Bitcoin Forum
November 14, 2024, 08:45:49 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Six US Presidents Have Destroyed Iraq  (Read 938 times)
Chef Ramsay (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001



View Profile
July 14, 2014, 12:51:57 AM
 #1

Quote
It doesn’t take a PhD in Sociology to conclude that Iraq was better off with Saddam Hussein than it is today.

It’s not that Saddam was a great leader without blood on his hands. It’s just that what six US presidents have done to Iraq over the past 35 years has been much worse than anything Saddam ever did to the people of Iraq.



Under Saddam, Iraqis had a thriving economy that included a wealthy middle class, a high functioning infrastructure on par with the most developed nations of the world, and free healthcare and free education through graduate school. Today, Iraqis have an effective unemployment rate of 50%, a difficult time getting water and electricity, and bombed out hospitals and schools.

In Saddam’s Iraq, women’s rights were guaranteed in the constitution, religion played virtually no role in government, Sunni and Shia got along relatively well, and al-Qaeda didn’t exist. Today, Iraqis are facing Sharia law, Sunni and Shia are killing each other, and al-Qaeda in Iraq (now known as ISIS) has become arguably the most powerful non-government force in the world.

Good job, America

The reason Iraq is in the mess it is today is not because of some long-standing feud between Sunni and Shiite Muslims, it’s because six US presidents, spanning ten terms, have created a situation that made today’s Iraq inevitable.

The people of Iraq should be applauded for going this long without imploding. They obviously are more peaceful and have more fortitude than Americans. The United States would be in a state of anarchy if bombs were dropped on its major cities, crushing sanctions were levied that killed hundreds of thousands of its children, they were occupied by a foreign military, a puppet government was installed by another country, and arms were given to Republicans to shoot Democrats, and vice-versa.

But Americans can’t imagine that type of scenario, and they choose not to think about what their tax dollars, their elected officials, and their willful ignorance has done to another civilization.

And to add insult to injury, Americans, particularly Democrats, are essentially quiet now that their president is about to do the same thing to Iraq that five other presidents have already done.

So working chronologically backwards, here’s how six US presidents have destroyed Iraq.

Barack Obama

The US is at war in Iraq. Nobody wants to acknowledge it, possibly because this is not a war with Iraq, it’s a war inside Iraq.

Maybe people actually believed Obama two weeks ago when he said, "American combat troops are not going to be fighting in Iraq." But on Tuesday it was announced that armed drones and Apache helicopters are being flown by US military inside Iraq.

Since when do "advisers" fly Apache helicopters and armed drones?

Also on Tuesday, The Hill reported that Obama is sending 200 more US troops to Iraq, bringing the total number of US ground forces in Iraq to 750. And on Wednesday, the State Department stated that the Obama administration wants to sell 4,000 more US Hellfire missiles to the Iraqi government.

At what point will "progressive" news outlets like Democracy Now and CommonDreams talk about "mission creep" and Obama doublespeak? It may be a while given they are currently talking about immigration, the NSA and the Hobby Lobby. Important issues, yes, but when your country is starting another war in a place it has already terrorized for 35 years, those issues need to be moved down the priority list.

If a Republican were in the Oval Office it’s a guarantee that the supposed left-leaning media and national antiwar groups would be going berserk, and might actually play a role in stopping the US from going back into Iraq.

But they won’t because their funding largely comes from Democrats, so they can’t go after Obama with the same vigor in which they did with Bush.

Even Kirsten Powers, who writes for the USA Today questioned the integrity of fellow liberals in Wednesday’s paper when she wrote, "Liberals who obsessed over President Bush’s abuses of executive power are suspiciously silent now, or worse, defend the same behavior they found abhorrent in a Republican."

George W. Bush

Not much needs to be said about what the younger Bush did to Iraq. Based on the lie (not bad intelligence, it was a lie) that Saddam had WMD and was a threat to the US, and on the ruse of tying Iraq to the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush whipped Americans into a frenzy and got them to go along with the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Bush’s war left at least one-half million Iraqis dead, forced nearly 4 million to become refugees, destroyed Iraq’s infrastructure, and created an untold number of enemies of the US, including ISIS.

