X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.640
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 54
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 09:27:53 -0700
NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.228.143.141
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1089304051 63.228.143.141 (Thu, 08 Jul 2004 11:27:31 CDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 11:27:31 CDT
Path: kermit!newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!diablo.voicenet .com!216.196.98.140.MISMATCH!border1.nntp.dca.giga news.com!nntp.giganews.com!newshosting.com!nx01.ia d01.newshosting.com!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswes t.ne
t.POSTED!not-for-mail
Xref: kermit rec.ponds:152798

On Wed, 7 Jul 2004 15:55:04 -0400, "Benign Vanilla"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
Just because we think our democracy is superior and we have the power it
doesnt give
the U.S. the right to push our way of life down the throats of anybody
else in the
world. we most certainly do have the right to defend ourselves from
attack, but not
to attack countries that didnt attack us.
compare the rights women HAD in Iraq to those of women in our "friends"
countries of
Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Ingrid
snip

If we clarify a bit...Iraq invaded a sovreign ally of the UN, Kuwait. We
entered Kuwait to defend the Kuwaties and get Sadam out of there. We did
this successfully. On his way out, he destroyed most of the country. The UN
imposed sanctions, and failed to enforce them for 10 years. Our country was
attacked by someone we believed to be connected to Iraq so we finally
implemented, and enforced the UN sanctions our way, since the UN was too
crippled by corrupt politicians living off the oil for food program. The UN
did nothing but starve the Iraq people. The US ended that atrocity and is in
the process of freeing the people of Iraq.

Or something like that...

BV.

Something like that -but pretty slanted. To be precise, Kuwait was a
MEMBER of the UN, and an ALLY of the United States. Hussein attacked
on a pretext, a UN sactioned multi-national force drove him out. The
UN did attempt to enforce sanctions, however their effectiveness was
limited.

The connection between Iraq and Osama bin Laden was tenuous at best.
It's easy to pick an enemy as a scapegoat, but al-Quida was one of the
LAST groups Hussein wanted operating in Iraq. Hussein was willing to
play the religious angle, but he basically ran a secular regime. bin
Laden and the Taliban want to institute conservative Islamic
governments.


"Free the Iraqi People" is a great slogan, however the majority of the
Iraqi people interviewed state that they were safer under Hussein than
they are now. And neither the coalition forces nor the Iraqi security
forces seem to be able to halt the insurgents (I hate that term by
the way - terrotist thugs would be more appropriate).

PlainBill