To: cosmicforce who wrote (99198 ) 3/22/2005 8:47:14 PM From: Brumar89 Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 108807 It's true We threw our weight around in the ME in our dealings with the Shah. However contrary to your assertion: We supported and armed Saddam Hussein (those darn pictures of Rumsfeld shaking Saddam's hand just won't go away) American arms to Soviet client Saddam were insignificant. and it started from the time that the American fleet sailed into Tokyo telling them they didn't have the right to keep to themselves! Perry showed them. Oh, for God's sake. You connect opening Japan to trade with the outside world to them attacking us in WWII? Is the liberal mindset such that if America ever does anything which offends anyone for any reason, America is evil and deserves attack? Seems to be the basis of your argument.And then we humiliated them at the Treaty of Versailles. ?? Japan gained Germany's concessions in China as a result of the Versailles treaty. Pres. Wilson did oppose this but gave in. I suppose that ineffectual opposition was an insult which justified war.We embargoed their oil because of their aggression against China. If we'd supplied Japan to aid their colonial war against China, you could count that among America's sins. Supply an aggressive expansionist government and be blamed for supporting bloody oppression or refuse to do so and be blamed for embargoing. Whatever America does its wrong seems to be your mindset in this argument. Look at how American propaganda portrayed the Asians: we made them look like buck-tooth monkeys. I think most such propaganda was after the start of the war and was aimed at the Japanese. Hmm, liberal cartoons make Bush look like a chimp, so I suppose war against liberals is called for - LOL?Just out of curiosity, what do you think would happen if Venezuela decided to embargo the U.S. tomorrow and got the ME states to agree to extend the embargo the next week or month? Other than liberals rejoicing, I'm not sure what would happen. We've been embargoed before. Didn't go to war over it. You do know that the plan to take Arab oil fields as an act of preemption existed under Regan, don't you? I'm not surprised. Such plans have undoubtedly been contingencies since at least the Truman administration. Fortunately, we haven't had to execute such plans. More so than the Chinese? In the pre-WWII years, China was not in a position to build an empire. I'm sorry but Japan's aggressive behavior prior to WWII was not merely a reaction to being marginalized or isolated. There is not one bit of relationship between Iraq and 9/11 and no one can show there is. No, there were no WMDs. There was a relationship between Iraq and the first attempt to bring down the WTC in 1993, however. Because we caught the guy who made the 1993 WTC bomb after we invaded Iraq. And according to Vladimir Putin, Saddam's government did plan to launch terror attacks against the US. "I can confirm that after the events of September 11, 2001, and up to the military operation in Iraq, Russian special services and Russian intelligence several times received information that official organs of Saddam's regime were preparing terrorist acts on the territory of the United States and beyond its borders, at U.S. military and civilian locations." Vladimir Putin As to WMD's, it's certainly true that Clinton administration officials think they existed: "It is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons." Bill Clinton to Larry King, July 2003 "I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons ... I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." Clinton Administration Secretary of Defense William Cohen, April 2003