Bill Clinton

It was the Clinton administration that first perpetuated the myth that Saddam had WMD. "Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton stated in 1998 in justifying missile strikes on Iraq.

And even after the Clinton presidency had expired, former Clinton VP Al Gore supported George W. Bush on the issue of Iraq WMD, saying, “We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.”

But the most extreme form of terrorism carried out by Clinton was with the use of sanctions on the civilians of Iraq that killed 500,000 children. "Medieval," and "unconscionable" were words used to describe the slow, painful deaths Iraqi children suffered due to the absence of food, basic medicines and anesthesia, which the US prohibited from being imported into Iraq.

Clinton’s Secretary of State, Madeline Albright showed the true face of American compassion when she was asked about the deaths of a half million Iraqi children – more than the number who died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki – when she told 60 Minutes in 1996, "This is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it."

The humanitarian disaster resulting from sanctions against Iraq has been frequently cited as a factor that motivated the September 11 terrorist attacks. Osama bin Laden himself mentioned the Iraq sanctions as a reason for the attack against the United States.

More...http://original.antiwar.com/chris_ernesto/2014/07/03/six-us-presidents-have-destroyed-iraq/
Smack That Ace
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1974
Merit: 1108


Free Free Palestine


View Profile
July 14, 2014, 01:27:20 AM
 #2

Its funny how the most useless gambling threads have more posts and views.

People in this world have become so ignorant that they dont even realize how messed up the world has become.

Duke

Nik1ab
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 574
Merit: 500


freedomainradio.com


View Profile
July 14, 2014, 09:04:43 AM
 #3

The title should be called: Stupid indoctrinated americans who didn't stop paying taxes to warmongers destroyed Iraq. 

No signature ad here, because their conditions have become annoying.
petestheman
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 257


BINGO! BOUNTY MANAGEMENT


View Profile WWW
July 14, 2014, 09:24:24 AM
 #4

Its funny how the most useless gambling threads have more posts and views.

People in this world have become so ignorant that they dont even realize how messed up the world has become.

Duke


Thats because people would rather research easy ways to make money than understand the problems in our world and how our society works. That is our world some people unfortunately do not care about the atrocities being committed by governments or history so that we can learn for the future. Instead they just think about money, sex, and more money. Not that I do not think about money and sex I just make room for everything else.

BINGO! BOUNTIES : BOUNTY AND COMMUNITY MANAGERS

FINDING CRYPTO PROJECTS WHICH CAN MAKE THIS WORLD A BETTER PLACE TO LIVE IN.
Bitsaurus
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 873
Merit: 1007



View Profile
July 14, 2014, 10:38:16 AM
 #5

You can harp on what the US has done over the past 20 years (since the first Iraq invasion) but Saddam was no friend of the people (at least not most Iraqi).  Establishing peace and some prosperity for the sake of saying you have it while mass murdering millions of others that you deem unfit just not make a country.  By the logic stated in the OP Stalin was quite a successful leader.
Nemo1024
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680
Merit: 1014



View Profile WWW
July 14, 2014, 10:47:28 AM
 #6

By the logic stated in the OP Stalin was quite a successful leader.

Nevertheless, when Germany invaded Soviet Union, people went to battle under slogans "For Motherland. For Stalin."

I would be the first to condemn what Stalin did to Soviet Union and to Russia, but still any external intervention will only lead to more suffering and turmoil. Such problems must be resolved by a nation from within.

“Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right.”
“We are only as strong as we are united, as weak as we are divided.”
“It is important to fight and fight again, and keep fighting, for only then can evil be kept at bay, though never quite eradicated.”
Bitsaurus
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 873
Merit: 1007



View Profile
July 14, 2014, 10:56:43 AM
 #7

By the logic stated in the OP Stalin was quite a successful leader.

Nevertheless, when Germany invaded Soviet Union, people went to battle under slogans "For Motherland. For Stalin."

