No, not American so try again. And surely the US today is more free and libertarian than ever before?
'Waste' NOT 'waist' for crying out loud! Simple truth is Saddam had 5000 viable chemical weapons from his 90s stockpile in caches scattered around the country, so potent that they could poison our troops a decade after the liberation. When you say waste you want people to think this was the outflow from some factory but Iraq's chemical weapon production had been abandoned years earlier. So the only people who lied were the Iraqi exiles who sought to get their country liberated from dictatorship and fed our confirmation bias. No ones rewriting any history, the facts are plain for all to see. FYI the US and the rest of the west supported Saddam as a bulwark against the Ayatollah and rightly so. We sold Saddam dual use tech and he used it to make WMDs, if I sold you a can of petrol you could use it to fuel your car or burn your neighbours house down, that doesn't make me liable for your crazy actions.
It is waste, since it can't be used as a weapon anymore. And your claim troops who illegally invaded Iraq over damn lies, killing babies like some decades ago, indeed can get terrible sick from chemical waste. Rather dumb to go looking for chemicals, but fail to wear protective gear. Than again, the US government treats it's troops like dirt. And them idiots accept it. As noted, you're free to prove the waste was still able to be used as a weapon. I asked twice now. You're just failing and repeating your total nonsense. When you sell dual use items to Assad, than you will be made liable for his actions and kicked behind bars for decades. And there is no right for the US against the Ayatollah. The US uprooted the democracy in Iran, and installed a fascist dictator. With the help of the CIA, 10.000's of people got tortured to death for the US's geopolitical games. The people got rid on that American stooge. In revenge the US backed up a terrorist in Iraq. Hence the US is the biggest supporter of terrorism on this planet. Blood is on their hands and on the people who are still backing this up.
OK, you are not a US citizen. That makes your ignorance understandable in a big way, though many US citizens are equally misinformed.
Of course it could have been used as a weapon, hence it poisoned our troops? Nothing illegal about the liberation and those troops saved the lives of the babies, toppling Saddam and lifting UN sanctions. "And them idiots accept it"? "Than you will be made liable"? Well at least they can speak English properly. You know you whining the same thing again and again isn't going to convince anyone. The West toppled a proto communist and installed a friendly dictator who was renown for his progressive liberalism to win the Cold War. The Iranian people got rid of the stooge and replaced him with a regime that was infinitely worse, justifying the West's actions in the first place. Do show me where the US backs political violence in a free and democratic regime?
What ignorance exactly? Do please explain to all we unenlightened who have the temerity to disagree with you?
I welcome disagreement and the opinions of others. That's why I'm here. But opinions formed from misunderstanding or disinformation cannot be taken seriously. Free and libertarian are not the best words to describe US society today. Yes, an American citizen is as free to do anything he wants as a citizen of any other country in the world. But if a US citizen speaks truth to power, well he better be prepared for the worst, for even an Australian citizen speaking truth to power sits in Belmarsh prison today for that offense. And while the US citizen can do as he pleases, only a few realize that their government has been lying to them, again, about 18 years worth, regarding a very expensive war brought under fraud, paid for by their tax dollars? What does that mean?
Not seeing any sources They got poisoned by chemical waste. Not seeing anything to back this claim up. There was nothing communistic about the Iranian democracy. They just went Iran for Iranians and cut off the west from the lavish profits they were making on deals made from their thug colonial era. The fascist dictator was massacring 10.000's of people to death, and you call that "progressive"... your attempt to white wash the blood of the hands of the Americans is joke. That's their call and their right to do as an autonomous nation. The US has no rights to undo it.
Yes, it is. It's just an empty term that idiots throw around when they cannot debate the substance of an issue. Except you haven't produced a single fact in support of your position. All you did was accuse your opponents of being "conspiracy theorists", thereby proving my original point about the term being used solely to shut down debate. A few exceptions do not disprove the rule. Empirically speaking, the best predictor of whether or not something will become official policy is how much the rich support it. That is just a fact. Nobody said otherwise. Nobody is decrying democracy. I'm simply stating facts which have been demonstrated empirically by Princeton academics who study political science. Sounds like you're describing the average Trump supporter.
It is that simple. The insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan have fought the US military for almost two decades using nothing but small arms and improvised explosives. Historically speaking, conventional military forces struggle against determined insurgencies who utilize guerrilla tactics. So you're just wrong objectively.
