BF2S Forums Saddam bribed democrats for opposition?

rawls2 wrote:

I quote this because IMO thats whats going on today but instead of Hirohito it's the islamic luminaria thats pushing the propaganda.

Any half diligent reading of the history of the middle east in the 20th century will show that the US does not have the Arab or Persian worlds best interests at heart.

Am I lying when I say that the US supported and armed the evidently brutal Saddam Hussein at one point in time?

Am I lying when I say the US wholeheartedly supports (including militarily) the regime of the House of Saud, a deeply unpopular dictatorship with one of the worst human rights records in the middle east?

Am I lying when I say that the US wholeheartedly supports the arch enemy of the Arabs, Israel?

Am I lying when I say the US engineered the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadeq?

The answers to those questions are facts, not propaganda, and it is all the Arabs need to know when assessing the US.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-03-27 13:19:30)

CameronPoe wrote:

rawls2 wrote:

I quote this because IMO thats whats going on today but instead of Hirohito it's the islamic luminaria thats pushing the propaganda.

Any half diligent reading of the history of the middle east in the 20th century will show that the US does not have the Arab or Persian worlds best interests at heart.

Am I lying when I say that the US supported and armed the evidently brutal Saddam Hussein at one point in time?

Am I lying when I say the US wholeheartedly supports (including militarily) the regime of the House of Saud, a deeply unpopular dictatorship with one of the worst human rights records in the middle east?

Am I lying when I say that the US wholeheartedly supports the arch enemy of the Arabs, Israel?

Am I lying when I say the US engineered the overthrow of Mohammed Mossadeq?

The answers to those questions are facts, not propaganda, and it is all the Arabs need to know when assessing the US.

Its not just the US supporting these, France and Britain supplied weapons and equipment to Saddam not to mention the Russians.
The Saudis have arms deals with Belgium, UK, France, Germany, Italy as well as the US.
French and British supplied Israel as well.
The paintings of Israel soldiers shooting civilians is propaganda just like those paintings of the US flag where the stars are replaced by skulls. The US and West care a damn sight more about the Arab people then their own governments.

CameronPoe wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Its not just the US supporting these, France and Britain supplied weapons and equipment to Saddam not to mention the Russians.
The Saudis have arms deals with Belgium, UK, France, Germany, Italy as well as the US.
French and British supplied Israel as well.
The paintings of Israel soldiers shooting civilians is propaganda just like those paintings of the US flag where the stars are replaced by skulls. The US and West care a damn sight more about the Arab people then their own governments.

Why should ordinary Arabs on the ground over there like France or Britain either? When I was in Palestine I was asked if I was from the 'good part of Ireland or the bad part'. When I said I was nothing to do with the UK it became evident I was from the 'good part'. I'll put it like this though: if the US chose not to go into Iraq, would the Brits have gone anyway?

The US and the west couldn't give a fucking toss about the Arabs. This may come as a surprise to you but practically every decision made by a government is made on the back of a cost-benefit analysis. The Arabs have oil. If the Arabs didn't have oil then they would be treated just like Zimbabweans are treated: left to rot at the hands of a megalomaniacal dictator. You wouldn't hear squat about Arabs on the TV if it wasn't for oil. And Arabs probably wouldn't give a toss about us if they didn't have oil because we probably would never have had the need to exploit their resources are become involved in their internal politics for our own benefit. They would probably be content fighting themselves.

Newsflash: Israeli soldiers have killed plenty of civilians. You can go to the website of the ISRAELI human rights organisation B'tselem if you want stats.

Ok the billions of dollars of aid to Africa isn't caring much like I suppose?

Here's something though, regardless or whether you're involved in this war or not, you still get oil from the same regions as those fighting in it. Of course I could gurantee that if any military force was sent to Africa there'd be complaints about that as well. But then there's always the other option, if one country isn't doing the parts you want like getting rid of Mugabe, convince your own government to deal with him. Countries in the Middle East are currently a bit more of a problem than those in Africa.

CameronPoe wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Ok the billions of dollars of aid to Africa isn't caring much like I suppose?

Doesn't really seem to be doing much for Sudan, Somalia, Nigeria, Congo, Central African Republic, Mali, Chad or Zimbabwe....

And let's not forget Burma and Tibet in Asia and poor little Chechnya in Russia.

M.O.A.B wrote:

Here's something though, regardless or whether you're involved in this war or not, you still get oil from the same regions as those fighting in it. Of course I could gurantee that if any military force was sent to Africa there'd be complaints about that as well. But then there's always the other option, if one country isn't doing the parts you want like getting rid of Mugabe, convince your own government to deal with him. Countries in the Middle East are currently a bit more of a problem than those in Africa.

I don't agree with interventionism. Zimbabweans need to get up off their lazy fucking asses and remove him by force THEMSELVES. The countries in the Middle East are 'more of a problem' because they have all the oil and we've been trying to get our grubby hands on it since the stuff was discovered...