I would be the first to condemn what Stalin did to Soviet Union and to Russia, but still any external intervention will only lead to more suffering and turmoil. Such problems must be resolved by a nation from within.

Yes, this is true.  Iraq left itself susceptible to outside manipulation and the US capitalized on that.  Clearly the US did not do it for Iraq in some altruistic manner. The US was fighting a idealistic war with USSR (or so we are told).  Iraq choose to side with the US.

Now look to the regions that were previous Soviet block like Ukraine - they're doing just great today Tongue

Damned if you do, damned if you don't
cech4204a
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252
Merit: 250

12CDKyxPyL5Rj28ed2yz5czJf3Dr2ZvEYw


View Profile WWW
July 14, 2014, 11:33:10 AM
 #8

Nothing new, they are even happy with their result. There might be other countries also very soon. At least Gaza and Israel looks like that.

Bitcoin is DEAD
Nemo1024
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680
Merit: 1014



View Profile WWW
July 14, 2014, 05:13:55 PM
 #9

Now look to the regions that were previous Soviet block like Ukraine - they're doing just great today Tongue

Damned if you do, damned if you don't

Ukraine is not a good example in this regard. It sided alternately with US or Russia, changing allegiance with every other president. In reality, it sided with wherever the current oligarch-in-power saw most profit. Yanukovich topped it, trying to suckle both cows, and failed. On the population level Ukraine was always divided (http://stanislavs.org/two-ukraines/).

A better example would have been Belarus or Kazakhstan. And in Belarus, for example, all of the country's industry remained intact and functioning, unlike in Baltic countries...

“Dark times lie ahead of us and there will be a time when we must choose between what is easy and what is right.”
“We are only as strong as we are united, as weak as we are divided.”
“It is important to fight and fight again, and keep fighting, for only then can evil be kept at bay, though never quite eradicated.”
cryptasm
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 997
Merit: 1002


Gamdom.com


View Profile WWW
July 14, 2014, 05:42:42 PM
 #10

Don't forget the Secretaries of Defense

magdapani
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 23
Merit: 0


View Profile
July 14, 2014, 06:42:22 PM
 #11

I would say one President really. George W Bush, and his administration lying to get us into Iraq. If not like you said OP, Saddam still has blood in his hand, but he would still be in power.
tooil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 181
Merit: 100


View Profile
July 14, 2014, 06:55:02 PM
 #12

Don't think any American care that much.
bitsmichel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 250



View Profile
July 14, 2014, 11:09:30 PM
 #13

I would say one President really. George W Bush, and his administration lying to get us into Iraq. If not like you said OP, Saddam still has blood in his hand, but he would still be in power.

He is not in power, but what system the Iraqis have now? is it any better?

Quote
Yes, this is true.  Iraq left itself susceptible to outside manipulation and the US capitalized on that.  Clearly the US did not do it for Iraq in some altruistic manner. The US was fighting a idealistic war with USSR (or so we are told).  Iraq choose to side with the US.

The war with the USSR had also been of financial interest, at least the war with cuba has been of financial interest.
Of course, the people at the time were feeling somewhat threatened... as opposed to say Iraq.

Chef Ramsay (OP)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 1001



View Profile
July 15, 2014, 02:11:46 AM
 #14

I would say one President really. George W Bush, and his administration lying to get us into Iraq. If not like you said OP, Saddam still has blood in his hand, but he would still be in power.
True but the actions of the past presidents have paved the way and emboldened the neoconservative approach that got us bogged down in Iraq. I'm really sorry for all the people on both sides that died and hope that God punishes those that were responsible for the bulk of the deterioration over there. I didn't vote for Bush either time nor his democratic opponent but now I'm actively taking steps to do my part to restore the GOP to a party of non-intervention, free markets and sound money. Thankfully, Rand Paul is off to a great start and the party and the public is trending his way on a host of issues.
MisterDD
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 96
Merit: 10


View Profile
July 16, 2014, 08:55:53 AM
 #15

Yes, and all that because of money and power.
America is on every place where they can have profit and power.

So people will say we are free, yea right.
Today all works because of money, and we are controled on same way by who knows how many secret organizations.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!