Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Bombing Kills More Than 140 in Baghdad

 

BAGHDAD — As Iraqis gathered late on Saturday night in central Baghdad to eat, shop and just be together to celebrate one of the last evenings of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, a huge bomb exploded and killed at least 143 people, the third mass slaughter of civilians in three countries carried out by the Islamic State in recent days.

Posted

Bombing Kills More Than 140 in Baghdad

 

BAGHDAD — As Iraqis gathered late on Saturday night in central Baghdad to eat, shop and just be together to celebrate one of the last evenings of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, a huge bomb exploded and killed at least 143 people, the third mass slaughter of civilians in three countries carried out by the Islamic State in recent days.

 

 

If there's one thing we learned from the occupation of Iraq, it's that no one cares about brown people that smell like camels.

Posted (edited)

 

If there's one thing we learned from the occupation of Iraq, it's that no one cares about brown people that smell like camels.

 

Just saw a post on facebook reminiscing about how there were no suicide attacks in Iraq pre 2003 invasion. Wait for them to start hailing Saddam Hussein as a man of the people, and we tore him and his stable government down for our own purposes. :rolleyes:

 

We may have been ill advised to invade a country we weren't prepared to follow through with, but Saddam Hussein was a monster that deserved to be put down for the atrocities committed against his own people.

Edited by What a Tuel
Posted

 

Just saw a post on facebook reminiscing about how there were no suicide attacks in Iraq pre 2003 invasion. Wait for them to start hailing Saddam Hussein as a man of the people, and we tore him and his stable government down for our own purposes. :rolleyes:

 

We may have been ill advised to invade a country we weren't prepared to follow through with, but Saddam Hussein was a monster that deserved to be put down for the atrocities committed against his own people.

 

When he was in power there were plenty of suicide bombers. It's just that he was smart enough to pay them to do it somewhere else:

 

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=129914

Posted (edited)

 

When he was in power there were plenty of suicide bombers. It's just that he was smart enough to pay them to do it somewhere else:

 

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=129914

 

Nice find.You'd think facts would stop these people in their tracks but I guarantee 20 years from now, people will revise history to believe Saddam wasn't that bad, and Iraq was much better off with him in control.

Edited by What a Tuel
Posted

 

Nice find.You'd think facts would stop these people in their tracks but I guarantee 20 years from now, people will revise history to believe Saddam wasn't that bad, and Iraq was much better off with him in control.

 

20 years from now? I've been having that argument with people for the past 5 years. "But under Saddam, Iraq had universal health care, universal education, religious freedom under a secular government, nobody starved, and was safe from extremists!" Yeah...just ignore the mass graves and multiple bloody wars he started. Everything was peachy.

Posted

 

20 years from now? I've been having that argument with people for the past 5 years. "But under Saddam, Iraq had universal health care, universal education, religious freedom under a secular government, nobody starved, and was safe from extremists!" Yeah...just ignore the mass graves and multiple bloody wars he started. Everything was peachy.

 

The DNC could run Saddam Hussien against Trump, and the interwebs would be filled with Progressives talking about how Hussein would be great for America, and then argue that if you don't vote for him, you obviously hate people of color.

Posted (edited)

 

20 years from now? I've been having that argument with people for the past 5 years. "But under Saddam, Iraq had universal health care, universal education, religious freedom under a secular government, nobody starved, and was safe from extremists!" Yeah...just ignore the mass graves and multiple bloody wars he started. Everything was peachy.

 

I say 20 years from now because right now people like you will argue with them, but 20 years from now the 90's kids will be in their 40's and the younger generation will do more revising than we will do correcting.

Edited by What a Tuel
Posted

The only "good" he did was stabilize that region. Not unlike Gadaffi.

The way he did it...

 

People forget that Qaddafi Duck was normalizing relations with his world-wide enemies - he'd denounced terrorism, ceased his WMD programs and welcomed international inspections of the decommissioning, was removed from the list of states sponsoring terrorism, and resumed full diplomatic relations with the US. In 2006.

