Was the war in middle east the right choice?

They aren't? REALLY? Where did you get this silly idea? Put down the Fox remote Sir.

 

Sorry i like Fox, they have good weather and Bill O'Rieley makes great points.

 

Your name is a contradiction of terms and facts!!!

Regards
Highlander

 

Mmmm...choice? What choice has those men women and children to the slaughter perpetrated against them?

Assassination from the air with your American drones!

The assassinantion squads in Syria paid for by the American tax payer!

The slaughter of those in Yemen protesting for democracy by American arms and drones!

You not on the same planet as the rest of the thinking world!

Regards
Highlander

 

Agreed. Overthrowing Saddam just made Iran stronger, and invading Afghanistan was exorbitantly expensive.

 

I see you forgot your meds again.

 

Dear Highlander,
READ the rest of the thread.
I defend very strongly the deaths of the civilians in Iraq!
Not to say that things like that cant happen, its war.
However i do hate it when people claim innocence like "We were attacked, people died!"
Yet they dont even think to learn about civilians killed on the other side.
So highlander i hope you end up reviewing and reflecting.
And until that F#CK YOU!

 

aye... right enough....one million dead Iraqis cannot ask for there lives back!

But what about the America death squads..... sorry... you don't want truths!

Yes Americans died on 9/11... but you cannot get an open investigation into the deaths! Democracy.... bollocks!

So come out of the shadows, review your dogma.... and allow the families of those who died on 9/11 the right to find the perpetrators of those who murdered they're loved ones.

Until then........ grow a pair!

Regards
Highlander

 

They make up the news. I'm sure you knew that and like them anyway. The right wing criminal network..Ollie Fox.


This just in from Fox noise network....Obama determined to strike, around 9/11. Details buy the kook on call at 5.

 

The invasion of Iraq was the biggest foreign policy blunder in US history. Saddam was never any threat to America for a start, and if you honestly believe that it was US policy to unseat 'tinpot dictators' then the question has to be asked why you didn't unseat Pol Pot, but instead armed, financed and supported the Khmer Rouge along with its leader; probably the most despicable genocidist since Hitler. Another of these tinpot dictators was the Shah of Iran, installed as America's puppet and who was as equally murderous as Saddam, and whose cynical installation has come full-circle to bite America in the arse. All problems in the region are of America's own making.

The world is full of nasty regimes but you don't see America anywhere near them; and why? The constant sanctimonious rhetoric we hear about 'freedom and democracy' is a cosy cover for US hegemonic geo-politics, designed to mollify your populace into believing that America has nothing but altruism in mind when it goes on its ever-increasing foreign vacations.

 

I wouldn't go down that 'moral' path if I were you-unless you want to consider US arming of genocidists as 'moral'; or the overthrow of legitimate democracies, such as that of Iran in 1953, as a moral act. Nothing America does in its foreign policy decision-making process has anything remotely to do with morals, and everything to do with self-serving. To believe otherwise is laughably naive.

 

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. America and its dumb allies attacked and invaded the wrong country, based on lies, misinformation and a beautifully orchestrated propaganda campaign by your idiotic government. America screwed up.

 

Yeah, he's also an idiot and a liar who believes that American soldiers were responsible for the Malmedy massacre during WW2!

 

Pretty much all of this.

 

Speaking of 'NAIVETE', Iran was not a Democracy in 1953 (the Shah then was not ruling a Democracy, he should be considered more benevolent than the present regime, which is a theocracy and managed by tyrannical religious fanatics)...

 

Iran was a democracy with a democratically elected Prime Minister and Parliament. It was the Prime Minister (Mohammed Massadegh) that was overthrown, giving the Shah almost unlimited power, which led to the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

 

Yes and he would he lasted for a far shorter period of time than did the Shah who shared his agenda and implemented everyone of Mossadiq's reforms. to put it mildly this pissed off the ahrdline claerics now running Iran and it would have pissed them off with Mossadiq doing it to and he had a lot fewer freinds internationally.

 

While the whole world was telling you that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11..? Didn't listen, didn't care... That's America all over...

 

You dont understand. I said 9/11 was used as the motivation of the invasion in the Middle East not Iraq. Read the thread.

 

While we dropped the ball on Iraq recently by leaving without ANY sort of military or even economic deal at least there is a chance of Iraq becoming a stable secular government. Afghanistan was never going to be "won" or "finished" because there is literally nothing to conquer in that waste of space of a country. We were doing it correctly in the beginning with spec ops and air power and were killing them in droves while taking minimal casualties. Then the brainiacs decided we need to send more troops over to Afghanistan just because the surge worked in Iraq. They are two completely different theaters of battle with different requirements. We should have stuck with small groups of spec ops and lots of air power and we could just keep hamming them indefinitely. Now we have lots of soldiers just standing around guarding barracks that can be shelled and driving around on patrols and getting blown up by IEDs. I really question the decision making capacity of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in this administration.

We built schools for the girls to go to which is all nice and goody two-shoes but they only use them when the press or soldiers are around. When no one is looking the girls are kept at home. They are nothing more than tribal primitives and frankly I don't know why we are wasting our time on them. At least Iraq had an educated and productive society in the past.

 

Bla bla bla... American invasion of middle east, using surrogates like Sadat and Mubarak against the Egyptian ppl, Saddam against the ppl of Iraq and then against Iran, was the motivation for 9/11...
US troops in Mecca and Medina was a primary motivation for the Saudi al Q hijackers, but al Q was created in an Egyptian prison after the assassination of American surrogate Sadat...
Can't pretend that American interference in the Middle East began after 9/11...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WWc8-P29wIc
A whole new version!

Regards
Highlander

 

There have NEVER been any US troops in Mecca or Medina.

 

Yes there was, in lead up to Iraq War one... It was one of OBL's complaints...

 

Absolutely NOT.. There have NEVER been any US troops in Mecca or Medina.