Do we as americans want a regional tyrant or a global religious movement? 51 percent of us voted for the latter. Lets hope things go better after posters in bagdhad announced the arrival of the LAST crowd that
"liberated" Iraq.
"Proclamation... Our military operations have as their object, the defeat of the enemy and the driving of him from these territories. In order to complete this task I am charged with absolute and supreme control of all regions in which British troops operate; but our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators... Your citizens have been subject to the tyranny of strangers... and your fathers and yourselves have groaned in bondage. Your sons have been carried off to wars not of your seeking, your wealth has been stripped from you by unjust men and squandered in different places. It is the wish not only of my King and his peoples, but it is also the wish of the great Nations with whom he is in alliance, that you should prosper even as in the past when your lands were fertile... But you, people of Baghdad... are not to understand that it is the wish of the British Government to impose upon you alien institutions. It is the hope of the British Government that the aspirations of your philosophers and writers shall be realised once again, that the people of Baghdad shall flourish, and shall enjoy their wealth and substance under institutions which are in consonance with their sacred laws and with their racial ideals... It is the hope and desire of the British people... that the Arab race may rise once more to greatness and renown amongst the peoples of the Earth... Therefore I am commanded to invite you, through your Nobles and Elders and Representatives, to participate in the management of your civil affairs in collaboration with the Political Representative of Great Britain... so that you may unite with your kinsmen in the North, East, South and West, in realising the aspirations of your Race.
(signed) F.S. Maude, Lieutenant-General, Commanding the British Forces in Iraq." 1917
I do believe everyone in the forums agrees the invasion of afghanistan was fully warranted. Iraq was a misguided adventure of finding a way to fix
this while convincing the world we are stopping
this.
Unfortanutely some persons in the administration were guessing the rest of the world recalls about as much history on Iraq as the rest of average americans. Or didnt care.
Here is a writeup outlining how trible and group favoriblility, and artificial splitting of like groups created an artificial need for an "interveening authority". Nationalization of the "countries" resources. This happened all across the world, so the rest of the world remembers europe, america, and the soviet union as "occupiers" from 1946 throughought the cold war.
Saddam came to power during this time, growing up as a child in an occupied country that hated anything western, what did you all seriously expect? His "global terrorism" was not the same as Osama's "global terrorism".
After 8 presidents
propped up the Shah through military aid the islamists revolted, and all of a sudden Iran wasnt our buddy anymore. Well we needed a new buddy. Even though Iraq was still in a 15 year oil supply contract with the russians
someone managed to convince the guy that the enemy of our
enemy is our friend. This all went well and good until he finally popped his cork and invaded Kuwait. I think the guy has mental problems and things really went downhill in the late '80's.
So again...
Who is at fault? The fool or the fool who follows him? Fortanutely for Rumsfeld, Rowe, Cheney, GW, Tony Blair or any forgotten mentions; we have not decided which fool led this charge.
