George HW Bush and the old school Reagan Republicans had a business arrangement with Saddam. They didn't care that Saddam was a sadistic, ruthless SOB as long as he kept the Iraq people in line and lived up to his part of the Bush/Cheney business deal.
The problem was, after Saddam got complete control, he wanted a larger slice of the money pie than his partners had agreed on.
So Saddam suddenly went from being a 'friendly' dictator to being an 'evil' dictator and enemy of our country. With the ruthless SOB now removed from power the future of Iraq is up for grabs.
Who will end up controlling and running Iraq will probably be another dictator who comes into power by forcing the differing fractions to co-exist. A safe and stable Iraq will not likely come about through our concept of democracy. Not in our lifetime anyway.
Do any of you see any viable solutions to the mess greed has made in the Middle East?
2006-08-29 05:52:31 · 4 answers · asked by Doc Watson 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Dr. Watson.. good to hear from you. As always you are right on point, and unfortunately I don't see a way out.
I posted a query the other day where I reasoned that we may now have to see this horrible thing through. As an American we have created so much debt and the dollar has been so destabilized that we now are in a place that we have to finish in Iraq and most likely will need to invade Iran and Syria to bolster and maintain the greenback as the petrol currency. Without that America is finished economically ...
I am sure that Dick Cheney has absolutely no concern/remorse for the Iraqi's on the ground nor the Troops that are there.. This has all been great cover for the "Grand Chessboard" ,, check out this link regarding the P.N.A.C. ...
http://www.sundayherald.com/27735
2006-08-29 07:36:30 · answer #1 · answered by hardartsystems 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wish we could be more like Sweden or the countries in the BENELUX, we leave folks alone, they leave us alone. But back to the war is peace, freedom is slavery reality of America 2006, Iraq is a sinking ship, and there is no hope for it now, indeed under Saddam the people suffered grave injustice, but by removing him we have removed the only thing keeping the ethnic factions in check. The Iraqi people are going to have to beat the crap outta each other, maybe for decades until they get a tolerable social stratification in place, basing its value in either religious dogma, or financial strength (like us). We basically created a vacuum in Iraq by removing Saddam, so why is everyone so surprised that is sucks?
2006-08-29 13:06:28 · answer #2 · answered by s j 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
So, basically a mob deal gone bad. And one side sends in the enforcers to take care of the former partner. Sounds like standard (organized crime) business as usual.
All evidence indicates that Iraq is not ready for a democratic form of govt. That requires a tolerance of differences and a willingness to abide by the decisions of the majority. Heck, we barely (if at all) meet those criteria in the US, and we've had two centuries to practice.
2006-08-29 12:55:22 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think the main attraction that Saddam held for the US back in the day, as we are seeing now, was that he held Iran in check. Now we face the scary prospect of one big Iran.
2006-08-29 12:55:37 · answer #4 · answered by Schmorgen 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