<<The Iraqi people now have an opportunity to build a nation where human rights, human dignity, and the expression of liberty can come forth.
Who created this environment? President Bush, the American military, and everyone who supported the endeavor.
Contrast that with those who cling to an Iraq where Saddam would still be in power murdering and torturing people who may have committed such horrible crimes as buying a cell-phone, satellite dish, or simply speaking out against Hussein.>>
This all very heart warming outstanding stuff.....I don't mean that in a cynical way either. I think that everyone agrees that it's great that Saddam is removed however, there seems to be an element here who think that anyone who disagreed with this conflict is pro Saddam (reference your last paragraph above). It seems to be the easy way out of arguing questions of deception etc.
If we're in the business of liberating nations from torturous thugs committing civil rights atrocities why aren't the PNAC folks gearing up for Operation freedom in these nations?!?!? I guess these aren't sexy enough....throw these bones to that liberal nestbed instead, the UN.
worldpress.org
news.bbc.co.uk
Using civil rights abuses NOW as a core reason for the invasion of Iraq will yield even more inconsistencies in this administration's foreign policy (and previous one's for that matter).
Why weren't we so caring of civil rights in Iraq back in the 80's when we SUPPORTED Saddam when we KNEW he was gassing his own people????
commondreams.org
<<Compared with the rhetoric emanating from the current administration, based on speculations about what Saddam might have, Kirkpatrick’s reaction was hardly a call to action.
Most glaring is that Donald Rumsfeld was in Iraq as the 1984 UN report was issued and said nothing about the allegations of chemical weapons use, despite State Department “evidence.” On the contrary, The New York Times reported from Baghdad on March 29, 1984, “American diplomats pronounce themselves satisfied with relations between Iraq and the United States and suggest that normal diplomatic ties have been restored in all but name.”
A month and a half later, in May 1984, Donald Rumsfeld resigned. In November of that year, full diplomatic relations between Iraq and the US were fully restored. Two years later, in an article about Rumsfeld’s aspirations to run for the 1988 Republican Presidential nomination, the Chicago Tribune Magazine listed among Rumsfeld’s achievements helping to “reopen U.S. relations with Iraq.” The Tribune failed to mention that this help came at a time when, according to the US State Department, Iraq was actively using chemical weapons.>>
It's not easy having it both ways.
MON |
