It not a matter of wants and dreams its a matter of reality there is enough deep resentment in that country to have mass killing for 20 years, regardless how many nice Iraqis there are.
Great post, Kalvin. This will undoubtedly confuse the anti-war/pro-terrorist crowd because it involves math. There's actually a site that has formulated similar numbers in an Iraq Survival Count. Of course, the anti-war left has no *real* interest in such, because they don't really care about all the deaths the terrorists are causing in Iraq.
Nope. I'm sure you have first hand experience of this post; and no doubt, sit back and gasp while you sit around drinking with all your "right wing" buddies - or maybe you are the one bringing it up. Either way. Says a lot.
what a crock for one he was our ally during most of that 40 years and we were helping kill his people secondly those numbers probably include the Iran war, yes or no? thirdly they are averaging more the 100 people killed a day now arn't they, in just bagdad
what are you talking about?, I was merely stating in my experience most right wing people I met in real life are racist as hell, inlcuding people in my own family, which is different then most people on DP. If anything its a compliment.
Worse,...1.5 million people died over the slavery issue in the civil war (civilians and soldiers). And countless black people were hung in the south...all the way up to the 50's. Then you have the virtual genocide of the American Indians by Union generals. I'd say America has experienced things far worse than Iraq.
Are you saying saddam was never our ally and we didn't sell arms and dual purpose technology to Iraq? Is that really what you are saying?
you know since I moved to the south I found out that the civil war has nothing to do with slavery, if you listen to southern white people's version yeah there was a civil war here, but there wasn't a religious war here was there? There wasn't a religious conflict thats 1600 years old here was there? Isn't that how long shia and sunni have been squabling?
Tons of people sold arms to Iraq. Russia and France primarily. We sort of went back and forth with Iran and Iraq..during their war... I'm not sure of the exact reasons, but I'm think it had to do with Russia (aka the Solviet Union) and our former relations with Iran.
You should know better than to believe history from one-side. I'm hoping you don't. Historians and southerns tend not to give the best answers on this, imo. It's complicated and I believe most Americans are ignorant on the issue of our Civil War. Moot point. Our situation was dire, and represented a mass desire throughout the southern region. Afterall, these people were elected as people whom wanted to stay in the union or leave. Those that wanted to leave where heavily supported...and in some cases the referedums represented a rather one-side view. Iraq has yet to politically divided in that manner. It to some level represents less of a drift than our situation in the american civil war. When such happens, then I'll think it's time to leave and contain regional conflict. Yeah, there wasn't. There was a war over political powers due to slavery. A general sentiment that a region would loose it's grip over government. But to say this is just a permanent war against to the two religions is to negate that most of the neighbor nations actually do have a few different religions within...that have been in harmony for sometime.
any history book? here is synapsis of our dealings with saddam, go ahead look up some dates , transactions etc http://www.casi.org.uk/info/usdocs/usiraq80s90s.html
lol, you should hear some of the people down here talk about the civil war, like they were on the right side of it
So how does this prove that for 40 years we helped him kill people?? I'm fairly sure your source does not match what you posted earlier...nice try though...keep it up and you will be better than Gworld...
Both sides had their faults...although in my opinion, Lincoln was probably right in the long-run. I'm not sure what liberal or conservatives would do if that happened today. Lincoln's success was primarily because he would do anything to win, and he had the economic might of the north...with a good navy.