Had we not gone into Iraq, what would have happened to Vice-President Cheney's
"shadow government?" How would Halliburton make all that money? and ad
infinitum. Why didn't we go into Saudi Arabia, or Syria the REAL sources of the
terrorists and their financing? Not to mention Egypt and Iran.
The issue was not saving people, it was saving face for the Ex-former Pres bush
& minions who still had egg on their faces.
The French have always had interests in Africa, why did they not go in? Why
didn't China go in?
Why didn't Rwanda's neighbors go in?
So in your mind the whole burden should be shouldered by the US? or is this a
back-door way of saying that you agree with me that the Iraq deal was a farce to
begin with, and that the incumbent administration should be held criminally
responsible for their misrepresentations, lies and miscellaneous cheating?
But hypocrisy it is not - the whole deal smells much fouler than that.
Fair Enough.
So substitute "Criminally Negligent" for "Criminally responsible".
Now tell me that it isn't hypocritical of the US to not go into Rwanda,
and to openly state that 800,000 people being murdered is of no
consequence to the US because Rwanda has no strategic value to the US,
but charge into Iraq( unilaterally mind you) and state one of its goals
as 'freeing'/'saving' the Iraqi people.
If the issue was with saving people, then those 800,000 would not have
died. But the issue, quite clearly, is whether or not the location and
its stability is of strategic importance to the US.
I'm not even getting into whether this is right or wrong, but I can't
understand why so many sweep this simple fact of US Foreign Policy under
the table while describing the US's actions as almost altruistic when it
is most certainly not.
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
