At 05:57 PM 8/28/2004, you wrote:
Keith, You want simple? Sadamned signed a treaty in 1991 which stipulated ALL WMD's and the equipment to make them were to be destroyed under UN Supervision. After a DECADE of playing mouse games with Hans Blix & Co. UN resolution 1441 was fully supported by the UN with a final date for compliance. Sadamned refused to fully comply. He refused to accept exile instead of armed enforcement. We forced compliance. 9/11 changed how we deal with those who actively support or harbor terrorists. We ARE in a war we didn't start. Blame bin hidden. He started WWIII. If you think Terrorists want to listen to reason, I'll help take up a collection for a ticket so that you can try. Words of wisdom and a warning, don't try. They will only kill you in front of a camera. Stuntman
> > That is a rather tenuous and convoluted explanation. I would also hope that your assertion that American foreign policy is based, at least in part, upon retribution is wrong. American foreign policy should be based upon what is truly in the best interest of our country, but I would have to conclude that under the current Administration, it is indeed upon retribution. > > Keith > > Stuntman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Stuntman, your knowledge of World history is truly remarkable. I > would be very grateful for you to educate me, as to how our support of > Iraq in its war of aggression was in any way whatsoever related to the > Cold War.< > > If RUSSIA had not built Sadamned up, he never would have had the > ability to take on Iran. Once that war was started it also was seen as > an opportunity to pay back Iran for the Hostage crisis by the USA. > So if it hadn't been for the Cold war, Sadamned would never have been a > major player in the Mid East. > The USSR was great at playing one side against the other, trying to > weaken both sides untill they could achieve a solid relationship which > would lead to their control or dominate influence. > Sadamned was a player switching sides to get what he wanted, and was > never even considered real ally material. The political mindset during > the Cold war caused many mistakes to be made, however we couldn't do > nothing. It is a little Yin/Yang that luckily never ended in Communist > domination or nucleur winter. > > > The geopolitical situation at the time was that the United States was > concerned more about the spread of a fundamentalist Shiite revolution > from Iran than the growing power of the brutal dictator, Saddam > Hussein. In point of fact, Saddam Hussein, was much more closely allied > to Russia than Iran had ever been.< > > Who are they playing footsy with now? Like I said, they played both > sides. Just look at Irans military hardware history. > Stuntman > > > Stuntman wrote: > > The US has been actively involved in addressing this issue. It is > > within our best interests to get China to put him in check. After all > > Sadamned WAS our problem, we helped him (for a brief period) when he > > was fighting a war with Iran (due to influnces of the cold war). N. > > Korea IS China's problem because they helped build them up during and > > after the Korean conflict (part of the cold war). > > A lot of "Hot Spots" all over the globe are remanents of the Cold War. > > Now that it looks like those planes in Russia were acts of Terrorism, > > they will become active partners in cleaning up all the messes > > created during almost half a century of cold war activities. > > Big question! > > If the treaty of Versilles had been enforced, would there have been a > > cold war? > > Lots of little pieces to this puzzle. > > Stuntman > > >
-- It's not the fall that hurts.
