Re: cc: Re: too beautiful not to share

["Dennis Henderson" <hendomatic () gmail com>]

On 10/4/07, Brian Loe <knobdy () gmail com> wrote:
> On 10/4/07, SDALAN04 () smumn edu <SDALAN04 () smumn edu> wrote:
> > Even if that was the case what do you have to say about this!?!?!
>
> That is the case.
>
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
>
> What about it? There wasn't a coalition that would have supported
> taking Saddam down - and Bush 1 didn't have the balls to do it alone.
> Well known and obvious. So what?



For all of you genx-ers who were still learning your numbers when we kicked
saddams ass out of Kuwait:

The mission was NOT to remove saddam from power. It was to remove saddam
from Kuwait.
The coalition was formed on that basis and GHWB enforced it.
You have no idea what kind of pressure Saudi Arabia was under allowing US
forces to attack IQ from their bases.
You have no idea of the struggle that went on between Bush1 and the Military
at that time when Schwarzkopf wanted to take it all the way to baghdad.

Yes the US plays the game "the enemy of my enemy is my friend(for a while)"
Yes the US armed IQ against IR in the 80's.  Lesser of 2 evils (at the
time.)
The foreign policy at the time was to prevent the spread of communism
wherever it occurs.
Yes Donald Rumsfeld took part in that policy. So what? Should he have been
shaking hands with the Ayatolla instead?
Time goes on. Things change.
Quit trying to make static comparisons.

Al Gore spewed his rhetoric as he believed at the time. The Clinton
Administration made regime change in IQ a foreign policy goal.
GWB finished the job.

Quit making excuses for it.


Geez!

_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.