How much of this is...


PDA






answerguy
February 14, 2004, 03:30 PM
B.S.?

http://www.bushflash.com/thanks.html

If you enjoyed reading about "How much of this is..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MikeB
February 14, 2004, 04:46 PM
Seems like BS to me.

A couple of points.

We never really sold or gave arms to Iraq, if you'll notice the Iraqis have AK-47's and Russian tanks not U.S. gear.

The movie also doesn't seem to mention the time Saddam spent in Prison, I forget the dates, but it was during the mid 60's. While the movie claims the CIA was supporting Saddam during this time.

This movie also talks about Kuwait flooding the market with oil immediately after the first part of the war - when Saddam invaded Kuwait, but I seem to remember Saddam having his troops light the well heads on fire, I believe it took Kuwaiti and U.S. workers more than a year to get the wells working again.

whm1974
February 14, 2004, 05:24 PM
Remember Politics makes strange bedfellows. During the cold war we made
allies with those that are now enemes.

Bill Meadows

answerguy
February 14, 2004, 05:36 PM
I got that little film from:
http://www.vegsource.com/talk/pacifism/wwwboard.html

If you think the people over at Democratic Underground have their fingers in their ears so they don't have to hear the truth you should try out these guys.

This board too:
http://www.vegsource.com/talk/veganissues/wwwboard.html

A common question over there; how do you get rid of mice? And the usual response is live trap them and transport them to the country. Don't they realize that those mice will be predator food within hours?

Stand_Watie
February 14, 2004, 05:39 PM
Remember Politics makes strange bedfellows. During the cold war we made
allies with those that are now enemes.

And during ww2 we were allies with the commies, knowing full well what monsters they were. The facists were just the monsters who were ever so slightly a more imminent danger to us.

Edited for clarity.

Cool Hand Luke 22:36
February 14, 2004, 05:49 PM
And during ww2 we were allies with the commies, knowing full well what monsters they were. The facists were just ever so slightly more imminently dangerous to us monsters.


You seem to be trying to draw some kind of moral equivalence between the Amercans & Allies and the axis powers ("...us monsters"). There was none. The Japanese launched an unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor, then declared war on the US, followed by Germany's declaration of war against us. If it hadn't been for those events the US most likely would have continued to try and limit it's participation in the war to lend-lease.

The US atomic attacks on Japan were fully justified and necessary, and resulted in civilian deaths that paled in comparison to those caused by Japanese atrocities during the war.

Describing WWII America as "us monsters" for any reason is unwarranted.

Samurai Penguin
February 14, 2004, 06:01 PM
"The facists were just (ever so slightly more imminently dangerous to us) monsters."

I think the Fascists were being called monsters, rather than us. Although some might see us as heading toward Fascism...!

Stand_Watie
February 14, 2004, 06:09 PM
I'm glad I came back to this one quickly - poor grammar on my part

change that to...

"The facists were just the monsters who were ever so slightly a more imminent danger to us"






You seem to be trying to draw some kind of moral equivalence between the Amercans & Allies and the axis powers ("...us monsters"). There was none. The Japanese launched an unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor, then declared war on the US, followed by Germany's declaration of war against us. If it hadn't been for those events the US most likely would have continued to try and limit it's participation in the war to lend-lease.

Cool Hand Luke 22:36
February 14, 2004, 06:14 PM
I'm glad I came back to this one quickly - poor grammar on my part

change that to...

"The facists were just the monsters who were ever so slightly a more imminent danger to us"


Thanks for clearing that up. I get your meaning now that you weren't trying to put the US on the same moral level as the axis powers.

And you're right of course that the USSR was just as reprehensible as the Axis powers.

jimpeel
February 14, 2004, 07:12 PM
Other than a delightful little piece of propaganda it does have the positive message that we should not operate under "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" doctrine that the United States has become all to familiar in doing.

HunterGatherer
February 14, 2004, 07:42 PM
I laugh every time I see that. My favorite part is when they act like whacking 800 Iraqi communists is a bad thing.

whm1974
February 14, 2004, 08:16 PM
The Japanese launched an unprovoked attack on Pearl Harbor, then declared war on the US

I did read somewhere that there's proof that FDA wanted the Japanese to attack us in order to get into the war. Don't know how true this is but govenments have started wars in order to get away with stuff they couldn't otherwise.

Bill Meadows

Ironbarr
February 14, 2004, 09:46 PM
That subject has been around since about when the shock started wearing off - around Dec 10, '41.

Now - for my "I read somewhere":

Just checked my history file and can't find the site... but what I read was that Hitler was just months, if not weeks, away from developing an atom bomb - now THAT would have been a calamity.

Also there was an effort as things were falling apart for him to send the necessary material and paprework to Japan by submarine - the sub never made it. In fact there was a TV movie about that some months back - maybe last summer, not sure.

If Truman knew of that transfer maybe Hiroshima and Nagasaki had a dual purpose - one, to do what it did ... end the war; and two, to guarantee that in ending the war and McArthur's reign would snuff out any effort of Japanese nuclear effort.

Possible?

Hey! Brain flash... It was the either the History Channel or Discovery a while back. Super interesting. Maybe someone can add to this.

-Andy

joab
February 14, 2004, 11:49 PM
The connection between Saddam and the CIA came up during the first Gulf War. But given America's former friends it should come as no surprise.
Noriega
The Shah of Iran
Batista
Castro
Osama
Stalin
Diem
France

HunterGatherer
February 15, 2004, 02:02 AM
"Ho! A white whale! 3 points off the starboard bow!"

Cool Hand Luke 22:36
February 15, 2004, 06:23 AM
The connection between Saddam and the CIA came up during the first Gulf War. But given America's former friends it should come as no surprise.
Noriega
The Shah of Iran
Batista
Castro
Osama
Stalin
Diem
France

Saddam....Check

Noriega....Check

Batista.....Check

Castro.....Nope, never was a US asset or on the CIA payroll.

Osama....Nope, never was a US asset, never was on the CIA payroll, and was not trained or funded at any time by the CIA or any other American agency. Bin Laden used his own money in Afghanistan, did not work with the US, and was as rabidly anti-American during the 1980's as he is today.

Stalin......Check

Diem.......Check

France....Check.

fallingblock
February 16, 2004, 03:45 AM
Saddam....Check....neutralized

Noriega....Check..... " ,sometimes they just don't listen!

Shah........Check..... " ,another one who didn't listen. Got Regan in.

Batista.....Check..... " ,never trust cigar-smoking Fidels!

Stalin.......Check...... " ,ideology discredited, empire fragmented.

Diem........Check...... " , took a while, but that one's fixed now as well.

France.....Check..... now in the process of marginalizing.....



:D

HunterGatherer
February 16, 2004, 11:37 PM
Spoilsport :p

If you enjoyed reading about "How much of this is..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!