Of course, this is just a lie you are driven to as a former Saddam supporter. Remember posting that Saddam was a good progressive ruler?
Message 18548817
From: Thomas M.
Friday, Feb 7, 2003 2:20 AM
View Replies (2) | Respond to of 24309
Here is a rendition of history that doesn't defy the space-time continuum:
<<< In earlier times, Iraq's oil was completely owned by US, British, and other Western companies. In 1958 there was a popular revolution in Iraq. Ten years later, the rightwing of the Ba'ath party took power, with Saddam Hussein serving as point man for the CIA. His assignment was to undo the bourgeois-democratic revolution, as I have already noted. But instead of acting as a compradore collaborator to Western investors in the style of Nicaragua's Somoza, Chile's Pinochet, Peru's Fujimora, and numerous others, Saddam and his cohorts nationalized the Iraqi oil industry in 1972, ejected the Western profiteers, and pursued policies of public development and economic nationalism. By 1990, Iraq had the highest standard of living in the Middle East (which may not be saying all that much), and it was evident that the US had failed to rollback the gains of the 1958 revolution. >>>
[BTW it was a lie that Iraq had the highest standard of living in the Mideast in 1990 as I demonstrated back in February. ]
Continuing with more lies from your Michael Parenti link:
Soon after the collapse of the Soviet Union, US leaders decided that Third World development no longer needed to be tolerated. Just as Yugoslavia served as a "bad" example in Europe, so Iraq served as a bad example to other nations in the Middle East. The last thing the plutocrats in Washington want in that region is independent, self-defining developing nations that wish to control their own land, labor, and natural resources.
US economic and military power has been repeatedly used to suppress competing systems. Self-defining countries like Cuba, Iraq, and Yugoslavia are targeted.
michaelparenti.org
Tom |