 

That's right...the Bush administration normalized relations with Libya and disarmed Qaddafi. Diplomatically. It took the "interventionist non-intervention" policies of the Obama administration to undo all that and !@#$ it up in spectacular fashion - take "credit" for ousting a leader we'd normalized relations with, who wasn't sponsoring terrorism and wasn't a regional threat, even though it was the Europeans who did all the work (and leave the guy who DOES sponsor terrorism, has an active WMD program, and is a regional threat, in power because the Europeans won't do the heavy lifting for you, even though you drew a "red line.")

 

Stupidest, most incoherent foreign policy ever. And that includes a Clinton administration that created a safe haven for al Qaeda in Afghanistan because Mavis Leno was offended by "gender apartheid" in the area.

Posted

People forget that Qaddafi Duck was normalizing relations with his world-wide enemies - he'd denounced terrorism, ceased his WMD programs and welcomed international inspections of the decommissioning, was removed from the list of states sponsoring terrorism, and resumed full diplomatic relations with the US. In 2006.

 

That's right...the Bush administration normalized relations with Libya and disarmed Qaddafi. Diplomatically. It took the "interventionist non-intervention" policies of the Obama administration to undo all that and !@#$ it up in spectacular fashion - take "credit" for ousting a leader we'd normalized relations with, who wasn't sponsoring terrorism and wasn't a regional threat, even though it was the Europeans who did all the work (and leave the guy who DOES sponsor terrorism, has an active WMD program, and is a regional threat, in power because the Europeans won't do the heavy lifting for you, even though you drew a "red line.")

 

Stupidest, most incoherent foreign policy ever. And that includes a Clinton administration that created a safe haven for al Qaeda in Afghanistan because Mavis Leno was offended by "gender apartheid" in the area.

 

Yup. Stupid and, at least in Barry's case, hypocritical. This (and to a lesser degree Banghazi and the "recharge" button presented to Russia) are why she has no business being president because while she supported Iraq, she didn't learn from her first mistake.

Posted (edited)

After Slaughter, Bangladesh Reels at Revelations About Attackers
New York Times, by Julfikar Ali Manik & Geeta Anand

 

Original Article

 

Killers not street scum but products of Bangladesh elite families and prep schools.

 

 

 

.

It's about time that we (and the administration) quit pretending otherwise..................

 

 

 

 

 

Sorry, I'll go back to pretending that the month of suicide bombs & terror attacks have nothing to do w/ Ramadan. Probably militant Quakers.

 

 

.

Edited by B-Man
Posted

 

20 years from now? I've been having that argument with people for the past 5 years. "But under Saddam, Iraq had universal health care, universal education, religious freedom under a secular government, nobody starved, and was safe from extremists!" Yeah...just ignore the mass graves and multiple bloody wars he started. Everything was peachy.

 

Not to mention attempted genocides.

Posted

 

Not to mention attempted genocides.

 

I'll also add "Saddam is our fault because we put him in power" as another claim.

 

We thought plenty about removing him, but were not confident anyone replacing him would be any better.

 

Either way, we get the blame for waiting too long to remove him, and on the other end, the blame for removing him.

Posted (edited)

It looks like only dictatorships in the Middle East could prevent total chaos.

 

Gaddafi , Saddam , the Shah , Assad .

 

Now it is all out war between Shia and Sunni , with minorities in grave danger. A massive wave of refugees and dead civilians as a grim result.

 

Even Afghanistan should have been left alone except for air strikes against al qaeda , just leave them be in the stone age.

 

the E.U. is up in arms at the 1 million Syrian refugees who entered its borders last year. 2015

While the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region currently hosts around 4.8 million Syrian refugees alone (not to mention Iraqi, Palestinian and many others)
Edited by ALF
×
×
  • Create New...