I have one son who has experienced 3 infantry deployments to Iraq and 2 infantry deployments to Afghanistan. I believe he would agree with your use of the term "failure." A lot of blame for the failed neocon agenda has to fall on this individual. I believe in his mind thousand of US soldiers killed and wounded and Trillions of dollars spent was a small price to eliminate an enemy of Israel. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wolfowitz
Yes you do, I listed them but you deigned not to read them. They got poisoned by Saddam chemical munitions which degraded in the decade after the liberation. Don't need anything to back it up, it is self evident. No, Iran was drifting towards a communist dictatorship, the Shah saved it from that and was very progressive, too progressive for the hardliners unfortunately which is why they deposed him. No one is washing blood off any hands, we backed friendly dictators for the greater good because the alternative is infinitely worse as modern Iran shows.
No, a conspiracy theory is a baseless accusation which conforms to an underlying prejudice and I have provided plenty of facts. No one is arguing that the rich do not wield out of proportion influence on government policy but those who claim that they control it entirely just do so as an excuse to portray democracy as false. Do show me how these Princeton boys proved this? That's the great irony, in the 90s the left quite rightly mocked the right wing black helicopter crowd over their unfounded paranoia coming up to the turn of the century, now they're the ones who are doing the same saying that Trump is another Hitler who wants to take away everyone's freedom?
I asked you to source it a bunch of times. You never did. Hence it's waste, not a weapon. The soldiers were dumb enough to not wear protected gear when they found chemical waste. Last time I checked, the United States, still uprooted an elected government and installed a fascist dictatorship.
What's that in your pocket? You make strange and false claims in these series of posts, like Saddam and WMD. So far you come across as one who posts government propaganda talking points. From past experience I know that meaningful and honest dialogue with those holding such views are futile and a waste of time.
I sure did, what didn't you understand? It's left over chemical weapons and I take it you never played football in a NBC suit or served in the Gulf? I did. The US saved Iran from a communist dictatorship, the greatest justification for supporting friendly dictators is what replaces them is worse, Iran is the perfect example.
A perfectly ironed and starched handkerchief? What's false and what's strange about the truth? So you mean you're running away?
No, it's an observation based on research done by Princeton academics. They found that the best predictor of whether or not a policy became law is the amount of support it receives from the richest members of society. That held true even when the majority of the country was against the policy. Clearly, then, the evidence shows that the US is not really a democracy, but an oligarchy. You refuse to accept the truth because you're so emotionally invested in the fairy tales that have been told to you since you were a child. You simply cannot accept the fact that everything you believe is based on a lie. You haven't provided a single fact that contradicts anything I've said. All you've done is throw around the term "conspiracy theory" in a pathetic and transparent attempt to shut down the debate. A government where the rich wield influence disproportionate to their number is the opposite of democracy. Your attempt to split hairs about whether they control it "entirely" or just mostly is just a red herring. Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy You realize that America was founded by people who were extremely skeptical and fearful of government power right? And that their skepticism was based on thousands of years of governments abusing their power? How naive do you have to be then to believe that continuing that great tradition is somehow weird or conspiratorial? Just pick up a history book and you can read about hundreds of examples of the richest and most powerful using governments to exploit and oppress the rest of society. It's not a theory, it's a fact.
Wolfowitz is just a typical neocon gangster - a soulless bureaucratic functionary who helped carry out the will of a network of interlocking interest groups, among them the Israeli lobby.
The truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it. You seem to consider false claims made by known liars in government to be the truth. I do not.
Your posed is riddled with inaccuracies and nonsense narrative. We all know Saddam had and used Chemical Weapons - Rotten Ronnie was allied with Saddam while he was using these weapons against Iran and the Kurds. The question of the Iraq was was did he have an active chem weapons program - and he did not. Finding some hastily disposed of (buried) chemical weapons - none of which were usable - is not a Chemical Weapons program - nor would these be in any shape to ship to Syria. You speculations are not plausible on the basis of what you are claiming. In case you missed it above WMD - in the context of Iraq - was "Active Chemical or Nuclear Weapons program" - none of which Saddam had.
No one is saying that money does not have huge influence in a democratic society but this does not detract from it, Brexit and Trump surely prove that?
No, he did not have a weapons programme, no one doubts that. And yes the great US president Ronald Reagan did back Saddam because the Ayatollah was infinitely worse.
