ELIDE, please don't talk about politics, you just embarass yourself.
and then learn to use the quote function properly for once in your life, jesus tap-dancing christ!
haha i love all the people "durrr, saddam was liek killing all his own people we had to invade". yeah, that was the rationale for the invasion. it wasn't the imminent threat of nuclear destruction....er, wait, i mean the harboring terrorists.......er, wait, i mean the not allowing inspectors.....er, wait....
fact: saddam possessed no WMDs. the united states forces, on the other hand, continue using cluster bombs and depleted uranium shells and bombs, both of which linger in the environment causing wanton civilian casualties long after their initial deployment. hell, they still find thousands of cluster bombs a year in *kuwait*, from the first gulf war 15 years ago. oh right, not to mention the studies suggesting the US forces used chemical and nerve agents in the offensive at fallujah in 2004.
fact: there is zero credible evidence linking saddam hussein to the 9-11 attacks. the united states, of course, is itself home to dozens of terrorists, but the anti-cuban kind; these include Luis Posada Carriles, who blew up a civilian airliner and now resides in comfort in Florida. (now that's our kind of terrorist!) not to mention the hundreds of former civilian and military officers from vietnam, guatemala, el salvador, haiti, chile, indonesia, iran, somalia, argentina, and more who are responsible for innumerable death squads, tortures, disappearances, and massacres.
fact: the united states demanded that saddam hussein open up his presidential palaces, his personal security military units, and other highly-secret military facilities to weapons inspectors. naturally, in 1997, when the US senate ratified the "Convention on the prohibition of the development, production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons and on their destruction", they added an amendment stipulating that
"the president may deny a request to inspect any facility in the united states in cases where the president determines that the inspection may pose a threat to the national security interests of the united states." ah, hypocrisy is rarely this refreshingly black and white.
http://www.stimson.org/pubs.cfm?ID=28
not to mention, who abandoned the kurds in the 70s after funding their insurgency during our allegiance with iran? or after the first gulf war? oh that's right. we did. somehow i think if humanitarian assistance was the main motivating factor--or even a goddamn
consideration--i don't think the historical record would show a decades-long trail of not only abandoning them to their fate but supplying the iraqi government with the weapons they used to suppress them.
and, uh, by the way
not to mention the water and power getting cut intermittently. and the curfews. and the checkpoints. it's a damn swingin' time in iraq now, innit!?