No matter how to put it, your still contributing to that oil haul, the keyboard ur typing on is derived form the stuff. Problem is how are Zimbabweans to remove him themselves? They have nothing to do it with, bit of a loss for them there like so I guess when it comes round to it we'll have to leave them there so they can do it themselves. Bit like asking the Pals to get rid of Hamas, they ain't never gonna do it, only way you can help the small improverished countries controlled by true dicators and terrorist groups is by force. Talking doesn't work with these people. The reason the aid money has little effect is because its being sent there through charities who rarely get it to where it needs to be, again you want aid to get where it needs to be in a hostile country, you need to protect it Somalia in the early 90's was a good example of this, 20,000 Marines restored order and got the food where it needed to go.

Tibet is getting support as well from the world against China.
Chechnya has some of the same problems as Palestine, those in command are Islamic nutjobs, get rid of them and you'll get everything back on track quicker. Only way you're gonna do that is to intervene. There could be a fight in the street that you could prevent if you intervened, and you could save the life of someone in the process. You sit on the fence and watch and you'll watch someone die who you could have helped.

Turquoise wrote:

You make some great points, but the question I always ask myself is...  Would the Arabs and Persians be as merciful to us if they had the money and power we do and we were the poor ones?  Something tells me they wouldn't be.

My sympathy for the Middle East is very limited.  This will eventually come down to them adapting to the West or us kicking the shit out of them.

My view would be that since we are in an almost unassailable position of dominance we can afford to 'live and let live' rather than bite off more than we can chew and go the way of the Roman empire. We don't have to confront the opposite reality thanks to centuries of bloodlust, imperialism and warfare that put us where we are today.

Turquoise wrote:

I wish I could say the same, but I think extremists have ruined that possibility.

Until things like Wahhabism wane in their influence and until the Israel-Palestine situation is resolved, I do not think lasting peace is an option at the moment.

Proper domestic security and decent intelligence will insulate the US from any threat from the region. I might add that the US' biggest ally outside of Israel in the region, Saudi Arabia, has adopted Wahabiism as the state creed. That seems like a highly illogical situation to me.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-03-27 15:46:10)

ATG wrote:

ffs folks. The question mark in the OP title should indicate that it is a story and not an agenda I am pushing.
" if the democrats "
" make up your own mind "


sheeesh

ATG wrote:

All I have to say is that, if the democrats sold their soul I'm sure it was at a cheap price.

CameronPoe wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

No matter how to put it, your still contributing to that oil haul, the keyboard ur typing on is derived form the stuff. Problem is how are Zimbabweans to remove him themselves? They have nothing to do it with, bit of a loss for them there like so I guess when it comes round to it we'll have to leave them there so they can do it themselves. Bit like asking the Pals to get rid of Hamas, they ain't never gonna do it, only way you can help the small improverished countries controlled by true dicators and terrorist groups is by force. Talking doesn't work with these people.

How exactly do you think the Irish got rid of the Brits? How exactly do you think the Americans ousted the Brits? How exactly do you think India got rid of the Brits? How do you think Israel carved out a state for itself? How do you think Cuba ousted the dictator Fulgencio Batista? How do you think Croatia and Slovenia came to be? People power. People stand up for themselves and say 'enough is enough', they procure weapons from wherever they can get them and they engage in a bloody and necessary civil war or war of independence. The people must own the movement, they cannot be handed an abstract concept like 'freedom'. Where differences of opinion exist sometimes bloodshed is necessary and sometimes new borders must be drawn.

Using force to oust dictators generally just leaves a power vacuum and an open battlefield. The political process is a naturally evolving beast, not something you can generally force. Self determination is the duty of all peoples of this planet.

M.O.A.B wrote:

The reason the aid money has little effect is because its being sent there through charities who rarely get it to where it needs to be, again you want aid to get where it needs to be in a hostile country, you need to protect it Somalia in the early 90's was a good example of this, 20,000 Marines restored order and got the food where it needed to go.

Yeah, Somalia is one of the best countries in Africa today... lol.

M.O.A.B wrote:

Tibet is getting support as well from the world against China.

Aren't 'the world' heading to China for their holidays this summer to watch the olympics?...lol

M.O.A.B wrote:

Chechnya has some of the same problems as Palestine, those in command are Islamic nutjobs, get rid of them and you'll get everything back on track quicker. Only way you're gonna do that is to intervene. There could be a fight in the street that you could prevent if you intervened, and you could save the life of someone in the process. You sit on the fence and watch and you'll watch someone die who you could have helped.

I'd like to see anyone militarily intervene in Russia. I'd set my video recorder for that one...

Irish didn't get rid of the Brits for starters, because NI is still part of the UK. They also got weapons from outside countries. India was regiven its independence, it didn't fight for it militarily. The USA were helped to defeat the British with French naval help as well. Israel is assisted militarily.

I never said Somalia was one of the best countires in Africa, point out where that was said. I said that the aid reached its destinations when 20,000 Marines were deployed there. When they left it went back to its chaotic ways. Intervention maintained order while they were there.

Most of the world also headed to the Olympics when Russia invaded Afghanistan so I don't see the link there.
Also yet again I never said military intervention into Russia, I'm referring to the Russians intervening in Chechnya to remove the Islamic nutjobs which
a) Isn't intervening onto Russian soil
b) It would be Russian troops doing the inervening

Last edited by M.O.A.B (2008-03-27 16:50:54)