[emcon5]

Originally posted by 944S Boyeee
emcon5.....

Please, call me Tom.

I'm not really "comparing" reality TV/advertising to news......they are different beasts in many respects, but the end result is that WE view the finished product. I'm not saying the news is all smoke and mirrors......but those who provide the news are in control of what is reported - meaning, just because we see it on the news, doesn't always make it true. News stations don't just run out and put on everything they want - it is monitored. Jou kno wha I'm sayin'??

Fair enough. There is an entertainment aspect to news, and almost all the news outlets are owned by like 4 companies. I don't think "monitored" is the correct word, that kind of has a George Orwell tone to it.

I'm not sure what questions I didn't answer....but if one of them was "can give an example of something deliberate that the coalition has done that isn't justified?"......well, that simply comes down to me thinking the war isn't justified (but that's a whimpy answer). I guess I'd say the support of certain groups in the Middle East. The provision of weapons and training to both Iraq AND Bin Laden (didn't the US create Al Quada to fight Russia?)

No, we supported the Mujahideen after the Soviet invasion. The Taliban came a little later as an offshoot of this, as I understand it. Some details here. We did to the Soviets the same thing the Soviets did to us in Vietnam. In the context of the Cold War, this made perfect sense. We helped the Mujahideen by billing it as a holy war, which brought radical Muslims from all over the world. I think it is safe to say at the time we had no idea how bad an idea that was. It is also interesting to note that most of the Mujahideen fought on the side of the northern alliance against the Taliban. Bin Laden faught in Afganistan against the Soviets, but didn't create Al Queda until later, to fight Israel and western influences in Arab countries. Having American infidels being in Saudi Arabia during the Gulf War is what put him over the edge completely. Some background here.

The abandonment of Afghanistan after a promise was made to them before they fought the Russians.

Exactly what did we promise them, and was this before or after the people in charge (the Taliban) started calling us the Great Satan? You know, the fine folks who without our help would be vassals of the Soviet Union.

The same abandonment the US did to the Kurds after they used them to fight.

We screwed the pooch on that one. My understanding of it is we expected after the humiliating loss in the first Gulf war, Saddam's power would be weakened to the point that he would be overthrown by the Sunni's and Kurds. Unfortunately we were wrong, and the Kurds/Sunnis took it in the ass.

THAT is why they were gassed, by the way - the Kurds supported/were supported by the US and went against Saddam (which was a good thing) and Saddam was punishing them in his sick way.

Wrong. The Kurds were gassed in March 1988. We didn't try to get them to revolt until the Gulf war in 1991, nearly 3 years later.

These are the same Kurds who are now asking for gas masks (because they are not stupid this time), yet the US is refusing them the masks

I am going to wave a preliminary BS flag on this one. I think that would make the mainstream press if it was true. Got a cite for this?

because I feel they want the Kurds to get hit again, thus making Saddam even more a monster.

You can't be serious. What is this rediculous assertation based on?

If the US had supplied the Kurds with masks in the first place, this "attack on his own people" would never had been such a big deal. The US Government didn't keep a promise (once again) and should step up and admit it and stop trying to blame others for the misfortunes of those they promised support to.

Again, this happened while we were still on relatively good terms with Iraq, even after The USS Stark incident in March of 87.

If they are going to police these lil' bastard countries, at least do what they promised when they butt their noses in others business. Don't hand people weapons, money and military support and then pull out when the war is won, leaving them poor, desolate and feeling anger and expect them not to react or harbor hatred when you promised that you would fully support them from start to FINISH. Duh!

Ok, so you are saying if we would have let the Soviets kill them off everything would be fine?

Let's be honest here. You asked me what would justify that gas attack. The Kurds opposed Saddam and supported America. What should people do to those who oppose them? I think every war supporter knows the answer to that. Saddam gassed them because they turned their backs on him and started supporting/being supported by the "enemy", the US. Kurds were "The US" to Saddam, there should be no suprise he gassed them. Was it right? No. Was it something that happened "out of the blue" because Saddam is nuts? No.

The chronology is still wrong. Even if this was the case, your argument is absurd. Following the same reasoning, it would be perfectly acceptable for the National Guard to fix bayonets and attack the peace protestors in San Francisco. After all, they are a bunch of wannabe Marxists/socialists who oppose the actions of the US Government.

Like I said, let's be honest - Saddam had to test those weapons somehow if he ever planned on using them against a real enemy. How do you test weapons/drugs, etc normally? By putting it on the people. Let's be honest again, we all know the public are just a bunch of numbers to the Governments of the world. If he was going to test those weapons on anyone, why not his opposition? Makes sense to me.

Now you are REALLY reaching. The US has Chemical weapons left over from the cold war, and so do the former Soviets, among many others I am sure. Who were all those weapons tested on? Certainly not villaiges full of women and kids.

America kills it's own people every day. They approve drugs that shouldn't be approved (Phen, Phen, certain types of Breast Implants, etc, etc). How many times have we heard about this drug or that drug killing X amount of Americans and these drug companies get sued?

Bad examples, The Phen Phen thing is a joke, both of those drugs have been safe for years by themselves. It is only when they are used in combination (which they were never tested/approved for) were there problems. As I understand it, our prescription drug approval process is one of the more difficult ones. I know there are medicines you can get in Canada (or Europe) that I can't get here.

It's enough. America has the death penalty, which is punishment for breaking laws. The Kurds broke one major law (don't oppose Saddam - stupid law, but it's there) and they faced the death penalty.

So you equate the attack on a village with nerve gas to execution of violent criminals? Wow. I don't even know how to answer that.

We can only speculate how many American die each year from food additives, smokes, bad drugs, etc, etc. How many Kurds died? I'm guessing not even close to the amount who die each year in America from things the Government can prevent and if it can be prevented, the blame should lie on those who could prevent it.

Even if your this line of reasoning made sense (which it doesn't), Nothing you listed is mandatory. All those items are choices, you choose to smoke, you choose to take drugs, you choose to get big fake boobs. Nobody is forcing these things on anyone.

The Kurds certainly didn't choose to get gassed.

I know those many not be answers to some because it makes the US look bad - but every answer can't make the US look good, sorry.

I'm so not anti-US or pro-Saddam - but I just can't sit back and watch the US Government lie and try and make it look like they are angels all the time.

So what was the lie again? I must have missed it.

It takes two to tango. People don't hate for no reason and the US Government has to admit they did things to create said hatred - and it's not "living the Western Lifestyle" or "being free".

People certainly do hate for no reason. Look at the former Yugoslavia. People hate each other there for crap that happened centuries ago. Look at Northern Ireland. Those jokers hate each other for following slight variations of essentially the same religion.
I won't even get into anti-semitism.

America has been bad......not as bad as Saddam, not even close - but they are not smelling of roses either.

So what is your point? We haven't attacked or threatened our neighbors. We don't torture dissidents. We contribute the lions share of the UN budget. We bail the rest of the world out when they have problems.

Iraq started a war, which it lost. Part of the conditions of the cease fire were limitation of certain weapons, and allow inspections. They have not complied. They had 12 years to comply, and they haven't. The UN Security councel even says they are in breach. Clinton should have done this 5 years ago when they kicked the inspectors out, but he was too busy playing hide the cigar with his intern.

Tom