oil.



All good points, McPuck. The history of the US in the area isn't good though...especially when it comes to democracy. Iran had a fledgling democracy after they kicked the British out, the CIA ran a coup and installed the shah. In 1979 when the people of Iran stood up and kicked the shah out, Ayotollah Khomeni was working with a democratic movement. Khomeni screwed them in the end, but they did help him get to power because they opposed the US.

The US has been supporting the House of Saud. One of the groups opposing the Saudi royal family are people working for democracy. The US helps to keep tabs on these damgerous insurgents who want to promote democracy.

The US also brought Saddam to power and kept him there during some of his worst crimes against humanity. Again, people belonging to democratic movements were considered to be enemies and oppressed. Saddam was very much a creature of George Bush Sr., BTW. That's who found him and promoted him (George was in charge of the CIA then), it was George (Veep now) who pushed for the US strengthen ties with Iraq during the Reagan administration. It was George who may have given a tacit nod for Saddam to invade Kuwait.

There are other examples, but those are the ones with most impact on the present situation. When I hear that the US is spreading democracy in the Middle East I just giggle and shake my head.

   

How could they regret kicking out the Shah? Tell me the redeeming factor that makes Savak and the Shah a good thing? Your point is so ludicrous you should do stand up if it wasn't for the fact it's so repulsive.

   

Yes as in the ARTICLE was WRITTEN 3 week ago.




He fled Iraq because of Saddam. You can think what ever you want.

   

About that Iran thingy:


http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/blum/iran_kh.html

   

Those students are the next generation Godz, all born after the revolution. How many of their parents do you think still support the revolution?

   

1  2  Next