The bizzarre thing was that I expected the "Rummy shakes hands with the bad guy" photo or comment to rise to the top. Also, you guys must be slowing down because I also expected the, "hey that document you quoted from was printed by our 'friends' in the government of Saudi Arabia" argument.
Did America do the right thing in supporting Iraq during the war against Iran? Well at that point we have to ask, did the UK do the right thing in supporting Russia in the war against Germany (despite the fact that Russia invaded Poland from the East a few days after Germany invaded from the West)?
In both cases the world consensus was that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" and that the greater threat must be dealt with first, therefore we supported Russia against Germany, but once the greater threat (Fascism) was eliminated the focus of the West was on containing and then eliminating Communism as well.
The late 70s and 80s were a dangerous time in the Middle East, the US supported Iraq in the war against Iran because of a perception that Iran (and particularly the Fundamentalist student movement) was a greater threat to Democracy at the time than Saddam's regime - which was not surprisingly also the decision of the majority of "old rule" governments in the region. I'd say that the US decision at the time (which was really meant to ensure that both nations totally exhausted each other without the actual balance of power changing) was politically expedient but not exactly morally perfect. You were once again in essence supporting Stalin against Hitler. Hardly the kind of choice one really wants to make (note well that at the time the EU also heavily supported Iraq via weapons sales, including materials for making chemical weapons.)
Now the USA has concluded that the stakes are simply to high for the west to try to play the balance of power game in the Middle East as it currently stands any longer. The ability of state-funded terrorists to inflict catastrophic losses in the west, and the continued rise of an increasingly militant Islamic underclass (Umma) bent on a pan-Islamic realization of the ideal of the Dar-El-Islam means the game is just too dangerous, and therefore the forcible removal of the old order and the installation of Western Style democracies is the only possible solution (other than appeasement or simply waiting to get "blowed up real good"). So far the process, which has to be long-term, is actually working in achieving US goals.
1) Libya has dumped its WMDs
2) Democracies have been installed in Iraq and Afghanistan and the example is emboldening the middle classes in other M.E. nations to seek the same reforms.
3) Jihadists are being fought on an "away game" basis, rather than having to fight them in our back yard
4) Syria may actually end up withdrawing from Lebanon, etc.
Unfortunately, in this process Europe appears to be saying, America is our enemy, and again repeating the mantra of the cold war: "You crazy militaristic yahoos are going to get us all killed! Just do what these people tell you to, and you'll be all right." And if one applies the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" rule Europeans are throwing their emotional support behind the very forces which are hell-bent on destroying them both from within and without.
Considering that I pastor many of the men, and their families, who are fighting against the Jihadists, I suppose I get rather irrationally upset when the Beeb runs documentaries that make them out to be the stormtroopers while the guys who fly jet liners into skyscrapers, blow up buses, trains, pizza parlours and funerals as an objective, and carve off heads on video, are considered to be the "freedom fighters."
But what does you expect from an ignorant idiot?
Anywho, sorry to be a bother, I won't whine on this thread no mo'.
Peace out,
SEAGOON
