Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In a 60 minutes commerical the interrogations of Saddam Hussein reveals he invaded Kuwait because the Emir of Kuwait was trying to drive the economy of Iraq down and putting an insult of "to make every Iraqi woman a 10 dollar *****"... so Saddam attack Kuwait. Saddam disposed of all WMDS a long time ago (someone should tell that to Huckabee). He didn't think Bush would be stupid enough to invade Iraq for no reason (apparently he underestimated stupidity and didn't realize greed would be a factor). He also talked about Osama being a fanatic and found Osama to be a threat to Iraq and so claims that he was involved with Al Qaeda seemed to be made up by the Bush administration (no surprise since Saddam and Osama have been historical enemies). However what did come out was the massacre of refugees and rebels with chemical weapons and he was responsible for that. He also was interested in resuming WMD production in the future but no date as to when he would rebuild the WMD arsenal. So now that we knew that Saddam didn't have WMD and was not associated with Al Qaeda... how will history in the U.S. remember Bush's legacy in the Iraqi war?
You really think Americans have the brains to absorb all that and remember it? Our duplicity and aggression will probably go down the memory hole along with our murder of tens of thousands of Phillipine Islanders and unprovoked invasions of nearly every country in Latin America. Uncle Sam can do no wrong, that's the red-blooded American's creed.
I saw the 60 Minutes interview and it was fascinating. It verifies what the UN inspectors said back then about Iraq and Saddam and the supposed WMDs.
But would Bush & Co. listen? Of course not. They attacked Iraq, put forth an inadequate effort in Afghanistan and let Bin Laden get away. And now Iraq's unstable, the Taliban's back, and Iran -- the country Saddam most feared -- is even more of a loose cannon.
I still can't get over how we let Bin Laden get away. The military begged for more troops and more force for Afghanistan but Bush and his cronies ignored them. Some day, I'll bet it's discovered that this was deliberate and it had something to do with Bush's close ties to Saudi Arabia. The Iraq invasion was a smokescreen.
50-100 years from now for all we know we could have a huge ally in the middle east. We were at war with Japan and Germany about 60 years ago and they have the largest GDP after the United States, respectively. Obviously all this can be influenced greatly if a democrat takes office, sets a timetable and a civil war erupts
Was Iraq a mistake? Who knows. It's still way too early to tell how it will pan out in the long term.
That sounds a little like what the Japanese were mumbling to each other in the early summer of 1945 about having attacked Pearl Harbor.
Iraq = hundreds of times the advertised costs in exchange for none of the advertised benefits. Some folks should simply wake up and smell the failure...
50-100 years from now for all we know we could have a huge ally in the middle east.
Supposedly, we already do -- Saudi Arabia. That's why we have troops there, give them weapons, and look the other way at their human rights abuses. They did save our bacon at the last OPEC meeting, though, when a number of the members wanted to stop accepting dollars. If I recall correctly, if Saudi Arabia didn't step in, those folks might have had enough votes to make it stick.
Of course it's all about oil. Let's really tick them off and kick-start green technologies. Where I live, the wind farms are really expanding.
In a 60 minutes commerical the interrogations of Saddam Hussein reveals he invaded Kuwait because the Emir of Kuwait was trying to drive the economy of Iraq down and putting an insult of "to make every Iraqi woman a 10 dollar *****"... so Saddam attack Kuwait. Saddam disposed of all WMDS a long time ago (someone should tell that to Huckabee). He didn't think Bush would be stupid enough to invade Iraq for no reason (apparently he underestimated stupidity and didn't realize greed would be a factor). He also talked about Osama being a fanatic and found Osama to be a threat to Iraq and so claims that he was involved with Al Qaeda seemed to be made up by the Bush administration (no surprise since Saddam and Osama have been historical enemies). However what did come out was the massacre of refugees and rebels with chemical weapons and he was responsible for that. He also was interested in resuming WMD production in the future but no date as to when he would rebuild the WMD arsenal. So now that we knew that Saddam didn't have WMD and was not associated with Al Qaeda... how will history in the U.S. remember Bush's legacy in the Iraqi war?
depends on who's writing the history books..and what type of institution you are learning about him at.... and depends on what sort of political direction the nation takes in the coming century..... when clinton was elected.. it was in direct response to negative feelings about desert storm.. as well as Reagan and his policies.. and now that bush is in office.. Reagan has seemed very popular and in good light... due to what he has done for promoting democracy... Reagan didn't start a war on false premis's though... and I don't think bush has done anything really for world peace.. the only thing he has done is conducted himself in favor of special interests of certain american groups of people.... thus limiting himself in finding many who will see his presidency in good light.... but you never know....
I just hope there's plenty of people still around to constantly remind america that he indeed was a sh*tty prez....
50-100 years from now for all we know we could have a huge ally in the middle east. We were at war with Japan and Germany about 60 years ago and they have the largest GDP after the United States, respectively. Obviously all this can be influenced greatly if a democrat takes office, sets a timetable and a civil war erupts
Yup. Depends on whether we stay to finish the job. If we leave, it will be looked upon as a huge failure. If we stay to finish the job, it will be looked upon as a huge success and a turning point in history.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
